Perhaps you should follow some of the links provided above.
That is an obfuscation. “South Korea” is not the favoured name of the “Republic of Korea,” neither is it a slur.
I don’t care about favoured/optimal terms; I want confirmation on the usage of slurs, especially national slurs.
For myself, I have decided I will not use Nork (NORK). I believe it derogatory. If I need an abbreviation, NK for North Korea seems even shorter, and less fraught.
It’s not a controversial position that slurs are frowned on, and prohibited in most cases. The question is really whether this particular item is a slur. You’ve linked to a video game. There was a note from Tom linked above from a few years ago. Here is what I’ve found on some cursory searching:
Wired in 2012:
(my bold in each of the above)
And I’ve asked a former reporter in DC who also has stated the term is used not as a slur.
The fact that:
You are British = You are a Brit = Okay
and
You are Japanese = You are a Jap = NOT okay.
…means that context, history, etc. are relevant in making the evaluation. I haven’t seen persuasive evidence that “nork” is a slur at this point in time though I am open to evaluating new information.
Now, this way of handling things is why I like you as a mod. No black and white thinking, but open to different ways of interpreting how things are actually used in reality.
This sensitivity combined with practicality is the reason I very much supported you becoming a mod in the first place.
So slurs would be prohibited, but you need to see them as a slur? Ok, lets look at those examples you’ve provided. [ol]
[li]a trove of Nork rocket data[/li][li]Pentagon Assessing Nork Threat[/li][li]More NorK rocket fire[/li][/ol]In all the above cases “Nork” is a shorten adjectival of the North Korean state. Thus it can be lacklustre, at worst, not demeaning (the DPRK isn’t a person). But what if “Nork” was used to describe people, and not rockets/data? Calling someone(s) a “Nork” makes authorial intent clearer; after all, you cannot objectify an object/place/idea, only humans are able to be dehumanized.
Since you’re not convinced by my previous link to youtube gamers, how about a twitter sample? I am fairly confident 98% of these users are calling North Koreans “Norks” in a disparaging manner (often while imaging their death by nuclear bombing). See, while your examples are ambiguous, ambiguity breaks down (and its utility in debasing people clarifies) once the word is applied to people.
I can believe that there are people who don’t use it as a slur (there’s people who **earnestly **use “Jap” without ill intentions), but your contact can’t guarantee that “Nork” (as applied to a person) simply isn’t used in a disparaging manner. A quick google search brings up right wing commentaries debunking that claim.
I will agree with you that context, history, and such are very relevant.
Not offensive in Australia or New Zealand either. I saw a sign at the local grocers for “Jap Pumpkins” the other day, for example, and cars imported into New Zealand from Japan are referred to as “Jap Imports”.
In this part of the world it’s simply a shortening of the word “Japanese”.
https://www.allacronyms.com/_business/SKOR/South_Korea
I have also seen it used in sports.
Not all shortening of country names in reference to people is offensive. Australian’s don’t have any problems being called “Aussies” and its fine to call NZ people “kiwis”.
I’d argue that “NORK” has no history of being used as an offensive term so it’s a neutral term. If you can find me a post online from a North Korean saying it’s offensive to them then I’ll change my mind.
I can confirm Quartz’s assertion that it is not a slur. Bear in mind we are speaking of general usage in the UK, not the minority in the London area who usually go along with US opinion on such matters. If you credit The Guardian and other such outlets you’d certainly be forgiven for thinking it was a slur here. But thankfully they are not the arbiters on these things. Although I do cheerfully accept the SDMB’s rule on this, it is after all an American board and it’s quite understandable that it should adhere to US practice.
…maybe not offensive with the people you associate with, but most certainly offensive with the people I associate with. I haven’t heard the phrase “Jap Imports” in decades. It most certainly is no longer commonly used on this side of the Tasman anyway.
I think that the reason such abbreviated forms are not offensive in these instances is owing to the fact that many Aussies and Kiwis share the same culture as the other Anglophone countries that might use the terms. It’s when abbreviated terms are used to describe people of a different race or culture that the trouble starts.
We move in totally different circles so I doubt our experiences on anything match up, to be honest. I suspect that based on your experiences most of New Zealand can speak fluent Maori; based on mine hardly anyone can.
For what it’s worth, having worked in the NZ media I can tell you “Jap” was not on the list of banned words.
Oooooh, Kiwi fight!!! 
I’m OK if NORKS is banned, as long as we can still use Mooks. Mooks is good, right?
…your suspicion is incorrect. As was your blanket assertion that “Jap” is not offensive in New Zealand.
Well it isn’t worth much I’m afraid. When exactly was the last time the NZ media used the word “jap” anyway? Care to cite this list of banned words? Was that a government prescribed list, or just a list created by the media outlet that you happened to be working for?
So is Moops.
I clicked the through to the twitter link and other than making me a sad panda I’m not sure you’ve made a convincing argument. Firstly, using a shortened form of a word applied to people isn’t always a slur. So to establish that “nork” is a slur there would need to be some evidence, context, history, etc. That means we need to move on to the analysis, rather than simply stopping at the fact that the term is being applied to people.
Secondly, we generally allow insults towards off board people or groups, but we do not allow slurs, even in the Pit, generally. Consider that if “nork” is a slur, then the statement, “North Koreans are assholes” would be okay but “Norks are assholes” would not be okay. If “nork” is not a slur, then both statements would be okay. Surely both are disparaging so that is not the distinction to draw.
Thirdly, the mere fact that a term is offensive to someone does not make it a slur. Otherwise there could be some kind of heckler’s veto where a person’s level of offense taken could restrict everyone else. Obviously this is context dependent and as a result there aren’t hard and fast rules. I don’t think slurs just come out of no where though. Given there isn’t a lot of usage I personally don’t think it rises to the level where I’d want to moderate its usage at this time. I personally wouldn’t use the term simply because it sounds silly, and I try to use people’s and group’s proper names as much as possible.
Fourthly, I do recognize that terms can change meaning over time, and some things that are offensive today were less so in the past, and vice versa. At some point it was perfectly cromulent to describe people as “oriental” or “colored”, etc. I don’t think we are there quite yet.
Also, terms may be offensive in some contexts but not others. For example, “gringo” or “Yankee” may be OK sometimes, and other times may be used as insults.
Which takes us back to the point I made in Post #3. No North Korean has registered a complaint about the term with the Moderators of this board. Anybody else complaining about it is just RO.
Well, as they all worship Dear Leader, we could call them the Dearly Led. At least until Mr. Yuuuuge makes them the Dearly Departed.
I can’t tell if you think this is a clever argument or a good joke. It’s neither.
North Koreans live in a prison state. They don’t get to comment on whether your cutesy term for them crosses the line into a slur. And, if it is a slur, then it doesn’t just damage those at whom it is directed. De-humanizing other people has many ill effects on all concerned. (I think it’s pretty clear that it’s one of those words that isn’t a slur in all usage yet.)