Dating animal consumers

I gave it a broad term because I'm vegan, and preferably, I would like whoever I date to be vegan too. So 'meat eaters' doesn't cut it.

This has been a real conflict for me - would I ever seriously date someone who wasn't vegan? (when I say 'date', I actually mean seriously date, someone you plan on spending a large part of your life with)

Image not mine

Veganism is such a big part of my life that, before, I didn't see much of a point in dating someone who viewed certain animal products as commodities and tasty treats. Yeah, it's easy to focus on other things that you like or have in common...but being vegan affects a lot of my personality, what I choose to do, how I react to certain things etc...it isn't like being really into a band.

Speaking of, I used to have the idea that I didn't really want to date anyone unless they shared a similar taste in music...but music doesn't affect who someone is (a certain type of person doesn't listen to rock music for example), yet a lot of vegans have proven that they give a shit about animals and are conscious about what they put in/on their body....I've never met a vegan who isn't compassionate, kind, and genuinely animal-loving. Veganism isn't just a diet, it's a lifestyle.

This might sound pretentious to some people, but it makes sense. Like, for example, if you're a feminist, could you date someone who's misogynistic and sees no point in feminism, even if they treated you well? Just like veganism, feminism affects how someone sees the world, what they do, what they're passionate about etc.

So what's my overall view? I could date someone who still used animal products IF they were open to the idea of stopping/wanted to stop eventually. If it's taking a while, then I understand that - I once met a vegan who told me it took her five years to give up animal products altogether, and that didn't mean that she didn't care, it meant that it was a hard process.

To become vegan, or even vegetarian, you have to dismiss everything that you've probably been told your entire life - you need to look past the constant adverts, animal-consumer mentality, everyone around you saying that using animals is completely okay...and that's fucking difficult, even when you do become veg*an. I still struggle with the animal-consumer society, but in a different way - instead of struggling to break free from all I've known, I struggle to understand why people are so apathetic or downright aggressive when it comes to using animals.

And I understand the aggression - telling someone that [you believe] what they've been doing and love their entire life is grotesque and actually causes a lot of pain and suffering for the animals, the planet, and the human race can be hard-hitting, people are bound to get defensive...so I get that, but if people take a second to properly think about what they're doing instead of immediately getting in vegans' faces, they'll realise we're not just saying this to piss them off.

In conclusion - yes, I would date someone who wasn't vegan...but not if they have no intention to ever change that or think that veganism is a waste of time. If they find the idea of vegetarianism appealing even, that's still fine, because a lot of veggies eventually do become vegan...it's like a stepping stone (it must be incredibly hard to go vegan right away).

....But I still won't approve of them using animals; what I will approve of is their will to change.

No Shave November

Or 'Movember' (which I shall call it from now on because it's quicker to type).

A movement started to raise awareness for prostate and testicular cancer.

I'm not here to talk about cancer or the reason why Movember was invented, I'm here to talk about what some people have been saying about women regarding Movember.

A regular theme I've seen is that women taking part in Movember are either not entitled because it's something regarding men only (not shaving their facial hair), or that if they DO, they have to be prepared to get no sex [because women not shaving is ew gross].

I want to address the bit about entitlement first. Not only does the Noshember website encourage men AND women alike to put down the razor for a month, but if women want to show their support for cancer, why shouldn't they be able to (by also not shaving) as well....?

Someone on tumblr sums up what I'm arguing against nicely:

'Why would they do that? It’s all about them, all the time. They have pink everywhere for breast cancer awareness, which is primarily a female problem. But this one month of awareness for a male problem, which most probably don’t even know about, is driving them insane. Pathetic.'

HAVING A GO AT WOMEN FOR ALSO WANTING TO SHOW SUPPORT IS MESSED UP.

That's almost like arguing with straight people for wearing a t-shirt that promotes LGBTQA* rights.

I could go down the 'it's also possible for trans*women to get prostate or testicular cancer' route because it's a valid point, but I would end up compiling a completely separate rant for that one because the erasure of trans*people from the media is incredibly vast and a lot of people don't (or refuse to) understand or are transphobic.

Also...women have facial hair.

There are places encouraging women not to shave their legs, but women do also grow facial hair, it's not a big secret, it's biology, and I think it's sad that women should have to feel bad or ashamed about not shaving ANY PART of themselves because the media promotes us as completely hairless, even in razor adverts. Not once have I seen a woman shaving actual hair from their body in a razor advert, yet a quick google for Gillette showed a man shaving hair from his body because, guess what, no-one shaves hairless parts of their body. But, again, that's another rant for another time.

