It is perhaps natural that a
person accused of bigotry is unlikely to share the viewpoint that his ideas are
bigotted as this is a designation that is usually only arrived at through a
majority consent - most present forms of bigotry being once deemed perfectly
acceptable and thus 'common wisdom'. The transition in a belief from that of
'common wisdom' to a general consensus of their being bigotry marks a victory
for those reformers who don't wish to see, for example, homosexuals ostracised,
lepers abandoned to the elements or the human race erasing those of it's members
deemed 'inferior'. The majority of us today see these particular changes in
attitude as positive advances whereas we regard the residual pockets wherein
such beliefs persist as nurseries of woefully misinformed
atavism.
Advances in medicine establish pretty clearly what the nature and rate of infection etc is for leprosy and thus minimise the dangers of treatment plus any attendent superstitions that may have existed and forced sterilisation is pretty much frowned on everywhere (with some exceptions - India in the 1970's springs to mind during the 'Emergency').
However, the acceptance of homosexuality is a relatively recent phenomenon. I would say it was only from the late 80's onwards (in the West) that the issue of homosexuality began to be treated in film and media in a multidimensional and thus sympathetic manner and so in this instance the lines are often blurred; with those who express an opinion which is considered by many blatantly homophobic nevertheless finding strong support in many quarters. There is a real schism on this issue between North America and Europe which espouses what liberal commentators would regard as an enlightened acceptance and countries in Africa and the Middle East where it is commonplace to find attitudes which if expresssed in the West would be regarded as frankly bigoted.
It's difficult to call someone bigoted if they are only expressing a viewpoint which is the predominant one in their culture. For instance, of all the African immigrants over here I've ever talked to on the issue of homosexuality the unanimous opinion is that it is an "abomination" and they've never heard tell of such a thing until they came to Europe. It's viewed as a white man's perversion in some quarters. I can't call them bigoted for holding such a view because it doesn't impinge on their thoughts in any other fashion, they don't obsess about it and they're not on a crusade to get rid of it - they simply don't experience it often enough and as it isn't corroborated or sanctioned by their culture the instances of it are far fewer.
As a result, when it comes to the expression of homosexuality I'm a strong believer in the primacy of cultural conditioning over genetic determinants - and so am less likely to denounce someone as a bigot when they express views intolerant of homosexuality, though I may remark they are being insensitive and so on.
Terrace racism is another commonly cited form of bigotry. But it's funny when it comes to football; the same people throwing bananas at John Barnes would probably rush onto the pitch and hug Paul McGrath (or any other black player) if he scored for their own team. Would an English soccer club fanbase riot in the 60's if their management decided to sign Pele - not likely. I'm not saying racism wasn't (or isn't) blatant in English soccer just that it's selectivity is more revealing of inter-club rivalry than anything else. Certainly, at any rate, racism of any kind is a form of bigotry in my book.
With respect to another imputed form of bigotry found nowadays, that of 'Anti-Americanism' (or any distrust or hatred towards any particular country) I think we're on less solid ground - as oftentimes the critique is based on prior political decisions enacted by that country's government. It comes down to a virulent opposition to specific policy choices which may have been detrimental to their own country's development - America been the most powerful country post WW II it was simply in a position to make more of those decisions than any other country.
Without going into specific details I certainly think Iranians are fully justified in espousing an "anti-American" viewpoint which cannot be dismissed as mere bigotry; grounded as it is in an objection to concrete policy decisions taken by the US government as opposed to them having an obstinant or intolerant set of beliefs which irrationally targeted 'Americans' merely because they are Americans - the question of their faith in Shia Islam and the perceived bigotry we think may emerge from that is here entirely incidental.
All told, it can be seen that humans are quite accomplished in the art of driving a wedge between themselves.
Advances in medicine establish pretty clearly what the nature and rate of infection etc is for leprosy and thus minimise the dangers of treatment plus any attendent superstitions that may have existed and forced sterilisation is pretty much frowned on everywhere (with some exceptions - India in the 1970's springs to mind during the 'Emergency').
However, the acceptance of homosexuality is a relatively recent phenomenon. I would say it was only from the late 80's onwards (in the West) that the issue of homosexuality began to be treated in film and media in a multidimensional and thus sympathetic manner and so in this instance the lines are often blurred; with those who express an opinion which is considered by many blatantly homophobic nevertheless finding strong support in many quarters. There is a real schism on this issue between North America and Europe which espouses what liberal commentators would regard as an enlightened acceptance and countries in Africa and the Middle East where it is commonplace to find attitudes which if expresssed in the West would be regarded as frankly bigoted.
It's difficult to call someone bigoted if they are only expressing a viewpoint which is the predominant one in their culture. For instance, of all the African immigrants over here I've ever talked to on the issue of homosexuality the unanimous opinion is that it is an "abomination" and they've never heard tell of such a thing until they came to Europe. It's viewed as a white man's perversion in some quarters. I can't call them bigoted for holding such a view because it doesn't impinge on their thoughts in any other fashion, they don't obsess about it and they're not on a crusade to get rid of it - they simply don't experience it often enough and as it isn't corroborated or sanctioned by their culture the instances of it are far fewer.
As a result, when it comes to the expression of homosexuality I'm a strong believer in the primacy of cultural conditioning over genetic determinants - and so am less likely to denounce someone as a bigot when they express views intolerant of homosexuality, though I may remark they are being insensitive and so on.
Terrace racism is another commonly cited form of bigotry. But it's funny when it comes to football; the same people throwing bananas at John Barnes would probably rush onto the pitch and hug Paul McGrath (or any other black player) if he scored for their own team. Would an English soccer club fanbase riot in the 60's if their management decided to sign Pele - not likely. I'm not saying racism wasn't (or isn't) blatant in English soccer just that it's selectivity is more revealing of inter-club rivalry than anything else. Certainly, at any rate, racism of any kind is a form of bigotry in my book.
With respect to another imputed form of bigotry found nowadays, that of 'Anti-Americanism' (or any distrust or hatred towards any particular country) I think we're on less solid ground - as oftentimes the critique is based on prior political decisions enacted by that country's government. It comes down to a virulent opposition to specific policy choices which may have been detrimental to their own country's development - America been the most powerful country post WW II it was simply in a position to make more of those decisions than any other country.
Without going into specific details I certainly think Iranians are fully justified in espousing an "anti-American" viewpoint which cannot be dismissed as mere bigotry; grounded as it is in an objection to concrete policy decisions taken by the US government as opposed to them having an obstinant or intolerant set of beliefs which irrationally targeted 'Americans' merely because they are Americans - the question of their faith in Shia Islam and the perceived bigotry we think may emerge from that is here entirely incidental.
All told, it can be seen that humans are quite accomplished in the art of driving a wedge between themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment