Since the latest so-called ‘royal race row’, the seemingly innocuous question, ‘where are you from?’, has been the subject of much debate.
I’ve heard so many stories these past few days – one about a British man with a French name who isn’t offended when asked where he is from, one about a woman who was born in Hong Kong but now has British citizenship and is never offended when someone asks where she is from, etc. And it’s as if these stories should be taken to mean that anyone who is offended by that question is over-sensitive or likes to play the race card. And no doubt those on the other side of the culture war are sharing stories of victimhood and offence, and concluding that anyone who asks, ‘where are you from?’, is racist, and this is of course just evidence that the U.K. is racist.
I find the question irritating and sometimes offensive (regardless of the colour of the person asking it), and dare I say sometimes I do suspect racism depending on how it is asked. In my opinion, there are better ways of asking someone where their parents or grandparents are from. Like that – for example. After all, if you are from the U.K. (even if you do have brown skin), and you are a more literally-minded person, then ‘where are you from?’ simply doesn’t make sense to you. It might even be reminiscent of ‘get back to your own country’. But let’s not go there.
Surely it only takes a bit of perspective to understand that some people may find something offensive (or irritating at best) and others may not?
Do I advocate speech codes and ideological training? No. I think we have the right to offend and to be offended (and to offend without realising it and not to be offended when others think we should be… the list goes on). Aren’t we able to navigate our own interpersonal interactions, rather than having an imposed political and ideological framework guide and constrain them?
This is the real issue here, in my opinion. The apparent implication of this incident is that ideological ‘diversity training’ is needed anywhere and everywhere that has so far escaped its grasp. Every person needs it. Schools need it. Care homes need it (after all, 83-year-old ladies need it). The Royal Family and all its people most definitely need it.
Are we all signed up to these ideological beliefs? What if we are not – can we opt out or openly disagree without fear of losing our jobs? Should ideological training be compulsory? Should it be legal? Is it legal? Does ‘diversity training’ encourage interracial interactions or hinder them?
Which is more preferable – some missteps, some misunderstandings, and even some racism now and then, or a set of ideologically infused rules to regulate all our interactions, in the hope that one day maybe no one will be offended and there will be no more racism? Never mind that there’ll be no more genuine conversation in such a world.
‘Diversity training’ is the Trojan horse being pulled into every institution. And ‘where are you from?’ – whatever you may think about that question – is just a distraction.
This article first appeared on Amber Muhinyi’s Substack. Subscribe here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
‘Saoirse (pronounced “Sur-sha”)’
Saoirse is pronounced “Seer-sha”.
In case anyone meets her, Saoirse Ronan apparently pronounces her name SUR-sha. She says herself Seer-sha is also another, very common pronunciation.
It’s a bit of a minefield. I think this may be where the problems started:
‘The earliest written records of Gaelic are in Ogham, a script used in early medieval Ireland. Ogham is sometimes called the “Celtic tree alphabet” because each letter is associated with an Irish tree name’
I know a few women called Saoirse, I’ve never heard anyone pronounce it ‘Sur-sha’, not even people on TV or radio referring to Saoirse Ronan. It’s a bit odd, it’s like someone called Vera wanting it to be pronounced ‘Vura’.
There’s an MP from Northern Ireland called Sorcha Eastwood, but it’s spelt Sorcha, not Saoirse.
Are you sure it’s not pronounced “id-i-ot?”
Courts have to start handing out exemplary punishment for this offence.
In cases with rock solid DNA evidence for murder, I, personally, would have at least one perpetrator every year shot.
This would provide both useful live firing practice for our young soldiers, who would queue round the block to participate, and a stark deterrent to potential offenders.
Anybody who appoints themselves as a spokesperson for victims of rape and sexual assault, whilst simultaneously being of the “Refugees welcome”/”Women can have penises and enter female spaces and sports” is an idiotic, deluded, hypocritical traitor.
You cannot be both concerned about women’s personal safety and be a woketard, it’s not possible. These people are frauds and traitors to their own sex.