The next point is the oh so lovely argument that if a woman doesn't shave, they're unattractive/will get 'no dick'. This one barely even needs a rant because it's pathetic.

I've heard people say many times that a woman not shaving is unnatural and that is the most backward piece of shit because 'natural' means 'naturally occurring', and that is what hair on anyone (yes even women) is!

If women were not 'supposed' to have body hair...then they wouldn't be born with the ability to grow body hair!

Plus, why do these people assume that a woman will care whether or not they get sex? That's not a terrifying threat. If someone won't have sex with a woman just because of body hair then tell them to take a hike because a lot of decent people will not give a fuck.

What about people who don't like facial hair on men? I've seen nothing about that potential 'problem'.

Most importantly, this was all started to raise cancer awareness, fuck whether taking part in Movember will get someone laid or not, it is nothing to do with that.

--

At the end of the day, women are not trying to 'take over' the cause, they just want to participate and show support, maybe even donate also.

What is the harm in showing support for something that might not affect the person directly?

What's Wrong With Rape Jokes?

incontemptcomics.com

I used to think anything passed off as a joke was 'allowed' to be funny. It’s just a joke, right? It's not serious so it’d be silly to take it seriously.

Then I realised that no, not all jokes are funny just because you're expected to laugh.

Let me explain to you why rape, in the context of something as seemingly harmless as a joke, actually causes more harm than good.

A comedian, Chris Dangerfield, wondered why it was okay to joke about murder but as soon as rape is mentioned, it’s dangerous territory. He states, “[H]ang on, it's alright to take a flame thrower to a bunch of people or drop a nuclear bomb on Korea? We can laugh at mass, holocaustic murder.

"But as soon as you mention rape, even in the context of it being simulated on a computer game, people are stuck.” [x]

Whilst jokes about murder (or anything negative that pokes fun at the victim/puts the act in a positive light) can be extremely dodgy, I feel a lot more uncomfortable about rape jokes (when I say 'rape jokes', I always mean jokes that make fun of the victim or the act in a positive way, jokes that show up rapists, that's different).

Why? 

Rape culture.

I’ve had people try to JUSTIFY taking advantage of a girl who’s presented in a certain way, whether she’s in revealing clothing or passed out from drinking too much, both because it’s apparently her own fault and she should know better. What.

There’s no such thing as ‘murder culture’ (or is there? ...no) but ‘rape culture’ is a very real thing. 

Rape Culture is an environment in which rape is prevalent and in which sexual violence against women is normalized and excused in the media and popular culture.  Rape culture is perpetuated through the use of misogynistic language, the objectification of women’s bodies, and the glamorization of sexual violence, thereby creating a society that disregards women’s rights and safety. [x]

Please read the many examples of what contributes to rape culture in the [x] above because some are extremely prevalent in your society; probably in your brain, too.

People don’t make light of murder in a serious context, but the same can’t be said for rape. People okaying non-consensual behaviour is everywhere: jokes, porn, music, music videos, adverts, and more.

These very public sources often tell women and girls that their body is a free buffet for any guy who wants a bite, whilst simultaneously telling guys that asserting dominance over the media-portrayed submissive woman is what being a real man is all about. This sexist, rape-friendly message is repeated over and over so many times that people will not question it. Not every guy or girl will feel this way, but they are being encouraged to, so it often doesn't get filtered out.

Ever heard pop songs subtly encouraging murder and telling people that it’s alright if they get murdered because they don’t own their life? I haven’t.

Why are non-consensual interactions even being fetishized....? Is it not sexy enough to have sex with someone who also really wants to do it with you?? Why must the person [in these songs and what have you] be presented as unwilling or uncooperative?

Now...how many people think that taking someone’s life isn’t a big deal? Sociopaths? Apathetic, careless threats to society, right?

How many people think that sexually engaging with someone even if they don’t want to isn’t a big deal? A lot of mentally sound people, and that’s a lot scarier – all of those potential, casual sex offenders.

Because of these messages, some men do not take ‘no’ for an answer, they either need to be told several times or might (MIGHT) stop when the girl says that she’s taken by someone else!! It's happened to me several times and it's happened to other women, too.

Like Michael J. Dolan, a comedian who used to tell rape jokes, said: ‘I don't think any one joke is a problem [...] the problem is it's contributing to a culture of misogyny.’ [x] That’s the main issue here, what it contributes to society when it’s being told, not just how bad the actual topic is.

