WHEN WHAT APPEARS TO BE OPPOSITION TO RACISM IS JUST DEFENCE OF PRIVILEGE.

Peter Wynn
3 min readSep 16, 2023

Most readers of my stories know that I have no time for the orange haired a-hole who is the first former occupant of the White House to be indicted on Federal and State Charges, and even less time for the red-haired a-hole who scraped back into the Australian senate by the narrowest of margins last year, and sacked the man she claimed the media wanted to see fall out with her over a homophobic statement.

The red-haired a-hole claims that she stands against racism and homophobia (granted, one of her right-hand men is openly gay) yet any stand against racism towards another group is fainthearted compared to a defence of privilege. For example, when one of her former sidekicks delivered an incendiary maiden speech making Nazi references, she labelled his statement “straight from Goebbels’ handbook,” but that didn’t stop her former sidekick from supporting her motion using terms that were used by white supremacists. Fortunately, her motion failed, and the only place where any of her motions should be passed is on the toilet. But 20 years before that, she objected to an Indigenous Australian being made Australian of the Year and an Asian-Australian being Young Australian of the Year.

The red-haired a-hole also purports to be anti-homophobia, but she voted against Marriage Equality when it was debated in Parliament! She also supported Trans-Exclusionary Anti-Feminist Posie Parker, yet she made excuses for a man who murdered his wife and children after she left him!

I remember when I was in Year 11, there were two guys who scored 990 TE Scores and a girl who scored 985. The girl scored straight A’s and the guys scored 5 A’s and one of the guys scored a B for English (he came from Taiwan), yet an Australian guy scored a C for English. Neither of the guys counted English towards their TE Scores. The guy from Taiwan was a nice fellow, but he didn’t think it was fair that the girl was awarded the Dux when she had done an easier level of Math. That was not a case of racism, it was a case of the girl scoring straight A’s and the guy scoring five A’s and a B. Nor was it a case of sexism. I would say to the guy in that case, “Okay, just graciously accept the runner-up award.” Okay, I didn’t like the girl because she was full of her own importance, but that’s not grounds to say, “Sorry, you don’t deserve the award.” If the school had awarded the guy the Dux, the red-haired a-hole would have claimed that it was reverse racism, and if they’d awarded the girl the Dux, she’d have said that it should have gone to the Australian guy!

I remember reading the story of Irene Moss, born Irene Kay Chee, who, when she finished primary school, came second to an Australian girl, and requested a recount. The teacher believed that she was being rude, but after a recount was done, it was indeed found that Irene had come first, not second. The Australian girl showed little resentment, and invited Irene over to her house for Saturday lunch. That was a clear-cut case of racism on the teacher’s part.

If a person who would have been overlooked for a position on account of their ethnicity, sexuality, neurology or whatever was awarded the position on merit, a privilege holder will always whine that it was unfair, and they were the victim. That is all the red-haired a-hole is doing!

--

--

Peter Wynn

Diagnosed with autism at 35. Explained a lifetime of difference.