evicting a racist lodger

fivetide

Notmyrealname wrote: »

There are plenty of things that used to be perfectly innocent which the politically correct moron brigade have jumped on as racist/secxist etc.
.

Quite right.

Anyone remember this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/5049771/Sir-David-Jason-apologises-for-Pakistani-joke-in-radio-broadcast.html

Perhaps if he'd asked "what do you call an englishman with a seagull on his head?" he would have got away with it but one is no more racist than the other.

Have a look at some of the comments from the people having a go at him and what they are accusing him of.

For me, this is not racist at all. That would imply a motive to be spiteful or cause hurt. All he has done is tell (a fairly bad joke) of the type millions used to tell as youngsters.

The lodger might well be a David Jason type, a simple off the cuff remark with no malice in it and as a result they are finding themselves homeless.

It is fine for the OP to judge, it is their home but it is not for us on this messageboard to speculate and condemn without full knowledge.

bigmaz

fivetide wrote: »

Quite right.

Anyone remember this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/5049771/Sir-David-Jason-apologises-for-Pakistani-joke-in-radio-broadcast.html

Perhaps if he'd asked "what do you call an englishman with a seagull on his head?" he would have got away with it but one is no more racist than the other.

Have a look at some of the comments from the people having a go at him and what they are accusing him of.

For me, this is not racist at all. That would imply a motive to be spiteful or cause hurt. All he has done is tell (a fairly bad joke) of the type millions used to tell as youngsters.

The lodger might well be a David Jason type, a simple off the cuff remark with no malice in it and as a result they are finding themselves homeless.

It is fine for the OP to judge, it is their home but it is not for us on this messageboard to speculate and condemn without full knowledge.

I just cannot see why that would be racist either. Its so true, the word Racism gets put about far too broadley, I really do not want to live in a world where we cannot tell jokes like that, but if some of the posters on here have their way thats exactly what will happen, what a sad world that will be!!!

propertyman

Fire_Fox wrote: »

I read it carefully thank you, it is your grammar or paragraph structure that is at fault.

Oh come on, the old refuge of the internet argument
- cut and paste a dictionary
- criticise grammar and spelling

it's the internet and common to find " stream of consciousness" posts.

Try a little harder. Even though you have changed my original post ( insertion in red) you are not disagreeing with, and have reinforced, what I have said, about racism as a term.

It is one thing to list characteristics and another to place value on them. That's where a simplistic dictionary definition falls short of a proper understanding and use of the term.

Especially one from the American Heritage Dictionary- a veritable who's who of the US progressive movement, to whom class and race warfare is their lifeblood.

propertyman

bitemebankers wrote: »

What is there left to discuss? There are few things more pointless than listening to someone like yourself trying (and failing) to justify racism.

My earlier post makes it clear what my views on discrimination are
-don't make race a determining factor in anything.

FireWyrm

bitemebankers wrote: »

Racism is generally held to be offensive as well as illegal. I can't believe anyone is trying to claim it can be considered otherwise, unless they're racists themselves, which would certainly explain it.

Once upon a time, every 'civilised' person also knew that witchcraft was morally wrong, so much so, that they denounced neighbours on the basis that their own cow was sick. Those neighbours quite honestly protested their innocence, but as everyone knows, if you are a witch, of course you would deny that witchcraft exists.

Witchcraft just like racism is in the eye of the accuser.

propertyman

Advice- unless it was completely disgusting
1: Say that you disagree with them and that it makes you uncomfortable
2: give them notice of seven days

Just be the better person, by way of example
a; in matters of tolerance
b; that despite provocation, you gave them time to move

bigmaz

bitemebankers wrote: »

What is there left to discuss? There are few things more pointless than listening to someone like yourself trying (and failing) to justify racism.

Just curious, did you find the David Jason joke offensive? The one that was in the article fivetide posted.

bitemebankers

FireWyrm wrote: »

Witchcraft just like racism is in the eye of the accuser.

Congratulations poster! You've just created the most pathetic justification of racism ever posted online. Click here to claim your free BNP car sticker.

bitemebankers

Eton_Rifle wrote: »

Legally, no.

But you don't usually try thow a woman out on the street after only a few days/hours (which weekend is 'last'?) over one single comment that was apparently open to interpretation.

The OP also said, "I am very, very uncomfortable with this person in my home."

At the end of the day, they don't need a better reason than this to evict a lodger.

FireWyrm

bitemebankers wrote: »

Congratulations poster! You've just created the most pathetic justification of racism ever posted online. Click here to claim your free BNP car sticker.

And your grasp of reality and 'civilised' behaviour is obviously tenuous at best.

Thankfully, we dont burn or hang witches anymore, but a few people's careers have been burned over relatively innocent comments in the media. Trial by mob never works out well for the accused, not then, not now.