Re-examining and learning from history

[hypochondriac]

6 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

Hypothetically, could a white person use the word in the same context?

Clearly not which is the point. I don't agree with certain people being allowed to use words and not others based on the colour of their skin. As has been said previously, does the shade of the skin matter? Should we be critical if a brown coloured person uses it but less critical the darker the user? 

[egg]

8 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

I am surprised that there are people who don’t seem to understand the difference between a white person using the N word in a pejorative way and a black person reappropriating the same word as using it as a positive rather than a negative to take the power away from its primal use. The same thing happens with Spurs supporters using anti Semitic terminology to their own ends.

Or perhaps l’m not given the posting history of those who miss the point.

 

An offensive word is an offensive word.

Who defines where the line gets drawn? Who judges if someone crosses a line? Where is the line for a white person, a black person, or a mixed race person? I'm fecked if I know. 

I watched pulp fiction last night. The n word was used by black people and Tarantino's character. I suspect if that film was released now the use of the word by the black characters would be OK, but probably not the white one. 

For me the term is offensive and if nobody uses it, we all know where we are. 

 

[aintforever]

When rappers and gangsters use it the context is pretty obvious TBF.

[Lighthouse]

6 minutes ago, aintforever said:

When rappers and gangsters use it the context is pretty obvious TBF.

If it is indeed about context, could you give an example of an instance when it would be acceptable for a white person to use it?

[egg]

13 minutes ago, aintforever said:

When rappers and gangsters use it the context is pretty obvious TBF.

Black to black I get...black to white?...white to black? 

[egg]

6 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

If it is indeed about context, could you give an example of an instance when it would be acceptable for a white person to use it?

Tarantino  character in pulp fiction used it talking to a black and white person re a black person. Acceptable? A black character used it talking to a white character. Would it have been acceptable for the white person to use it back to him? Blurred lines for me...have no lines. 

[aintforever]

22 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

If it is indeed about context, could you give an example of an instance when it would be acceptable for a white person to use it?

Not really. A black person taking ownership of it and using it sort of makes sense, wouldn’t make sense for a white person to do the same. 

[aintforever]

21 minutes ago, egg said:

Tarantino  character in pulp fiction used it talking to a black and white person re a black person. Acceptable? A black character used it talking to a white character. Would it have been acceptable for the white person to use it back to him? Blurred lines for me...have no lines. 

To be fair, most of what happens in Pulp Fiction is not acceptable behaviour.

[Lighthouse]

5 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Not really. A black person taking ownership of it and using it sort of makes sense, wouldn’t make sense for a white person to do the same. 

In which case ‘context’ isn’t the right word, as it bares no relevance to what is being said and why but simply who is saying it. If anything it’s a form of privilege 

[benjii]

2 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

In which case ‘context’ isn’t the right word, as it bares no relevance to what is being said and why but simply who is saying it. If anything it’s a form of privilege 

An acceptable context would be karaoke. 

If I'm busting out "Straight outta Compton" in da club then I'm a spit lyrics straight up, bitch, no radio edit.

[aintforever]

6 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

In which case ‘context’ isn’t the right word, as it bares no relevance to what is being said and why but simply who is saying it. If anything it’s a form of privilege 

Not really, why the word is being said relates directly to who is saying it to who. 

[hypochondriac]

3 hours ago, aintforever said:

Not really. A black person taking ownership of it and using it sort of makes sense, wouldn’t make sense for a white person to do the same. 

Is mixed race OK? What if you're mixed race but look more white? 

[aintforever]

27 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Is mixed race OK? What if you're mixed race but look more white? 

Dunno, that’s a grey area.

[hypochondriac]

7 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Dunno, that’s a grey area.

Boom tish. Very good. 

Edited 20 August, 2020 by hypochondriac

[sadoldgit]

22 hours ago, egg said:

An offensive word is an offensive word.

Who defines where the line gets drawn? Who judges if someone crosses a line? Where is the line for a white person, a black person, or a mixed race person? I'm fecked if I know. 

I watched pulp fiction last night. The n word was used by black people and Tarantino's character. I suspect if that film was released now the use of the word by the black characters would be OK, but probably not the white one. 

For me the term is offensive and if nobody uses it, we all know where we are. 

 

It is a word, no more, no less. The offensiveness is decided by how that word is used. If a person is using it to denigrate the person it is directed at it becomes offensive. You might not care for the word, but it is all about how the word is used. The C word is often used to denigrate another person but it can also be used between friends as in “Hello Bill, how are you doing you old c*nt”?

You may well find the N word offensive, but black people using it between themselves clearly don’t.

