****** was developed from Negro which is Spanish origin, It's racist if used against black people as it's derogatory. But not for black people to use it them selves because White people decided it was derogatory not them. Honky comes from the Easten European word for Bowhunk and is generally not derogatory for white people to say to white people(honky tonk man) But black people used it in a derogatory term to them meaning White Devil used. So both words are both racist and not racist depending on who is saying it. So it's about context. Aussie use the word Pommies for English and it's also the same derogatory level as the others. They're basically calling us criminals. Named after the red Pom poms on the head of British prisoners being transported to Aus. Aussie and Brits aren't derogatory, it's just shortened of where they're from. Paki wouldn't have been deemed racist is it wasn't for the amount of Indians, Sir-Lankens and Bangladeshi getting miss called it by Brits so it's no surprise that bit of shortened word became racist.
Not when you're accidentally saying to somebody from India? Probably the biggest insult you can give them with both countries historical hatred for each other.
That would of course be ignorance and not racism though, as although it would offend it's generally not meant as offensive. I believe racism isn't in the way it's received but in the way it's intended, something which is being skewed to death in society imo. But ignorance can hurt too, but doesn't make it racist imo.
Racism is all about intent. Plain and simple. Personally, I’d like to think that this ruling is just a stepping stone to common sense prevailing and that you get the job based on skills and competency rather than the colour of your skin. Racism here barely even exists as far as I am concerned. Sure, we have the odd idiot parading around, but compared to the vast majority of other countries, we are tolerant.
They’re saying they must have Asian interviewees. But what if no Asian applies ? I don’t think that the Asian minorities share our interest in the national game so you’re not going to get applicants anyway
Thing is, something is only offensive if you are offended by it. What gives some ****ing do gooder the right to tell me what I should be offended by? Some folk are more thick skinned than others. Some are more sensitive.
Pom poms? Where did you get that from? Everyone over here think it comes from the uniform's lettering which read POM... Prisoner of Mother England. Trouble with that is that they didn't wear uniforms. I'm pretty sure it's because, in the eyes of the Aboriginals, when subjected to the Australian sun, the first convicts/guards burned to the colour of pomegranates. At least that's the theory in the exhibit about the first fleet in the Australian museum.
Do they have to interview a woman for this or does it only apply to males? Surely the same rule should apply if they want to open that can of worms. YOU GET INTERVIEWED IF YOU'RE GOOD ENOUGH! Colour of skin or gender should not matter in any way!
OK, so we seem to agree that the terms Brit & Aussie aren't offensive but simply shortened versions of British & Australian. So can someone please explain to me why P*** is deemed racist & offensive? What about terms like Jock, Wop, Taffy, Sheep Shagger, Paddy, Mick, Spick, Itie, Frog, Kraut?
It's the context in which it's said. When i was in Saudi the Arab News would refer to Paki this or Paki that. It wasn't intended to be offensive at all.
Yes, even if it wasn't said in an offensive way, the term itself is regarded as racist even in a descriptive way as you suggest. Over here the term is now regarded as offensive. My point was that in Saudi it isn't regarded in that same way. Its just a shortened headline. You could argue around this subject for hours though Billy. We all see things in different subjective ways. Edited:
I know mate. Never thought you were. And I'm the same! Bloody do-gooding PC types are confusing the **** out of everyone these days!
