[Closed] A Black Dog Named "Digger"?

Is snoop actually in the dambusters then?

This story has been rattling about the media for a few weeks now, and I'm surprised it took so long for STW to pick it up, however....I read somewhere a week or two ago that the name change was simply down to cerification issues,using the word in question would automatically have pushed the film into a different and higher aged rated certificate, and was nothing to do with "PC GONE MAD" I've no problems with this.

We have a living language and as time rolls on, our society's perceptions of linguistics,perjoratives and what is and isn't acceptable change, in this case I believe for the good:)

My mum talks of how black people were routinely referred to as '****s' by many white folk in the 40s and 50s, without any malevolent intention whatsoever.

Yep, my dad grew up in Nigeria (he's white) and his mum saw nothing wrong with saying "****" till the day she died.

Likewise growing up in Glasgow in the late 70s/80s I happily called any newsagents "the ****s". It was just what they were called. There was no particular derogatory insult intended (by me) but it was still xenophobic.

Merely trying to bring light where previously there was darkness...

Racialist! There's nothing wrong with darkness. It is just "differently illuminated".

using the word in question would automatically have pushed the film into a different and higher aged rated certificate

Yup, but some people are having fun getting wound up over health and safety gone mad so leave them to it please!

Is snoop actually in the dambusters then?

You're confusing your histories and RAF heroes here. Snoop was most famous for his air battles with the Red Baron

Yep, my dad grew up in Nigeria (he's white) and his mum saw nothing wrong with saying "****" till the day she died.

Beaten to death in Brixton?

[img] [/img]

There was no particular derogatory insult intended (by me) but it was still xenophobic.

There's still the implication that someone is 'different', isn't there? Which of course they may well be, but Why not just call it 'the shop'? Why use the owner's ethnicity in the description? How is that relevant?

I know exactly what you're saying, not having a go at all. Just challenging certain behaviour, which I think we all should, see wether or not it is actually appropriate.

Why not just call it 'the shop'? Why use the owner's ethnicity in the descriptin? How is that relevant?

As I said, I can see now it was xenophobic, but honestly never [i]intended[/i] with any malice.
It was just what [i]everyone[/i] called those shops.

Same as your mum's experience with "****".

Incidentally, say someone made a film of your mum's experiences growing up. Would you be happy for them to take out those references to "****" that she commented on?

I know exactly what you're saying, not having a go at all. Just challenging certain behaviour, which I think we all should, see wether or not it is actually appropriate.

All true, fortunately the practice of referring to 'the **** shop' has died out. However, some, though fewer than in recent years still seem to think it is ok to suggest going for 'a Chinky'

It was just what everyone called those shops.

Really? Even the guy who ran it? Other Asians?

A guy I used to work with called all small corner shops **** shops, definately not an ethnic/racial thing since his local **** shop was run by a northern irish family. Who were admittedly 1st generation economic immigrants to Scotland 😉

As I said, I can see now it was xenophobic, but honestly never intended with any malice.
It was just what everyone called those shops.

Same as your mum's experience with "****".

Like I said; I completely understand that. The malice was rarely intended, but it was felt by those who were the subject of discrimination, however unintentional it may have been. And as minority groups gained more voice, socially, so many seemingly innocuous yet still offensive terms died out. 'You may not think there's anything wrong but we don't like it so please stop saying it'.

It's all about enlightenment. Once someone becomes educated out of their ignorance, they can see the bigger picture more clearly.

Incidentally, say someone made a film of your mum's experiences growing up. Would you be happy for them to take out those references to "****" that she commented on?

Erm, different issue really though, in't it?

Really? Even the guy who ran it? Other Asians?

No, not really. See how I put "everyone" in italics?
That implies emphasis. You were supposed to read between the lines. 🙄

his local **** shop was run by a northern irish family

Yeah I'm pretty sure I used the term for shops run by folk who were quite clearly not from ****stan or indeed anywhere in Asia. To me it just described a particular type of wee shop that sold more than the usual papers, bread, milk and fags.

Why not just call it 'the shop'?