Granted, it is strange that people use pejorative terms between friends, but then people are strange aren’t we?

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

11 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

 it can also be used between friends as in “Hello Bill, how are you doing you old c*nt”?

 

 

No wonder Maidstone is so dangerous, even pensioners abuse each other. 
 

Do you have to be an old c*nt, to use that greeting, or could a youngster call you one? 

[egg]

2 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

It is a word, no more, no less. The offensiveness is decided by how that word is used. If a person is using it to denigrate the person it is directed at it becomes offensive. You might not care for the word, but it is all about how the word is used. The C word is often used to denigrate another person but it can also be used between friends as in “Hello Bill, how are you doing you old c*nt”?

You may well find the N word offensive, but black people using it between themselves clearly don’t.

Granted, it is strange that people use pejorative terms between friends, but then people are strange aren’t we?

 

You refer to black people using it to black people who they are friends with. That I understand.

However, I'm not sure this is context as people claim, but rather who apparently can use the word. 

Help me if you will.

Assume these people are all friends, in which scenarios, if any, is the use of the n word offensive? 

1.Black person to a white person addressing him by the n word? ?

2.White person to a black person addressing him by the n word? 

3. White person addressing a white person but describing a black person (also a friend)?

4. As 3 but a white person addressing a black person. 

5. As 3 but a black person addressing a white person. 

[aintforever]

If I was you Egg at would just play safe and call your black friends mate or pal.

[egg]

15 minutes ago, aintforever said:

If I was you Egg at would just play safe and call your black friends mate or pal.

Ha! I do mate. I'm just trying to understand who can use the word as seemingly some can...just checking if its purely a black/black thing.

[benjii]

14 hours ago, egg said:

You refer to black people using it to black people who they are friends with. That I understand.

However, I'm not sure this is context as people claim, but rather who apparently can use the word. 

Help me if you will.

Assume these people are all friends, in which scenarios, if any, is the use of the n word offensive? 

1.Black person to a white person addressing him by the n word? ?

2.White person to a black person addressing him by the n word? 

3. White person addressing a white person but describing a black person (also a friend)?

4. As 3 but a white person addressing a black person. 

5. As 3 but a black person addressing a white person. 

1. Funny

2. Depends on the black guy

3. Depends whether they live in a dump and wear clothes that are too baggy or not

4. Depends on the black guy 

5. This is getting boring

Like most things, it’s not really about race but social environment. Let’s say Carlton from the Fresh Prince went about calling people niggers. That’s clearly affected and probably offensive because he’s a privileged guy who wouldn’t normally mix in circles where people use the word.

However, I can well imagine a white guy who grows up in a poor part of Atlanta regularly calls black people nigger because that’s how they talk round there. 
 

It’s like if Rees-Mogg turned up in Milbrook and started calling people “mush”, it would obviously be a piss take.

[Wes Tender]

It seems that the BBC are attempting to surpass  themselves in the wokeness stakes, considering banning Land of Hope and Glory and Rule Britannia from The last night of the Proms. Apparently they will have a female conductor from Finland who considers that those songs offend her Black Lives Matter sensibilities. Well, fuck off back to Finland then. Why have a Finnish conductor at a concert event celebrating Britishness anyway? 

This is a step too far, BBC. Take a cue from your name; British Broadcasting Corporation. If the British part offends you, drop it, and we can appoint another national Broadcasting body, one which is proud of this country and its history and which is prepared to report the news without bias and your left-wing agenda.

With luck, if this concert goes ahead without these mainstay anthems, somebody will organise a rival concert reinstating them. EU and LBGT rights flags will not be welcome, as they will not be deemed appropriate to this particular event.

[aintforever]

2 hours ago, Wes Tender said:

It seems that the BBC are attempting to surpass  themselves in the wokeness stakes, considering banning Land of Hope and Glory and Rule Britannia from The last night of the Proms. Apparently they will have a female conductor from Finland who considers that those songs offend her Black Lives Matter sensibilities. Well, fuck off back to Finland then. Why have a Finnish conductor at a concert event celebrating Britishness anyway? 

This is a step too far, BBC. Take a cue from your name; British Broadcasting Corporation. If the British part offends you, drop it, and we can appoint another national Broadcasting body, one which is proud of this country and its history and which is prepared to report the news without bias and your left-wing agenda.

With luck, if this concert goes ahead without these mainstay anthems, somebody will organise a rival concert reinstating them. EU and LBGT rights flags will not be welcome, as they will not be deemed appropriate to this particular event.

What have the EU and gays got to do with it?

