Pathetic old racist fart on Frogley road (Lounged)

[Tony.London Suburbs]

As a a survivor of Early 1970's Office life onwards I just have to laugh:))....Mixed sexes in the Office back then in many cases and,in general,members of each sex slaughtered the other one(individually and collectively) and I'm struggling to recall anyone ever taking offence,the only real exception came when I worked for Southwark Council in The 1990's there were plenty of People there only too ready to take offence as I recall.Much "tip-toeing" and walking on eggshells went on.

Wasn't involved(as a mere Temp.) personally but witnessed a few things.

[bignumber5]

On the Sushi vs Frog arguement:

I had a french mate at uni who I called frog and he called me ros bif, much like others have described (Horsebox). But that's a friend, and a bit of banter with unspoken but clearly established rules that we are mates giving eachother a bit or flak for the sake of being jovial. I would not wander round a Paris street late at night randomly calling people "Frog". That's the distinction. Similarly, an Asian guy that I work with often ends playful arguements with "it's a brown thing, you wouldn't understand". I seriously doubt he uses such an expression outside of pre-established boundaries.

There are terms that are "offensive" depending on who delivers them, to who and in what context. The same term can be harmless, or even a display of affection, in different hands (my best mate from uni greets me with "ay opp, c**t", and I do the same back to him).

The OP describes a situation of a stranger throwing out a term based on bugger all but appearance. Offensive.

When we lived in NZ, racism was an interesting thing to watch being casually indulged in: racial relations with the Maori population were being focussed on so heavily that it was almost as if the White population had "used up" their racial equality card on one group and needed to blow off steam with casual comments about other groups.

Are people on this thread viewing the OP's experience differently because it seems to refer to intolerance towards someone Japanese and we have "used up" our equality on the African and Carribean population of our area? I don't think that anyone would think it ok to call a black person "rice&peas". So what's the difference?

Also, Brendan - I know you're taking the piss with the punching thing, but lets not rule out the possibility that wanting a fight and trying to provoke the OP may have been the motivation behind this whole business. I think that while you are obliged by chivalry and fairness to smack them, you are obliged by common sense and self preservation to keep your head down and keep walking, lest you get a screwdriver in the belly.

[Brendan]

Yeah I wasn't being entirely serious BN5, just expressing the sentiment.

[Jeremy]

Sue Wrote:

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

> Have you actually read anything I've written?

I could ask you exactly the same question!

I don't know *any* English people who are offended by being called "rosbif", in fact most people think it's a bit of fun. So by your own logic - people aren't offended by it, therefore it's not offensive.

But the intentions behind the words are absolutely relevant, most people are intelligent enough to understand when someone's being spiteful or not - eg context, tone of voice... these things have to be taken into account. Surely you can understand that?

At the end of the day, I fundamentally disagree with you - and arguing on here isn't going to change that.

[Jeremy]

bignumber5 Wrote:

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

> There are terms that are "offensive" depending on

> who delivers them, to who and in what context. The

> same term can be harmless, or even a display of

> affection, in different hands (my best mate from

> uni greets me with "ay opp, c**t", and I do the

> same back to him).

Yes.

[Sue]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Have you actually read anything I've written?

>

> I could ask you exactly the same question!

>

> I don't know *any* English people who are offended

> by being called "rosbif", in fact most people

> think it's a bit of fun. So by your own logic -

> people aren't offended by it, therefore it's not

> offensive.

>

> But the intentions behind the words are absolutely

> relevant, most people are intelligent enough to

> understand when someone's being spiteful or not -

> eg context, tone of voice... these things have to

> be taken into account. Surely you can understand

> that?

>

> At the end of the day, I fundamentally disagree

> with you - and arguing on here isn't going to

> change that.

xxxxxx

Yes, we have a fundamental disagreement.

And unless you have been on the other end of remarks/actions from somebody which have offended you, but which they think are fine (and maybe others do too) then you will have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about, as you seem to have no empathy for those in that position.

Your remark "most people think it's a bit of fun" says it all - what about the others?

I could give you more - and more serious - examples, but you'll just leap down my throat again and clearly you just can't understand.

So let's leave this here, as it must be bloody boring for everybody else :)

[bignumber5]

Brendan Wrote:

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

> Yeah I wasn't being entirely serious BN5, just

> expressing the sentiment.

Agreed, just playing :))

[NatashaD]

I agree with most of what you say Jeremy, plus you of all people would know what you're talking about. Well said.

[KidKruger]

The bloke who used the term to Sensie's missus was being offensive, whether he meant to or not that was the effect of what he spouted, quite clearly.

That scumbag needs a dose of what perhaps Sensie is trained at (assuming he's a 'sensie' in the Goju-Ryo / Shotokan stylee) so as to leave him horizontal for 10 mins so he can ponder what he's going to say next !

[chuff]

Shu.Kurimu.Sensei it seems an odd thing to say to someone and yes I can see how it could be upsetting.

I reckon he took one look, thought she was attractive and out of his league and that was the first thing that fell out of his mouth. Seen it myself plenty of times. Used to get very upset when younger and had to endure men 'woofing' at me from the other side of the street. Took me years to work out that they weren't calling me a 'dog'.

i'm old and shrivelled now though chuff

[NatashaD]

Kidkruger, I agree that the term was offensive, but I disagreed that it was necessarily 'racist'. I will explain why.

The word ?racism? has become a useful political tool. But politicians, intellectuals and the equal rights industry have used the word so indiscriminately that ?racism? has joined the ranks with ?fairness? and ?justice? and ?equality,? words that have the unique characteristics of meaning whatever you want them to mean, yet, at the same time, having no useful meaning at all.

