Ooooh, What happened to the KFC thread?

R34GTT

I don't see the term Jap as offensive, if it is then perhaps someone should tell the organisers of the long running bi-annual Japanese car shows Japshow and Japfest.

It's all about context and knowing if it is offensive/derogatory. I'm sure if Pakistan did manufacture cars and there was a British following for them with specific car shows then they would not be called P***show or P***fest.

Leif

Azari wrote: »

You really aren't too bright, are you?

The comment means exactly what it says.

In the past the police were often unwilling - or even downright hostile - when crimes motivated by the racial or sexual characteristics of the victim were reported.

I was simply saying that that is not acceptable. And if the attitude of the police hasn't changed by understanding and embracing their responsibilities then we will have to make do with them being scared not to act properly.

Clear now?

I don't care for your insults. :mad: You need to learn how to discuss something without being abusive to those whose opinion differs from your own.

Azari

Shevchenko01 wrote: »

Not true. During WWII and for some time afterwards (recent, living history) – although many will say for good reason.

And, was there some code by which if someone called the, then, enemy, 'Jap', they were demonstrating contempt but when they called them 'Japanese' they were not?

That is what you need to prove to show that the abbreviation is racist.

One small question - what about the use of "Jap's Eye" not an offensive slur and use of the word Jap at all, eh?

LOL, another example of you muddled thinking.

Do you think a Frenchman calling some British youth a 'spotty Brit chav' is in some mysterious way more offensive that calling him a 'spotty British chav'?

When only a very small percentage of people were abolitionists, did that make slavery morally right? Did it require the vast majority to stand up to be counted before it became unacceptable? Yes, I know this is a more extreme comparison but valid nonetheless.

Your thought process are so illogical as to be opaque. You are conflating two entirely different ideas.

We are not talking about people saying nasty things about the Japanese. We are talking about the use of an abbreviation.

Here's a question for you.

Which of these do you find most offensive?
Which do you think would be more likely to make a Japanese uncomfortable?

1) The Japs still produce the highest quality TV's in the world.
2) The Japanese ignore world opinion and keep hunting and killing whales.

Do you think either sentiment is racist?

Leif

tommyknocker wrote: »

I posted the Wikipedia article in support of it being ambiguous and not condoning the rights or wrongs of the term 'Jap', and I'm on your side for free thinking and opinion. Thanks for the compliment, NOT.

from one of the 'pc bully-boys'

It was an informative post.

From another of the 'pc bully-boys'. :rotfl:

System

Azari wrote: »

And, was there some code by which if someone called the, then, enemy, 'Jap', they were demonstrating contempt but when they called them 'Japanese' they were not?

That is what you need to prove to show that the abbreviation is racist.



LOL, another example of you muddled thinking.

Do you think a Frenchman calling some British youth a 'spotty Brit chav' is in some mysterious way more offensive that calling him a 'spotty British chav'?



Your thought process are so illogical as to be opaque. You are conflating two entirely different ideas.

We are not talking about people saying nasty things about the Japanese. We are talking about the use of an abbreviation.

Here's a question for you.

Which of these do you find most offensive?
Which do you think would be more likely to make a Japanese uncomfortable?

1) The Japs still produce the highest quality TV's in the world.
2) The Japanese ignore world opinion and keep hunting and killing whales.

Do you think either sentiment is racist?

lol you could do that with any racial phrase

1) the ch**ks produce some if the nicest food in the world
2) the Chinese have one of the worst records of human rights abuse in the world

Azari

goater78 wrote: »

lol you could do that with any racial phrase

1) the ch**ks produce some if the nicest food in the world
2) the Chinese have one of the worst records of human rights abuse in the world

Indeed.

That's exactly the point.

You should not obsess with the minutia of names and abbreviations but on the sentiment in each statement or utterance.

Certain words are accepted to embody negative sentiment such as the one you used above together with 'n****r' and 'paki'. (But the latter is not yet so offensive that it cannot be used quoted). (Ch**ks is evidently offensive because it embodies a derogatory differentiation of a race by some physical characteristic.)

A word is not racist until its use is limited to those people who wish to be identified as holding a prejudice towards the race in question. Otherwise you end up with the absurd situation that it is OK to say nasty things about a populace if you use the full name but unacceptable to say nice things using the abbreviation.

Until then it may be deemed inconsiderate to use but is only racist if that is the intent of the user.

Shevchenko01

Azari wrote: »

And, was there some code by which if someone called the, then, enemy, 'Jap', they were demonstrating contempt but when they called them 'Japanese' they were not?

That is what you need to prove to show that the abbreviation is racist.

No. A person finding it offensive, especially a member of the group it's aimed at, makes it racist. Taking a word, alter it sufficiently and apply it for no reason to an ethnic group knowing that it has been used as a racist slur makes it racist.

Azari wrote: »

LOL, another example of you muddled thinking.

I'm sorry, but simply saying that does not make it so. You need to back up your statement with evidence. try again.

Azari wrote: »

Your thought process are so illogical as to be opaque. You are conflating two entirely different ideas.

No, your failure in being able to understand arguaments are such.

I merely argued against your idea that something is okay until the vast majority deem it not so.

Azari wrote: »

Here's a question for you.

Which of these do you find most offensive?
Which do you think would be more likely to make a Japanese uncomfortable?

1) The Japs still produce the highest quality TV's in the world.
2) The Japanese ignore world opinion and keep hunting and killing whales.