[aintforever]

2 hours ago, Wes Tender said:

 

Edited 23 August, 2020 by aintforever
Duplicate

[Lighthouse]

On the subject of LNATP, I wish we’d change our national anthem. Hate it on so many levels. Well, three I guess. The God bit, the Queen bit and the drab and dreary tune.

[Wes Tender]

It now appears that after the huge outcry in the media and social media following the BBC's announcement that they will be dropping Land of Hope and Glory and Rule Britannia from The last night of the Proms because the songs are not woke, the BBC have now started to give ground to public opinion at last. Even a government minister gave them an earful.

But on closer inspection, the announcement made by the BBC isn't a total about face. It says that a new arrangement of Jerusalem will be performed, along with orchestral versions of Land of Hope and Glory and Rule Britannia.

So not only are they going to meddle with Jerusalem, but they propose to drop the words of Land of Hope and Glory and Rule Britannia, the words not only being the essence of both tunes, but the part that the entire controversy is about. Usually of course, an invited soprano sings Rule Britannia and the BBC Concert Choir sings Land of Hope and Glory and Jerusalem.

I expect that if the BBC think that they can get away with this, they are going to be bitterly disappointed.

[Born In The 80s]

29 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

It now appears that after the huge outcry in the media and social media...

This seems to happen every day now, doesn't it? A huge public outcry on social media (yawn). It seems to me that over the past few years all people want to do is get offended by absolutely anything they don't agree with. People going out of their way to try and defund the police. Then the same time, people trying desperately to defund the BBC. It all stems through social media and I think it's an incredible shame that the world is going this way. 

The BBC just can't win right now and it's a damn shame. I've voted conservative my entire life and voted to leave the EU. Some of my left-wing mates think I vote the way I do because I watch BBC news! Seems to be the opposite accusations flying around now. As a nation, it seems people don't want impartial news; they want stories to be written in biased ways (Guardian/Daily Mail) to suit their political agenda. Seems everyone is offended by everything right now. 

 

[Weston Super Saint]

What's the verdict on the Jacob Blake shooting - and subsequent riots - in the US?

Obviously I don't have all the facts but from the short video clip doing the rounds it looks like he was surrounded by police (the reason for that I guess is open to debate as we don't have the full details), but then decided he was just going to ignore them, walk round the front of his car and get in the driver's door.

If that happened in the UK (no matter what colour the person doing it), then it would be highly likely that the police would use their tasers - probably after a bit of a scuffle as tends to be the case in the UK but not so much in the US - to do so in the US though is asking for them to shoot isn't it?

[Winnersaint]

3 hours ago, Born In The 80s said:

This seems to happen every day now, doesn't it? A huge public outcry on social media (yawn). It seems to me that over the past few years all people want to do is get offended by absolutely anything they don't agree with. People going out of their way to try and defund the police. Then the same time, people trying desperately to defund the BBC. It all stems through social media and I think it's an incredible shame that the world is going this way. 

The BBC just can't win right now and it's a damn shame. I've voted conservative my entire life and voted to leave the EU. Some of my left-wing mates think I vote the way I do because I watch BBC news! Seems to be the opposite accusations flying around now. As a nation, it seems people don't want impartial news; they want stories to be written in biased ways (Guardian/Daily Mail) to suit their political agenda. Seems everyone is offended by everything right now. 

 

Couldn't agree more. Create division to rule and then spend as much time reinforcing those divisions to utterly polarise societal opinion . Nothing new in it. Whereas once a lot of the views of idiots were simply confined to idiots own brains social media has allowed those idiots views on all sides to gain mainstream traction so that people are so entrenched they are unable to see an alternative view without resorting to emotional insults or threats of violence. Take your pick from. "Woke, Remoaner, Fascist, Lefty, Brexshitter etc; and could someone please tell me how someone who does not agree with Brexit is a 'traitor' or 'enemy of the people'  is that just social media hyperbole? You know the sort of thing you can safely say on a keyboard but wouldnt say to someone face to face.  

[skintsaint]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

but then decided he was just going to ignore them, walk round the front of his car and get in the driver's door.

Hard to tell but a serious overreaction it seems by the cop, I mean maybe he thought he could have been leaning in to grab a gun or something? I know that if a few cops are pointing guns at me I won't just keep walking around and then lean into a car.

[Lighthouse]

56 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Hard to tell but a serious overreaction it seems by the cop, I mean maybe he thought he could have been leaning in to grab a gun or something? I know that if a few cops are pointing guns at me I won't just keep walking around and then lean into a car.

What do you mean, ‘maybe’?
 

