feral
New Member
Posts: 8,237
|
Post by feral on Feb 7, 2009 18:34:57 GMT
"Bonkers" isn't the word I'd use to describe you.......  |
|
|
|
Post by vania on Feb 7, 2009 18:35:47 GMT
Oh for gawds sake you silly pregnant looking dog -if you call someone on the street an ugly pregnant dog you're deliberately being offenisve.If you call a black on the street a golliwog you're also being deliberately offensive .No one is saying any different .Or are you just pretending to be thick ? You said a person can only be offensive if that is the intention. If I call someone on the street an ugly pregnant dog, in a jovial manner because that is how I address my friends, then, according to your own logic, it's not offensive surely? |
|
|
|
Post by flatandy on Feb 7, 2009 18:39:44 GMT
I dont quite know how many ways you can say " an object ,in itself ,or a word , in itself ,is not racist but the intent behind it can be " .I have discovered however that the only way of responding to the many ways that has been said is to more or less accuse the poster of supporting racism . You can say it many times, but you'd still be wrong. You can use racist words in ignorance, but they are still racist words. You can't call someone a nigger, even in ignorance, without using a racist word. And the reaction when it's pointed out to you, if you did use it in ignorance, is to apologise. I use nigger as the example because it's the most obvious one. |
|
|
|
Post by flatandy on Feb 7, 2009 18:46:54 GMT
I wonder whether Andy will understand if i try one more example .I doubt it, but here goes anyway .Me last post on the subject ( hehe ) Right,Andy .If I called you a golliwog would you say I was being racist ? ( cos I used ,by your definition, a racist word,like ) No eh ? Sooooo ...that proves without doubt that it aint a word that is racist but the fecking INTENT behind it . Once again. You can use racist words without being racist. I have used nigger, paki and gollywog repeatedly throughout this thread. If you called me a nigger it would be just as stupid as calling me a gollywog. But in either case I'd bring you up on the use of language that you should avoid because it's racist. If you used either word for a black person - which would be the appropriate comparison as it's not completely meaningless - then you would almost certainly be being racist unless you were astonishingly ignorant. I'm not likley to be offended by you calling me a gollywog because my race haven't been categorised widely as "gollywogs". |
|
|
|
Post by Victor Meldrew on Feb 7, 2009 19:05:38 GMT
If you used either word for a black person - which would be the appropriate comparison as it's not completely meaningless - then you would almost certainly be being racist unless you were astonishingly ignorant.
But no one here has called anyone a golliwog. The only reference to golliwogs throughout this entire thread is in connection with the doll, which has been around much, much longer than the extremist scumbags that hijacked it. If your point is the way a word is used can be racist, and that's very much evident in what you've just posted, then nobody here can be accused of racism on this thread, because no one has used it in that context. Therefore, by your own admission, if people use certain words innocently, as has been done here with goliwog being an affectionate term for a doll, rather than a racist jibe at people, then you agree that it's not racist? You must do, or otherwise your last post won't make any sense at all. OK, let's see if I can get another product off the shelves. Christ, I hate all those blackcurrant jams coming over here and taking our jobs. By the way people, keep it going. I've just got 10/1 with betfair that this thread reaches 20 pages.
|
|
|
|
Post by vania on Feb 7, 2009 19:08:02 GMT
Except (allegedly) Ms Thatcher...
|
|
|
|
Post by vania on Feb 7, 2009 19:11:20 GMT
In relation to Victor's post I had a question, which was ignored, and I'm going to re-ask:
Just a query to people who keep saying 'it was an innocent doll in the 20s'. Was it? or was it just the case that at that time period, racist caricatures were more acceptable and widespread that they are now?
I mean the Merchant of Venice/the character of shylock are pretty anti-semetic, even though in those time periods no issue would have been taken with it as anti-Jewish attitudes were seen as the norm.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarrant on Feb 7, 2009 19:16:05 GMT
Good point Victor.
Those mushrooms soups should all be deported!!
|
|
sweet soul
New Member
Keep The Faith !
Posts: 5,106 
|
Post by sweet soul on Feb 7, 2009 19:18:46 GMT
Eh?
|
|
|
|
Post by Victor Meldrew on Feb 7, 2009 19:18:51 GMT
Except (allegedly) Ms Thatcher...
Vania, I have no idea, because unlike some people, I don't try to guess people's thoughts. At present, thought crime isn't illegal and long may it continue. I don't know whether she meant it in racist terms or whether it was an innocent attempt at likening the guy's hair to an object she knew.
For example, if the guy had flame red hair, who would she have offended if she'd likened his hair to a London bus?