Let me present this website with the title ‘Only Psychos Think Rape is OK...Right?’

Every point is extremely shocking, but here are a few (the first two are from boys AND girls from the ages of 11-14 years old):

‘31% of the boys and 32% of the girls said it was acceptable for a man to rape a woman with past sexual experience’

‘87% of boys and 79% of girls said sexual assault was acceptable if the man and the woman were married’

‘One in 12 admitted to committing acts that met the legal definitions of rape, and 84% of men who committed rape did not label it as rape’

‘43% of college-aged men admitted to using coercive behavior to have sex, including ignoring a woman's protest, using physical aggression, and forcing intercourse’

And another site which provides examples of people willing to admit to rape. 

‘As long as the R word doesn’t get attached, rapists do self-report.’

Are you paying attention to this? 

This is really fucking scary.

It should not and does not have to be like this.

The fact that people, especially young people, are soaking up rape culture so rapidly should be horrifying; you learn the basics of life when you’re a kid, and ‘rape is justifiable in certain situations (like if she's not wearing much)’ or ‘non-consensual sex can be funny because someone made a joke about it’ should not be something that people...children...consider.

The bottom line is: if you tell a ‘joke’ that makes light of serious issues that people are already taking extremely lightly (rape is just the beginning), it adds way more fuel to the fire. Showing people (by means of a joke) that they should continue to make light of serious issues like rape is moronic and extremely inconsiderate.

What if a joke you told made someone think that what happened to them was okay, or makes them scared to speak up to their parents, to their peers, to the police because everyone around them is laughing at their situation? More rapists go free, often without realising that they’ve committed rape!

Think.

You can easily be funny without being an asshole.

Edit 31/07/14:

I do not think that eradicating rape jokes is the only solution to stop rape, nor do I think they're the main perpetrators of rape, not at all....my issue is that jokes like these normalise rape and only contribute to the rape culture that is always very prevalent (and massively varied).

Simon Amstell challenges social norms

I am a fan of Simon Amstell. I've seen him perform stand-up comedy a few times, I also watched him on Nevermind the Buzzcocks and Grandma's House.

He's a funny guy, but on top of being funny, he's also smart...he thinks, you know? A lot of people don't think, don't question social norms, aren't frustrated with a lot of social norms. As someone who enjoys questioning things and comedy, putting them together is the equivalent of putting hummus with...most any carbohydrate.

His live show, Numb, is amazing. I saw it live but for some reason I didn't appreciate how smart he was being at the time....rewatching it, however, it's nothing short of brilliance.

 The New York Times said:

'British Comic Simon Amstell has a gift for taking a social norm and gently mocking it until it seems utterly ridiculous.'

Here are some points, with quotes, that he raised in the show which I especially liked:


Gender

"We're being fed these words that don't make any sense like 'manbag' and 'guyliner', like men don't have hands or eyes. It still upsets me to hear even young, trendy couples saying things like, 'We're having a baby but we don't know the gender so we don't know whether to paint the nursery blue or pink, we might go for yellow just to be safe.' What is the danger here?"

"'Tomboy.' What is this word? Maybe your idea of what a girl is supposed to be is quite restrictive."

Race

"I'm not keen when the word 'but' is inserted into a sentence when there is no need for it: 'Oh they're Indian, but they're so polite.' There's no 'but'!"

Vegetarianism/Veganism

"I would like to be in the future now, or somewhere else, so I could look back at this time and say, 'Do you remember when people drank milk from other species?'"

"'Do you remember when people got upset when their pets died? But then when other animals died...they ate them?'"

Patriotism

"'Do you remember when people felt proud of where they came from, like it was something to do with them?' It's just where you happen to fall out of your mother's vagina. If you're going to have a flag, have a flag of a vagina, so then you can meet people and go, 'Hi, where are you from? Oh, same as me? Let's be friends.'"

Marriage

"We made it all up, marriage, it's not a naturally occurring thing. We had to have all this romantic language: 'Will you marry me?' It couldn't be the truth, which is: 'Would you please save me from my loneliness, depression, and fear?'"

Money

"'If I could just win the lottery ....Oh I have won it, oh I've spent it all, the problem was internal...' Money is just a system for moving things around, and to be so attached to things..."

The News

"It isn't even the news. What they give us are the worst things they can come up with that have happened in the world that day, and that's not a fair representation of what's going on in our planet."

