The diabolical dangers of "yuck!"
Have political correctness and hyper-tolerance gone too far? It's amazing how many people don't think so. Take these folks in England, for example. In a recently published book, the NCB denounced the dangers of "Yuck". Presumably, they also abhor "ick!", "bleech", and "eww!"
That's right, mom and dad, if little Tommy holds his nose and turns his face away from an offering of Thai food or a sippy cup of rice milk, he's a budding KKK member. Apparently, tolerance of diversity means that individual tastes and cultural preferences are a "no-no" and the rejection of an unappealing side dish by a toddler is an act of racism that must be nipped in the diaper donned bud.
FYI: The word "racism" loses its sting when you spell it N-O-N-S-E-N-S-E.
Comment(s) »
» Leave a comment
- Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
- Since there already are comments to this post, your eventual comment might trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
- The line and paragraph breaks automatically
Neither you, nor I dare say any of the string of me-too knee-jerk reactivists have bothered, or will bother, to read this book. In fact, a quick search for this book found only one link to the actual book itself, and about 35 blogs where one Hannity-wannabe or another pipes out some variation of what you just spewed up there, as if any of them were in any way "original" in their outrage over one item, taken out of context, from a 366 page report on racial attitudes during developmental years.
I expect such patent stupidity from most conservatives, but you're normally better than that, Cate. That's why I like your site, you usually dig beneath the alarmist stuff to find out the facts and context.
In a quick perusal of the book's table of contents, I was amazed to find that there wasn't a chapter devoted to forcing little Timmy to eat his Mexican food, nor was there any chapters devoted to whether "Yuck!" was more racist than "Gross!"
Instead, chapters are on items like "Misunderstandings about what racism is, and what it isn't", "Xenoracism against white people", "Racism and phobias about religion," "Working within a no-blame culture." But it might be tougher for the Coulter-lovers to get worked up over those topics. Most of them wouldn't be able to pronounce xenoracism.
This is an utter non-story, except for how the anti-liberal crowd seem to be desperate for something to raise their hands up and scream bloody heck over.
But, keep up the work of the uninformed, Cate, and with any luck, our nation will return to the good old days when we playfully called them "darkies," and banned them from marrying our daughters?
Comment by Michael— 2008/07/09 @ 01:02 PM — (Reply)
Your diatribe is very revealing. The name calling, the partisan attcks... there are no mentions of party or even politics in this post. If it's a knee-jerk reaction, then it was my own knee, bobbing along of its own accord in response to the article at breitbart.com.
Michael, what I want to know is why you think that if 35 different bloggers write something similar in response to a news article they are all parrots. Certainly, you don't believe that people can't share an opinion without being coached by a radio personality. FYI - I haven't heard a single mention or read a single post about this article or the book it discusses other than my own, so calling me a parrot makes you... well, uninformed.
Furthermore, a cursory glance through the table of contents doesn't make you an expert on the book any more than knowing the alphabet gives me command of every entry in the dictionary. It is a reasonable assumption that the breitbart article is presenting factual material from the book. Material, by the way, that the parent of any toddler would consider absolutely ludicrous.
I'm guessing that there is also much good to be found in a discussion of human relations and cultural diversity but attributing something as silly as infant food preferences to racism. I just find that, pardon the pun, a little hard to swallow.
Comment by Cate— 2008/07/12 @ 07:56 PM — (Reply)
Tell me, Michael, which of us is the hater here.
The BBC, hardly a shill for Rush Limbaugh, quotes the book:
It said: "A child may react negatively to a culinary tradition other than their own by saying, 'Yuck!"'.
That may indicate a lack of familiarity with that particular food, or "more seriously a reaction to a food associated with people from a particular ethnic or cultural community".
It also warned: "Racist incidents among children in early-years settings tend to be around name-calling, casual thoughtless comments and peer group relationships."
Certainly some preschoolers have been exposed to racism but since the book is purportedly an academic treatise designed for use as a handbook to aid state-hired preschool teachers and staff, we can assume that the largest portion of the children to be affected by Miss Jane Lane's wisdom are rarely with their parents. Maybe the British government should investigate xenophobia among public educators since they have custodial responsibility for the tots 8 hours a day ;-) Just a thought.
Unless someone points it out to them, young children are unlikely to even know which food is foreign - so while we're getting real, consider the fact that only a few months prior to day care, everything but milk was foreign to little Tommy.
But never you mind, Michael - you keep up the name-calling -it makes your side look so tolerant. And insinuating that I'm a racist... wow - that's so unexpected (yawn).
Comment by Cate— 2008/07/12 @ 08:26 PM — (Reply)
Assuming breitbart to to be factual is, I suppose, no worse than quoting Fox News, or CNN, but to do so and blithely NOT assume an underlying bias is to intentionally put blinders on yourself. The very absurdity of the story ought to have raised red flag in any deliberative reader, in my opinion. Maybe the text IS ridiculous, but until my library gets a copy, I won't be able to judge one way or another. My expectation, though, is that most of it will be dry, largely uninteresting drivle that most preschool educators ought to know already.
As for whether or not I seem "tolerant," isn't the whole point you're trying to make that folks have been too flippin' hyper-sensitive? I don't mind the well-reasoned conservative, but those are rare jewels (you being one of the most brilliant diamonds of the lot, Cate), among a pile of rubble. And I'll freely acknowledge that the same could be said for liberals, libertarians, communists, whathaveyou. (Well, truth to tell, in my experience, libertarians tend to be a little more reasoned than other "ism's", but only slightly so. Most don't get past the basic Ayn Rand-idolatry.)
Tolerance is met with tolerance, understanding with understanding, Cate. Stupid prattle was met with stupid prattle, here though, and I apologize for my side of things. You knew full well the intent and context of the story, and chose to reduce it to a mockable point. This is your blog, and that's why most folks flock here to read you. I had no right to piddle on your parade.
Did not mean to insinuate you were in any way rascist, Cate. Just that you were being trivial.
Comment by Michael— 2008/07/14 @ 01:21 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/07/12 @ 08:22 PM — (Reply)
BG
Comment by Barry G.— 2008/07/13 @ 06:25 AM — (Reply)
I've had a lot else on my mind the past few days- my father's journey ended two weeks ago (or perhaps I should say his next journey began), so I probably wallowed in the mental distraction more than polite decorum should have dictated.
Apologies to all I may have offended, though I reckon most here have thicker skin than a shrill little liberal like me is likely to scratch through.
Comment by Michael— 2008/07/14 @ 01:28 PM — (Reply)
BG
Comment by Barry G.— 2008/07/15 @ 01:47 PM — (Reply)
Nothing political is ever correct anyways.
Comment by The Dudeler— 2008/07/14 @ 03:11 PM — (Reply)
Michael, I am very sorry for your loss. Your writing is always that of a gentleman.
Comment by Ed— 2008/07/14 @ 05:06 PM — (Reply)
rofl.......The flavor of "politcal correctness" is total bs...next thing you know they will call rape unilateraly consensual intercourse, abortion will become genetic de-selection, murder will become involuntary life cessation, and lets see what could we call rascism?.....hmmm how bout lets see...um ....pigmentaly selective preferance.....rofl
Comment by riffran— 2008/07/14 @ 05:29 PM — (Reply)
Comment by riffran— 2008/07/14 @ 05:31 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2008/07/15 @ 11:14 AM — (Reply)