Because (at least in the North East) 'the corner shop' was closed on a Sunday afternoon, whereas 'the **** shop' was not. It also sold spicy food that you couldn't get anywhere else. You're right though, there was an element of differentiation; there really were not many non-white faces in 1970s Tyneside, so the fact that the shops were run by ****stani people was kind of novel.

Nowadays I have a lot of different ethnic food shops near me, and call them 'the Indian shop', 'the Turkish shop', 'the Polish shop' and 'the Chinese supermarket'. I'm not in any way being demeaning or negative, but when the type of food sold is so bound up in the culture, what else would I call them?

It's all about enlightenment. Once someone becomes educated out of their ignorance, they can see the bigger picture more clearly.

So should they then pretend they never said it in the first place?
Isn't that more offensive?

[i]"You used to call us '****s'..."

"No we didn't. We said.. umm... "diggers" .. yeah because.. err... we really dug your clothes..."[/i]

Erm, different issue really though, in't it?

Well not really no. You said it wasn't meant in offence and it would be an incidental detail to the main plot that may cause offence now.

Not the same issue as changing a dog's name in a film though is it?

You're confusing your histories and RAF heroes here. Snoop was most famous for his air battles with the Red Baron

I really like what you did there. 🙂

[img] [/img]

Nowadays I have a lot of different ethnic food shops near me, and call them 'the Indian shop', 'the Turkish shop', 'the Polish shop' and 'the Chinese supermarket'. I'm not in any way being demeaning or negative, but when the type of food sold is so bound up in the culture, what else would I call them?

So should they then pretend they never said it in the first place?
Isn't that more offensive?

Twoundred! 😀

I am going to start claiming assists Elfin 😉

Thanks folks, reading the entire thread was perfectly timed for the bus home. Usual pedants and willy waving but with added humour.

You set 'em up, JY; I'll bang 'em in! 😀

Right, I'm to the Turkish place (no no; it's a Turkish-run restaurant specialising in Turkish cuisine), then off to watch a film about a Brazilian (no no; it's a film about Ayrton Senna who was a Motor Racing Driver from Brazil).

I'm confused now...we were the good guys in WW2, right?

'****' might make people feel uncomfortable, because of the association with the historical treatment of and struggle for emancipation by black people throughout the Globe.

Precisely why its relevant to keep the name in the film.

For me it's a highly relevant marker that puts into perspective the pervasive Social Darwinism that had been around for the 100 years previous to WWII and had made the notion of Empire a normality - the white man's burden - and had in no small way contributed to the racial policies of the nation being bombed. The fact that this small point makes a connection between the British and the Germans is highly relevant and is worthy of its inclusion.

Not sure why you think it is offensive to not call a dog **** in a film. Could you explain why this is offensive?

I find it offensive to be patronised to the extent that accounts of historical events have to be altered to spare my blushes.
And I find it distasteful that we might pretend these things didn't happen.

It's the "Gone With The Wind" view of history. And it is nasty.

We are hardly rewriting history here...

Eh? That's exactly what it is!

[i]*applause for trailmonkey*[/i]

I think ****s role in history is sufficiently small that if we fully eradicate him nothing much has been altered...certainly not the big picture
I can see both points of view i would remove the name but leave something in about it at the end perhaps to explain it ...or something for the directors cut where it is redubbed
Yes trail monkey does make a better point than you 😉

For me it's a highly relevant marker that puts into perspective the pervasive Social Darwinism that had been around for the 100 years previous to WWII and had made the notion of Empire a normality - the white man's burden - and had in no small way contributed to the racial policies of the nation being bombed. The fact that this small point makes a connection between the British and the Germans is highly relevant and is worthy of its inclusion.

Jeez do you really believe any of that you typed?

It's the Dog's name and it's being changed to something else and that's it nothing else.

I think ****s role in history is sufficiently small that if we fully eradicate him nothing much has been altered...certainly not the big picture

Doesn't matter how small of a part, it still altering history is it not?

I suppose it depends on your definition of history. Pedantically [ totally accurately if you prefer]you would be correct as we have changed a dogs name from starting with a n to starting with a d......I only hope the future can forgive us this radical rewriting of WW2 and this incident in particular. PS this is happening in a fictional account of historical events ..do you think all the dialogue will be "real" and 100% accurate?
I think nothing much will change. We reinterpret history constantly. We used to view the empire as ace but less so now...is that not a more significant change?