Alcohol

"The only way to not drink alcohol at a party is to be a recovering alcoholic...otherwise it's, 'Do you want a drink?' 'No thank you.' '....Have a drink!'"

Numb is available online (if you're in the UK) for another few days, catch it while it's there!

I don't think it's available on DVD until late this year, but it's well worth the wait!

Gay representation in Beaver Falls

Whether it’s someone coming out, someone finding out that someone else is gay, or suspecting that someone is gay, how public media handles it can be make or break.

If something like a television show is even vaguely negative when it comes to being anything other than heterosexual, it could alienate queer people and send the wrong message to other people who discover that someone is not hetero. It’s as simple as a character making a gay joke without punishment, or having a character distance themselves from a friend who’s recently come out.

People need to be told that gay is okay, something that shouldn’t be a big deal, something that isn’t terrible. That’s where Beaver Falls  comes in.

I’ve probably only seen three episodes of this show, but something stuck out in the episode (Series 2, Episode 4) that I caught on E4 in the early hours of today.

Mac

Let me explain the episode very quickly: there’s a guy, the basketball team’s ‘ace’ player (Mac), who kisses another guy (Barry) when supposedly high. He lies about it to everyone, saying that it was in fact Barry who kissed him. In turn, everyone thinks that Barry is gay and some people taunt him. At the end of the episode the truth is revealed, Mac admits it to his wife and gives back their wedding ring with tears in his eyes.

Pretty standard plot. It wasn’t the plot that caught my eye, it was the way that the characters acted, especially the guy who gets kissed.

I’m going to play a little game called What I Expected vs. What I Got:

Some of the guys call Barry gay since they think he was the one who kissed Mac

What I Expected: Barry to get mad and assert his masculinity, somehow proving that he isn’t gay because he’s offended by their jeering and wants to appear as heterosexual as possible

What I Got: Barry runs off, annoyed. He then admits to his girlfriend that he was mad, but not because they thought he was gay...but because they were using the word ‘gay’ to attack him

Everyone finds out that Mac might be gay after he goes crazy and punches someone several times for calling him a ‘fag’; he then runs away

What I expected: Everyone to be shocked and talk about it in an unpleasant way

Mac confronts the basketball player who called him a 'fag'

What I Got: Barry vehemently insists that he’s the gay one, potentially putting his reputation on the line and trying to show a video (that some of the kids tried to secretly capture) of him kissing Mac for a laugh in the woods so that he can ‘prove’ his homosexuality to everyone

Barry finds and joins Mac, sitting next to him

What I Expected: Slightly awkward silence, Barry questioning whether Mac likes him and being concerned about it

What I Got: Barry teases Mac by asking if he thinks he’s ‘cute’, then asks if he always knew deep down, thereby taking an interest

Barry had every right to feel a little awkward, just like if anyone you don’t fancy kisses you, but he didn’t, he still treated him like a good friend.

Barry

I would also like to add, at no point does Barry use the abhorred phrase ‘no homo’ even as a joke (like a stupid spell to keep the gay at bay; god forbid anyone falsely assume that someone is gay).

These are the key points to take from this:

1. Barry got mad because people were treating being gay as a bad thing, NOT because he was being called gay
2. Barry gave no shits, twice, that people assumed he was gay; his main concern (the second time) was protecting Mac who was clearly distressed
3. Mac comes clean and accepts his sexuality, meaning he didn’t try to repress it or lie for the sake of his wife; a good message for queer people - hiding who you are, especially if you’re in a heterosexual relationship, can be damaging the longer that it’s left
4. Barry did not feel awkward around or avoid Mac even though he’d kissed him

I’ve not been this impressed with how ‘gay’ issues are handled on a TV show in a long time. Sure, there are shows that promote queer lifestyles, but this was handled so well.

It wasn’t a case of ,‘he’s gay, oh well’, it was, ‘he’s gay, it’s fine to be gay, and I feel comfortable, nothing has changed’.

So there we have it – Beaver Falls  gets my queer seal of approval!

Feel free to watch it on 4OD – Series 2, Episode 4 – if you’re in the UK to see the episode for yourself.

Weeaboo?

This blog entry is not as 'serious' as most of my blog posts, but it's still something that can encourage bullying, so I suppose it its own way, it is kinda serious.

The use of the word 'weeaboo' (formerly known as 'wapanese') in the anime, manga, and otherwise Japan-centric community.

