[Archived] Unimportant Sensationalism

[jim mk2]

Paki is as offensive a word as Yank - they both are nicknames to describe someone from a particular country, and both have negative connotations.

I would say that Septic Tank is offensive but why does Yank have "negative connotations" ?

[blue phil]

No, Paki is used indiscriminately here to describe anyone of South Asian origin, be they Pakistani, Indian, Bangladesh or Sri Lankan. It's therefore it's a word used to a race of people and can be compared to ni**er, except without the slavery connotations that come with that word obviously.

So because the word "Paki" is used generally as well as specifically automatically means that it is identical to the word "nigger" . That's quite an assumption isn't it ?

I'll go as far as to say that the word has become offensive but I would also argue that it's as much the fault of liberal zealots who tend to jump on words and phrases and use them as weapons in their never ending quest to identify "racists" .

I know older people who use the word with no hateful connotations at all . I also know many who use it solely as a term of abuse . In the middle are the many who refuse to bow to the trends of the preachers and zealots and use it as they always have - when THEY deem it to be suitable .

The trouble is when you get people from on high determining , or rather dictating , how we can use the language . Our own contributer , American , doesn't seem to like the word "Yank" ? Should he , or someone who agrees with him , have the power to make the term effectively banned in society ?

Once you go down this line you get freedom of expression curtailed . I've heard of people literally being carted off by the police in Blackburn for asking questions to Jack Straw in public on the issues of immigration . It's deemed by someone somewhere to be offensive , therefore it must be silenced .

Please don't censor this mods ......

[BuckyRover]

So because the word "Paki" is used generally as well as specifically automatically means that it is identical to the word "nigger" . That's quite an assumption isn't it ?

I'll go as far as to say that the word has become offensive but I would also argue that it's as much the fault of liberal zealots who tend to jump on words and phrases and use them as weapons in their never ending quest to identify "racists" .

I know older people who use the word with no hateful connotations at all . I also know many who use it solely as a term of abuse . In the middle are the many who refuse to bow to the trends of the preachers and zealots and use it as they always have - when THEY deem it to be suitable .

The trouble is when you get people from on high determining , or rather dictating , how we can use the language . Our own contributer , American , doesn't seem to like the word "Yank" ? Should he , or someone who agrees with him , have the power to make the term effectively banned in society ?

Once you go down this line you get freedom of expression curtailed . I've heard of people literally being carted off by the police in Blackburn for asking questions to Jack Straw in public on the issues of immigration . It's deemed by someone somewhere to be offensive , therefore it must be silenced .

Please don't censor this mods ......

I agree with the majority of that post.

*falls off chair*

[tony gale's mic]

So because the word "Paki" is used generally as well as specifically automatically means that it is identical to the word "nigger" . That's quite an assumption isn't it ?

I'll go as far as to say that the word has become offensive but I would also argue that it's as much the fault of liberal zealots who tend to jump on words and phrases and use them as weapons in their never ending quest to identify "racists" .

I know older people who use the word with no hateful connotations at all . I also know many who use it solely as a term of abuse . In the middle are the many who refuse to bow to the trends of the preachers and zealots and use it as they always have - when THEY deem it to be suitable .

The trouble is when you get people from on high determining , or rather dictating , how we can use the language . Our own contributer , American , doesn't seem to like the word "Yank" ? Should he , or someone who agrees with him , have the power to make the term effectively banned in society ?

Once you go down this line you get freedom of expression curtailed . I've heard of people literally being carted off by the police in Blackburn for asking questions to Jack Straw in public on the issues of immigration . It's deemed by someone somewhere to be offensive , therefore it must be silenced .

Please don't censor this mods ......

Urgh, you really are an ignorant old fool.

The word is offensive, not because of any "liberal zealots" but because of the skinhead thugs who first used the word as a term of abuse towards South Asians. The word "nigger" wasn't always used as a slur either:

In the United States the word nigger was not always considered derogatory, but was instead used by many as merely denotative of black skin, as it was in other parts of the English-speaking world. In nineteenth-century literature, there are many uses of the word nigger with no intended negative connotation. Charles Dickens, and Joseph Conrad (who published The Nigger of the 'Narcissus' in 1897) used the word without racist intent. Mark Twain often put the word into the mouths of his characters, white and black, but did not use the word when writing as himself in his autobiographical Life on the Mississippi.

In the United Kingdom and other parts of the English-speaking world, the word was often used to refer to darker skinned peoples colonized by the British Empire, or merely to darker-skinned foreigners in general; in his 1926 Modern English Usage, H. W. Fowler observed that when the word was applied to "others than full or partial negroes," it was "felt as an insult by the person described, & betrays in the speaker, if not deliberate insolence, at least a very arrogant inhumanity." The note was excised from later editions of the book.

The etymology of most abusive words can be traced back to fairly innocuous, non abusive origins, but language evolves. This isn't some kind of bizzare "liberal conspiracy", it's happened for centuries. The word "paki" is little different to this process, sure it's etymology is a little more obvious, but then it doesn't take a genius to work out a time in the 17th/18th centuries when "nigger" could have been used reasonably innocuously, given its fairly obvious origins. But "paki" is an abusive word and has been established as one for at least 25-30 years in this country, and every man, woman and child knows this fully.

