Sensitivity or PC nonsense?

From the Times Online: "Avon and Somerset Constabulary has begun to equip its female officers with a uniform issue hijab to wear when they enter a mosque... The scheme is believed to be a first for the British police. The Metropolitan Police, the largest and most diverse UK force, said that it issued headscarves to its Muslim female officers but not to non-Muslim officers."

It would be easy enough to write this off as merely being ultra-PC; it wouldn't be the first time for this police force. "In 2006 the Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset had to apologise after it emerged that the force had used positive discrimination to try to increase the number of female and ethnic minority officers, randomly excluding 186 white male applicants during a recruitment drive on the grounds that they were already over-represented." But that's a different order of issue; in job discrimination, even if it's "reverse", someone has been harmed. Even the advocates of reverse discrimination don't deny this; they merely think it's whitey's turn for a change. But no one is actually harmed by changing uniform headgear when indicated.

It can also be argued, however, that excessive accommodation is a concession of authority to a single religion. One could argue that providing a uniform hijab for Muslim officers is a reasonable concession to that officer, but requiring non-Muslim officers to wear one is not merely pandering to a single religion, but to one given wing at that- not all Muslim women wear hijabs. Wouldn't a requirement to wear one be the government taking sides in an internal dispute within Islam? What do you think?

Taking up the mantle

Antioch College is closed, and no one knows at this point if it will ever reopen... but the spirit of Too PC For Sanity has not died! Carleton University in Ottawa has stepped up to the plate!

For 23 years Carleton has participated in Shinearama, a fundraising event for the Canadian Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. This is a huge event, with 65 colleges participating, and significant amounts of money have been raised by it- Carleton alone, over the course of the years, has raised over a million. But no more- the Carleton University Student Union has dropped Shinearama from its roster of events. Why? I quote from the resolution whose passage killed it:

"Whereas Orientation week strives to be [as] inclusive as possible;

Whereas all orientees and volunteers should feel like their fundraising efforts will serve the their diverse communities;

And Whereas Cystic fibrosis has been recently revealed to only affect white people, and primarily men

Be it resolved that:

CUSA discontinue its support of this campaign

Be it Further Resolved that the CUSA representatives on the incoming Orientation Supervisory Board work to select a new broad reaching charity for orientation week."

Good catch, Carleton! Not one penny should be sent to an organization so racist, so oppressive, that they will spend it on white men! No, not even if it's to save them from a dreadful disease that will kill them in their 20s- if the demographics are wrong, we won't belong!

It's not true, of course- Cystic Fibrosis strikes both sexes and all colors. But then, as we have seen with debates on cultural misappropriation and "code words", facts are often not on the side of the PC. No matter- there is a higher truth here. As long as people believe there's an oppressive situation there, their feelings will be hurt- and that's what it's all about, right? Trying to correct or educate them would be condescending- a PC sin in its own right- so just go along with it. After a while, you won't even wince.

sources:
Canada.com
CTV.ca
FlackLife

An example of why P.C. "experts" are ignored

This headline from the Telegraph: "Toddlers who dislike spicy food 'racist'"

"Toddlers who turn their noses up at spicy food from overseas could be branded racists by a Government-sponsored agency.

The National Children's Bureau, which receives £12 million a year, mainly from Government funded organisations, has issued guidance to play leaders and nursery teachers advising them to be alert for racist incidents among youngsters in their care.
This could include a child of as young as three who says "yuk" in response to being served unfamiliar foreign food."

Of course, everyone on the planet- expect for race relations experts- knows that toddlers are notorious for their food issues; every book on childrearing ever written contains a chapter on it. Sometimes they are finicky, sometimes they develop irrational hatreds of or attractions to certain foods at random- and then change their minds with a rapidity that leaves flip-flopping politicians in the dust. It is a natural stage of human development.

But that means nothing to such "experts", who can stretch farther than Reed Richards in the pursuit of offense. We are frequently chastised for using "code words" that are so well coded that neither the speaker nor the audience understood the "code". Indeed, sometimes the codes are not merely obscure, but fictitious; for example, "picnic" has nothing to do with lynching, "rule of thumb" is not derived from wife beating, and people went on "outings" long before gay activism. You'd think "experts" would use Google or Snopes before going out on a limb, but then as a rule they don't have to worry about anyone calling them on it.

I just pray that the spicy food hadn't been packed in a brown bag .

UPDATE: I've just learned that "Black Hole" does not mean a collapsed star with near infinite gravity, as I've believed all my adult life; it is a racial epithet. So is "Devil's food cake", according to this Dallas County Commissioner