1) can be far more politly said by, "The Japanese". Why use Jap...lazyness or a deliberate attempt at causing harm?
2) is factual so cannot be racist.

Shevchenko01

tommyknocker wrote: »

What gives you the right to cast aspersions against someone you neither know or have any knowledge of, other than judging him on his views expressed in a single thread. As has been stated before, the bigotry is yours as YOU are the one who seeks to point the finger with malice, and group together in a holding cell in your tiny mind all those who do not kow-tow to your idiosyncratic viewpoint and belief that YOU are right.

What goater has been saying is mild to the extreme in relation to what Azari has been posting - read some of his posts. Please don't accuse one in defence of another when the other is on the moral low ground. This "debate" has turned into a farce by the name-calling and refusal to respect other peoples views.

I don't know you, but I hope you are a reasonable and educated person and use that when you read through this.

I initially had no problem with Azari's view - didn't agree but respected his right to that view as, I believe, have most others.
Problem is, the more that someone puts their fingers in their ears and sings "la-la-la-la-la" when others are talking, the more they have to shout to be heard. I have also looked at some of his posts in other threads and it seems a common trait on his part - talks down to those that disagree and resorts to insults - often cloaked in a (what he used to describe me) passive-aggressive manner.

tommyknocker wrote: »

Pretty much everyone? There are probably only a dozen commenting within this thread and I think you'll find 4 or 5 of those with the viewpoint that 'Jap' is not offensive. Some are sat on the fence. Of the rest who DO find it offensive, is it any coincidence that quite a few of them are . . how shall we put it . . not of English descent, and would therefore probably find half the words in the Oxford dictionary offensive.

I assume that the "how shall we put it . . not of English descent" is aimed at me? I'm not offended by that - how can I be? I am after all, not English. Although I feel I have more than a reasonable grasp of the language.

I'm not sure if you meant English or actually British - most of my friends are not English either - they are from Wales and Ulster - but speak remarkably good English.

If I ever find a word that I find offensive (like N****r, P**i, c**t) I simply refuse to use them. I don't ever force anyone else to do likewise but would respectfully ask them to refrain in my presence - you see the English language is so rich there are always plenty of other words available to use.

Most of the bad-blood in this thread has come from one person refusing to accept what others think or believe and trying to tell them what to believe - and that tommyknocker has been my only gripe here. It is after all with each person his own conscious.

Leif

tommyknocker wrote: »

The Wikipedia post was informative as it proves categorically that although the abbreviation 'Jap' can be construed as offensive in some regions, in others such as Australia, Singapore, Brazil, Hong-Kong, etc, etc, it is not.

The 'pc-bully-boys' on here are those who seek to ram their politically correct opinions down everyone's throats oblivious . . no, blinkered, to the fact that evidence states otherwise. It's people like you who CAUSE racial aggravation. Another person's opinion is none of your business.

The Wikipedia link does not prove anything. It puts forward a point of view that the term Jap is considered insulting by some people, but clearly it is ambiguous. If you had bothered to read my earlier posts, rather than simply abusing me, you would understand my viewpoint, rather than ascribe to me the view you think I hold. However, given the ease of communication, and that anyone can read an English forum, it is not unreasonable to take the view that if a word is deemed racially offensive in America, for instance, then it might be best to avoid using that word. You might disagree, in which case why not explain why without abusing me.

Anyway, your post above does what Azari has done i.e. he has ascribed to me views that I do not hold, he has pigeon holed me as something he dispises (created a straw man), and then he attacks me on that basis. Except that I do not fit into that pigeon hole. And even if someone did hold the view that the term 'Jap' was racist, or racist in British English, I would not see that as justification for verbally abusing them. I might say I disagree, but no more.

However, this might interest you:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/Jap

I cannot say if the Oxford Dictionnaries site is correct, but clearly they consider the term 'Jap' to be offensive in what they call 'World English'. Perhaps you should direct your abuse to the site owners.

tommyknocker

Leif wrote: »

The Wikipedia link does not prove anything. It puts forward a point of view that the term Jap is considered insulting by some people, but clearly it is ambiguous. If you had bothered to read my earlier posts, rather than simply abusing me, you would understand my viewpoint, rather than ascribe to me the view you think I hold. However, given the ease of communication, and that anyone can read an English forum, it is not unreasonable to take the view that if a word is deemed racially offensive in America, for instance, then it might be best to avoid using that word. You might disagree, in which case why not explain why without abusing me.

Anyway, your post above does what Azari has done i.e. he has ascribed to me views that I do not hold, he has pigeon holed me as something he dispises (created a straw man), and then he attacks me on that basis. Except that I do not fit into that pigeon hole. And even if someone did hold the view that the term 'Jap' was racist, or racist in British English, I would not see that as justification for verbally abusing them. I might say I disagree, but no more.

However, this might interest you:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/Jap

I cannot say if the Oxford Dictionnaries site is correct, but clearly they consider the term 'Jap' to be offensive in what they call 'World English'. Perhaps you should direct your abuse to the site owners.

I have neither pigeon-holed you nor attacked you but you clearly want to make your own assumptions.

Because a word or phrase is deemed offensive in one country, but not another, that is no just reason for someone to try and enforce the offensive view on another. Just like there is no reason for someone to try and enforce the non-offensive by return.

Myself - and Azari I am sure - and the others on here who expressed a view that they did not believe the term 'Jap' to be offensive, are merely expressing a personal opinion. I am certainly no racist and as such I resent someone trying to force their views on me as being correct . . . for no other reason than their own belief. Respect my opinion and I will respect yours.