It’s only an overreaction if you’re sat safely at home, nowhere near the incident, with the benefit of hindsight. If you live in a country where everyone is armed up to the tits with machine guns and you’re dealing with a complete stranger, it’s probably quite a reasonable reaction. 9/10 times, if someone ignores a Policeman pointing a gun at them, he probably is grabbing a 9mm in the glove box.

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, Lighthouse said:

What do you mean, ‘maybe’?
 

It’s only an overreaction if you’re sat safely at home, nowhere near the incident, with the benefit of hindsight. If you live in a country where everyone is armed up to the tits with machine guns and you’re dealing with a complete stranger, it’s probably quite a reasonable reaction. 9/10 times, if someone ignores a Policeman pointing a gun at them, he probably is grabbing a 9mm in the glove box.

Maybe could have waited to see if he actually had a weapon before shooting the 7th bullet into his back?

[Lighthouse]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

Maybe could have waited to see if he actually had a weapon before shooting the 7th bullet into his back?

Why seven bullets were fired I have no idea but there are cemeteries full of cops who ‘waited to see if he actually had a weapon’. 

[Weston Super Saint]

5 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Maybe could have waited to see if he actually had a weapon before shooting the 7th bullet into his back?

Seven is excessive for sure.

Do you think he should have walked away from the police, round the front of the car and opened the door? 

[Wes Tender]

7 hours ago, Born In The 80s said:

This seems to happen every day now, doesn't it? A huge public outcry on social media (yawn). It seems to me that over the past few years all people want to do is get offended by absolutely anything they don't agree with. People going out of their way to try and defund the police. Then the same time, people trying desperately to defund the BBC. It all stems through social media and I think it's an incredible shame that the world is going this way. 

The BBC just can't win right now and it's a damn shame. I've voted conservative my entire life and voted to leave the EU. Some of my left-wing mates think I vote the way I do because I watch BBC news! Seems to be the opposite accusations flying around now. As a nation, it seems people don't want impartial news; they want stories to be written in biased ways (Guardian/Daily Mail) to suit their political agenda. Seems everyone is offended by everything right now. 

 

Love it or loathe it, social media is the modern technological way that news and opinion is disseminated around the civilised democratic world nowadays. Because much of the mainstream media is biased, it is natural that people will seek alternative sources of information and opinion, whether that be You Tube, Twatter, Facebook, Instagram, email or other methods. It isn't possible to put this particular genie back in the bottle. The days of people relying on the National broadcasters like the BBC for news are long gone and they have lost their audiences because the public don't any longer respect their impartiality.

The campaign to defund  the BBC has arisen because they are increasingly irrelevant when all these alternative sources of information are available and the licence fee is effectively seen as a poll tax. It has always been right and proper in a capitalist society that people vote with their feet when it comes for paying for a service or a product. Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream made the mistake of expressing an opinion on the UK policy on "asylum seekers" on social media and saw their sales plummet after calls for their product to be boycotted for interfering in British politics. The BBC has also paid the price for its increasingly woke agenda and I understand that close to a million people have stopped paying their BBC licence fee during the past year or two. This latest episode over their vain attempts to curry favour with the Marxist BLM movement by meddling with a national institution like the Last Night of the Proms has been a gross error of judgement on their part and they deserve all the flak they get.

At last Boris has seen fit to signal his discontent. Well done him.

 

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, Lighthouse said:

but there are cemeteries full of cops who ‘waited to see if he actually had a weapon’. 

Doubt there are many of cops who had already unloaded 6 times into the back of someone who might be going for a weapon.

[Lighthouse]

5 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Doubt there are many of cops who had already unloaded 6 times into the back of someone who might be going for a weapon.

So your objection is based on the number of bullets fired, rather than the actual decision to shoot. Seven does seem excessive on the face of it but what if you’ve fired five and he’s still reaching for the inside of his car.

You can’t make these one off judgements with no context. This is the USA, 9/10 times the guy really is going to get his gun.

[aintforever]

48 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

So your objection is based on the number of bullets fired, rather than the actual decision to shoot. Seven does seem excessive on the face of it but what if you’ve fired five and he’s still reaching for the inside of his car.

You can’t make these one off judgements with no context. This is the USA, 9/10 times the guy really is going to get his gun.

It’s hard to tell what went on with just that small clip but I agree it does look excessive.

The police have a hard job but if the guy reaching into the car was a middle aged white man in a suit would the outcome have been seven bullets in the back? I dunno.

[Lighthouse]

1 hour ago, aintforever said:

It’s hard to tell what went on with just that small clip but I agree it does look excessive.

The police have a hard job but if the guy reaching into the car was a middle aged white man in a suit would the outcome have been seven bullets in the back? I dunno.

