Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Disagree with the term "the Indian" if you like, but do you really think that means Manter is a secret racist?


Dunno if you're doing a Canucking :D

But

Also I never said you were racist, it was more of a demonstration that if you throw words around with such powerful connotations then I'll show you an example likewise. A parody if you will.

and here:


(and firky explained that he used that as a vehicle to demonstrate how strong descriptors can be devalued when applied inappropriately)


I don't think Manter is racist but ignorant in her use of the phrase. It is very rare you do see actual racism on urban. Thank fuck!
 
Different though the emphases of 201 and 202 are, both cesare and sam have it right. ^^ Fair enough picking up someone/anyone on language and whether that language does (or doesn't) represent real attitudes. But let's not make it into something it isn't.
As far as I can see, it is only Manter making it into something it isn't. I didn't see anyone accuse her of racism, I did see people say it wasn't racist but it was iffy. She's the one who declared it an accusation of racism and promptly flounced.

Is there some shit going down on other threads that I don't know about?
 
I want to do a joke about being attacked by a french horn and puff pastry but I'd undo everything I said on this thread.

Is there some shit going down on other threads that I don't know about?
I never called her a 'sick fuck' either. :hmm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: ymu
Come on, Firks, you posted this:

If we're going to throw words like that around with out thought then I call you a racist for referring to the guy Pingu employed as 'The Indian'. Why? Because it smells like someone who's smart enough to know that they can't get away with calling him a 'paki' but not smart enough to realise why their chosen phrase is objectionable.

You did actually call her a racist - in those exact words. You didn't say "I could call you a racist," you said "I call you a racist." Manter's really not imagining that you called her a racist, is she?
 
Come on, Firks, you posted this:



You did actually call her a racist - in those exact words. You didn't say "I could call you a racist," you said "I call you a racist." Manter's really not imagining that you called her a racist, is she?
You ignored the conditional clause at the start of the sentence. You copy-pasted the text so there is no link for context.

What was the context?
 
Come on, Firks, you posted this:

You did actually call her a racist - in those exact words. You didn't say "I could call you a racist," you said "I call you a racist." Manter's really not imagining that you called her a racist, is she?

Yes, I did. If we are going to throw words - in that instance misogynistic (aimed at GG because he thinks heels are horrible and women who can't wear them can't drive (?!) ) - around then I'll throw the same sort of rubbish back. I stand by that quote.

Just as GG isn't a misogynist, Man' isn't a racist. That is what is being said in my quote.
 
Yes, I did. If we are going to throw words - in that instance misogynistic (aimed at GG because he thinks heels are horrible and women who can't wear them can't drive (?!) ) - around then I'll throw the same sort of rubbish back. I stand by that quote.

Just as GG isn't a misogynist, Man' isn't a racist. That is what is being said in my quote.

That's one way of interpreting it, but when you say ~"if you're going to call GG a misogynist, then I call you a racist," then, given that Manter did actually call GG a misogynist, you are also calling her a racist. If you'd said the same to me - and said that maybe it was because I secretly wanted to use the word paki - I'd be absolutely horrified. Anyone would. It's disingenuous to claim otherwise. "Oh, I didn't actually say you were you a racist, I just dropped some fucking enormous hints that you might be."

Why didn't you just PM your post to Manter? It wasn't just about the use of the word Indian - it was a (really negative) assessment of her whole character and telling her to think about whether she really fits in here. Why post that in public? To shame her?
 
Just to add my take, gentlegreen's behaviour towards women in the last couple of days is incredibly upsetting and offensive (not just bad drivers, but women who ever wear heels are apparently poor at their jobs and should not, in his view, be employed) and while not misogynistic, is IMO, closer to that than "the Indian" was to racism. And what we have there in among the outrage, is a hell of a lot of jollying him along. Sadly calling someone a sexist doesn't seem to be much of an insult on urban - and I can understand the desire to cast around for a stronger word. Even if it's not the right one.

But then I had my own foul up of a very similar nature to "the Indian" this week (referring to "The elderly" and "the disabled" as groups with potential mobility needs). I was very clearly in the wrong, but it was an absence of consideration, rather than gg's prolonged and shameless bigotry.
 
You ignored the conditional clause at the start of the sentence. You copy-pasted the text so there is no link for context.

What was the context?

So that needs context, despite being a substantial snippet of a post from two pages ago, but Firky mentions individual words from numerous different (unnamed and unlinked) threads, and you think that's fine.
 
That's one way of interpreting it, but when you say ~"if you're going to call GG a misogynist, then I call you a racist," then, given that Manter did actually call GG a misogynist, you are also calling her a racist.

Why didn't you just PM your post to Manter? It wasn't just about the use of the word Indian - it was a (really negative) assessment of her whole character and telling her to think about whether she really fits in here. Why post that in public? To shame her?

I don't really care if I upset her feelings if you want to know the truth. I did it in public because she posted her questionable phrase in public. There's plenty of examples of where other posters have been pulled up on their posts, I don't make an exception for someone - well that's not actually true...(as I said I was gentle - considering my reputation for going for the throat) the other examples I included I let slip by the way. But like water on a stone, enough was enough and I pulled her up on it. If I posted something like that I'd fully expect to be pulled up on it publically such is the nature of forums.

If that makes me a cunt so be it.
 
FFS, hasn't anyone noticed that Manter refers to her other half as 'the Northerner'? She has a sardonic way of expressing herself and as far as I'm concerned she is welcome to type 'the Indian' or 'the overhead'. It's harmless. But firky, the self-appointed moral arbiter, has got away with developing it into a bunfight and a massive derail. Seems like trolling to me.
 
Ok, I may regret getting involved but...

Firky, i understand there's context but i do agree that your earlier post read as a personal attack on Manter.
You did call her a racist (no matter what you wrapped it in) and i don't think that bringing other comments such as 'overheads' used in a flippant way/context is particularly fair. Implying that she doesn't belong on these boards is most definitely a personal attack imo, regardless of your softener of “Not going to chase you off the boards”.

and i can totally see that using 'the indian' was intended as simply shorthand for a person about which very little was known other than he's from india and a dick. obviously, in hindsight she should have used 'the dick' but she wasn't the only one using the phrase.

You can say it wasn’t intended as an attack all you want but I can’t read that post without feeling like you wanted to upset her (as opposed to not caring), and you did. Well done you. And as someone who likes Manter, I can’t help being a bit flabbergasted on her behalf.
 
Back
Top Bottom