Serious thread from me, for once...

[Bruce Rioja]

I was indeed with a girl, Tango. What I should've also made clear is that all the staring was being done by Asian males.

[TANGODANCER]

I was indeed with a girl, Tango. What I should've also made clear is that all the staring was being done by Asian males.

Same difference Bruce. Racism, as I've quoted before, is a two-edged sword. "What's she doing with him?" being the unspoken question.

[Bruce Rioja]

"What's she doing with him?".

Ahh, but that's just the norm for me.

[TANGODANCER]

"What's she doing with him?".

Ahh, but that's just the norm for me.

[Dujon]

Some people I think have rather thin skins.

Australians often refer to West Australians as 'sandgropers'; South Australians as 'crow eaters'; Queenslanders as 'banana benders'; Americans, generically, as 'yanks'; Englishmen as 'pommies' or simply 'poms'; New Zealanders as 'kiwis'. Sorry, Monty, but I can't recall any particularly oft used term for Canadians - though I have heard the odd 'canuck' (sp?) mentioned. In New South Wales the residents of Victoria are often referred to as 'mexicans', simply because they live south of the N.S.W. border.

In cricket the Pakistan team is (not as often as a few years ago) referred to as 'Paki' - e.g. "Pakis thump Aussies in one dayer".

As others have mentioned it all depends on the context in which such words are used. Blimey, it's no different to the use of the word 'bastard' in conversation or greeting. "G'day you old bastard" when directed to an old friend is hardly offensive; "You bastard" in the frame of a serious argument is.

There is too much made of innocent references in my humble opinion.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Poor old Canada has just got condemned by some UN boday for using the term, as we do quite a lot, "visible minority". Also condemned is our use of the term "ethno-cultural communities". Both it is said are racist. This came as something of a shock since the usual context is something like "visible minorities must be protected from discrimination". Oh well.

[TANGODANCER]

Poor old Canada has just got condemned by some UN boday for using the term, as we do quite a lot, "visible minority". Also condemned is our use of the term "ethno-cultural communities". Both it is said are racist. This came as something of a shock since the usual context is something like "visible minorities must be protected from discrimination". Oh well.

There's always an element of lunacy in these things; usually from bleeding-heart, do-good wanabees who don't know where to draw a line in their desire to be seen as redeemers. I read on a forum not long ago that a guy shouldn't be described as a
"Mexican" just because he came from Mexico. WTF next?

[blurred]

No word alone is racist. It's all in the use and intent behind it, and the context in which it is spoken/written.

[Soldier_Of_The_White_Army]

No word alone is racist. It's all in the use and intent behind it, and the context in which it is spoken/written.

100% correct!








Ya scouse git!!!

[CAPSLOCK]

No word alone is racist. It's all in the use and intent behind it, and the context in which it is spoken/written.

I'm struggling to find such a context for the word 'coon'

I might be missing something

[Athers]

Some people I think have rather thin skins.

Australians often refer to West Australians as 'sandgropers'; South Australians as 'crow eaters'; Queenslanders as 'banana benders'; Americans, generically, as 'yanks'; Englishmen as 'pommies' or simply 'poms'; New Zealanders as 'kiwis'. Sorry, Monty, but I can't recall any particularly oft used term for Canadians - though I have heard the odd 'canuck' (sp?) mentioned. In New South Wales the residents of Victoria are often referred to as 'mexicans', simply because they live south of the N.S.W. border.

In cricket the Pakistan team is (not as often as a few years ago) referred to as 'Paki' - e.g. "Pakis thump Aussies in one dayer".

As others have mentioned it all depends on the context in which such words are used. Blimey, it's no different to the use of the word 'bastard' in conversation or greeting. "G'day you old bastard" when directed to an old friend is hardly offensive; "You bastard" in the frame of a serious argument is.

There is too much made of innocent references in my humble opinion.

Interesting that it's still used in the media down there Dujon. I suppose in the UK there is such a large population of Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and their now British offspring that the word used in a derogatory way too many times has pushed it into the blacklist. (I mean no racism by the word blacklist ;))

The way I understand it those of Indian descent take the most offence but I can't base that on much evidence.

Certainly if you're caught using the word Paki on a football terrace you'd be out with a banning order. I believe some fans got prosecuted for it too a few years ago.

[TANGODANCER]

No word alone is racist. It's all in the use and intent behind it, and the context in which it is spoken/written.

I'm struggling to find such a context for the word 'coon'

I might be missing something

Didn't it originate from Camaroon?

[FaninOz]

It's the context or originality of the word that is usually offensive.

If my memory is correct from my early years in England, Paki was "developed" and used as a derogatory term only for anyone who had a brown skin and hence it is racist. Similar to Sambo for Black skinned people.

There are similar derogatory words for White skinned people as well, for the Example the Cantonese Chinese call us "Guilo" (spelling) or White Ghost.

Similarly Abo was used in Australia as a derogatory term for Aboriginals and is now banned here, also Jap or Nip was used as a derogatory term during WW11 and you will find it is banned in all press and TV reporting.

Interestingly Pom or Pommie is also now "normally" banned in good Australian society but was allowed for the most recent Ashes series, which resulted in quite a lot of press comment.

Even more interesting is that a POM or POMMIE is actualy a "bastardisation" of the term POME (Prisoner Of Mother England) and best describes the first Australians rather than someone from Britain visiting Australia or moving to live here of their own free will.

[cophilie]

No word alone is racist. It's all in the use and intent behind it, and the context in which it is spoken/written.

