Sunday, March 22, 2020

Never mind unconscious bias - here are some conscious biases that I'm happy to declare


(First published in The Dominion Post and on Stuff.co.nz, March 19.)

We’ve heard a lot in recent months about something called unconscious bias. Apparently this is the bias you have when you don’t know you have a bias. Perhaps we should call it the Claytons bias.

The genius of the concept is that people accused of having an unconscious bias are in no position to deny it, for the obvious reason that they weren’t aware of it. Thus they are held to be guilty by default, as it were.

Personally, I see no point in agonising over my unconscious biases when I don’t know what they are. In any case, I have plenty of conscious ones to keep me occupied, and which I’m happy to declare. Here are some of the things I have conscious biases about:

■ Sanctimonious vegans who aren’t content to quietly follow their conscience when it comes to dietary choices, but must parade their virtue and harangue those of us who enjoy meat and dairy products. I have an especially acute bias against celebrities who take advantage of their high profile in the media to push for a transition to a plant-based economy. I wouldn’t tell James Cameron how to make movies and I’d rather he didn’t tell me what I should eat. 

■ People who insist on inflicting their hideous musical tastes on everyone within a 100-metre range, whether they’re having a barbecue at the beach or driving down the street with the car windows wide open and the stereo cranked up to 11. It goes without saying that their musical tastes are invariably hideous because that’s the sort of people they are. But they apparently believe that the only reason we don’t all love Led Zep is that we haven’t heard them loud enough. Excessive noise is a pernicious invasion of privacy that should be punishable by internment in a confined space where loudspeakers play It’s A Small World After All on endless rotate.

■ Ageing, tough-talking politicians who address reporters as “Sunshine”, channelling Inspector Jack Regan from The Sweeney and imagining that they sound menacing.

■ Australians who make jokes about the New Zealand accent. A British-born Aussie columnist recently referred to Raelene Castle, the New Zealander who runs the Australian Rugby Union, as the Vuccar of Dubbly, thereby mocking her accent while simultaneously making a snide comment about her looks.  Apparently it didn’t occur to him that no one born in England – a country where an East Ender struggles to understand a Liverpudlian, and someone from the West Country might as well speak in Swahili to a Geordie from Tyneside – is in any position to disparage another country’s way of speaking; and still less so when that person has taken up citizenship in Orstrylia, whose national accent, in its more extreme forms, is about as euphonious as the screeching of a galah.

■ Shared plates in restaurants, which I suspect are a cunning plot to make people pay more for less.

■ Freedom campers who treat the landscape with contempt, transforming scenic spots into something resembling Sudanese refugee camps, only with less exacting hygiene standards. It beggars belief that some councils humour these spongers by making available an app that advises them on places where they can set up camp and presumably defecate on any convenient patch of ground. Most New Zealanders would be only too happy to tell freedom campers where to go – preferably the nearest airport.

■ Tiresome left-wing moralists masquerading as stand-up comedians, kidding themselves that they’re edgy when in fact they play it safe by pandering to the smug, conformist group-think of their like-minded audiences.  

■ Taxpayer-funded broadcasters using their privileged position to promote their pet ideological agendas.

■ David Attenborough – not so much for his preaching about climate change, although God knows that’s tedious enough, as for his habit of manipulating viewers’ emotions by anthropomorphising the creatures in his documentaries – in other words, encouraging us to think of them as behaving and feeling like humans.

■ Transgender activists who aren’t content to quietly follow their inclination without any fuss, as transgender people used to do (the author Jan Morris, for example), but who demand to be noticed and paid homage to as an oppressed minority.

■ Neo-Marxist ideologues who want to reconstruct the English language by erasing all reference to biological sex. In one of the more bizarre idiocies of 2019, a parliamentary select committee considering the abortion bill was urged to replace the term “pregnant woman” with “pregnant person” – a proposal that found favour with Green MP Jan Logie, who thought “pregnant person” was more inclusive. Seriously. And to think they let these people out unaccompanied in public.

10 comments:

Doug Longmire said...

Well hurrah !! Well done Karl.
I agree completely, and you have put it so well.

granddad said...

In fairness 'pregnant person' should be used as it's vitally important not to exclude 'pregnant men'!

ghob said...

Guilty as charged ...
My experience of the "up to 11" syndrome is that the subject matter is more likely to be Rap of the worst kind, full of over-done bass and lots of 'f'ing going on. The only reason you hear Led Zep at 11 nowadays is that the aficionado concerned has been listening to it at high volume for too long and is now a wee bit deaf after 40 years of exposure.

hughvane said...

At last - humour! I must take issue with the definition of Oz-speak, it's Ostraya , sometimes Ostraiya, no L in either. I cite as evidence the ghastly cricket commentators and commenters who butcher and mangle English like no other.

hughvane said...

Was it not the Melbourne City Council that, decades ago, trialled playing Barry Manilow music loudly to disperse crowds of yobbo youths congregating in the city centre late at night and causing mayhem? Perhaps that could be used on those who rend the air with their obnoxious aural assaults.

Doug Longmire said...

We have a new word in the English language. It is "vunlibrall". It has apparently replaced the real word vulnerable.
As has "Nar" replaced "now".
But - this is how it happens here in New Zillid.

Rowan G said...

This opinion piece from Karl has made my day.

Doug Longmire said...

Sorry to enlighten you granddad, but it is physiologically impossible for a man to be pregnant. So the correct term would be pregnant person, although this in fact, by definition means pregnant woman.

I too am heartily tired of hearing this ridiculous forced change to the English language to somehow require that we must address a transvestite male who wears woman's clothes by a feminine pronoun.
There are only two genders. Male and female. Locked into the DNA. Basic fifth form physiology. If a person decides to dress up in different clothing, take hormones, have surgery, it does NOT change their gender.

Odysseus said...

Climate catastrophists in all their myriad forms do it for me. Sadly it may take a real crisis like the pandemic we are now grappling with to put the hysteria and bunkum preached by Thunberg, Extinction Rebellion and the UN (which has thoroughly discredited itself) into true perspective and expose it for the the nonsense it is.

Birdman said...

It is neither Ostraya nor Ostraiya, it is the more simple (obviously) and precise Straya (said quickly). Having lived there for some time, attended the MCG for AFL matches and listened to true Strayans around me, decked out in thongs and little more than a cozzie, barracking for their favourite Collingwood hoodlum, whose sleeveless gurnsey was augmented with two bewdifil inked sleeves and who, when they learned I wuz from cross thu deech, respectfully enquired of my favourite sheep breed for personal satisfaction purposes, I can attest to this truth.