Well this unarmed, white guy got five whilst complying with Police instructions and crouching on all fours.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Daniel_Shaver

I’d need to see some sort of evidence that the officer in question had a history of racial prejudice to make such judgements, personally.

[aintforever]

15 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Well this unarmed, white guy got five whilst complying with Police instructions and crouching on all fours.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Daniel_Shaver

I’d need to see some sort of evidence that the officer in question had a history of racial prejudice to make such judgements, personally.

So would I, but you can understand why some people in the US may be concerned that it is race related given recent events. It will be interesting to see the full context what weapons the police recover from the car.

[Weston Super Saint]

12 hours ago, aintforever said:

It’s hard to tell what went on with just that small clip but I agree it does look excessive.

The police have a hard job but if the guy reaching into the car was a middle aged white man in a suit would the outcome have been seven bullets in the back? I dunno.

If a middle aged white guy walked from the rear nearside to the front offside of the car, opened the door and reached in for something whilst several police officers with drawn weapons were telling him to stand still, then he would also have been shot in the back.

[The Cat]

Maybe the police in the US should be given Tasers as well as guns. Go for Taser first, use gun only as a back up if necessary.

Jacob Blake could have been tasered before he got anywhere near the car door. He wouldn't now be paralysed. 

[Weston Super Saint]

13 minutes ago, The Cat said:

Maybe the police in the US should be given Tasers as well as guns. Go for Taser first, use gun only as a back up if necessary.

Jacob Blake could have been tasered before he got anywhere near the car door. He wouldn't now be paralysed. 

They are given tasers. He was wrestled, then punched, then tasered, then shot.  Shooting / using a gun was a backup...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53909766

Quote

The person who shot the video, Raysean White, told CNN that before he began filming, he saw police wrestle, punch and Taser Mr Blake.

 

[benjii]

On 24/08/2020 at 01:41, Lighthouse said:

On the subject of LNATP, I wish we’d change our national anthem. Hate it on so many levels. Well, three I guess. The God bit, the Queen bit and the drab and dreary tune.

Agreed. Notwithstanding the medieval lyrics, musically it is dismal.

[whelk]

1 hour ago, benjii said:

Agreed. Notwithstanding the medieval lyrics, musically it is dismal.

Maybe something banal by Ed Sheeran?

its ok and can be sung with gusto. Not the worst from what I hear at tournaments and Olympics.

I assume everyone would be up in arms with Jerusalem as well. 

[Lighthouse]

3 minutes ago, whelk said:

Maybe something banal by Ed Sheeran?

its ok and can be sung with gusto. Not the worst from what I hear at tournaments and Olympics.

I assume everyone would be up in arms with Jerusalem as well. 

It’d be a massive improvement, as would ‘I Vow to Thee my Country’. I’m sure somebody can find a line or two with some tenuous link to slavery but they’re at least uplifting and inspiring tunes, if nothing else.

[badgerx16]

On 23/08/2020 at 22:41, Lighthouse said:

On the subject of LNATP, I wish we’d change our national anthem. Hate it on so many levels. Well, three I guess. The God bit, the Queen bit and the drab and dreary tune.

It is a music hall song written to bolster English morale when the Italian/Polish chancer Bonnie Prince Charlie and his highlanders were thought to be marching on London, hence the oft ignored lines about Marshall Wade crushing " rebellious scots".

Edited 26 August, 2020 by badgerx16

[benjii]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

Maybe something banal by Ed Sheeran?

its ok and can be sung with gusto. Not the worst from what I hear at tournaments and Olympics.

I assume everyone would be up in arms with Jerusalem as well. 

Brazil, Chile, France, Russia. Quality anthems. Ours is BORING.

[Turkish]

45 minutes ago, benjii said:

Brazil, Chile, France, Russia. Quality anthems. Ours is BORING.

A national anthem is racist and not inclusive. They should all be banned. 

[The Cat]

6 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

They are given tasers. He was wrestled, then punched, then tasered, then shot.  Shooting / using a gun was a backup...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53909766

 

Wow. He must be harder than Terry Hurlock to have got up from being tasered.

[Wes Tender]

So the Lib Dumbs have appointed Sir Ed Davey as their leader beating pan-sexual Layla Moran 2-1 in the vote. Well, there wasn't much choice from among their 11 MPs was there, and I suppose that he was the least bad option available, as hardly anybody will have heard of any of them, apart from the boy Farron, who didn't set the world on fire the last time he led the party. The last leader they had with more than an ounce of charisma, was Nick Clegg. What became of him? 😉