Your profile doesn’t state your location, but I’m in the Eastern USA. You may consider the majority of us here culturally unaware and the irony of your insult in a thread about not insulting those of other nations has not gone unrecognized.
FFS. Did you even read what I wrote? I’m British - the fact that ‘Paki’ is a horrible, violent, racist term in the UK has not escaped me. I joined this thread with the assumption that anyone using the term was either racist or simply ignorant of this connotation.
However, to my great surprise, I learned that there are parts of the world where the term ‘Paki’ is just an innocent abbreviation (just like ‘Brit’ is pretty much everywhere). Importantly, one of those parts of the world where the term ‘Paki’ is used innofensively, is Pakistan.
Are we going to tell them that they need to stop using the word, because we ruined it?
So if some bunch of arseholes on the other side of the planet starts using the term ‘Brit’ as a racist epithet, we Brits have to drop the term? Bollocks.
The point is, for some people, it’s not a racial slur, so it sort of is a hardship being told that an innocuous part of your vocabulary is no longer available.
I’ll never use the term myself, because my background is one in which it was only ever offensive, but I think in general terms (such as on this board), the best we could hope for is that it’s informally flagged as a word that may be used as a racial slur.
Mmm, in two minds on this issue. But I’m with Mangetout I think - certainly flag the word, but it shouldn’t be insta-Modworthy.
There are some words I find offensive (Hottentot, for instance) where context is everything. OK in quoting a Shakespeare’s Sister song, not OK in other contexts.
As another example, the word “kaffir” is, if anything, worse than “nigger” in terms of offensiveness to me. It’s something akin to combining “nigger” with “motherfucker” in one word while spitting in one’s face. But in context, it’s not offensive at all. I must admit to getting a start recently when it was used in its original meaning to refer to non Muslims (possibly by Ibn, can’t recall) and it wasn’t clear at first, but in the broader context totally made sense. Similarly, if I saw Paki used in context by someone referring to their cricket team, it wouldn’t set off any racist alarm bells. But if a Brit referred to his “Paki neighbour”, it totally would.
Bang on. It’s pretty cool that you’ve changed your mind on this issue. To your credit, you did so quite early on in the thread too.
Sorry, man, but that’s just pathetic. And the most weaksauce attempt at racism apologism I ever saw. I’m sure you, like everyone else on the planet, grok the very simple concept of loaded, racist terminology; which means you’re just being contrary for the sake of it.
I don’t see a whole lot of close reasoning going on in your posts. Precisely what is your answer to the point made by **Mangetout **in his last post and just quoted by bldysabba?
And here’s a clue: calling everyone who disagrees with you a racist apologist and suggesting they are being insincere is not a way to win a debate. It’s just an attempt to avoid a debate.
“Race” has many different meanings. Some strict and some loose, discussing people with a common cultural background (for example).
Thanks - In all honesty, it’s an awful predicament, and I stumbled in here assuming that this would be like every other similar case I’ve encountered; that is, where a term that was racist (but widely accepted because the system was broken) became unacceptable in stages, so at one point in the process, people are using it confrontationally, whilst others are merely using it out of habit (but still not acceptably), but it’s not like that; there are at least three distinct communities of usage for this term, and one of them isn’t using it in any kind of racist sense.
And at any attempt where I adopt a policy of calling everyone who disagrees with me a racist apologist, please let me know.
I won’t apologise for calling a clearly insincere post insincere.
Huh? I was replying to DrDeth who made a silly post - comlete with rolleyes smilie - about how he was offended by the word “you”. Which he clearly isn’t. If you consider that a sincere reply, good for you. I do not believe it to be so. Sorry.
Actually my profile does state my location - it’s there for all the world to see (unless the board’s enabled some needless “you’re only a newbie here and thus none of your particulars will show to other board members until you’ve earned your spurs and posted 50,000 posts” type nonsense.
Secondly, you’d have to be pretty thin-skinned to take what I said as an insult. But hey, if the shoe fits…
Bizarre that some here are still struggling with this concept.
No, ‘nigger’ is not an abbreviation of Negro - for one thing, it has more letters: defeating the whole point abbreviation. If anything, it’s a corruption of the word, and once you read its etymology - see the etymology for both words below - then you can see how Negro transmogrified into ‘nigger’.
‘Nigger’
Origin:
late 17th century (as an adjective): from earlier neger, from French nègre, from Spanish negro ‘black’ (see Negro)
Origin:
via Spanish and Portuguese from Latin niger, nigr- ‘black’
Maybe you were responding to DrDeth, but Mangetout earlier responded to an aggressive post by you, making some very good points. Princhester was asking you why you haven’t responded to Mangetout. You’ve completely ignored what Mangetout has to say, and continue to bang away at your “racist slur” tom-tom (not unlike other posters in this thread). His is a perspective that is culturally very similar to yours, but he’s made a genuine attempt at understanding that there could be more than one way of looking at this issue, and maybe, just maybe, the opinion of those who can come under the ‘Paki’ label may be worth listening to.
My perspective is one of a British man of Indian descent (born in Britain - I’ve never been to India) who has suffered racially motivated abuse, primarily featuring this term, all my life. I have been told to “go back to your own country, you fucking Paki” on many occasions; and, notably, my own country is not Pakistan (it’s not even India - it’s the UK, but if we’re talking ancestry, mine is not of Pakistani origin).
Mangetout tried to compare the term to “Brit” which is a comparison I do not find even remotely appropriate.
Maybe, just maybe, the opinion of* this *person who can come under the ‘Paki’ label may be worth listening to.
I’ve gotta say that I’m shocked and more than a little upset to find myself having to defend my desire not to be refered to by racial slurs and to be attacked by people here on the SDMB for that position.
You’re clearly not paying attention to what I said. I don’t know how to remedy this - I mean, I could repeat myself, or maybe you could scroll up and read it again.
Please just read post #28, for the opinion of someone who is also worth listening to on this subject.
Nobody is trying to argue that it’s an innofensive term here in Britain, in the contexts you’ve experienced it, but the contexts in which you (and I) have experienced it, here in Britain are by no means universal.
I’m paying attention. I keep re-reading your post. Clearly I just don’t get this subject.
You do realise there’s a BIG difference to a white guy referring to someone of [one of various] descents as a “Paki” and someone using it about themself?
Yes, that’s what this whole thread has been about*. You got it.
*(although I don’t think the distiction is precisely white vs everyone else).
Also…
Substitute pretty much anything for the graped term, and it’s no less offensive.
I think this issue should be settled with a cricket match! 