![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dreamer_easyIt's International Blog Against Racism Week! Visit ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
ibarw for lots of links and resources.
Why having red hair is not like being Black :-)
As a ginger nut myself, I've been surprised to see people compare being a redhead to being a Person of Colour. So, to understand why well-meaning people might say that, let's do this backwards: let's first of all look at the ways in which being a redhead is like being Black.
First of all, red hair is genetic. The colour of human skin, hair, and eyes results from two pigments, the reddish phaeomelanin and the brownish eumelanin. At least six different genes control the production of these pigments, which is why humans come in so many different shades. Eumelanin helps protect us from UV damage from sunlight. The "tanning hormone", MSH, switches on the production of eumelanin. But in redheads, the receptor for MSH doesn't work properly - which is why redheads often tan so badly.
Secondly, redheads are sometimes targetted by bigots. I haven't been teased about my carrot-top since childhood, so I was really surprised to discover that in the UK, redheads are considered fair game for some quite serious harassment, and not just in the schoolyard. The stories are frightening: redheaded women taunted, in the tube or at work, about the colour of their pubic hair; a family moving house to escape harassment; even a stabbing.
And lastly, red hair is irrelevant. Or rather, it should be. Nobody should be judged on a stereotype of gingers as oversexed and temperamental. And yet, people still do it, just as we jump to conclusions about people because the colour of their skin. Nobody should feel free to bully redheads, and yet, some people still do it, just as some insult and harass people based on their race or ethnicity.
So much for the ways in which gingerism resembles racism. Now let's look at the ways in which they're different.
There's a lot more to racism than just pigmentation. For example, in the US, Irish immigrants were considered non-White (and lazy, ape-like, and generally inferior). Racism is inextricably mixed up with ethnicity. In Australia, racism against Middle Eastern immigrants tends to focus on language ("They won't learn English!") and religion ("omg terrorists! They don't respect Our Women! etc"), because it'd be hard to get away with more overt racism.
Redheads don't form a group that's like a race or an ethnicity. We don't have a common language or religion or culture. We don't have a history of being enslaved, segregated, locked in internment camps, or kicked off our land. We don't have a current experience of indefinite detention without charge or trial. We don't have a significantly higher infant mortality rate than blondes or brunettes, nor a lower average income, nor a shorter expected lifespan, nor a higher likelihood of growing up in poverty; nor do we make up a disproportionate percentage of prison inmates, or death row inmates. We're not crowded into neighbourhoods where other people won't live. To date, no-one has tried to "ethnically cleanse" us.
The longer that list goes on, the sadder it gets, and the more obvious that gingerism hasn't and isn't doing the kind of widespread damage that racism has, and is. Gingerism is unquestionably prejudice. It's just not in the same league as racism. And I pray to the red-headed goddesses of this world that it never will be.
Perhaps the most useful thing about comparing gingerism to racism is this: gingerism is patently ridiculous. If judging and mistreating people for their hair colour is obviously arbitrary, silly, and mean-spirited, then maybe our suspicions and assumptions about people from different backgrounds aren't as factual, logical, and natural as we think they are.
Your remarks are very welcome! (I'll add some links and footnotes in a comment.)
ibarw for lots of links and resources.Why having red hair is not like being Black :-)
As a ginger nut myself, I've been surprised to see people compare being a redhead to being a Person of Colour. So, to understand why well-meaning people might say that, let's do this backwards: let's first of all look at the ways in which being a redhead is like being Black.
First of all, red hair is genetic. The colour of human skin, hair, and eyes results from two pigments, the reddish phaeomelanin and the brownish eumelanin. At least six different genes control the production of these pigments, which is why humans come in so many different shades. Eumelanin helps protect us from UV damage from sunlight. The "tanning hormone", MSH, switches on the production of eumelanin. But in redheads, the receptor for MSH doesn't work properly - which is why redheads often tan so badly.
Secondly, redheads are sometimes targetted by bigots. I haven't been teased about my carrot-top since childhood, so I was really surprised to discover that in the UK, redheads are considered fair game for some quite serious harassment, and not just in the schoolyard. The stories are frightening: redheaded women taunted, in the tube or at work, about the colour of their pubic hair; a family moving house to escape harassment; even a stabbing.
And lastly, red hair is irrelevant. Or rather, it should be. Nobody should be judged on a stereotype of gingers as oversexed and temperamental. And yet, people still do it, just as we jump to conclusions about people because the colour of their skin. Nobody should feel free to bully redheads, and yet, some people still do it, just as some insult and harass people based on their race or ethnicity.
So much for the ways in which gingerism resembles racism. Now let's look at the ways in which they're different.
