AIBU to think public racist / anti immigrant / anti trans posts can justify dismissal?

Sarah Sharif.

@TheGreatDownandOut @greencatwitch

I'm not fond of most religions now I agree it's an excuse to control and opress women but i do appreciate the community feel etc

This is the danger with some religions trying to ban critism we should all be free to critique all religions and call them out without fear of being called racist.

I'm afraid you're talking bollocks.

Complex issues aren't ever attributable to one thing.

Was there a negative attitude to victims of grooming gangs? Yes

Was there also a fear among professionals of being accused of racism? Yes

Was there also a fear that being honest about grooming gangs causing social unrest and overtime racism in the community? Yes.

When Ellie Williams was lying about being a victim of Asian grooming gangs there were public protests and Asian businesses attacked.

And it comes up again and again, in the Southport enquiry we had a teacher saying she was so concerned about his attitude and lack of remorse after violent/weapons incidents in school she was pressing the issue then another professional said 'do you really want to profile him as a black young man with a knife and felt she was being accused of racism and shut down.

With the Nottingham inquiry, staff spoke about the culture of fear of sectioning a violent black man. In reference to the 'big, black and dangerous' report accusing MH services of institutional racism.

Anyone who pretends no-one in the public sector fears accusations of racism is a bad actor or just do not know what they're talking about.

Surely it depends ? The ta maybe amazing and the most supportive ta to all her charges but still feel that immigration is too high ?

I feel the same way as you. Down to the last part about respecting people who peacefully practice whichever religion they choose.

The problem with fundamentalist religions is they often believe their doctrine is above the law of the land. And this creates a clash if they live in a country whose laws are not religion based. Such as extremist Muslims living within the UK. Or, another good example, FLDS members living in the US. I think the FLDS is just as problematic as Islam with its treatment of women and girls but followers of FLDS are predominantly white and western. So how could I be accused of being racist?

I’m afraid I think that’s bollocks. There was a culture of thinking girls who were out at night, drinking and using drugs and hanging around with older men were worthless. Police themselves sexually abused girls. Then it all came out and the cops used whatever excuse their could ‘ooh, we were scared of being called racist’. Why weren’t they scared of being called racist when they watched an innocent black men die on the floor at Hull police station? Or when they fitted up a group of black men in Cardiff for a murder? Weird isn’t it, that they’re only scared when it suits them.

Social work as a profession is captured. So many 'trans' young people. The use of pronouns on everything. Reality left social work a long time ago, to the deteriment of confused, traumatised young people who think changes from male to female or female to male (biologically impossible) will sort their problems (it won't).

A political rally against there being more black and Asian children in her classroom, and portraying that as a negative? That’s not politics, and I’m glad she identified herself so the vulnerable children she is contact with can be protected from her.

Yes I think the Henry Nowak incident is a good example of this.

This.

Being called racist should not trump safeguarding children or vulnerable adults.

The Henry Novak killer used the pretence of racism to ensure the police looked at that first rather than at what was really happening he had stabbed Henry who was dying on the floor whilst the police checked the poor killer's story of racism.

This.

How can it be hateful to use biological fact, and say that people can live as they chose, use what name they prefer but cannot change sex. That's not hate although some would like to tell everyone it is.

The right and left is very much used. There are good people in all parties and to just say right is racist, hateful etc when there are clear examples of people who are left leaning that are equally hateful, antisemitic, etc is too simplistic.

I think it should be ok for her to go to a political rally, however unpalatable, and make a speech. I don’t think she should have mentioned that she worked in a school or talked about pupils there. I think she should have been much more careful what she said and it was obvious that people would be watching those videos to try to identify people.

If you look at the grooming gangs in Rotherham, that’s exactly what happened. There was a culture of fear of being called racist, and people in authority at a lower level were both genuinely nervous about raising concerns relating to Pakistani men in “relationships” with vulnerable young girls, and also used it to not bother to do anything, many times because it was too much hassle, which harmed children. The only way to stop that is to openly tackle the culture of fear.

Of course you think you are, all racists think they’re brave for ‘saying it like it is’. But how about the Muslim girls and women who will know they can’t trust you? How much braver will they have to be when people like you - paid for by the rest of us by the way - make them feel less than because you think they are ‘dangerous’.

They breached their employment contracts presumably.

If someone is public facing and working for an organisation funded by the taxpayer, to express extreme views that could amount to prejudice against groups of service users would not be acceptable.

Only if we let them, which perpetuating the nonsense espoused by pp is doing.

Thank you, appreciate the link.

‘“I work in a school, 1,100 kids. Up until 18 months ago we only had between three and four in every 1,000 kids (who were) Black or Asian children. We have now anywhere between 75 and 80 of them. In 18 months. So it’s on its way.”
She went on to urge demonstrators not to use Turkish barbers, accusing the businesses of crimes, provoking some pushback from those assembled.’

https://somersetleveller.co.uk/news/school-worker-brenda-heal-will-not-return-for-new-term-after-immigration-protest-remarks/

I agree with your first point. But a learning assistant is in a trusted position with children. If I had children (of any ethnicity, but especially of a minority) in the school Brenda Rose Heal was in, I’d pull them out rather than have them exposed to her hatred. Wouldn’t you?

What did she say? We’ve only had a description of the receptionist.

What did happen to the msps and their support of this violence? Did they pull a “whoopsie gosh we didn’t know” or
double down?

There is, in my view, a big difference between seeing the harm that a religious state like Afghanistan can do, and seeing an entire religion and all its participants as ‘dangerous‘, without any nuance whatsoever. I wonder how she thinks she’s any safer for Muslim women or children if she writes them all off as dangerous.

There’s also a wide range of understanding of what ‘GC’ means and how that is applied. The law protects her beliefs, as it protects the beliefs of people who are trans.

Of course anyone can have any extreme views they like, provided they act within the law and any regulatory or contractual arrangements they are subject to - for example employment.

I personally find it dangerous when agents of the state, who have enormous power, hold strong views (negative or positive) about some groups of people. And again, I don’t think it aligns with the regulatory position of social work to single out a religion as ‘dangerous’. If you can’t be neutral, get a different job.

Do you work in social work?

I'm not denying anyone's experiences. The failings of the SW system and children's services are a matter of public record. What I'm trying to understand is what this actually looks like for social workers. Are they being encouraged to ignore the abuse of Muslim girls? Or are they being encouraged to approach addressing it in a different way in order to not alienate the families? They're two very different things.
And, no, it's not remotely 'romanticised' to believe there are operational models used to reach and connect with different demographics which typically involve taking into account people's different cultural norms. Its a very basic concept that's been around for decades.
My interest is in learning how and why this has become a barrier to SW safeguarding some groups of children. Are they being encouraged to ignore abuse they believe is based in religious beliefs, or not?