There would be altogether less sex crimes if there were less people in society who belonged to these two misogynist cults. Less stabbings and mutilation of kids/young people also.
This from Germany illustrates my point about who the actual perpetrators of the majority of sexual assaults and stabbings are, and ignoring this by potentially introducing female-only carriages on trains is hardly getting to the root cause of the problem. Especially considering you can now change your gender in Germany from the age of 14yrs, this idea seems even more pointless;
”Antje Kapek, the transport policy speaker for the Green Party in Berlin, has called for the introduction of train carriages for exclusive use by female passengers. This follows a shocking upsurge in serious sex crimes on trains and buses, with Berlin alone experiencing the equivalent of more than one such assault every day. Frankfurt is heading in a similar direction.
Transport hubs across Germany are becoming less safe. Federal Police recorded 13,543 violent crimes at train stations in the first half of 2024.
Critics point out that such changes to ticketing and rolling stock would leave the basic problem intact, that of sexual aggression from men. For the German Greens, this points to a separate issue they would rather not discuss: the actual men being arrested for these offences. When news outlet NiUS analysed a list of the names of suspected rapists from North Rhine-Westphalia, it concluded that 55.8 percent of the perpetrators were either not German or from a migrant background.
The Greens—who fully supported the opening of Germany’s borders in 2015—would sooner not address the fact that men from specific communities are disproportionately represented in the crime statistics compared to their numbers within the overall population. Women-only train carriages would respond to a symptom of the problem, in the deflection-oriented style preferred by the collapsed traffic light coalition government.
Other examples of this approach involve telling railway staff in Thuringia that ticket inspection is now discretionary and that conductors can opt out of checking the credentials of passengers who appear to be foreign, due to the threat of assault. Nationally, faced with a wave of stabbing, the authorities are considering a ban on knives in public with blades over 6 cm in length. This focus by the government on objects rather than perpetrators helps explain why German voters are growing bemused and angry with the official failure to grasp the nettle of violent crime.”
https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news/german-greens-advocate-women-only-train-carriages/
The 3 photos of men in blackface are definitely Welsh miners. This is why the Welsh Labour party needs to destroy white culture.
https://x.com/Basil_TGMD/status/1857100800054468634
It isn’t just rape and murder of white women though is it. Today’s papers report the murder of a 24 yr old woman found in the boot of a car in Ilford, East London. Her name was Harshita Brella (Harshita is an Indian name) and the police believe she was murdered by someone known to her. (In other words, they suspect it could be an “honour” killing.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39nwjygjgro
We have imported millions of men from a cultural and religious background who believe women and girls are their property to be disposed of – literally – however they wish. If they have no care or respect for the individuality and rights of their own women/girls, why should they have any for white girls who they consider to be slags and “easy meat?”
Prophesied in the book of Revelation:
And he cried with a mighty voice, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the Great! She has become an abode of demons, and a prison of every unclean spirit, and a prison of every unclean and hated bird. For all the nations have drunk from the wine of her raging fornication, and the kings of the earth have fornicated with her.”
Babylon the Great stands for western civilisation, standing on the foundations of the first civilisation that rose up in Uruk Mesopotamia and now sexualised to the point of being depicted as a prostitute. The nations, symbolised as birds (Daniel 4:14), have introduced unclean religions into the city. Thus the largest mosque in the western world by land area is the Mosque of Rome, with Strasbourg’s not far behind. Demons have returned to the house that was swept clean of them and brought with them spirits more evil than themselves. The sense is not that they are captives, rather they hold the city captive.
More on this in When the Towers Fall: A Prophecy of What Must Happen Soon.
This was 5 years ago but is about pathological altruism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o40yZO2QPc
It happened again.
And an update 1 year ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzWVkHlAXhQ&t=183s
It happened again.
These are very much related.
Ah, the acting profession where they are at their best when somebody else tells them what to do and what to say. They should stick to that.
Never heard of this Ronan nonentity and I’m quite pleased about that. What a waste of space!