Just found out a guy who works for me is being a git

[ViolentPanda]

Seems like nit picking to an extreme to me... I have bipolar, am I part of the group "the bipolar" or "a person with bipolar" or "a bipolar person".. I am quite comfortable with "the nutter"!

It's not about you, it's about whether a group of people, any group of people, should be regarded and identified by a single defining characteristic such as age or disability when it's only a part of who they actually are.

Me, for example, I'm disabled, but I'm also white; male; middle-aged; a supporter of West Ham United FC; a photographer; an anti-fascist and anti-Zionist; a superannuated punk and many other things. "disabled" isn't all that I am, it's a single facet of me, why should someone be allowed to refer to myself and others with similarly diverse characteristics (and that's all of us, by the way!) by that single signifier when it doesn't represent more than a fraction of me, and is perjorative to boot?

 

[Citizen66]

If you look at gentlegreen's posts on that thread alone, he doesn't come across entirely as a misogynist, but as someone with "issues" around women. However, taken with some of the other stuff he comes out with, I can understand why people might assume he was a misogynist if they didn't realise that what he actually is, is a misanthrope.

Isn't that the sort of cop-out that loads of bigots come out with as way of a defence?

Anyway, I can't possibly be a sexist/racist, because I hate EVERYONE!!1!

It's up there with "I've got black friends."

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think VP is indulging in a bit of Canucking right now, if I've understood it correctly

Not true. "Canucking" means serial posting without reading the thread. I usually read the thread first.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Isn't that the sort of cop-out that loads of bigots come out with in way of a defence?

Anyway, I can't possibly be a sexist/racist, because I hate EVERYONE!!1!

It's up there with "I've got black friends."

Well, I'm not saying he isn't a cunt, and I'm not saying he's an equal opportunities cunt either, I'm saying that he very obviously has a hard time relating to people per se, rather than to any single gender.

Some of my best friends are northerners.

 

[Lord Camomile]

Not true. "Canucking" means serial posting without reading the thread. I usually read the thread first.

I thought it was just serial posting with added delay.

Duly noted

 

[Firky]

I am not getting involved tonight. I have a 1/4 and your mum's coming around, VP

 

[Orang Utan]

Not true. "Canucking" means serial posting without reading the thread. I usually read the thread first.

But you do reply to very early posts in a long thread when the discussion has moved on.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Oh FFS, JC2. Page 4? We're on 12!

I am going to scrape me tin out.

Is that some euphemism for manually evacuating your bowels with a soup spoon?

 

[ViolentPanda]

But you do reply to very early posts in a long thread when the discussion has moved on.

I know. It's how I roll. I pick up a thread where I left off.

 

[Wilf]

Is that some euphemism for manually evacuating your bowels with a soup spoon?

2 posters 1 cupasoup

 

[ViolentPanda]

i doubt it, actually. if you look at the big contentious posters who have been barracked non-stop, it's been upchuck, foxy and cheesy. 3 women. The difference here is that manter is being defended by both male and female posters, while quite notably, the only defenders of the first three were a small number of men (apart from upchuck, who had no fans, afaicr).

there's something to be said about how urban treats unpopular women... but i'm not sure this is a good example of that.

Not pbman, detective_boy and ninjaboy, then?
Also, as I recall, upchuck only started getting shit after she lobbed out some particularly nasty little asides about native Australians and about unemployed people, and I don't agree that Cheesy gets barracked (whatever Drew claims ), she gets argued with. I've argued with her myself, several times, but I've not seen people barrack her just for posting.

 

[ViolentPanda]

but the attacks and defenses of her were, i think largely coming from the understanding that she was a woman.

Some of the early ones were about how her narrative didn't add up (her pictures, for example), and that seemed to draw in some other posters who just wanted to put the boot in.

 

[weltweit]

It's not about you, it's about whether a group of people, any group of people, should be regarded and identified by a single defining characteristic such as age or disability when it's only a part of who they actually are.

Referring to someone as "the indian" is not referring to age or disability rather just their nationality and as far as I am aware indian is no term of abuse like Paki is understood to be for example.

Me, for example, I'm disabled, but I'm also white; male; middle-aged; a supporter of West Ham United FC; a photographer; an anti-fascist and anti-Zionist; a superannuated punk and many other things. "disabled" isn't all that I am, it's a single facet of me, why should someone be allowed to refer to myself and others with similarly diverse characteristics (and that's all of us, by the way!) by that single signifier when it doesn't represent more than a fraction of me, and is perjorative to boot?

So, to be clear, where Manter said:

No, because in that case the Indian can't afford to eat while he is here....

You find that uncalled for and perjorative.

But if she had perhaps said:

"No, because in that case the Indian employee can't afford to eat while he is here...."

That might have been ok?

Have to say I must be having a senior moment or something because I can't see that the original is perjorative or even offensive, I must be missing something, it just seems to me like someone calling me "the englishman", perhaps when I was among french people, which would not offend me.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Awwww firky done got a new fan club member

Poor old fanclub members. They don't realise he's cueing them all up as potential donors for when he's worn out the monkey liver with his legendary drink and drugs intake.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Referring to someone as "the indian" is not referring to age or disability rather just their nationality and as far as I am aware indian is no term of abuse like Paki is understood to be for example.



So, to be clear, where Manter said:



You find that uncalled for and perjorative.

But if she had perhaps said:

"No, because in that case the Indian employee can't afford to eat while he is here...."

That might have been ok?

Have to say I must be having a senior moment or something because I can't see that the original is perjorative or even offensive, I must be missing something, it just seems to me like someone calling me "the englishman", perhaps when I was among french people, which would not offend me.