In the middle are the many who refuse to bow to the trends of the preachers and zealots and use it as they always have - when THEY deem it to be suitable .

God bless those heroes phil! Fighting for their rights to use terms that are now widely considered racist! Maybe they deserve a medal?

I have some sympathy with some of the older folk who used it before it became a term of abuse, but really there's absolutely no need to use the word "paki" when any number of words could replace it. Those people who do use it shouldn't be at all surprised that people question what prejudices they may have and suggest that they might be a little racist.

For the record I don't think Harry is a racist, but he shouldn't have been using that term. And while I agree that this story was blown out of proportion, without doubt, this goes the same for any royal story going. When you compare it to the media fury that has accomanied other royal stories, I'd say it's about right.

[blue phil]

AESF, you're an idiot. Plain and simple.

Urgh, you really are an ignorant old fool.

Does this make me better or worse than AESF ?

My - how they must have trembled at your rhetoric at the Cambridge Debating Society !

Are you sure it wasn't the Cambridge Mass Debating Society ?

[SouthAussieRover]

I must say I quite like this story

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7826701.stm

[colin]

Are you sure it wasn't the Cambridge Mass Debating Society ?

Please forget the semantics. The use of "Paki" and "nigger" are unacceptable in 2009. It's quite that simple.

They are now terms of abuse. End of discussion.

[tony gale's mic]

Does this make me better or worse than AESF ?

My - how they must have trembled at your rhetoric at the Cambridge Debating Society !

Are you sure it wasn't the Cambridge Mass Debating Society ?

Great joke. I wasn't trained there, I only competed in the Nationals Finals there some years back, still we did learn to debate the actual points being raised.

Which you seem to have conveniently forgotten to counter...

On a side issue, this whole "sooty" business is taking it one step too far. Seems innocent enough really.

I must say I quite like this story

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7826701.stm

There's a world of difference between that and "paki" though. I doubt you'd find anyone on this board who'd agree with the furore surrounding that.

[jim mk2]

. But "paki" is an abusive word and has been established as one for at least 25-30 years in this country, and every man, woman and child knows this fully.

Correct, and even someone as thick as Prince Harry should have realised it. An Eton education may buy a cheated art A-level (allegedly) but it apparently does not buy decency and common sense.

[Rovermatt]

Certain people will argue until they are blue in the face that 'Paki' is not an offensive term. They will maintain that any negative inference is created by 'liberal fascists' intent on destroying society. The fact remains however that the term is an offensive one. When used as a pejorative, it is against anyone of Asian ancestry.

Harry may have been wrong to use such a term on camera, however I think it's far from obvious that he's a racist.

[thenodrog]

If I remember rightly Gordon you told the story a few years ago of how you were driving along the streets of Blackburn with some kids in the back of your car. You spotted some elaborately dressed females walking along the side of the road and said: "Look at those lovely Pakistani women over there."

Immediately the kids in the back of the car said: "We're not allowed to say that word. We've been told by our teacher that it's a naughty word to use and we're not allowed to say it."

Presumably describing someone's nationality as ""Spanish" or "Italian" or "German" or "French" isn't offensive in the eyes of that particular myopic teacher. So why is the word "Pakistani" to describe somebody's nationality apparently so offensive?

To others within the PC Brigade the word "Pakistani" is just about acceptable, but God forbid if the word is actually shortened or abbreviated.

Presumably if an Asian man used the abbreviated term "Brit" to describe the British Prince Harry then that wouldn't be offensive.

Correct. Said teacher was young and completely bloody gormless. I've since realised just how bloody easy it is to become one. You've a good memory though Smithy, the occasion, not my relating of it granted, took place over 10 years ago. If Teech had had the intelligence she should have explained to them that it's not the noun but the adjective that in most cases is deemed offensive and to differentiate accordingly. Anybody hearing it could tell that Harry's "There's our little Paki friend" was said with obvious affection rather than insult. (Lets rem these guys go through a lhell of a lot together both in training and in action.) More insulting by far to say there's that effin Pakistani bstard.

BUT annoyingly and in many ways sadly a hell of a lot of nomark numpty's metaphorically raised their skirts amid shreiks of outrage as they jumped on the media bandwagon though! It's a poor do but throughout our candyfloss society nowadays any excuse to complain or object is now seized upon with glee.

[tony gale's mic]

Correct. Said teacher was young and completely bloody gormless. I've since realised just how bloody easy it is to become one. You've a good memory though Smithy, the occasion, not my relating of it granted, took place over 10 years ago. If Teech had had the intelligence she should have explained to them that it's not the noun but the adjective that in most cases is deemed offensive and to differentiate accordingly. Anybody hearing it could tell that Harry's "There's our little Paki friend" was said with obvious affection rather than insult. (Lets rem these guys go through a lhell of a lot together both in training and in action.) More insulting by far to say there's that effin Pakistani bstard.

