Well, it never ceases to amaze me that people think nationalist sentiments are based solely upon centuries-old resentments. Undoubtedly that’s a factor, but most of the Scottish nationalists I know primarily consider that Scots could do a better job running their own country without English “assistance”.
Now there’s also the Scots who don’t like being called Brits (or sometimes even being called Scots) because they think of themselves as Irish … whole 'nother can of worms.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ruadh *
**Well, it never ceases to amaze me that people think nationalist sentiments are based solely upon centuries-old resentments. Undoubtedly that’s a factor, but most of the Scottish nationalists I know primarily consider that Scots could do a better job running their own country without English “assistance”.
**(/quote]
In all fairness, it was a reply to someone talking about Scots not liking the Act of Union.
Of course there are other factors, but I trully believe that expressing resentment towards being called British due to an act that was passed nigh on 300 years ago is a bit over the top.
Indeed. I was quite sad to see the Celtic game and not seeing a single Scottish flag, yet seeing a million and one Irish ones.
But as you say, best leave that one be.
I’m the only one who said anything like that and I said they didn’t like “the Union” not “the Act of Union”. Two different things.
The cameras might not have caught them but there were definitely Saltires there. Admittedly, nowhere near as many. More than you’d probably see at a Rangers match amidst all the Union Jacks, however.
That’ll be me being half asleep then. I shouldn’t post when I have just got in to work.
I guess it must be. I definitely don’t remember seeing a single one.
What derogatory word do you call the English if not Brits? If it is Brit, then we’ve got away very lightly.
(Don’t bother to answer if you’re either French or Australian. However, I’d be curious to know what you call us if you’re French/Australian - rospommes?)
I certainly saw a few, but about half were among the Porto fans*.
As I’ve said before on these boards, there are also English people who don’t like ‘Brit’ much. Me for instance. But the nature of a word, and whether it’s insulting or not, depends on a shared understanding between the person who says it and the person on the receiving end.
Of course if an American called me a Brit, limey or whatever and I knew they were just using it as a colloquialism with no offence intended it wouldn’t bother me at all in the same way as ‘pommy bastard’ from a smiling Australian doesn’t hurt. But if I thought you were intending to insult me I’d take it that way. For that reason, ‘Jap’ is insulting if it’s used by a person who intends it to be an insult, or if they know that a Japanese listener is likely to believe it to be an insult.
*In case anyone needs an explanation for that: Porto’s team colours are blue and white, like the flag.
Bullshit. I am advocating the “tell it like it is to the clueless” approach. My suggested use of the term “bigot” fits very well into its use in polite society. The racial slur the bigot in question used does not.
That does not, in any way, give anyone the right to go around using a racial slur to refer to someone else.
Then your grandfather is also a bigot.
Provide proof of this assertion. Failing that, retract it.
A racial slur has only a demeaning sense. A racial slur does not have a good sense, nor do those who use such racial slurs.
Not everyone called them that at the time. Or do you believe the Nissei who fought for their country (you know, the United States) went around referring to the Japanese by a racial slur? Do you think German-Americans went around referring to the Germans by a racial slur? Or that Italian-Americans went around referring to the Italians by a racial slur?
Oh, getting back to my “tell it like it is to the clueless” approach: I hope you took notes. I just used that same approach for your benefit.
Regarding “Brit”
On Diego Garcia, British Indian Ocean Territory, the popular place for the British contingent to party is The Brit Club. Yes, that’s actually the name of the place.
>Provide proof of this assertion. Failing that, retract it.
First person accounts. Not written down anywhere, for all I know it was unofficial. I just know that the Chinese had no reason to keep my grandfather alive AND captive unless they were getting rewarded, so I’m going to take his word on this one. Also, the Nationalists and the Communists would shoot each other and take extra care to not harm the American captives. Sure, they could have been just being nice, but it was ten times easier to turn them over to the Japanese to be tortured and killed.
>A racial slur has only a demeaning sense. A racial slur does not have a good sense, nor do those who use such racial slurs.
And the term “bigot” has a good sense? From what I’ve seen, bigot is only thrown around to demean people whose opinions differ from the politically correct left.
My point is a word is just a word. If you want to get offended at words, that’s your personal problem. One example of my point is when you learn a foreign language (if you’re truly open-minded you should…), you obviously don’t know all of the history behind certain expressions. So as a fledgling user of a language, you may mislearn or mistakenly use a word that may be offensive to the other culture. This useage can hardly be called deliberately demeaning. I’m using this as an analogy to someone who is brought up in a segment of American culture that uses a word to refer to those “different” people. Without knowing or thinking much about the history of the useage of a word, you start to use it indiscriminately and not think about or mean it to be demeaning or offensive.
I will admit that my grandfather is uneducated and ignorant, but bigoted? no.
>Not everyone called them that at the time. Or do you believe the Nissei who fought for their country (you know, the United States) went around referring to the Japanese by a racial slur? Do you think German-Americans went around referring to the Germans by a racial slur? Or that Italian-Americans went around referring to the Italians by a racial slur?
