Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

If someone calls a Canadian a 'Canuck' is that racist?

Yes. This is very relevant.

Thank you for contributing today.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 317
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

If someone calls a Canadian a 'Canuck' is that racist?

The whole point K'man, is it's up to you (the poor victim) to decide.

If you are upset by it, the ''perpetrator'' has made a racist remark.

Much like Sharia law.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

giphy.gif

Do you want me to understand what you mean by this, or do you just want to leave me guessing? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow.... i really didnt think this thread could take a more bizarre turn than it has in other parts but hats off!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Robin Evans said:

I can feel john reaching for his keys again.....

Don't worry Robin I'm not offended by Ginger John's vague and feeble attempts to insult me. So poor beleaguered John can rest easy.

Unsurprisingly, the tactics of sniggering and whispering or the use of innuendo in order to hint at, or imply your prejudices, rather than state them explicitly, is a strategy which is co-incidentally, often employed by modern-day racists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Robin Evans said:

I can feel john reaching for his keys again.....

Yeah we can't have a discussion breaking out on a forum Robin, that would be the thin end of the wedge.

The point about canuck is helpful because everything has to with the origin of the language, the reasons for its usage, what the term is used for and who uses it and why.

Or you could be British and claim it's all in good humour, can't you take a joke and anyway we're a model for the rest of the world cos a government report said so!

 

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Yeah we can't have a discussion breaking out on a forum Robin, that would be the thin end of the wedge.

The point about canuck is helpful because everything has to with the origin of the language, the reasons for its usage, what the term is used for and who uses it and why.

Or you could be British and claim it's all in good humour, can't you take a joke and anyway we're a model for the rest of the world cos a government report said so!

 

add to that list:

whether it is used as an adjective to a further insult.. that is where a lot of confusion starts to come IMHO.. terms, in and of themselves, are not necessarily insulting but when used to emphasise a further insult that is when you know why they are being used and that is the part that is intent IMO (not just mine but courts i believe too)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fighting irish said:

The whole point K'man, is it's up to you (the poor victim) to decide.

If you are upset by it, the ''perpetrator'' has made a racist remark.

Much like Sharia law.

 

Whereas, of course, the right person to decide is a white man on an internet forum.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RP London said:

terms, in and of themselves, are not necessarily insulting

I'm afraid they are just that, always intended to be just that and unlikely to ever move on from being insulting, insinuating and chock full of implications and meanings beyond the word itself.

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Oxford said:

I'm afraid they are just that, always intended to be just that and unlikely to ever move on from being insulting, insinuating and chock full of implications and meanings beyond the word itself.

i'm thinking more just using the term "Welsh", for example, in normal conversation is not insulting, it is descriptive of where a person comes from, but when used as an adjective to a larger and wider insult then it becomes the edge that tips it into offensive and, broader sweep, racist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RP London said:

i'm thinking more just using the term "Welsh", for example, in normal conversation is not insulting, it is descriptive of where a person comes from, but when used as an adjective to a larger and wider insult then it becomes the edge that tips it into offensive and, broader sweep, racist.

Exactly, yet that is used by some people with malign intent to say they are confused by what is racist to say and what isn't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RP London said:

i'm thinking more just using the term "Welsh", for example, in normal conversation is not insulting, it is descriptive of where a person comes from, but when used as an adjective to a larger and wider insult then it becomes the edge that tips it into offensive and, broader sweep, racist.

Also, after a few drinks, the silly Taffy will get very worked up when you bring up "welching" on a deal.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.