Priti Patel Cartoon

[Everanewbie]

Whatever you think of her politics, AIBU to feel that the Guardian, and left wing commentators display disgusting hypocracy in their treatment of politicians in the centre-right, especially when female or of colour, in thius case Home Secretary Priti Patel?

Diane Abbott has been targetted by the most foul abuse, which is rightly highlighted and condemned, however claims of abuse are fired back when her views, consistency, politics and competance are questioned. But if the person in question is more of a centre-right pursuasion, they seem to be fair game.

There is plenty of biased and deeply ideological "reporting" in the Guardian LuluJakey. They might write better quality sentences than the Daily Mail and have less celebrity gossip, but if you happen know a subject in depth, it's very easy to see how the Guardian obscures and twists the facts to push an agenda. It's become extremely authoritarian and moved away from being a liberal newspaper. One of its main problems is that it employs far too many columnists in proportion to actual journalists to be reliable, and also that those columnists uphold a very narrow editorial line that is not even willing to reflect a variety of views on the left of the political spectrum, never mind more widely still.

doesn't leave many options for us haters then

This is in extremely poor taste. I can see what they were getting at but as seen in the Alistair Campbell row, just because you didn't mean to be racist or inappropriate it can be perceived that way.

This is a shining example of privilege and not understanding or caring about the cultural sensitivities.

I have absolutely no time whatsoever for PP but this is horrid.

It’s racist because she is being compared to a bull when she’s Hindu, and the ‘nose ring’ has more in common with what rural Hindu women wear than the ones worn by bulls. The cartoonist has also darkened her skin to make his point

@GCAcademic

The Guardian cannot cope with BAME people who are not left wing. If anyone who is not white is not a Labour supporter, the Guardian reveals itself to be every bit as racist as the Daily Mail.

It published a deeply unpleasant article last week about East African Asians (and their descendants) who have the temerity not to vote Labour. It clearly believes that all people whose skin is not white must think alike - and if they do not, they are somehow defective.

Brilliantly put. ^

Absolutely agree. Deep down the Guardian is every bit as bigoted and nasty as the Daily Mail.

And they are showing it more and more every week.

@GCAcademic

In fact your description of the Guardian, pretty much sums up the far left.

The Guardian is racist trash

I’d ask for a link about the East Africa voting but it’s just going to piss me off more isn’t it

I must see if I can block them on my iPad. I was looking a link about Glastonbury and posted theirs, stupid of me really.

In fact your description of the Guardian, pretty much sums up the far left.

Yes, I agree. That's because the Guardian is invested in pushing the far left line, and most of its columnists are of that persuasion.

I find it a depressingly neo-colonial attitude, i.e. the brown people must think like us, or be educated to do so. Heaven forbid they should be allowed the freedom to come to their own conclusions about what's best for them and their families. If they do, we'll put them back in their place with nasty cartoons and editorials.

Hindu Council have asked for an apology.

I also agree the Guardian is incredibly narrow-minded, and ridiculously unsophisticated and dogmatic in its treatment of race, sex and other issues of inequality. Black people in particular are put on an incredibly patronising pedestal, until they're not if they don't adhere to the Guardian's idea of a nice, salt of the earth lefty ethnic person.

There was a weekend edition a while ago with a magazine guest-edited by Stormzy - nothing against him, I like him but the patronising fawning and hero-worship from all the white woke journalists was excruciating.

(I do occasionally read it as you can see! But recently I've also been reading the Times, Telegraph, FT and the I to get a better round-up and read some of the interesting GC articles that are around.)

I am left wing, can't stand Priti Patel, but I think the cartoon is racist. It shows that Bell paid no heed to the difference in heritage between Johnson and Patel and how that might impact on portraying them both as bulls. Also, as GrumpyHoonMain said, the nose ring on Patel is very iffy given that some Indian women wear them.

@GCAcademic

Yes, I agree. That's because the Guardian is invested in pushing the far left line, and most of its columnists are of that persuasion.

I find it a depressingly neo-colonial attitude, i.e. the brown people must think like us, or be educated to do so. Heaven forbid they should be allowed the freedom to come to their own conclusions about what's best for them and their families. If they do, we'll put them back in their place with nasty cartoons and editorials.

Well said again!

In my village, we have half a dozen Asian families, and they all support Conservative. In the families are a mix of dentists, lawyers, GPs, accountants, and Store Managers. I have encountered a number of far-left people saying they are STUNNED that these POC are Tories, and 'they should be ashamed of themselves'

Such narrow-minded and bigoted views.

A similar example ... Me and DH go out for the day/on a long-ish drive, DH almost always drives. I am not keen on driving, and DH loves it, and he KNOWS if he can't drive for a bit (like if he gets tired/needs a nap for half hour,) that I can - and will - take the wheel. We are both very happy with this.

Still, this doesn't stop several women I know demanding to know why let HIM do most of the driving, and telling me I should demanding I do 50% of the driving. When I say 'I really don't care,' I get told he has gaslighted and brainwashed me into being the little woman who is driven around by the big important man.

Again, incredibly bigoted and narrow-minded. And these SAME people have the 'how on earth can a POC be a Tory' mindset.

I think it has indisputable race/faith based undertones and is extremely offensive to the point PP might have justification to sue.

And my politics could not differ more from hers

Swish “ It shows that Bell paid no heed to the difference in heritage between Johnson and Patel”

Oh it’s more than that. It’s “brown person, how dare you not behave the way we want”.

Can someone explain EXACTLY why they think it’s racist?

Rather than saying it’s racist or has racist tones etc

BOTH Patel and Johnson are depicted as bulls because they were being bullish in the face of criticism of Patel In commons for bullying.

It’s not racist because Boris and Priti are both depicted as bulls possible as a reference to bullying. It is a rubbish cartoon though, if it’s open to this much interpretation it hasn’t done its job (whatever that was?).

Frankly, anyone calling PP "centre right" is patently a bot...

Ps most people claiming it’s racist have deliberately cropped Boris out because they know it weakens their argument.

Guardian far left?

lol

It’s not racist because Boris and Priti are both depicted as bulls possible as a reference to bullying. It is a rubbish cartoon though, if it’s open to this much interpretation it hasn’t done its job (whatever that was?).

But the point is is that there is a BIG difference bewteen portraying Johnson as a bull with a ring through his nose and portraying Patel as a bull with a ring through her nose, because of the differences in their heritage.

Really not comfortable with that cartoon, at all and I loathe Patel.

It feels like a jab at her ethnic heritage, not her politics.

I think that's why it's complicated - it can be seen as racist, it can also be argued that it's not, but in the context of being a white cartoonist targeting a politician with an Indian background, he should have taken care to avoid the implication.

It's like making a joke or cartoon involving bananas. Aimed at Boris Johnson - not racist. Aimed at a black person - EVEN IF no racism was intended and it was done exactly the same way as it was to a white person - is crass at best and potentially has racist undertones because of the context and the use of bananas in other incidences of racism. The cartoonist should have the awareness that it could be seen that way, and they could (possibly accurately) be accused of unconscious or covert racism.