There's a lot more to racism than just pigmentation. For example, in the US, Irish immigrants were considered non-White (and lazy, ape-like, and generally inferior). Racism is inextricably mixed up with ethnicity. In Australia, racism against Middle Eastern immigrants tends to focus on language ("They won't learn English!") and religion ("omg terrorists! They don't respect Our Women! etc"), because it'd be hard to get away with more overt racism.
Redheads don't form a group that's like a race or an ethnicity. We don't have a common language or religion or culture. We don't have a history of being enslaved, segregated, locked in internment camps, or kicked off our land. We don't have a current experience of indefinite detention without charge or trial. We don't have a significantly higher infant mortality rate than blondes or brunettes, nor a lower average income, nor a shorter expected lifespan, nor a higher likelihood of growing up in poverty; nor do we make up a disproportionate percentage of prison inmates, or death row inmates. We're not crowded into neighbourhoods where other people won't live. To date, no-one has tried to "ethnically cleanse" us.
The longer that list goes on, the sadder it gets, and the more obvious that gingerism hasn't and isn't doing the kind of widespread damage that racism has, and is. Gingerism is unquestionably prejudice. It's just not in the same league as racism. And I pray to the red-headed goddesses of this world that it never will be.
Perhaps the most useful thing about comparing gingerism to racism is this: gingerism is patently ridiculous. If judging and mistreating people for their hair colour is obviously arbitrary, silly, and mean-spirited, then maybe our suspicions and assumptions about people from different backgrounds aren't as factual, logical, and natural as we think they are.
Your remarks are very welcome! (I'll add some links and footnotes in a comment.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
You're the world's biggest hypocrite
Date: 2009-08-19 09:16 pm (UTC)So if you cut me, then I don't bleed-- because YOU said "it's not in the same league." Gotcha. So when Jews and blacks made slurs against me, it's ok-- but it would be wrong for me to return-fire with slurs against them.
GOD I want to stomp your face in.
You are cherry-picking facts in order to be a politically-correct toady, and claim that racial slurs are worse than slur against redheads. But when you say:
"Redheads don't form a group that's like a race or an ethnicity."
Then you're being ignorant and simplistic. Redheads are not a race or ethnicity-- but it is genetic; the only difference unlike them, it's caused by a recessive gene, rather than dominant.
That’s the only difference. And recessive genes simply are expressed more diversely among a population—i.e. we are the world’s only genetic minority, even among our own group.
This means that while we didn’t have the same group-disadvantages that they had—i.e. we couldn’t be targeted and oppressed as a group like they were-- we also don't have the same group advantages that they have from their cohesiveness. On the contrary, each of us is basically on our own, having no group-support that they have, and without the ability to band together for group-protection. So we are basically divided, outnumbered, and targeted individually for a common phenotypical characteristic.
Therefore we need more protection than other minority-groups, since we can’t protect each other like they can: even our own parents can look different than we do, and this can cause us to become targets even within our own families. It's insane to say that a larger, more powerful and more cohesive group, should get more protection than a more weaker and more disparate one!
Consider Jews: they are not only an ethnicity, but also a religion: that gives them homogeneity as well as cohesiveness This gives them great power in terms of mutual support and activism. It’s similar with blacks, who likewise have made gains in this area because of their homogeneity.
True, we can't be targeted jointly in history like the others could, but only because we aren't homogeneous like they are-- and therefore there was no opportunity to oppress us as homogenous group. However, it's absurd to say that it's better to target and oppress people individually based on their color, than not as a group. Individuals have rights-- not groups; and when there is a widespread public mentality or belief which causes individuals to be targeted and oppressed based on their color, then the CAUSE of such is irrelevant: they deserve to be just a safe.
Redheads don't have the NAACP, the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, or any other group looking out for them-- but they have the same right to their safety, their sanctity and their self-respect. Therefore the law must act to ensure that we have the same rights as everyone else: if someone makes a slur against us, then the law should do not only what it would do against a racist or anti-semitic slur, but ALSO what the NAACP or the ADL would do.
For example, when Rush Limbaugh made slurs against redheads, not only should he be sanctioned by the FCC like he would against an anti-semitic slur, but should also fine him the same amount as he would suffer. The purpose of the law is to protect those who can't protect themselves, in order to protect everyone equally-- there is no such thing as a "safe prejudice."
So basically, Limbaugh should lose his job on ABC radio for his comments, just like he lost his job on ESPN when he made a racist comment (which wasn't anywhere NEAR as offensive as his anti-redhead slur).
Re: You're the world's biggest hypocrite
Date: 2009-08-20 07:01 am (UTC)Re: You're the world's biggest hypocrite
Date: 2009-08-20 09:47 am (UTC)Re: You're the world's biggest hypocrite
Date: 2009-08-20 04:24 pm (UTC)Re: You're the world's biggest hypocrite
Date: 2009-08-20 03:18 pm (UTC)Is this some kind of lead-up to the ethnic cleansing of straw men...?