| | 起因： Discussion on A Racial Discrimination Case 在最近的一次对于种族歧视案例的网络讨论中，本人踊跃发言，值得记录在案（在自己的博克内），尤其是第四次发言没有通过对方的“言论审查”，未被公布，更加有必要在自己的博克里留下记载。在讨论结尾时，楼主抱怨大家对他的批评是“杀死信使”，这个说法不确切，需要更正。在报道这个案件的同时，尤其是在后来的评论里，楼主表明了他的立场， 即"我觉得人权法庭似乎采取了一个非常aggressive的裁决。" 这个立场任何人都可以看出已不属于中立。本人对其作出的反应，就是针对这种非中立，有偏颇的立场和观点（亦即偏见）作出的批评。 我的第一次回复： Yes it is“种族歧视”.
Prejudice (偏见) is an attitude, not action, may not be the discrimination (behavior) per se, but when the racist remarks were made at a meeting (that's openly and publicly), then, it became the behavior, it is discrimination. Those words have impact on the listeners (the workers). 我的第二次回复： I am glad to see that you clearly indicated your "personal opinion" here in your reply. This is actually what benznj asked (he was asking about your opinion, which I think
he has a very valid point, yet you refused to answer, saying it's not about you).
I believe your action of reporting this case here is highly commendable, as it alerts us about such a rather
important racial discrimination case, however, your writing also reflects your attitude inevitably, which in my opinion, is with certain degree of bias.
You seem to take the same stand as Rapps, the manager/owner, and believe that 魁北克人权法庭 is over aggressive "人权法庭的判决已超越其职权范围"(your words).
You wrote you are not convinced whether there is an action of "EXCLUDES". I am afraid that perhaps your bias blinds you in not seeing the exclusion of those Chinese workers ("You Chinese") from Rapps' group of people who he thinks "每天洗澡洗头，用肥皂洗手，上厕后冲水，不随地吐痰...".
Pardon me for being frank but--
Don't you see the clear EXCLUSION here?
If I were you, I would be proud that there is such a thing as Quebec Human Rights Tribunal that fights for the interests of the minorities in Canada, I am not sure I could say the same for USA (eh, maybe ACLU...)
http://blog.creaders.net/hupanwenhuo/user_blog_diary.php?did=84077 | 我的第三次回复： 2cents,
It's a good thing that you said "I can understand why some people take it personally."
And I would say, it's a good thing if you said "I don't understand why some people take it personally."
What does that mean? It means I believe you are entitled to say however or whatever you understand about taking it personally.
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong to have a personal opinion or take a stand.
Thanks for briefing us with your legal family background, and I see you explained why you tried to be neutral. Fine. It's a good thing to be neutral and objective. However,when stating that "人权法庭的判决已超越其职权范围", you indicated your judgment that 人权法庭的判决 is wrong. Is that "neutral" and "objective"? I don't think so.
Many people are reluctant to recognize their own biases, but there are also many people who are psychologically strong enough to acknowledge their own bias.
I think just because of the bias you hold, you are confused as whether this is a case of discrimination --as you put in the title of this post: 这是种族歧视吗？ To me, it is clearly racial discrimination, no doubt about it.
You wrote: It’s too bad if I don't feel personally involved with your cause.
I'd say: Don't feel too bad. I did not expect that you will be involved with my "cause".
As a matter of fact, I don't even have a cause.
Or, maybe I do have a cause, now that you mention it.
Maybe my cause is that I identify with Chinese, as I came from China,and as I have lived here for so long, I'm acculturated and have adopted values here in believing in "Speak up even when your voice is shaken," especially when there is such a case of racial discrimination.
And it's perfectly OK for you not to identify with Chinese, and not to be involved with "my cause".
Again, I repeat here that I think your reporting this case here is highly commendable. |
| | 我的第四次回复：（没有被楼主公布） To 2cents: 既然你写道“谢谢大家的热烈参与讨论并强烈表达意见”那容我再添一笔。 你说：“我只是一个信使，许多人选择了杀死信使。这是我们中国社会的一个特征。” 我说：（1）你不止担当了信使，你还表达了你的观点和立场。对于你的信使角色，我两次都表示了值得称赞；对于你的观点和立场，我指出了你的偏见。而你却把指出你的偏见说成是“杀死信使”。这不确切。
如果你真的是只是扮演信使角色的话，你会采取中立立场，把双方立场交待清楚，就行了。可是你加上了这么一句话“人权法庭的判决已超越其职权范围”，这就是你的观点立场了。你若是在这句话之前加上一句“公司的老板认为”“人权法庭的判决已超越其职权范围”，那才是真正的中立。可惜你没有。你清楚地表明，你同公司老板的立场一致。这是中立吗？不是吧！ 既然你并非中立，并不是单纯的“信使”， 而是有一定立场的，指出这一点就谈不上什么“杀死信使”。 （2）杀死信使，shooting the messenger,根据我对跨文化研究的了解， 是一种普世现象, a universal phenomenon,it happens everywhere, 来源据说是莎士比亚的剧作。 中国人中当然也有，而你却说"这是我们中国社会的一个特征。" 耐人寻味。 (3)你给出的三个定义(百度定义,联合国定义,法律定义--法律定义的出处(哪个国家的?美国?加拿大?)都指明种族歧视是一种行为 (or practice, which is behavior, too).那个老板的言论是在会议上说出的,已经构成speaking这种行为,种族歧视的罪名难逃.如果魁北克省上诉法院裁定老板胜诉，我会觉得惊奇。 | |