Are you entirely stupid?

I said in an earlier post that using the term to refer to an individual is fine IMO, if you've no other better term to refer to them by. It's referring to a group of people as "the ........." that is perjorative.
Ya fucking fuckspud fuck-knuckle.

 

[Lord Camomile]

it just seems to me like someone calling me "the englishman", perhaps when I was among french people, which would not offend me.

It may be semantics, and indeed the wrong semantics, but in that instance at least you're "the englishman", not "the English".

I think. To be honest I'm not too sharp on these things myself, but I do think I'd naturally say "the Indian guy", rather than "the Indian". As mentioned above, it's related to using it as an adjective rather than a noun.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Yeah and you constantly stuck up for PBman. What's your point caller?

And diesel.

 

[Orang Utan]

I can understand the argument that 'the overheads/indians/etc' can be used to dehumanise people but I don't think that means we should never use it as short hand when identifying people.
We do it naturally, especially in the work place. People are referred to identify them from other people quickly. Waiters talk about tables, doctors/dentists/therapists etc talk about appointment times, teachers talk about years.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Prams? Cars? WTF you lot on about?

Sorry, like but I've had a slight change of heart, following the Nigerian's being lazy comments and revelations. I hope the door hit her arse on the way out and knocked some of that shit in her brains out.

So relaying an anecdote where a Nigerian claims "we're all lazy" is the same as you yourself actually saying "Nigerians are lazy"?
If I say "back in '91 I was chatting with my mate Joe at work, and he said 'bloody Nigerians, we all work bloody hard finding ways to avoid working. If we channeled our energy into actual work, we'd be world-beaters' ", have I just claimed that Nigerians are lazy and/or crooked, or have I related an anecdote about what a single Nigerian individual has said to me?

 

[Puddy_Tat]

Poor old fanclub members. They don't realise he's cueing them all up as potential donors for when he's worn out the monkey liver with his legendary drink and drugs intake.

and to feed firky-puss with the other bits

 

[ViolentPanda]

pbman's real name is pbman?

It was actually Cleatus J. Buttfuck.

 

[ViolentPanda]

and to feed firky-puss with the other bits

(((((firky-puss)))))

 

[sheothebudworths]

Referring to someone as "the indian" is not referring to age or disability rather just their nationality and as far as I am aware indian is no term of abuse like Paki is understood to be for example.

Referring to someone as 'elderly' or 'disabled' is not *abusive* either, is it? That's not the point.

 

[cesare]

I can understand the argument that 'the overheads/indians/etc' can be used to dehumanise people but I don't think that means we should never use it as short hand when identifying people.
We do it naturally, especially in the work place. People are referred to identify them from other people quickly. Waiters talk about tables, doctors/dentists/therapists etc talk about appointment times, teachers talk about years.

The most obvious shortcut way to refer to you, would be "the ginger" eg "I hope the ginger turns up on time for his induction on Monday". Referring to you by an obvious characteristic, rather than eg "I hope the new guy turns up on time for his induction on Monday".

"Overheads" is pejorative because it's based on perceiving a group of people as a cost burden rather than a revenue benefit.

There's nothing inherently pejorative about tables, appointments or years.

 

[Firky]

Wrong htread

 

[weltweit]

Are you entirely stupid?

Quite possibly. My reason now, so long after the event of trying to understand this is that I think I am quite likely to do it myself - and cause offence potentially, as I can't see it clearly.

I said in an earlier post that using the term to refer to an individual is fine IMO, if you've no other better term to refer to them by. It's referring to a group of people as "the ........." that is perjorative.

She was referring to one person, the indian person, the only indian person in the group.

No, because in that case the Indian can't afford to eat while he is here....

Ya fucking fuckspud fuck-knuckle.

It is all very well saying that, and maybe I am being thick or something but I don't get it.
A french person referring to me as "the english" would not offend me one bit

so for example :

No, because in that case the English can't afford to eat while he is here....

That would simply be bad english rather than offensive.

But, as far as I can see, there are no negative connotations to the word "indian".

 

[weltweit]

It may be semantics, and indeed the wrong semantics, but in that instance at least you're "the englishman", not "the English".

I think. To be honest I'm not too sharp on these things myself, but I do think I'd naturally say "the Indian guy", rather than "the Indian". As mentioned above, it's related to using it as an adjective rather than a noun.

Yes, I think I probably would say the indian guy also but it seems a minefield this avoiding offence business.

 

[Firky]

Poor old fanclub members. They don't realise he's cueing them all up as potential donors for when he's worn out the monkey liver with his legendary drink and drugs intake.

Aahh, VP. Firstly, I had a transplant because of a hereditary condition. Nothing to do with my mystical legendary drink and drugs intake, that is really quite a crass thing to say. Surprised at you but I know you well enough to know that's not what you meant. Also I never really was one for drugs, I experimented here and there but that's all. I still smoke weed for the muscular pain I get in my abdomen, it helps enormously as well as having other beneficial side effects (i.e getting stoned!). Also I did like a drink, I won't deny that one, I used to hammer it when I was at uni but I was no George Best. As a matter of fact my LFT's were that of a perfectly healthy adult. In the end cancer got the better of my old liver - not drink, not drugs. Check your privileges, old man.

Now roll the fuck off

 

[Lord Camomile]

Again, I don't think it's about there being negative connotations itself, it's about how it is used.

I'm sorry, I can't atriculate this point very well

 

[friedaweed]

How would the land lie if we referred to this as the indian thread?