What we do have in abundance is prejudice, bias and stereotyping, some of which is bad, some of which makes good sense.

Is it racism, for example, to wish you daughter would marry within her race?

Is it racism to be wary of strangers of a different race who may or may not share your customs, ethics or traditions?

Is it racism to consider common stereotypes when dealing with a stranger of another race?

Is it racism to prefer that your favorite club admit only members of your race?

[Louisa]

If a person finds a term offensive then as far as I am concerned whatever you wish to call it, the other person should apologise and think before they act next time. I personally find many things offensive such as swearing in general for no apparant reason, the break down in manners from people who should know different. But I would not make a big deal of it unless I was directly affected by it, then it would matter. So I believe that this lady had every right to be upset and no one should judge her for being so. Whether it can be considered racist I dont know, but if she feels it was (and non of us were present to judge) then we should all accept that.

Louisa.

[Jeremy]

Well... I think it may have been racist... it seems as though he was singling her out and trying to embarrass her, based on her race. Which is a horrible thing to do.

[Keef]

Wow, just seen this thread. Shu.Kurimu.Sensei sorry to hear about this tw@t shouting at your other half, hope she is okay.

For my part, I would say that it was definitely racist. He looked at the lady, and didn't choose to wolf whistle, or comment on her looks (both of which would also be offensive), he chose to make an obvious referrence to her race, and do it in a loud aggressive way. Like Jeremy said earlier, it's the manner in which a phrase is used that makes it racist in a particular set of circumstances. For that reason I think it was racist.

Not nice hearing that you've had a lot of it in Dulwich, but unfortunately not surprising either.

Natasha30D, I sometimes find you really funny, but on this thread you're out of order.

[NatashaD]

Keef, my username is NOT Natasha30D. Thank you very much for your 'constructive' criticism.

[BJL]

NatashaD Wrote:

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

> Is it racism, for example, to wish you daughter

> would marry within her race?

> Is it racism to be wary of strangers of a

> different race who may or may not share your

> customs, ethics or traditions?

> Is it racism to consider common stereotypes when

> dealing with a stranger of another race?

> Is it racism to prefer that your favorite club

> admit only members of your race?

In my opinion - yes, yes, yes and yes.

[NatashaD]

BJL. fair enough. It all depends on your definition of racism - which was the point.

[BJL]

NatashaD - this dictionary definition of racism is pretty much the same as mine:

(Source: Compact Oxford English Dictionary)

racism

? noun

1 the belief that there are characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to each race.

2 discrimination against or antagonism towards other races.

What else could it mean?

[pk]

BJL Wrote:

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

> NatashaD Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Is it racism, for example, to wish you daughter

> > would marry within her race?

> > Is it racism to be wary of strangers of a

> > different race who may or may not share your

> > customs, ethics or traditions?

> > Is it racism to consider common stereotypes

> when

> > dealing with a stranger of another race?

> > Is it racism to prefer that your favorite club

> > admit only members of your race?

>

> In my opinion - yes, yes, yes and yes.

and me, without question

[Tony.London Suburbs]

BJL Wrote:

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

> NatashaD - this dictionary definition of racism is

> pretty much the same as mine:>

> racism

> ? noun

> 1 the belief that there are characteristics,

> abilities, or qualities specific to each race.

....Well thats ridiculous!..Take The Olympics I'm just about to back all the White Europeans Runners in the 100 Metre Sprint and all The Black Swimmers in every event...obviously there is NO difference:)-D

> 2 discrimination against or antagonism towards

> other races.

>

> What else could it mean?

[Tony.London Suburbs]

No thinking about it,I will be The Bookmaker and you can have 5/1 ALL The White Athletes combined in The 100 Metres..and as a "once-in-a-lifetime" """SPECIAL OFFER"" You can back The Black Swimmers at 5/1 COMBINED to Win more Medals than their White Counterparts...I KNOW I'm too generous but hey! the Dictionary clearly states "the belief that there are characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to each race. "......

[TillieTrotter]

Get yourselves out clubbing and tell me there isnt a difference between black and white dancers. The black dudes sure know how to move. >:D

[pk]

Tony.London Suburbs Wrote:

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

> No thinking about it,I will be The Bookmaker and

> you can have 5/1 ALL The White Athletes combined

> in The 100 Metres..and as a "once-in-a-lifetime"

> """SPECIAL OFFER"" You can back The Black Swimmers

> at 5/1 COMBINED to Win more Medals than their

> White Counterparts...I KNOW I'm too generous but

> hey! the Dictionary clearly states "the belief

> that there are characteristics, abilities, or

> qualities specific to each race. "......

and specific means "relating to one thing and not others"

so you think all black men run fast (and no white do) and all black men are poor at swimming (and no white men are)

[Tony.London Suburbs]

I was just going to say "and next some fool is going to suggest that AS A GROUP Black Dancers are more rhythmic than their White counterparts(YES! There ARE "exceptions" in each group) but as a whole is someone SERIOUSLY suggesting that if you did a study of Millions of Dancers then The Black Group wouldn't win by a Country Mile???

Thats genuinely Tillie what I was about to writeB)

[Tony.London Suburbs]

pk Wrote:

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

>

> so you think all black men run fast (and no white

> do) and all black men are poor at swimming (and no

> white men are)

.....Co-incidently pk I have just answered that on my next "Dancing?" Point!

By The Way if you disagree roughly half the 100 Metre initial entrants are White for The 100 Metres do YOU want a juicy FIVE-TO-ONE Odds of HALF the Field!..If you TRULY believe there is no difference(AS A GROUP with exceptions) Then PLEASE let me know...You can Bet as much as you want My Friend>:D<