There are many definitions of this term, so allowed me to link you to Urban Dictionary for a variety of explanations; take your pick.

Aren't a lot of these things what a typical fan would do/know, too?

To sum it up, a 'weeaboo' is someone who is apparently obsessed with Japan/Japanese pop culture to such a degree that they often start to 'act' Japanese in an attempt to mimic the people/characters that they idolize so much.

This term is usually used by people who also like the things that a 'weeaboo' likes so, by using this demeaning word, they can easily separate themselves from them/make fun of them; it's like going, "I really really like this band, but I'm not a fangirl/boy."

I have used the word 'weeaboo' myself, I even made a video about it three years ago before I realized how stupid the whole thing was. Watch it [here] if you want, I'm probably gonna be deleting it soon.

If someone is really obsessed with a culture and ends up mimicking a lot of what they do, why does it matter? Let them do their thing.

Can it be annoying? Sometimes, yeah, but so what? Just don't associate yourself with people like that, then? A lot of people annoy me, but I just distance myself.

"But SJ, they've giving anime/manga/whatever a bad name." And? Who cares what people think of your hobby? People think you're an obsessive who wants to be Japanese because of these 'weeaboos'? Oh well. The important thing is that YOU enjoy your hobby, right?

I'm not going to bad-mouth certain fans of what I like to feel superior, to feel like the 'better' fan, the more 'worthy' fan, that's bullshit.

Animals vs. Humans; the meat debate

When you tell someone that you don't eat meat, let alone that you refrain from animal products entirely, the results vary but they tend to be on a similar level:

• But, why?
• Don't you miss things? Like bacon?
• I could NEVER do that!
• ...Why though?
• What do you eat?
• WHY

My answer to the most popular question (in case you didn't get it, it's 'why'), is, "Why not?" Like, why aren't  you vegan? Meat-eaters tend to get confused about why I'm vegan, but I am genuinely confused as to why they're not.

I've also been asked several times, "Why vegan? Why not just vegetarian?" Asking me why I'm not vegetarian is akin to asking a half-full animal shelter why they don't take in more animals. There is plenty of room for more animals, but because that shelter would need to have more responsibility, more compassion, they should just stop halfway?

There are many reasons why veganism is worth it, not just for the individual, but for the animals they're saving, the planet, the environment, other  people etc, and I could chock-a-block this post with all of these reasons but as someone with a short attention span, I don't expect anyone else to keep up with me after the fiftieth paragraph!

Therefore, I will quickly cover something that's pretty straight-forward - why do we treat animals as lesser beings?

I'm about to answer that question for you, with counter-arguments.

~

Some people hate this word, but as it's brought up in the book I'm going to reference, I'm gonna go ahead and say it: thinking less of animals because they're not human is a form of what some would call 'speciesism'.

The following quotes are taken from 50 Philosophy Ideas (You Really Need To Know) by Ben Dupré (page 106). I chose this book because these are the exact same questions that I've been asking myself/the world.

Speciesism is described here as: '[A] basic lack of respect for the dignity and needs of animals other than humans, no more defensible than discrimination on the basis of gender or race.'


This is a bit of a touchy thing to bring up - sexism and racism - but before you immediately write this off, the basis  of the idea is the same: changing the way you treat someone/something based on something that is a part of them, something that you deem inferior.

But hold up SJ, you may say, there's no way you can compare a human being to an animal, they're a completely different species, completely separate from us, no parallels.

I will get to that.

Should we only  be looking out for our fellow man? Why not look out for humans and  animals? Dupré says that lions for example favour other lions over say, warthogs...'so why shouldn't humans show a similar partiality?'

Because, some may say:

1. 'humans have a higher level of intelligence than animals (or at least the potential to do so);
2. predation is natural (animals in nature eat other animals);
3. animals are specially bred to be eaten/used in experiments (and wouldn't exist otherwise);
4. we need to eat meat (although millions of apparently healthy people don't);
5. animals lack souls (but are we certain that humans do have them?);'

He read your mind, right? But then he counters a couple of these thoughts:

1. '[I]f we decide it is superior intellect that counts, would we use this criterion to justify using a child or a mentally retarded person with a level of intelligence below that of a chimpanzee in a scientific experiment?'
2. '[I]f we decide that it is "nature's way", we soon find that there are many things that animals (including humans) naturally do that we might not wish to encourage: sometimes male lions follow their nature in killing a rival's offspring, but such behavior would generally be frowned upon in humans.'
3. I don't understand why this is an argument. All this says to me is, "If these animals didn't exist, they wouldn't be treated horribly and killed." Not existing v.s. a lifetime of captivity, pain, and death; that's a tough one.
4. No we don't. Many people have used the 'humans have canines like carnivores in the wild' argument so I'll get rid of that first off by linking to this short post and this picture for an easy comparison (I dare you to rip apart an animal with your little canines). What's in meat that isn't in vegan food? This lovely lady goes into it perfectly; stand-out quote: 'No medical condition requires someone to eat meat when there’s a plethora of edible plant life available; all of our nutrients can be easily gained through plant life.'
5. I'm not going to get into 'souls' because I'm not someone who believes in souls, animals or humans. Just like I don't agree with the idea that God put animals on the earth to be eaten.

This is only one side of it all - morality/animal rights aside, there are several reasons why a vegan diet is beneficial, reasons which will be covered another time but until then, Google is your friend.

Black in a White Society

It's been a while, eh? I've wanted to blog so often recently, but I didn't know what to write about. Now I have something, so I'll get to bloggin'.

I want to talk about commonplace racism towards people of colour, specifically black people as this is what the article I'm about to bring up has as its focus.

I go to Falmouth University in Cornwall, and it took me a while, but I started to realize something very different from the hometown that I've grown up in for 23 years straight - differences in racial diversity. My hometown in Berkshire is very diverse; actually, since coming home from uni for the summer, I've been actively seeing, for a laugh, if I can go a second without seeing a person of colour in the town centre. I cannot. Five seconds, tops? ;)

When I'm back 'home' in Cornwall, on a 'bad' day, I only see a handful of coloured people throughout the entire day. And when I say coloured, of course I mean people of colour, so this is inclusive of all racial minorities, not just black people....which actually makes this observation even more hard-hitting when it comes to diversity.

It took me a while to realize how 'different' I felt, even after I wrote and performed a - partly exaggerated - spoken word poem entitled I Am Different (based on Sam Selvon's The Lonely Londoners, a book specifically about how negatively black people were treated in London after World War Two). Maybe I was in denial? Maybe I refused to even acknowledge it because I wanted to fit in in a new location?

Anyway, back to the article I found.

The focus of the article is actually about a black woman, Martha-Renee Kolleh, who has put a sign up in her cafe window 'warning' customers that she is black, lest people unwittingly come into the shop and find out for themselves.

Martha-Renee Kolleh

The reason? On several occasions she has had people come in, take one look at her, and walk back out again, presumably because they are faced with a woman who is black.

I felt like I identified more and more with this article as I read each paragraph, nodding my head with mutual understanding as incident after incident occurred against Lola Okolosie, the black woman responsible for the article titled, 'If you are allergic to black people, don't come in' – at first I balked …'

She mentions early on in the report: 'A few weeks ago, a trip to a popular Dales village reminded me of why being in all-white areas is increasingly something I am reluctant to do.' Then she recalls how she was ignored in public by ‘[t]wo white, middle-aged male cyclists’ after she asks them politely to move their bikes so she can park her car, yet when a white man in a sports car comes along and asks the very same, they easily comply.

They did acknowledge her presence, she was heard, they just brushed her off in favour of someone they thought was more worthy of a parking space.

She then goes on to say, 'I won’t even mention the number of stares I got just walking around the village and, no, it had nothing to do with my attractiveness or indeed lack thereof.'

That quote was what resonated with me most.
 
As Okolosie also mentions, it's difficult to 'prove' when someone is being racist, subtly or otherwise, without being accused of blowing it out of proportion, but then why do I feel that I'm being treated differently (because of my race) in a place where 96%-97.6% of the population is 'White British' (figure taken from a 2001 survey of select Cornish towns) and not in my hometown, which is about as diverse as London?

(This survey was taken over ten years ago, but the 2009 pdf says that 'the overall pattern of Cornwall’s population by ethnicity has remained essentially the same as in 2001')

It would be like walking through a town comprised of males and getting funny looks; I would then be inclined to blame my gender over anything else.

The horrible thing is that this commonplace racism is not only used by white people. I will openly admit that I've been prejudice against my own race because of the stigma that is attached to black people. It's awful, I feel disgusted with myself for the thoughts that are so deeply rooted in my skull because of the part of the world that I grew up in, the place that priorities people with fair, not dark skin.

The society that's telling people, telling children, to favour 'white' has in turn made me think less of myself and the way that I look.