Shocked at my friend.

summerspring

Whatever nit-picking you want to do, I would think suki knows the area she is living in, better than the rest of us. I know a place a bit like that (not in Northern Ireland, just somewhere rural in England) where everyone is white and the locals have very old-fashioned and unpalatable views.

Pollycat

summerspring wrote: »

Whatever nit-picking you want to do, I would think suki knows the area she is living in, better than the rest of us. I know a place a bit like that (not in Northern Ireland, just somewhere rural in England) where everyone is white and the locals have very old-fashioned and unpalatable views.

I think you'll find that I've never posted that Suki doesn't know the area she is living in better than the rest of us.
Just maybe not the right term for it. :rotfl:

I also don't dispute that there are probably areas within England, Wales & Scotland that have similar views to the province that Suki lives in.

zagfles

AubreyMac wrote: »

My nationality is British as I was born and bred here.

Ethnically, I am Asian.

I do not take offence to being called 'coloured'. In fact, I even call myself this. As someone else said it comes down to intent and context in the way it's delivered.

Many people can not differentiate Asian countries such as India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka so any dark skinned Asian is described as 'Indian' even if they are not of Indian heritage. Same with Chinese/Korean/Japanese/Vietnamese or Nigerian/Ghanaian or Jamaican/Barbadian, the list goes on. Often when I correct people their response is "they all look the same".

What annoys me the most is the assumption/conclusion that white people are the ones who are racist. I have experienced racism from all sorts of people.

Excellent points. I know an Asian guy who's a contractor and has lived in loads of different countries, he says Britain is the most tolerant and least racist of all the countries he's lived in. He finds it "cute" how we tie ourselves in knots over what terms to use, while other countries he's lived in have blatent direct discrimination even sometimes built into law, such as different tax rates dependant on race!

pollypenny

summerspring wrote: »

It's been known to mean race since the 16th century :rotfl:
About 30% of English words originally come from Latin, how far do you want to go back?

The word miracle comes from the Latin mira, meaning strange. So if you call someone a miracle, you're calling them strange :rotfl:

You are really clutching at straws with this argument of yours that the original Latin meaning of a word gives you the green light to take offence on behalf of others.

Ok, if we're on to roots of words here goes:

I can't see anyone bring called a 'miracle. However, their recovery from an illness could be very much against all odds, therefore strange, therefore a 'miracle'. The same would apply to a sporting achievement.

It's something rare, strange, so a miracle.

The thread has taken a turn. :cool:

Petra_70

AubreyMac wrote: »

My nationality is British as I was born and bred here.

Ethnically, I am Asian.

I do not take offence to being called 'coloured'. In fact, I even call myself this. As someone else said it comes down to intent and context in the way it's delivered.

Many people can not differentiate Asian countries such as India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka so any dark skinned Asian is described as 'Indian' even if they are not of Indian heritage. Same with Chinese/Korean/Japanese/Vietnamese or Nigerian/Ghanaian or Jamaican/Barbadian, the list goes on. Often when I correct people their response is "they all look the same".

What annoys me the most is the assumption/conclusion that white people are the ones who are racist. I have experienced racism from all sorts of people.

Thanks for posting this AubreyMac.

In my experience, non-whites are rarely offended by anything; it's the holier-than thou PC brigade and the 'professionally offended' who seem to get offended on behalf of others that are the problem. They cause discord and disharmony, not the people saying the supposedly offensive words!

Most of the time if someone does say something 'old fashioned' (I won't say the words or phrases,) it is almost never meant as offensive. I have seen so many people shouted at for saying an old fashioned saying that is now supposedly offensive, and they never ever mean anything by it. And it is always white people who kick off.

Does my head in tbh.

UK0106

summerspring wrote: »

This isn't the U.S., which has a different history of race relations to us.

Half caste is not offensive, but you do get people who like to get offended on other people's behalf It's just a descriptor. The d word used by suki's friends is impolite and the n word is very taboo, but half caste is just a bit old-hat now so is not used. Like calling the radio a wireless, lol

Actually, as a "half-caste" person, I can tell you that it's not just a descriptor to me. I personally find the term offensive and would (and have) told people who have referred to me as "half-caste" exactly that. It's absolutely nothing like referring to an inanimate object using an old-fashioned term at all and using that analogy makes you sound quite ignorant to me.

Coincidentally, these days many people are a mix of multiple races, not just two or even have a mix of 3/4 of race and 1/4 another. How would you describe them?

For the record, I am offended on my own behalf. If other mixed race people are not offended by the term being used to describe them, that's their call.

AubreyMac

UK0106 wrote: »

Actually, as a "half-caste" person, I can tell you that it's not just a descriptor to me. I personally find the term offensive and would (and have) told people who have referred to me as "half-caste" exactly that. It's absolutely nothing like referring to an inanimate object using an old-fashioned term at all and using that analogy makes you sound quite ignorant to me.

Coincidentally, these days many people are a mix of multiple races, not just two or even have a mix of 3/4 of race and 1/4 another. How would you describe them?

For the record, I am offended on my own behalf. If other mixed race people are not offended by the term being used to describe them, that's their call.

I have a friend who I went school with. She is 1/4 white and 3/4 black African.


Despite being 3/4 black, she is very light skinned. This is often a curiosity to those who meet her and when asked about her heritage, she tells people she is "quarter caste".

AubreyMac

zagfles wrote: »

Excellent points. I know an Asian guy who's a contractor and has lived in loads of different countries, he says Britain is the most tolerant and least racist of all the countries he's lived in. He finds it "cute" how we tie ourselves in knots over what terms to use, while other countries he's lived in have blatent direct discrimination even sometimes built into law, such as different tax rates dependant on race!

Ah, you see, I have been told that 'tolerant' is derogatory as it implies 'put up with'.

zagfles

AubreyMac wrote: »

Ah, you see, I have been told that 'tolerant' is derogatory as it implies 'put up with'.

So 'intolerant' must be a positive quality then

zagfles

AubreyMac wrote: »

I have a friend who I went school with. She is 1/4 white and 3/4 black African.


Despite being 3/4 black, she is very light skinned. This is often a curiosity to those who meet her and when asked about her heritage, she tells people she is "quarter caste".

Just shows how peoples' opinions differ about which terms are and aren't acceptable. As I mentioned before my Chinese gf was offended when referred to as 'black' even though it is apparently PC to refer to Chinese people as black! So even consulting the latest PC dictionary won't necessarily mean you won't offend!

I think it mainly comes down to context, intent and history of usage, rather than any sort of analysis of origin or literal meaning of the term. For instance the indisputed highly offensive term which is simply a 4 letter abbrieviation of a country, isn't offensive because of its origin or literal meaning, it's offensive because of the context in which it has been used historically. The term Brit isn't offensive, because it is usually correctly used to refer to a citizen of this country rather than a race.

I reckon 'gay' is going to become politically incorrect in a few years - with it's increased slang usage as meaning 'naff' or 'rubbish'.