Jeez do you really believe any of that you typed?

every word. because its true. you may not get it but it's still true.

It's the Dog's name and it's being changed to something else
and that's it nothing else.

yeah, its being changed for no reason whatsoever 🙄

trailmonkey - Member

For me it's a highly relevant marker that puts into perspective the pervasive Social Darwinism that had been around for the 100 years previous to WWII and had made the notion of Empire a normality - the white man's burden - and had in no small way contributed to the racial policies of the nation being bombed. The fact that this small point makes a connection between the British and the Germans is highly relevant and is worthy of its inclusion.

If changing the dog's name helps prevent posts like this, I'll consider it a victory.

yeah, its being changed for no reason whatsoever

BBFC give higher certificates for films containing discriminatory language.

'****' is on the list, regardless of context.

No conspiracy to alter the past, I reckon that's as simple as it gets. Despite how amusing the outrage is.

yeah, its being changed for no reason whatsoever 🙄

Maybe they should call the dog "still"? 😉

If changing the dog's name helps prevent posts like this, I'll consider it a victory.

given that changing the dogs name has provoked the post, your victory is unlikely.

perhaps you like the **** word and use it in every day speech?...

i can only assume that you haven't read anything that i've posted so far. i'd expect a guardianista like you to be fouling their hush puppies over this one though.

i can only assume you cant detect humour apologies if offence was caused but thanks for you humorous portrayal of me.

damn you jy, now i feel all guilty 😳

no don't it is a fair caricature but i prefer bleeding heart pc liberal do gooder tbh.

liberal is only an insult with a capital L

As usual, the PC brigade are in denial, and seek to distort the meanings and intentions to suit their own agenda. There is no connection between the use of the name "****" for a black dog and the racial policies of Nazi Germany.

Guy Gibson might or might not, have been a rabid racist, but there is certainly no clue in the name he chose for his dog.

The term "Negro" was once perfectly acceptable and many black civil rights organisations used it in their names. Indeed Martin Luther King constantly used the term Negro, and at time when the term "black man" was considered to be deeply offensive.

Today it is considered wholly unacceptable to refer to a black man as a Negro, whilst "black man" is considered to be extremely polite. The term **** has undergone simular changes in its level of acceptance.

The fact that Guy Gibson called his dog **** does not reflect an attitude which "contributed to the racial policies of the nation being bombed". Any more than the fact that the term "black man" was considered to be highly offensive, reflects a deep feeling of anti-racism during that period.

The irony of all this is that the English language is constantly evolving to take into consideration the sensitivities of minority groups, something which you would expect the PC brigade to welcome. How ironic therefore, that the PC brigade appear to be in complete denial and are claiming that the meanings are as relevant today as they were 70 years ago.

As usual, the PC brigade are in denial, and seek to distort the meanings and intentions to suit their own agenda. There is no connection between the use of the name "****" for a black dog and the racial policies of Nazi Germany.

Don't think that view came from the mythical 'PC Brigade'

There's nothing "mythical" about the PC Brigade - I've had the misfortune to be at meetings where they've turned up.

And btw, I learnt a very long time ago that the PC brigade can never agree about anything......"right, I move that we don't use the term chairman, as it's sexist, let's use chairwoman". "What about if it's a man? .....I think we should just use the term 'chair'" "No I think it should be chairperson".........and so it goes on - the pointless waffling bollox, until everyone suddenly remembers that there was an important issue to discuss, only half the meeting has been wasted with pointless PC bollox.

as usual in your rush to hate, you've misinterpreted my stance to be PC. it is not. i'm actually making the case for the name to stay as ****. a fact that you might have picked up on if you'd bothered to read.

There is no connection between the use of the name "****" for a black dog and the racial policies of Nazi Germany.

there is a connection. social darwinism was as much a part of british culture as it was german culture and contributed to the normalisation and justification of both british imperialism and nsdap policies.i suppose i could always just ignore the work of noted historians though and just take your word for it.