mjmooney Posted January 28, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2015 Also, who decides? I am always suspicious of anybody who claims to speak for a huge mass of people, who in reality probably have a huge variety of opinions. It's like when I used to work with a bunch of radical feminists, some of whom wore badges which read "Women demand a curfew on men" (it was during the Yorkshire Ripper era). I wouldn't have minded if it had said "I demand", or even "We demand", but to claim to speak for ALL women? Half the population of the world? So, are all - or even a majority of - "people of colour" offended by being called "coloured people"? To me, it sounds about on a par with somebody from the outer London suburbs being outraged by being called a cockney - although that is arguably worse, as it is actually provably wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Yeah maybe. I don't think it's unreasonable though, for people of different races to define what they would and wouldn't like to be called. Who are we to tell black people (or people of colour) what is and isn't offensive to them? That's fine. Perhaps we could all be copied in on a monthly memo saying what is and isn't acceptable. As others have said, 'black' was considered to be rude when I was young. It being hard to keep track of isn't really an excuse. if somebody called you a word removed, and when you got upset they said "Well I don't find it offensive so I thought it was ok" you wouldn't really accept it would you? I mean, you might accept their apology if you believed them but you would expect them to stop calling you a word removed in future because you were offended by it. You wouldn't let them carry on because they thought it was ok, and back in their day it was fine to call people words removed. I'm afraid I don't accept that as a valid analogy, as the 'C' word you're suggesting, always has, and probably always will be regarded as highly offensive. There's also no valid way it can be used that I can think of without intending to cause offence (other than maybe as a term of endearment between cockney mates "alright you cant, ow you doin' cant"). So on the use of 'coloured', the only people who seem to be getting up tight about it are white middle class liberals and anti-racism groups who probably think they are duty bound to. It's only a guess but I'd reckon most black people themselves would shrug their shoulders and not give a toss. The word was considered as the polite and well-meaning way to refer to black people until the 80s, and while it sounds dated and slightly wrong now, I don't think it's much of an offence to use something that was considered polite until fairly recently. The standard response to calling somebody 'black' when I was young was that it was rude because nobody is actually black. I do realise that the meaning of words change over time, but it's not like we're talking about the 'n' word or other offensive term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) What does the C in NAACP stand for? ... Edited January 28, 2015 by AVFCforever1991 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Car indicators that flash too fast. Doesn't that indicate (no pun intended!) that one of the other lights is out? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) There's also the United Negro College Fund, still in existence, but also hasn't bothered to update it's name to better reflect the times. There exists an Offended-Industrial-Complex here in the States which reigns supreme on university campuses and on left leaning blogs and websites just waiting to pounce on every new "microaggression". Heterosexual white men are almost exclusively the target. Some deserve to be called out on their racism or sexism or elitism, but all too often the OIC makes a mountain from a molehill and weakens any subsequent legitimate gripe the offended might have. Cabbagepatch seems to have been given a pass, largely helped by his own quick mea culpa, and maybe the fact that he's viewed as someone from a background that didn't expose him to everyday common parlance. Edited January 28, 2015 by maqroll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 28, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2015 Yeah maybe. I don't think it's unreasonable though, for people of different races to define what they would and wouldn't like to be called. Who are we to tell black people (or people of colour) what is and isn't offensive to them? That's fine. Perhaps we could all be copied in on a monthly memo saying what is and isn't acceptable. As others have said, 'black' was considered to be rude when I was young. It being hard to keep track of isn't really an excuse. if somebody called you a word removed, and when you got upset they said "Well I don't find it offensive so I thought it was ok" you wouldn't really accept it would you? I mean, you might accept their apology if you believed them but you would expect them to stop calling you a word removed in future because you were offended by it. You wouldn't let them carry on because they thought it was ok, and back in their day it was fine to call people words removed. I'm afraid I don't accept that as a valid analogy, as the 'C' word you're suggesting, always has, and probably always will be regarded as highly offensive. There's also no valid way it can be used that I can think of without intending to cause offence (other than maybe as a term of endearment between cockney mates "alright you cant, ow you doin' cant"). So on the use of 'coloured', the only people who seem to be getting up tight about it are white middle class liberals and anti-racism groups who probably think they are duty bound to. It's only a guess but I'd reckon most black people themselves would shrug their shoulders and not give a toss. The word was considered as the polite and well-meaning way to refer to black people until the 80s, and while it sounds dated and slightly wrong now, I don't think it's much of an offence to use something that was considered polite until fairly recently. The standard response to calling somebody 'black' when I was young was that