Had she said "the man looks like a nasty golliwog", there would be no doubt and no argument. Doesn't the fact that so many people, not just on this board, but thoughout the Country do not feel she was racist in what she said, and even more claim they do not regard golliwogs as racist objects, give you some idea that it's nowhere near a clear cut case?
It's not an argument either side is going to win. The reason? It comes down to pure perception of individuals, and they are completely split on this matter.
People can keep peddling the line that if you use the term golliwog or if you own one then you are racist until they are hoarse. In this instance, it's just not going to wash with a large proportion of the Country.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarrant on Feb 7, 2009 19:21:04 GMT
I mean the Merchant of Venice/the character of shylock are pretty anti-semetic, even though in those time periods no issue would have been taken with it as anti-Jewish attitudes were seen as the norm. No, this is just another example of the precious society. Money lenders, at that time, were almost always Jews. The Jews then did indeed keep themselves separate from society. This was their choice. They arrived in the 10th century claiming to be regfugees from Palestine and saying they intended to return when the Mohammadean hords had gone. The terms of the loan may have been extream but their purpose was surely to ensure repayment. |
|
|
|
Post by flatandy on Feb 7, 2009 19:21:06 GMT
By the way, I don't think I've called anyone on this thread a racist - there are one or two I have my doubts about, but I've not called anyone racist.
I have said that if you know a word is offensive and racist - paki and nigger are good examples - and you use it, then you're either a racist or you're trying to be oh so clever and shocking.
|
|
|
|
Post by vania on Feb 7, 2009 19:22:57 GMT
Except (allegedly) Ms Thatcher... Vania, I have no idea, because unlike some people, I don't try to guess people's thoughts. At present, thought crime isn't illegal and long may it continue. I don't know whether she meant it in racist terms or whether it was an innocent attempt at likening the guy's hair to an object she knew. For example, if the guy had flame red hair, who would she have offended if she'd likened his hair to a London bus? Had she said "the man looks like a nasty golliwog", there would be no doubt and no argument. Doesn't the fact that so many people, not just on this board, but thoughout the Country do not feel she was racist in what she said, and even more claim they do not regard golliwogs as racist objects, give you some idea that it's nowhere near a clear cut case? It's not an argument either side is going to win. The reason? It comes down to pure perception of individuals, and they are completely split on this matter. People can keep peddling the line that if you use the term golliwog or if you own one then you are racist until they are hoarse. In this instance, it's just not going to wash with a large proportion of the Country. Not sure what you're going on about. 'Guess people's thoughts'? You said nobody has referred to somebody as a golliwog, I said except 'allegedly Ms Thatcher' as that is what she was suspended for. |
|
|
|
Post by Victor Meldrew on Feb 7, 2009 19:23:35 GMT
Blimey tarrant, this is getting annoying now. Will you please stop typing stuff that I wholeheartedly agree with. I'm losing my enthusiasm for this board. Oh well, there's always berty, and he'll never let me down. |
|
|
|
Post by vania on Feb 7, 2009 19:24:03 GMT
And you're red hair comparison is crap if it was the mixed race French player she was talking about. Look him up and please point out to me what on earth about his persona could reasonably be said to look a bit golliwoggish.
|
|
|
|
Post by vania on Feb 7, 2009 19:26:23 GMT
Who has said anybody who owns a gollywog is racist?
I keep getting accused of that but I am pretty sure I said it seems to be a generational thing as to whether people see the dolls as offensive or not.
|
|
sushimo
New Member
One tequilla, Two Tequilla, Three Tequilla - Floor.
Posts: 243
|
Post by sushimo on Feb 7, 2009 19:27:56 GMT
|
|
sushimo
New Member
One tequilla, Two Tequilla, Three Tequilla - Floor.
Posts: 243
|
Post by sushimo on Feb 7, 2009 19:28:57 GMT
Anyways, scrap away, I am off out for the night!!
|
|
sweet soul
New Member
Keep The Faith !
Posts: 5,106
|
Post by sweet soul on Feb 7, 2009 19:29:39 GMT
Dare i mention the word ...Fuzzy Wuzzy ?
Darn i did! ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by vania on Feb 7, 2009 19:34:48 GMT
What you think she's criticisng Boris because she's a Labourite?
"Chiles, 41, said Brand was 'aghast' by Miss Thatcher's comments and challenged her about using the word 'golliwog'.
'"Yes, well, he's half-black," Carol explained, waving her hand in front of her face,' said Chiles in The Sun."
So she didn't refer to him as a gollywog because he has big hair, or a long blue coat, or looks a little bit like one, but because he's "half black". I reckon she desperately wanted something to rhyme with frog and Bob's your uncle. Never ceases to amaze me the way some people get so obsessed with the fact someone has a different skin shade to themselves, so much they feel the need to point it out.
Crikey what time period is she from?
|
|
