Carol Thatcher and the racist remark

[BlueSam]

lol:D

 

[shaundickov]

When did you leaarn about the concepts of context and history.

You've spent most of this thread and the other one you started pretedning that they don't exist.

Oh, it's suits your argument now does it? Right. Carry on.

I don't believe that your 'context and history' argument is valid when you start quoting it in order to say that some words are more offensive than others. eg calling someone 'big ears' is acceptable when calling someone 'big-lips' isn't.

It's the hypocrisy I can't stand - calling someone a 'racist woman' as kronkoshite did.

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

When did you leaarn about the concepts of context and history.

You've spent most of this thread and the other one you started pretedning that they don't exist.

Oh, it's suits your argument now does it? Right. Carry on.

I don't believe that your 'context and history' argument is valid when you start quoting it in order to say that some words are more offensive than others. eg calling someone 'big ears' is acceptable when calling someone 'big-lips' isn't.

It's the hypocrisy I can't stand - calling someone a 'racist woman' as kronkoshite did.

Yeah, as I said, it suits your argument

 

[shaundickov]

Yeah, as I said, it suits your argument

No, you still don't seem to understand.

Here is my opinion:

You CAN'T use the 'context and history' bullshit to argue that some words are more offensive than others. Calling someone 'big ears' is as offensive as calling someone 'big lips'. They are both equally offensive, neither is more or less acceptable than the other.

So when people deem certain insults 'more offensive' than others based on 'context and history', it's pure bullshit.

 

[dannybcity]

It's not that difficult to understand, ALL words derive their meaning from history and context, if they didn't it would just be a series of noises. It is society that applies the meaning of the words based on the context of the word and it's use throughout history, this is how words can mean two entirely different things. If we take the word M***ch for example. Rags aren't upset when you use the word with regards to the visiting the famous beer festival, however refer to them by the same name and they get offend, due to their history attached to the word and the context that you have used it in. It's really not that difficult to understand and I sense that all you complaining already do but choice not to acknowledge it so you can call it "just another example of PC gone mad" and bleat that "we can't say anything anymore".

 

[masterwig]

Can someone who was around at the time of the 'golly's on jam jars etc explain how they were percieved back then. Am I right in saying they started to be considered racist when Enid Blyton depicted them as thieves?

Just trying to understand how they went from acceptable toy to racist symbol.

I am assuming there is more to it than the simple fact that they are black as I don't see anything particularly wrong in dolls having skin which isn't Barbie white.

 

[tueartsboots]

Can someone who was around at the time of the 'golly's on jam jars etc explain how they were percieved back then. Am I right in saying they started to be considered racist when Enid Blyton depicted them as thieves?

Just trying to understand how they went from acceptable toy to racist symbol.

I am assuming there is more to it than the simple fact that they are black as I don't see anything particularly wrong in dolls having skin which isn't Barbie white.

Personally, I never linked Golli with race. Robertson's Golli badges are highly collectible.

 

[shaundickov]

It's not that difficult to understand, ALL words derive their meaning from history and context, if they didn't it would just be a series of noises. It is society that applies the meaning of the words based on the context of the word and it's use throughout history, this is how words can mean two entirely different things. If we take the word M***ch for example. Rags aren't upset when you use the word with regards to the visiting the famous beer festival, however refer to them by the same name and they get offend, due to their history attached to the word and the context that you have used it in. It's really not that difficult to understand and I sense that all you complaining already do but choice not to acknowledge it so you can call it "just another example of PC gone mad" and bleat that "we can't say anything anymore".

I agree with you. Society is split between those who think words such as gollywog are acceptable and those who think they aren't.

I don't have a problem with people who find them unacceptable, UNLESS they show blatant hypocrisy and call women 'bitches', gays 'queers', Americans 'yanks' etc etc.

If you think offensive words should be banned, then at least show some consistency. You can't call for the 'p-word' to be banned whilst at the same time saying 'woman' or 'yank' is OK, because for many people these words are DEEPLY offensive.

 

[dannybcity]

I don't call women 'bitches' in fact I don't know anyone who does. I heard plenty of people call people 'pakis' though. 'Yank' is irrelevent there's a fuckin baseball team with the name FFS.

 

[shaundickov]

'Yank' is irrelevent there's a fuckin baseball team with the name FFS.

In that case, the n-word is irrelevant because eminem and all his mates rap the word thousands of times in front of millions of people.