Although in this case (the IRS scandal) it’s not being used because it’s descriptive; it’s being used to obfuscate. The person quoted doesn’t want to get pinned down in the details of whether said actions were legal, officially approved, or within some rule set; the speaker is looking for a phrase that dissociates IRS leadership from the scandal while sounding quotable enough to become a media sound bite, discouraging more detailed analysis.
I agree. As far as the perceived offensiveness of the phrase, I figure I really can’t feel how painfully someone else’s shoe pinches their foot. That doesn’t mean I don’t think they’re wrong about it being painful.
Yes, even when it’s glaringly obvious its origins can easily be overlooked. I remember having a major “d’oh!” moment as a teenager when it suddenly dawned on me what the expression “get your cotton-pickin’ hands off that” means. And “down the river” I had never even thought about until just now.
I never thought about “down the river” that way before. Huh…learn something new every day.
People are just way too sensitive these days.
Or just more sensitive to things they never thought about before. That’s not a bad thing.
How about “went rogue”? It conveys the same meaning, and with 72% fewer syllables.
What did you think it meant?
My line is whether the original meaning still exists. I won’t use “gay” as insult because of that. I also rarely use “lame,” albeit more often because the original meaning is fairly uncommon. Same with “retarded.”
I see this as similar to “gypped” or “welched,” neither of which have their original meaning anymore. I see getting offended by those things as being a problem with the person being offended, as there is no possible interpretation where they are trying to insult you.
I even think this applies somewhat to people who ask you not to say it. Sure, you shouldn’t say it to them personally, out of courtesy, but it would be stupid to stop completely. And that means you might slip up and say it again in their presence.
When it gets to the point that the majority of people to whom it applies don’t care, I don’t either. Hence my use of “black” instead of “African American” or “[American] Indian” instead of “Native American.”
That depends on your definition of sensitive. It is definitely a bad thing to be an offenderatti, someone who gets offended on behalf of someone else or makes a show of being offended just for the spectacle. It should just mean you pay attention to other people’s feelings and consider them in what you say. Not that you get offended easily because it might offend others.
I actually never thought much about it. I assumed it was some sort of agricultural colloquialism. Like I was going to sell you my produce or livestock or whatever, but then fucked you over by taking a better price further down river.
Except thanks to Sarah Palin, the term “going rogue” is now more synonymous with “went retarded” (no offense BigT).
Around here we had “just off the boat” to refer to someone who wasn’t very bright and probably spoke with an old country accent. I haven’t heard it used since the last generation died off. And it wasn’t used to anyone’s face so I know it wasn’t a compliment.
The “wasn’t very bright” part wasn’t really true as a rule. It was just that immigrants were ignorant of many of the scams laying wait for them when they arrived and so were easily fooled. And some of their old customs and mannerisms seemed dated.
By the time I was born it had morphed into meaning anyone who was backwards. It wasn’t until I began researching my families history that I understood what difficulties they had encountered being new arrivals and why use of this phrase would be significant to them.
I’d rather ask Is this offensive? than Is this racist? in areas where the line seems so fine. As others have mentioned, much of what appears to be racism is ignorance and unfamiliarity. Once we understand what hurts each other many of us are willing to be more sensitive to it.
Nothing is a slur unless it is intended to be. Get over it. A slur is a crime of intent.
“All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?”
Nothing is a slur if it can be used in mixed company.
Not intentionally racist? The "Group’s History(s) inspired it? Ummm… the entire concept springs forth from racism - it is NOT the “group’s” histories that inspire the bigotry - it is the BIGOTS. imho
It is heap big offensive.
Why? Because they find it’s a chink in their armor? (That is not racist, but I had a friend who got called into HR for using it in a whitepaper. Too bad, he’d been working like a Turk all day to get it finished.)
If you look up those so called ‘racist’ expressions none of them is racist.
chink in the armor-a weakness in a plan or system
whitepaper-is a policy document. Historically there’s also green papers
working like a Turk–the word Turk is from the gaelic ‘torc’, a wild boar. Anyway, there are a number of expressions (swear like a Turk, hate like a Turk) dating back to the 1700’s.
I’m not in the habit of knowingly using words or phrases that can cause offense or discomfort unless I’m intentionally trying to cause offense or discomfort. “Off the reservation” just sounds wrong to my ear. So I wouldn’t use it.
But if someone used it around me and I didn’t have reason to believe they were being racist, I wouldn’t give it much thought. Though I would probably wince if they were talking about someone who is Native American or if they were speaking in the presence of someone who is Native American.
Cite - not for the translation of torc, for the etymology of the phrase.
It can be. In this case it is.