I'm struggling to find such a context for the word 'coon'

I might be missing something

I got told I had 'coon eyes' the other day if that helps. (sunburnt face and sunglasses)

[Soldier_Of_The_White_Army]

No word alone is racist. It's all in the use and intent behind it, and the context in which it is spoken/written.

I'm struggling to find such a context for the word 'coon'

I might be missing something

I got told I had 'coon eyes' the other day if that helps. (sunburnt face and sunglasses)

As in Raccoon I take it?

[Soldier_Of_The_White_Army]

It's PC good crazy to me. Calling someone a 'Paki' is deamed racist or insulting, fair enough. Yet in order to insult or racially abuse a white Britain, they have to call us a white motherfxcker or Brit Bxstard, why? Because calling someone 'whitey' or 'Brit' is neither taken as abusive or racist.

That being the case, surely a person would only be racially insulting a Pakistani is they called him/her a 'Paki Bxstard' for example.

[50sQuiff]

It's PC good crazy to me. Calling someone a 'Paki' is deamed racist or insulting, fair enough. Yet in order to insult or racially abuse a white Britain, they have to call us a white motherfxcker or Brit Bxstard, why? Because calling someone 'whitey' or 'Brit' is neither taken as abusive or racist.

That being the case, surely a person would only be racially insulting a Pakistani is they called him/her a 'Paki Bxstard' for example.

This recalls a previous thread:

There's all this support going round for 'kick racism out of football' but during the World Cup, there was a few stories on Trinidad and Tobago and that their supporters call Chris Birchall 'White Boy'. Now, could this be classed as racism? Before you all jump and say 'haha no way' or whatever, just think, say England played 10 white players and Sol Campbell, what would happen if we called him 'Black Boy'? There'd be a national outrage.

I don't think it's on that T&T can call Birchall that, but if it's the other way round then it's classed as racism. Racism isn't just one way. This is just one example of it being one-way though, it's bothered me for some time how Asians/Africans etc have got away with it.

Some of you extreme lefties might start ranting on that I'm racist, which is totally ridiculous but I know I'm right about what I'm saying.

Are they really using 'White Boy' as a pejorative term? Terms such as 'Black Boy' are bound up in centuries of racial social constructs, whereas 'White boy' isn't.

When I was in India last year there was a cricket series going on. I caught sight of a newspaper headline in a major broadsheet that went along the lines of India 'having whipped the Pakis'. My eyes were wide-open for seconds because I found it so shocking, until I quickly understood that this is simply the standard abbreviation for Pakistan outside of Europe and part of a generally friendly sporting rivalry. No National Front and historical connotations, means no racism. It's not words in themselves that are offensive Epitaph.

Now if they were calling Birchill 'White Trash' perhaps, or 'Cracker' this would be a different matter. They would be pejorative racist terms. I suggest you think far longer and far harder before getting huffy about these complex issues, and lashing out at 'lefties'.

[TANGODANCER]

Wan to tell you a true little story of the consequences of one moment of anger:

A job argument between an old fiend of mine and a lad of black-skinned heritage resulted in my friend getting sacked after thirty two years with the same firm. He had a go at the black lad for not doing something critical regarding IT at work. The lad adopted a very arrogant attitude to the extent my friend lost it just for one moment. He called him an "arrogant bastard"
in his anger. Unfortuantely, he added the word "black" to it. He was didmissed and now is unlikely, at his age, to get another job. Thirty two years service down the pan for one moment of anger.

Despite his appologies, which the lad refused to accept, he was allowed to resign to save formal dismissal. A very costly word indeed. Had he punched the lad on the jaw the incident might have been viewed in a slightly different way as he could have claimed provocation. As it is, he's gone. Such is the law today.

[50sQuiff]

Wan to tell you a true little story of the consequences of one moment of anger:

A job argument between an old fiend of mine and a lad of black-skinned heritage resulted in my friend getting sacked after thirty two years with the same firm. He had a go at the black lad for not doing something critical regarding IT at work. The lad adopted a very arrogant attitude to the extent my friend lost it just for one moment. He called him an "arrogant bastard"
in his anger. Unfortuantely, he added the word "black" to it. He was didmissed and now is unlikely, at his age, to get another job. Thirty two years service down the pan for one moment of anger.

Despite his appologies, which the lad refused to accept, he was allowed to resign to save formal dismissal. A very costly word indeed. Had he punched the lad on the jaw the incident might have been viewed in a slightly different way as he could have claimed provocation. As it is, he's gone. Such is the law today.

Oops. That deeply ingrained racism just can't help but spill out at the worst possible times, it seems.

[enfieldwhite]

Wan to tell you a true little story of the consequences of one moment of anger:

A job argument between an old fiend of mine and a lad of black-skinned heritage resulted in my friend getting sacked after thirty two years with the same firm. He had a go at the black lad for not doing something critical regarding IT at work. The lad adopted a very arrogant attitude to the extent my friend lost it just for one moment. He called him an "arrogant bastard"
in his anger. Unfortuantely, he added the word "black" to it. He was didmissed and now is unlikely, at his age, to get another job. Thirty two years service down the pan for one moment of anger.

Despite his appologies, which the lad refused to accept, he was allowed to resign to save formal dismissal. A very costly word indeed. Had he punched the lad on the jaw the incident might have been viewed in a slightly different way as he could have claimed provocation. As it is, he's gone. Such is the law today.

I believe a certain Mr Atkinson had such a lapse. Sorry, TD I don't see the difference.