Leaving aside annoyance with the bank which led to a nicotine lapse on Wednesday, it's been quite a decent week. I came across this opinion piece in the Evening Standard:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23800010-liberals-are-hardly-models-of-tolerance.do
I agree up to a point that often those are most PC and "inclusive" are actually really very intolerant with any dissension from their point of view, but part of the fury at the Jan Moir article was that it was sloppy journalism. Blaming Stephen Gately's death on his sexual orientation, before the Post Mortem have given the public the facts that it was caused by a hereditary heart condition, was simply stupid. Had the argument been prefaced by a few discreetly positioned "ifs", it would have caused less rage (and guarded the Paper's butt against complaints and legal action). As a liberal, I am intolerant of sloppy conservative reasoning. For instance, it strikes me as perverse to argue that Stephen Gately's death was possibly hastened by aspects of his "gay lifestyle", when it is much more clearly the result of his parent's heterosexuality. If they hadn't been straight, then they wouldn't have passed on the genetic condition that killed him! Selective reasoning of course, but at least I am not in the habit of publishing it as gospel truth - unlike certain journalists!
Off to Ma's with her birthday card!
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23800010-liberals-are-hardly-models-of-tolerance.do
I agree up to a point that often those are most PC and "inclusive" are actually really very intolerant with any dissension from their point of view, but part of the fury at the Jan Moir article was that it was sloppy journalism. Blaming Stephen Gately's death on his sexual orientation, before the Post Mortem have given the public the facts that it was caused by a hereditary heart condition, was simply stupid. Had the argument been prefaced by a few discreetly positioned "ifs", it would have caused less rage (and guarded the Paper's butt against complaints and legal action). As a liberal, I am intolerant of sloppy conservative reasoning. For instance, it strikes me as perverse to argue that Stephen Gately's death was possibly hastened by aspects of his "gay lifestyle", when it is much more clearly the result of his parent's heterosexuality. If they hadn't been straight, then they wouldn't have passed on the genetic condition that killed him! Selective reasoning of course, but at least I am not in the habit of publishing it as gospel truth - unlike certain journalists!
Off to Ma's with her birthday card!
I agree. I would consider myself as being on the left politically but I am disturbed to find many "liberal" social attitudes to be founded on an intolerant & aggresive set of grievances towards the rest of society. This only ever leads to hardening of positions and a renewed cycle of conflict.
ReplyDeleteBritish society, according to a recent survey, is increasingly tolerant to sexual minorities which can only be a good thing. But the same survey shows an intolerance towards the poor verging on hatred. I would say modern society is indifferent rather than really tolerant. The modern mantra is: "Why judge someone when I know I get up to no good either!"
As the father of a disabled son I must add there is a clear intolerance towards the disabled in society.
Actually, as ABC Rowan has pointed out : modern society sees itself as tolerant but isn't very forgiving to those who are different.
There was an article in the Times that said the fat and the underclass are the new gays (ie soft targets for abusive comment) and the prejudice against disability be it in the form of mental illness or physical disability is painful to behold. And liberal social attitudes being founded on a "chippy" sense of grievence has a sad element of truth to it. I have a right not to be offended seems to be a driving thought these days.
ReplyDelete