White Nurses Now Required to Acknowledge their “White Privilege”

     Those born with the unshrivable sin of “Whiteness” must grovel by acknowledging this sin in order to work their chosen profession in an act of useless recentness. Specifically, Australian nurses are now required to announce their “White Privilege” to Aboriginal patients.

“Australian nurses and midwives are being forced to announce their ‘white privilege’ before treating Indigenous and Torres Strait Islander patients – a move which has been slammed as ‘racist to its core’.

“The term ‘white privilege’ defines the unearned social and cultural advantages awarded to people with white skin which are not enjoyed by people of colour or non-white backgrounds.

“The Nursing and Midwifery Board believes the cultural safety of Indigenous or Torres Strait Islander patients is just as important as their clinical safety.”

     Medical care is medical care. Medicine is not based on culture let alone “cultural sensitivity”.

     This has not gone without criticism, however.

     If that hasn’t been declared to be a H8 crime yet, it probably will be soon…


2 Responses to White Nurses Now Required to Acknowledge their “White Privilege”

  1. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 04.06.18 : The Other McCain

  2. avatar Jack Burton says:

    Okay. Let’s say I have “white privilege.”

    “Privilege” does not exist ex nihilo. It had to start somewhere with some people at some point in history.

    I have no problem with others admitting to the world that my ancestors were more apt, more intelligent, more able, more sophisticated, and much more likely to come out on the winning side of any conflict with their ancestors. If they want to take it back 50 years, 500 years or 5,000 years I am up for that. The better team apparently won the privilege game and took home the trophy. The 2nd place team took home — well — 2nd place.

    If they say the game was rigged, then my ancestors were smarter than theirs and figured out how to rig the game and theirs didn’t. If they say my ancestors were more savage than theirs then that means theirs were weaker than mine. If they say there were more of mine, then that means that mine were simply better at understanding how to use the environment and technology to sustain a greater population. If they say that my ancestors were better geographically situated that means that they were better realtors, able to find and hold superior territory. If they say my ancestors had bigger, badder, and more destructive weapons that means than their ancestors were probably stuck in a stone-age existence for 10,000 years past their time.

    No matter how you slice it… they are making the claim for me that their ancestors could not quite hack it when it came to competition for the “privilege” of being on top. They were weaker, ineffective, and overall a fine example of Darwinism in action. Seems to me as if they are pointing the “finger of blame” at the wrong set of ancestors. I’d suggest they have a heartfelt talk with their grandma and grandpa and ask them why ~their~ grandmas and grandpas were so pitiful in the game of life.

    Now understand that ~this~ is how ~they~ see the world. This is what ~they~ are admitting happened. Unless, of course, they want to somehow claim that “privilege” just happened along one day from out of nowhere and someone picked it up off the ground and has been using it ever since. Should be an interesting and amusing read.

    Because they believe that since what they call “privilege” was obtained either unfairly or by simple luck they have a “moral right” to take it.

    If they want to admit to having inferior ancestors who were not good enough to not be taken advantage of, or just plain unlucky that is fine with me. And it doesn’t say much for their current ability to “take” anything away from me. Bring it on and we’ll see how the rematch goes.

Comments are closed.