Sure they did, maybe not all but at least some of them did. My other grandfather fought in Europe. Very German-American. But he still called the Nazis Krauts.
>Oh, getting back to my “tell it like it is to the clueless” approach: I hope you took notes. I just used that same approach for your benefit.
For this approach to work, you must first establish that the person you are talking to is clueless. I am not, so obviously you just failed.
I’m trying to maintain civility here. I’m just expressing my opinions and some counter-examples to the demeaning useage of ethnic slurs. You’re trying to incite a fight by calling my relatives bigots. If you really want to start fights, take it to the pit. I’m not going to throw insults back and forth here.
Doozo yoroshiku onegaishimasu.
I know, you just have to know my friend 
She got upset when, at the Edinburgh Military Tattoo, they played the British national anthem instead of the Scottish “national anthem.” For what it’s worth, here in the US there are still southerners who insist that they should have never conceded defeat back in the 1860s.
It’s more of a joke than anything… but I think there is still some resentment of the way the government is set up and a feeling (grounded or no) that the Scots get the short end of the stick. I have no idea, I just tried to stay out of the politics when I was over there because I had no reason and/or right to form an opinion without knowing more about the history.
One thing that is definitely fighting words is calling a Scottish person “English.” A French girl I knew almost got into a fight in a tea house over that…
The word Brit is often supposed to be demeaning or at least patronising, especially when uttered by a certain type of Yank (particularly Republicans and other forms of plankton), usually in what it amuses the speaker to believe is an authentic Cockney accent.
The reason it hasn’t become a no-no is that the vast majority of Brits* are too thick-skinned to realise that it is meant as anything but a complement.
Having said that, the unabbreviated word “English,” when uttered in a certain tone of voice in a Glasgow, Cardiff (or even Cornish) pub near to closing time is a terrible, terrible insult, carrying the threat of impending physical violence.
*When most people say “Brits” they actually mean the English, as the Scots and the Welsh etc. tend to emphasise that they are Scottish, Welsh, etc. the first time you meet them. The notable exceptions to this rule are sports commentators, in which case the word “British” refers to a Scottish, Welsh or even Cornish team that has got through to the final of some international tournament.
A Pakistani LiveJournal friend of mine frequently refers to Pakistan as “Paki”. Can’t remember if she has used it to describe people too.
The OED mentions an earlier use of Brit to refer to Scots (or a certain tribe of Scots anyway). It also mentions your history. The first quote it gives seems like it could be derogatory. I think that probably it has been fairly derogatory over its history.
I think the key point as to why Brit isn’t considered as derogatory as Jap (to Americans) lies in the fact that the Americans and British have been on generally good terms for most of their separate history. Or a least the relationship has always been more complex than simple hatred. After all, our strongest cultural ties are and always have been with the British. Sure the Americans might get mad at the British, but there were always people who knew and liked some or all of the Brits.
Americans didn’t identify with the Japanese like they did with the British. Many Americans definitely thought of them as inferior. Of course Jap would have a bad connotation. I’m sure even the word Japanese was used derogatorily. It probably was less likely to be used derogatorily because it was a more standard form and perhaps because it didn’t sound as harsh (i.e. short and sharp).
Re: “Gook”
The OED gives a quotation from 1935 that uses gook that comes from the Phillipenes. The usage from Korea they give dates from 1947.
For the same reason that “Paki” is demeaning. If the word (or sound or whatever) has a history of being used in a demeaning way then people will see it in that light.
…mostly…
…kinda…
…sometimes…
…but not always. 
If Paki is not supposed to be used for Pakistanis, then what is? And what are people of Indian ancestry called in Britian? And I take it Asian is not a racial thing, it covers people from China as well as Indians (who are Caucausian as the English, just not usually as pale). I suppose if I ran into a third-generation Anglo-Indian over here in America I’d think of them as just British, but that’s probably the assimilationist Yank in me talking.
“Pakistani”.
Too often, “Paki” 
Actually, “Asian” in Britain generally does mean Indian or Pakistani.
Here’s a page from the UK Census 2001. All the categories listed there were available for people to self-identify their ethnicity (in fact there was at least one other box to tick “White” > “Irish”).
Note how “Asian” is sub-divided into Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Other Asian – which presupposes “other South Asian”. No generic term is commonplace for people originating from further east in Asia, so if people are of, say, Thai or Malaysian extraction it was assumed they would have ticked the box for Other.
On the page everton linked to, Chinese is listed separately from the Asian grouping. I’m Vietnamese, so I’m not quite sure if I would have checked the “other Asian” box or the “other” box. Could someone explain this to me please?
Sorry for the slight hijack, but that strikes me as really odd.
Like I said, it would have been assumed that you would have ticked the Other (not Other Asian) box. Of course the census people realise that China, Vietnam etc. are in Asia, but the colloquial use of “Asian” here means south Asian (from the Indian subcontinent), so Other Asian would be for Nepalese, Sri Lankan etc.
In practice, I’d be very surprised if some people in your situation wouldn’t have ticked the Other Asian box anyway, but I can’t remember how much advice there was on the census form itself.