BUT annoyingly and in many ways sadly a hell of a lot of nomark numpty's metaphorically raised their skirts amid shreiks of outrage as they jumped on the media bandwagon though! It's a poor do but throughout our candyfloss society nowadays any excuse to complain or object is now seized upon with glee.

Harry is (probably) not a racist. But using that word is unacceptable, when everyone knows it's meaning. Language evolves and changes according to the times as I pointed out in one of my previous posts (there was a time when "nigger" was acceptable), and in Britain for the last twenty years the word "paki" has been a derogatory and racist term.

[thenodrog]

and in Britain for the last twenty years the word "paki" has been a derogatory and racist term.

No it's an abbreviation of the name of a country as it always has been and should remain so. It may have been abused in the past but so has much of the English language from time to time. Groups of servicemen as groups of kids in school will always revert to nicknames it's part of that culture and I doubt you will stop it.

Nearly all the objections I heard trundled out on the radio after the Harry incident contained associated the word 'Paki' with the Skinhead culture of the early 70's and with the word 'bashing' after it. However the skinhead stuff lasted about 5 years and I don't know about you but personally speaking I haven't seen a skinhead gang for about 30 years. They only ever had a minority following amongst the nations youth anyway BUT what a sorry testament to the integrity of our society that so many weak minded individuals are unable to deal with such and allow a few ignorant boors to exert such influence over them over a generation later. I guess the 50 year old skins will be laughing up their sleeves at their lasting legacy.

[tony gale's mic]

No it's an abbreviation of the name of a country as it always has been and should remain so. It may have been abused in the past but so has much of the English language from time to time. Groups of servicemen as groups of kids in school will always revert to nicknames it's part of that culture and I doubt you will stop it.

Nearly all the objections I heard trundled out on the radio after the Harry incident contained associated the word 'Paki' with the Skinhead culture of the early 70's and with the word 'bashing' after it. However the skinhead stuff lasted about 5 years and I don't know about you but personally speaking I haven't seen a skinhead gang for about 30 years. They only ever had a minority following amongst the nations youth anyway BUT what a sorry testament to the integrity of our society that so many weak minded individuals are unable to deal with such and allow a few ignorant boors to exert such influence over them over a generation later. I guess the 50 year old skins will be laughing up their sleeves at their lasting legacy.

Oh Jesus.

Skinhead culture may not be rife these days, but "paki" as a derogatory word has outlived the skinhead culture. We may not have seen many skinhead gangs for a while but every day up and down the country people are being called this term as an offensive word.

Still, I guess you can argue with these people:

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/paki?view=uk

[jim mk2]

No it's an abbreviation of the name of a country as it always has been and should remain so. .

Come orf it Gordon; Paki is a term of abuse and you know it.

[gillibrand]

Is it OK to refer to the President of the United States of America as Uncle Ben, it seems to be a new derogatory name, who knows packets of rice will have to be removed from the shelves in the UK!

[tony gale's mic]

Is it OK to refer to the President of the United States of America as Uncle Ben, it seems to be a new derogatory name, who knows packets of rice will have to be removed from the shelves in the UK!

Why would you even want to call him Uncle Ben?

His name's Barack Obama for christ's sakes.

[gillibrand]

Think about it before you start blaspheming, it was what a couple of visitors from Texas called him!

[Jimbo]

"Uncle Tom" would be the correct pejorative term

[American]

Come orf it Gordon; Paki is a term of abuse and you know it.

As derogative as calling Australian's convicts, but that doesn't stop you.

[thenodrog]

Everybody must realise by now that Jim likes to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. Note his judgement of Emerton that smithy highlighted.

But...

Isn't there a strong argument to suggest that real 'australians' those dark skinned chappies who eat caterpillars and walk about the bush a lot? Just as real Americans are the ones that live on reservations and never seem to need a shave.

[tony gale's mic]

It's more than just a strong argument. Pity the lovely Australian people/Governments officially classed them as fauna/pests till 1969 when they were recognised legally as being humans.

Unbelievable.

[neekoy]

It's more than just a strong argument. Pity the lovely Australian people/Governments officially classed them as fauna/pests till 1969 when they were recognised legally as being humans.

Unbelievable.

WHOAH THERE CHAMPION! Don't think you guys are getting away with this unscathed. Wasn't the "Australians" that tried completely WIPING THEM FROM THE PLANET

[jim mk2]

As derogative as calling Australian's convicts, but that doesn't stop you.

And it doesn't stop you taking pathetic little pot shots at all and sundry.

But as someone who gets upset by the word "Yank" you really should be more careful.

Oh, and the correct use of the word is derogatory. You'll find it in an English dictionary - the language of poets mangled by your fellow countrymen.

It's more than just a strong argument. Pity the lovely Australian people/Governments officially classed them as fauna/pests till 1969 when they were recognised legally as being humans.

Unbelievable.

Quite so dear boy. I'm looking forward to seeing some genuine Aussies in the HMP cricket team too. Never happen though.

[dave birch]

It's more than just a strong argument. Pity the lovely Australian people/Governments officially classed them as fauna/pests till 1969 when they were recognised legally as being humans.

Unbelievable.

To back up Neekoys comment.

Would you care to give the source for your comment?