mpw said:
Nobody I know ever batted an eyelid because they all understood that that was the name of a product and not meant as an offensive remark. The black guy selling the stuff never thought of it as offensive so why should anyone else."
Well, the use of these 'offensive terms' by the people they 'target' is almost a whole 'nother thread in itself, isn't it? It may seem interesting / confusing / challenging that Black rappers have 'reclaimed' the 'n' or that gay people can be quite happy calling each other f*gg*ts --- but they are generally understood - and used - as derogatory terms
And far be it for me to make assumptions but the it is possible that the fact that he was
selling something may have 'coloured' his attitudes somewhat? - or perhaps he was getting high off his own supply and was desentisizied to it all?
The point is it not always the intrinsic value of the words used but how they are used.
No argument there, and in the USA and the UK and other places these are - and always have been - predominantly used in a derogatory context - I don't ever recall Jersey as being held up a shining beacon for race relations so I imagine a 'n****r' on that little Island is as denigrated as elsewhere - the fact that people don't complain doesn't mean they are not unhappy
... oh wait, I just realised - you don't actually have that many Black people on Jersey do you --- perhaps that's why no-one was complaining?
For example the product and the black guy selling it came from Senegal/The Gambia and his native tounge was Wolof. He would use the Wolof word 'honqy' to mean pale skinned or a white man with no offense intended,
perhaps he did - and perhaps he didn't --- unless it transpires that the Wolof people had a particular aversion to White people and pale skinned people were an oppressed 'minority' in Wolof society and he then used the term for white as derogatory remark ...
--- and anyway, unless he was a kind of particular saint, I'm willing to bet the guy did have a few 'choice' terms for you locals and other pale skinned peoples ...
I'm guessing you are using it in a deliberate attempt to be offensive. Well done you.
What I was doing was showing that as well as the intention, there are the feelings of people concerned to be considered - and maybe that should be a paramount consideration in the use of language
I was also challenging your view that 'n' word is ok and that you could speak for others in saying no-one else seemed to mind (which I found a little offensive in itself) - so I retaliated ... that's what happens when people get too clever.
ps I'm sure you realise that a prat is a charming dry vermouth ...?
Its all about communication, the 'rules' of all languages are blurred because good communication relies on the speaker adapting his words to meet the audience in a way that gets his message across, regardless of any 'rules' of grammer or syntax.
Well the 'rules' are also part of the listening / understanding part --- if the speaker imparts something other than intended s/he has failed - and quite possibly set the path for further 'errors'
... I'm presuming we are by and large discussing public or open communications and there's a further presumption of equality of rights to participate. i.e. in this case we are talking about the 'feelings' of gay people using the forums - but there's also a general consenus that the 'issue' applies in some way to Black people, people with disabilities, women (not necessarily in that order) and generally, any group that is likely to be subject to 'oppression' of some sorts
So we're really talking about who sets the rules - and in this case it seems like it's Arn
