Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This morning a "Kiwi" got all offended when I referred to him as Australian and when I was then quite indifferent about my "mistake".


I understand that they come from different countries, obviously, and that they speak with slightly different accents, but for London purposes, does it really matter? We all know what kind of Aussies/Kiwis tend to come to London and the way they behave, so making a distinction between the two seems quite academic. It would be a bit like complaining about calling someone a "hoodie" when in fact they weren't technically wearing a hooded top but perhaps had a large collar and a large hat on instead but still with the intention of disguising their identity.


Obviously the context in which you refer to someone as "Australian" or "Kiwi" has some bearing on whether the distinction is relevant but if the context is discussing their impact on London, or the activities they engage in, then I really don't see the problem.

It's like the Canada/America thing. Smaller brother gets pissed off about big brother. Big brother doesn't mind.


Us Aussies pronounce our vowels maaaaaaaaaaate. Just think of us as people who have been left out in the sun too long. Everything gets elongated and goes up at the end of every sentence.

Yeah. So I wasn't really going to respond as he is quite clearly either on some kind of medication or insane but I succumbed to temptation.


Personally I quite enjoy confusing kiwi?s and ausies (especially when talking cricket) just to wind them up but then I read the tone of the rest of his post and though, ?hang on a bit.?

Just call the average Jock "English" or even "British" down Sauchiehall Streetand you might get the general idea!

I was walking with my (then) tall,slim,Jamaican g/f in Princes Street,Edinburgh.I was not talking yet the Girl who was walking with a Guy coming towards us said "English B***rd" as they passed and carried on their merry way:))

Charmed,I'm sure:)

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And just exactly what ?kind of Aussies/Kiwis tend

> to come to London? and what are these "activities

> they engage in? or ?their impact on London? for

> that matter?


I think everyone knows perfectly well what I mean. I am not talking about all of them, but a very significant portion, perhaps 80 to 90 percent. The activities and impacts are similar in some ways to that of the Brits in the south of Spain. Although there are also significant differences, admittedly.


I wish people would read my opening post properly before piling in with their kneejerk/"humourous" responses by the way. I stated quite clearly that I was not talking about the obvious differences in accent for example. The question is how their nationality is relevant when one is discussing their engagement (or lack of) with the community they are living within; ie. London.


I challenge anyone to explain to me in what way one can make a generalisation about any difference in the way the two nationalities behave whilst in London.

mockney piers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think I remember reading recently that Kiwis

> have the most homogeneous accent of any English

> speaking nation, which I thought was quite

> interesting. I can't remember why that was the

> case though.


That?s probably because there are only 10 of them and they live on 2 little islands millions of miles from anywhere.

I know I'm gonna regret this but....


...your opening assumption is wrong. The stereotype of Aussie/Kiwi bar workers is just that. Sure, they exist, but to imply the entire diaspora as lager-swilling idiots is simply naive.


So the difference between them is moot. What's the difference between any bunch of young-twenty somethings with money in their pockets away from home and up for a good time? Regardless of nationality.

Are you going to pretend that it would not be possible to distinguish between, say, French twenty-somethings in London, and Aussie/Kiwi twenty-somethings?


david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I know I'm gonna regret this but....

>

> ...your opening assumption is wrong. The

> stereotype of Aussie/Kiwi bar workers is just

> that. Sure, they exist, but to imply the entire

> diaspora as lager-swilling idiots is simply

> naive.

>

> So the difference between them is moot. What's the

> difference between any bunch of young-twenty

> somethings with money in their pockets away from

> home and up for a good time? Regardless of

> nationality.

the difference is is that they come from different countries with different cultures, backgrounds etc and regardless of where they are or their supposed behaviour they deserve to be recognised correctly as to what country they come from... You are rude to even think that you have the right to just put them both in to one pot because you think the difference is academic..


If you dont want people to post back 'kneejerk/humeruous' responses then dont allow your posts to sound like such a joke! (and by that I do not mean a funny joke)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, AFAICS, the "civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300" were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...