it was rude because nobody is actually black. I do realise that the meaning of words change over time, but it's not like we're talking about the 'n' word or other offensive term. Well I couldn't think of an appropriate analogy. The point really wasn't the word being used, more the attitude to it. If someone used a word you found offensive, and you told them, you wouldn't be happy if they replied that THEY didn't find it offensive and continued to use it for those reasons. That was my point. The "C Word" was really irrelevant in what I was trying to say. I agree that if the only people being offended are white people then it's all a nonsense. My point was merely that if BLACK people are offended by the word "coloured", then that's reason enough to steer away from using it as it's not up to white people to decide what is and isn't offensive. In a way our points are similar I think, just coming at it from different angles. Going back to the original point, I don't think mr Cabbagepatch should be criticised for using the word. He's clearly not racist, and it was more naievity than anything. A gentle prod is due, which he's already received. Nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 if BLACK people are offended by the word "coloured", then that's reason enough to steer away from using it as it's not up to white people to decide what is and isn't offensive. I agree with this 100%. What I have a problem with is when offended people conjure up outrage from their own misinterpretation of an action, a statement, a word, etc. It reminds me of an incident in D.C. several years ago when a white aide to the black mayor used the word " niggardly" to describe someone. A black staffer took offense to the word, mistakenly correlating it to the word nigger. It became a mini scandal and the mayor forced the white guy to resign. When clearer thinking eventually prevailed, the guy was rehired, but it's this kind of stupidity that can lead to blind groupthink which can be very destructive and also make it harder for a legitimate claim of racism be heard amongst the din. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginko Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Car indicators that flash too fast. Doesn't that indicate (no pun intended!) that one of the other lights is out? Yep, that's what I thought too. It happened to me in my last car, though that was a 2001 Fiesta. Not sure about newer cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Car indicators that flash too fast. They do that on purpose. It is to let the driver know that one of the bulbs has gone. It will be tick tocking at double time in the car. edit: old news Edited January 28, 2015 by Genie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted January 28, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2015 So where do we stand on the Dambusters dog? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 So where do we stand on the Dambusters dog? Please elaborate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 28, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2015 So where do we stand on the Dambusters dog? Please elaborate. The dog the Dambusters had was named after a racial epithet beloved of rappers. It's become a bit of a talking point over the years as they want to remake a Dambusters film and the dog is a surprisingly important element of the story (although ultimately it's name doesn't matter, but for accuracy...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Stephen Fry is writing the remake and they've decided not to use the dog's original name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted January 28, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2015 Lost access to the new clearing, having foolishly tipped off Limpid that my donation had expired. One can only wonder at the party that's going on in there right now, although I can be certain it'll be over by the time I get back in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 So where do we stand on the Dambusters dog? Please elaborate. The dog the Dambusters had was named after a racial epithet beloved of rappers. It's become a bit of a talking point over the years as they want to remake a Dambusters film and the dog is a surprisingly important element of the story (although ultimately it's name doesn't matter, but for accuracy...) Ah right, I remember hearing about this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted January 28, 2015 Administrator Share Posted January 28, 2015 Lost access to the new clearing, having foolishly tipped off Limpid that my donation had expired. One can only wonder at the party that's going on in there right now, although I can be certain it'll be over by the time I get back in Always read the stickies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Another gripe I have with the PC mentality is some of it's more strident practitioners literally want to ban books. It's the point at which the left goes so far left that they merge seamlessly with the right. There are numerous American novels, some considered classics, who have characters who use the word "nigger". For this reason alone, there have been calls for these books to be removed from college curriculums, disregarding the value of the books as entire works, and the lessons to be learned from racially charged words and terms that were bandied about liberally in mainstream literature 125 years ago. Banning books at a university. Boggles the mind. Edited January 28, 2015 by maqroll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 28, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2015 Stephen Fry is writing the remake and they've decided not to use the dog's original name. They've called it Honky instead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Steve Hughes on being offended... Edited January 28, 2015 by AVFCforever1991 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 28, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2015 Steve Hughes on being offended... One of my favourite bits of stand up, funny and bang on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts