[Closed] Derogatory racist terms

Yeah.
"Throwing a Sikhy" is like ****-bashing, but worse.

why o why would you post this 🙄 its gonna run and run

My nan had a poodle called Sukhy

I guess it's the connotation rather than the word itself. The word that Harry used is synonymous with racism, therefore unacceptable.

*Elbows way to front.*

Can't say I've heard that one before.

Must confess, I did have a little s**** (all right you lot at the back, that's S****, you guttersnipes) at Moses' gag.

Think this has all been done now, really, though.

surely there must be some kind of racial intent thrown in with said racial comment? Can't some of these things be said in jest? Not that I think I'd ever use certain words

Similar to when my mates call me a fat/lanky/mackem bastard, (someimes all 3 in one sentance)

[url= http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=VcugUcHnsqs&feature=PlayList&p=318AA5EDEBB55AE6&playnext=1&index=7 ]Just wouldn't get away with it now![/url]

Ah ha, but when I might be called 'white boy' or a 'limey' or a 'pome', is that racist???

Is it (said Prince Harry comment) a racist comment exclusive to England, and maybe other western countries??

Surely ****(stani's) and Indians have the same, shall we say, social disagreement that we ourselves have with the French. We don't really dislike them that much (although they do smell and speak funny), but calling a Frenchman a frog is not deemed to be racist but calling a ****stani a **** is....... where is the logic in that??

I get called a sheep sha**er every sunday by my brother in law. I get highly offended and respond by saying his son has my eyes. It is quite bad how words are perceived - a **** is deemed highly racist where as ****stani isn't, you wouldn't think twice if someone called you a brit. I think in this day and age anything you think 'could' have an alternative meaning should just be avoided if you don't know the person and how they would react

Earlier, I watched a bit of Jerry Springer Show where a black bloke was openly saying white people are trash and he hates them. It went on and on and on and he didn't get called a racist. Is it because in US you can't be a racist if you're black or is it because it was JSS?

because being white makes you automatically racist and also immune from racism....apparently

I'll be perfectly honest, I loled at the clip bruneep linked to!

Wogs, now there's a word..

A word used to describe people of Indian and White parentage- I think 'Mixed Race' is the currently accepted term. Technically, I spose, I'm a 'Wog'.

I think I actually prefer 'Wog', to 'Mixed Race'. Less of a mouthful, for one. But am I allowed to call myself that? I dunno. I got in trouble once, for describing myself as a 'Mongrel'. The reaction of some people, to that one, quite threw me!

As for the 'only White's can be racist', well, by far the most racism I encounter, where I live, comes from some of the Bangladeshi people. There's an awful lot of fear and ignorance, within that community, unfortunately. There have been quite a few convictions for Racially Aggravated Assault, of young Bangladeshi men. For some really vicious crimes.

I'm not going to get too involved in this one. I think last week's thread on this was pretty good, and threw up lots of interesting opinions. T'was a credit to STW, mostly.

calling a Frenchman a frog is not deemed to be racist but calling a ****stani a **** is....... where is the logic in that??

Er, easy:

The first is an attack on a person because his nationality - it's called xenophobia.

The second is an attack on a person because of the colour of his skin - it's called racism.

"Wog" is short for Gollywog.

Never tried calling a black person by that term, suspect it wouldn't go down too well though.

According to Wiki:
Wog is in the UK usually regarded as an offensive slang word referring to people of color from Africa or Asia. The origin of the term is uncertain. Many dictionaries say "wog" possibly derives from the Golliwogg, a blackface minstrel doll character from a children's book published in 1895. An alternative is that "wog" originates from Pollywog, a maritime term for someone who has not crossed the equator. Attempts to derive "wog" from such phrases as "Worthy Oriental Gentleman", "Working On Government Service" (digging the Suez Canal) or "White Oriental Gentleman" are however considered backronyms.

The use of the word is discouraged in Britain, and most dictionaries refer to the word with the caution that it is derogatory and offensive slang.

The saying "The wogs begin at Calais" was originated by George Wigg, Labour MP for Dudley, in 1949. In a parliamentary debate concerning the Burmese, Wigg shouted at the Tory benches, "The Honourable Gentleman and his friends think they are all 'wogs'. Indeed, the Right Honourable Member for Woodford [i.e. Winston Churchill] thinks that the 'wogs' begin at Calais."[1] Wigg's coinage, sometimes paraphrased as "Wogs start at the Channel" or "Wogs start at Dover", is used to characterise a stodgy Europhobic viewpoint, and more generally the view that Britain (more so England) is inherently separate from (and superior to) the Continent. In this case, "wog" is used to compare any foreign, non-English person to those more traditionally labeled "wogs".

Er, easy:

The first is an attack on a person because his nationality - it's called xenophobia.

The second is an attack on a person because of the colour of his skin - it's called racism

Both can be considered xenophobic or racist depending on the intent behind the remark. The fact you assume it is because of the colour of the persons skin (which, sadly, it usually is) and not purely their origin is a little racist within itself.

It seems to be a major grey area.....globally

The origins of the word Wog are hazy, although most of the Wiki-ish definitions are sketchy (some are utter bollocks), I know that. I believe it to be a word of Indian origin, that became adopted by British Colonials. But I'm sure it started off as a word describing people of Asian/White origin, or those of light brown complexion. Someone like me, basically.

The Golliwog thing is a corruption of the word. Probably from 'Kali (meaning Black) and Wog. A strange combination. Points toward the fact that 'Wog' means 'foreigner', 'different', 'weird', 'outsider', etc. IE, someone who is 'not of our like'. People who were the result of (almost always) illicit liasons between White and Indian folk, were always going to be considered 'outcastes' anyway, as such unions were not just frowned upon, but mostly expressly forbidden.

Anyway, I quite like it, as a word to define myself.

So 'wog' might be the origin of 'golliwog' then, rather than vice versa?

You learn something new every day!

"Sikhy" isnt racist to me. It actually sounds endearing to be honest.

"Sikhy" isnt racist to me.

Are you a sikh though? I've always thought of you as a chetnik...

🙂

Whatever you do, don't call a spade a spade.

Hmm, can we call it a 'digger', then?

I am glad to say that I have never seen a spade. Our upbringings must have been very different.

Ever seen a shovel?

Entirely random thought. Is it correct that "mongo" is a derogatory term for a person with Downs Syndrome, rather than for a national of Mongolia?

I once knew a Chinese overseas student called Chinkit (well thats how it was pronounced). Gawd she was very very nice and it was ace racially abusing her in bed 😀 8)

People with Downs Syndrome were originally called mongoloids, until the Mongolian ambassador complained about it. So they changed the name to Downs Syndrome, named after him!

Think so. It's horrible, too. And to think, terms such as 'Mong', 'Spaccer', 'Flid' and 'Biffa' were common, when I was at school. Kids can be so cruel.

Fortunately, most grow up...

miketually- not true. Downs syndrome is so called after the doctor that identified the condition. Dunno about the 'Mongoloid' thing. My mum refers to people with downs as 'Mongoloid', as that is how they were described in medical circles (she was a nurse), until fairly recently.

[i]Kids can be so cruel.[/i]

[simpsons mode on]

we can? cool!
[simpsons mode off]

Hairychested, the chap you describe was undoubtedly being racist, and if people didn't say that, it's probably because it would be stating the obvious. However, you might want to bear in mind that if you're white, European and male it's rarely a disadvantage in our society, and one nutter ranting on Jerry Springer is hardly going to change that. 😉

*Ricky Gervais*

"Spakka"
"It's scope actually…"

miketually- not true.

You're right: [url= http://www.ds-health.com/trisomy.htm ]http://www.ds-health.com/trisomy.htm[/url]

Hey Rudeboy, I supose you would not like it if someone called you "wog" who you did not know as that would be bad manners?

You hear "black" people call each other the "N" word but they would not like a white person to call them that.

So what is the term "half cast" mean ?

Opening a can of worms here but I'm struggling to see any parallel between racism and derogatory remarks about peoples mental conditions?

Surely any remark aimed at someone with a learning disability hurts the parent or carer whereas a racist remark is immediately felt and understood by the primary target?

Sorry if that view offends anyone but I think feeling hurt on anothers behalf is abit lame.

Your girlfriend is a cheap slut? 😯

Er, easy:

The first is an attack on a person because his nationality - it's called xenophobia.

The second is an attack on a person because of the colour of his skin - it's called racism

Wouldnt zenophobia be a fear of people from a different country, whereas racism is discrimination against someone from a different country, racism has nothing to do with the colour of ones skin (other than the misinformed use it as a differentiator to identify country of origin, which doesnt really work due to many second generation people born in this country etc.

Surely any remark aimed at someone with a learning disability hurts the parent or carer whereas a racist remark is immediately felt and understood?

I have encountered quite a few people with problems such as Downs who were perfectly capable of realising people were being unpleasant about them and getting very upset. Its remarkable how well they pick up on such things. And no, feeling sorry for someone else isnt lame - its called empathy, its what sets us apart from psychopaths etc!

Coffeeking understood. Im talking about their depth of understanding.

I once went out with a girl who suffered terribly from racist comments growing up in Sheffield. She couldnt even listen to a remark made as a pure joke by a comedian. In a way it affected her, how she grew up IMO.

coffeeking (and stompy) - my post was, I admit, a little simplistic. I agree that it's not straightforward.

The fear bit is true in the sense of a literal translation of the Greek, but the term is commonly used to describe a dislike of those (actually or perceived to be) foreign.

I was going to add to my post somethign about ethnicity being the key driver for discrimination, rather than "race", which in terms of colour alone is considered to be a somewhat outdated identifier. If we look at the Balkan conflicts of the 1990s, we see that people of the same "race" (white Europeans) were doing each other in because of ethnic differences. Ethnic differences can exist within a nation state, and also transcend the boundaries of nation states.

And then, we get onto the idea of nationality - is an Englishman abusing a Scotsma for being Scottish racist? Unlikely. Is it differentiating him because of ethnicity? Unlikely, but possible. Is it xenophobia? Unlikely, but possible.

So, it's not all, er, black and white. And we're all grey.

KKF; I've been called worse. But you have a point. I spose there's a difference to how I describe myself, and whayt I'd be comfortable with others calling me. If, for example, someone I knew was asked 'what is RudeBoy's race?', or whatever, and they said 'oh, he's a Wog', then I wouldn't find that offensive at all, if the word was accepted as a simply descriptive one. But as it does have nasty offensive connotations, then I spose it's not socially acceptable. And neither is 'Mongrel', apparently..

Hey ho.

But I admit, I find using terms such as 'Wog' or 'Mongrel' quite amusing, sometimes. Cos I know it shocks people. Bit naughty of me, I admit. But I do object, when filling out a form, where they ask your racial origin, to having no option except 'Other'. Now that, I do find offensive.

Because it's a right mouthful, having to say 'Mixed Race Asian/White'. If I could just say something like 'Wog', and everyone knew what I meant, and there was not nastiness associated with the word, then I'd be happy.

As for 'half-caste', well apparently, that's now seen as unacceptable, as it has 'negative connotations'.

Speaking from personal experience, I'd say that growing up as a 'Mixed race' person is quite difficult, in terms of being able to define your own identity. You're neither this, nor that, and M-R people do feel quite excluded, at times. And I know that I, and other M-R friends felt quite put out, recently, with the election of the first 'Black' US President, and the first 'Black' F1 driver. To label these two people thusly, ignores and even rejects their White heritage. I must say, I was very pleased to hear Barrack describe himself as a 'Mongrel'. That did make me smile. And I am sure they, as I am, are very proud of their White heritage. I'm enormously proud of all aspects of my racial and cultural heritage, and would love to be able to use just a single word to describe that.

Feel free to continue discussing the issue in general, but I'd be really interested in any more thoughts on the term "SIKHY"

How would it be pronounced? 'See-ky'? Or 'Sikky'?

Maybe better to ask some Sikh people themselves.

I see your thinking, but it doesnt make sense to identify people by every possible MR possibility, you'd end up with people wanting to be "mixed race asian/white but more white than asian" etc. Cant see how "other" is offensive TBH, its just a category, not a method of deciding your worth.

Its very rare that my religious beliefs are given as an option on forms when they ask for religion, doesnt upset me when I have to tick "other"?

Never heard of sikhy. I did once use the phrase "dirty arab" to a mate when standing next to an arabian girl in an engineering workshop (I know, a girl, in an engineering workshop, a rarity to say the least!). She found it funny and held up her hands which were covered in oil (I'm not sure she realised I wasnt talking about her), but I realised that the term I'd been using most of my life (simply as a name for someone who's covered in muck, not considering the racial link at all) could be considered pretty offensive in certain ways even if it wasnt intended that way. That was the last time I used that phrase!

Surely it is possible to be insulting, abusive or racist using virtually any words within our language? Isn't it the intent that carries the offence, or do we now have PC police everywhere where any innocent use of any word whatsoever potentially offends someone somewhere?

For example, I recently received a proper trimming up over the use of the word "lady". To me in my generation (52 ans) the word is a respectful term with absolutely no negativity attached to it. So when and by whose say so did lady move into the same area as slag, slut etc.?

****, well thats a shortening of the word ****stan, in much the same way that Brit is for British and so on. The insult is in the intent with which its used, and quite simply it can be said in mnay ways and in many circumstances without it being negative. Equally so the other way around.

So intent is the issue surely.

I agree, intent and the maliciousness with what the phrase is spoken is surely more of an issue.....

G, no, it's not the intent of the person saying it but the offence it causes someone else. You just have to judge whether it'll offend someone based on societal norms and your knowledge of the person you're saying it to. Difficult I know, but that's the world we live in, and offending people accidentally was an issue well before the term "politically correct" was coined.

And for the record, I can think of a few circumstances where addressing someone as "lady" could be considered offensive - think "mate" but with none of the friendly connotations.

Bugger, I offend people all the time.......

I think because we live in a nanny state with far to many do gooders people have become far to sensitive to words and phrases that, at most, are generally uttered without an ounce of malice.

Call me what you like, they are just words........ sticks and stones....

Fred, golliwogs get their name from their similarity to a fledgling bird or golly - big eyes and and red mouth. Dunno where the wog comes from, tho.

And mongol for Downs syndrome is because of the typical eye formation of people with that syndrome, appearing like north chinese/mongols.

2d-worth

[i]****, well thats a shortening of the word ****stan, in much the same way that Brit is for British and so on. The insult is in the intent with which its used, and quite simply it can be said in mnay ways and in many circumstances without it being negative. Equally so the other way around.[/i]

Oh for goodness sake. **** is a shortening of the word ****stan, that has been in common use since the 70s as an insult for pretty much anyone non-white, by nasty people like the BNP, National Front, and other racists who generally agree with their ideas. Brit is a word that everyone has used for ages to describe British people, and has no negative connotations. How hard is it to understand that obvious fact?

Yes it's just a word, but you still shouldn't use it to refer to people, in the same way as you shouldn't say c*nt on blue peter. It is obviously offensive, and I find it really hard to see how people can't get that?

Joe

How would it be pronounced? 'See-ky'? Or 'Sikky'?

Cant see how "other" is offensive TBH

Well, it's not, in itself, it's just that I take slight issue with it. Everyone else gets a little box, yet I get relegated to 'other'. It's about personal identity. I'm not blaming anyone, or calling for all forms to cater just for me. But it would be nice to have an 'identity', you see.

It's not a big issue, besides, these days, I often see a box marked 'Mixed White/Asian'. Fair enough.

Moses; sorry, got to disagree with that explanation. Pretty sure it's derived from the Indian language, whatever Wiki says.

As for words, well, if someone called me a ****, I'd think, 'fair enough', but if they called me a '**** ****', for example, I'd be questioning why my ethnic origin was being brought into it. There'd be no need.

I don't go round addressing people by their ethnic origin, as it's seldom relevant. I don't expect anyone to do that to me.

Is describing someone as a "lady" offensive, or is it the use of it as a form of address? I occasionally hear people addressing weomen they do not know as "Lady" when they mean (in polite English anyway) "Madam". The correct response to someone shouting "lady" at one is to enquire "you talkin' to me boy?"

I'm obviously never going to get this, the whole identity thing, race never even fell into my thought processes while growing up - it was simply never something used to identify me or my classmates. Thats probably because they were mostly white, but even the odd indian or MR classmate didn't get seen as different, we were all just who we were in a sort of strange idealistic way. These days I use the terms to differentiate between people - "go and see X, he's the indian chap over there" etc, which I'm sure doesnt offend.

That said, there are certain... how can I say... stereotypes, that different races fall into, and these cause issues in certain situations. People from certain countries are more likely to behave in certain ways, due to the way their communities and education systems work. Are we supposed to ignore that and treat all the same and, if so, can we treat all the same or do we then have to take special precautions around them.

For example, if people from the moon are likely to be more lazy, laid back and need more pushing to do things, and cheat in exams more, do we:
a) expect this and make sure we structure things so they work better, and treat them differently at the risk of stereotyping or
b) Take them all as they come, then penalise them afterwards without taking into account their background?

The problem is that b) would mean you were more likely to fail moonians and so you'd be less likely to want to employ them in the first place, leading to discrimination.....

Ahhh my head!

Never heard of Lady being used in a derogatory fashion.

Never heard of Lady being used in a derogatory fashion.

I think it depends on the context and the inflection. Like the way calling someone "mate" can mean the exact opposite. Or the way Han Solo calls Princess Leia "Your Worship".

Joemarshall said:

Oh for goodness sake. **** is a shortening of the word ****stan, that has been in common use since the 70s as an insult for pretty much anyone non-white, by nasty people like the BNP, National Front, and other racists who generally agree with their ideas. Brit is a word that everyone has used for ages to describe British people, and has no negative connotations. How hard is it to understand that obvious fact?

Yes it's just a word, but you still shouldn't use it to refer to people, in the same way as you shouldn't say c*nt on blue peter. It is obviously offensive, and I find it really hard to see how people can't get that?

Thanks joe, that is in fact my point. In essence the word is not any different to Brit, but it is the intent with which it is used that makes it offensive, and repeated usage in that way has made it in effect a swear word on a par with "c*nt" as you so succinctly put it. However, the word of itself does not have racist undertones, it is the common usage and intent behind that has that.

Thus, the real issue is one of attitude and intent, and NOT, repeat not the words themselves. Chasing about after the use of this word or that is pointless and frankly fruitless, as all that happens is yet another word gets purloined from the vocabulary and and misused and abused.

So going back to the point of the thread. Harry ? Well I think he should know better absolutely, but is he a racist because he used ****? Probably not, thats probably more to do with his upbringing and education, but thats another whole can of worms, and had he not used the word then probably his actual attitudes would never have been exposed, so overall it was a good thing right? As for Sikhy, well does it offend the guy its aimed at? Are you in any way derogatory or predjudiced about him or his religion in any meaningful way, No? well in that case it probably isn't racist, but check for the PC police before you interact with your mate next if I were you.

and another thing

Mr Agreeable said

And for the record, I can think of a few circumstances where addressing someone as "lady" could be considered offensive - think "mate" but with none of the friendly connotations.

Now there you go you see, I can't follow that at all and really don't see where that word is offensive except if the context and intent makes it so. SO MOST ESPECIALLY not in the context, tone, and sense that I used it in. So frankly I object to getting bashed over the head for the innocent use of a word which apparently now means something completely different, in fact diametrically opposed to what my experience and education have shown it to me to mean.
As defined by Websters Dictionary:

A woman of refined or gentle manners; a well-bred woman; - the feminine correlative of gentleman.

😳

Think so. It's horrible, too. And to think, terms such as 'Mong', 'Spaccer', 'Flid' and 'Biffa' were common, when I was at school. Kids can be so cruel.

Fortunately, most grow up...

Ah - reminds me of being back at school. I had the nick names of both Spina and Biffa but luckily nothing to do with the terrible condition.

I seem to remember hearing that the 'stan' part of ****stan, Hindustan, Khazakstan etc means 'land of'.
Ergo, '****stan' would mean The Land of the ****, which would mean the term isn't offensive in the slightest,
Further digging reveals that the '****' part of the word means 'the pure', so in fact, it's quite a compliment.
I shall stop using it at once.

(BTW, hello forum).

Hello AdamG...

Yay everybody, he's back. 🙄

you are all mentalists

i say this because the dave repeats of allan partridge have this word removed

sihky hmmm well

it sounds harmless to me but depending on the context could be nasty id not use it myself,

Well as this seems to be going nowhere, I guess I should hint that what I actually saw yesterday was "S1KHY"...

i never understood why calling someone from ****stan a **** is deemed racist.
i am from britain therfore a brit, that's not racist
my friend is from australia, therefore a aussie.

just my two penneth.

also, someone who works with my wife got in trouble in a meeting at work for saying, let's get down to the nittygritty.

anyone know why??

i never understood why calling someone from ****stan a **** is deemed racist.

Here you go, Ton:

http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/prince-harry-racist-or-just-plain-idiot

well i am ignorant, and fat, and grey, and old, and grumpy, and a bit stupid i suppose.

lots of ISMS there.. 😳

If we're going to make racism a thing of the past, we have to forget that there is any difference whatsoever and move on. After all, that's all racism is - persecuting someone based on a difference of appearance, culture or country of origin.

I think it's wrong to brand a word derogatory, simply because it describes someone's race - it gives that person a weapon which can be used to perpetuate hostility. If a word is used in a jovial, unoffensive way, it should be taken in that same spirit. The only reason for anyone to claim umbrage - in this case in particular - is to create racial tension where there isn't any.

So in my opinion, those that are using this incident to build racial collateral against the Royals, against Harry, or against the British in general are the worst kind of racists.

If being referred to by a characteristic such as race is going to be deemed unacceptable, then so too should any physical attribute or personal characteristic, and that would be completely ridiculous.

I know an auto-electrician whose name is something like Prupdalle Patel. He calls himself '**** Pete' because people have trouble pronouncing his name. By 'outlawing' that word, you make a racist of everyone who refers to him as that, even though when he rings up, he says 'Hiya, it's **** Pete...'.

I can't help thinking that militant sectors of the Asian community are using the race issue to gain an upper hand over their indiginous neighbours. Nowadays, a crime is considered racist if any of the victims feel race might have been a contributory factor. There doesn't need to be any evidence of a racial aspect, just the say-so of a victim, which puts a rather inaccurate slant on 'race crime' figures.

Better to ask a question, than to keep quiet and stay ignorant, though. I'd say someone who does that, then admits to their own lack of prior knowledge, can't be that stupid.

so if ya call me fattie, i will have ya.. 😆

fattie

marked man.. 😈

I can't help thinking that militant sectors of the Asian community are using the race issue to gain an upper hand over their indiginous neighbours.

You were doing quite well, up to that point...

I think it's more an issue of people using whatever means they can, to get themselves up to an equal status with their 'indigenous neighbours'. Although there are those who will sadly exploit this, as there are those who might make spurious claims against minority groups, to destabilise communities and incite racial hatred.

And I'm somewhat more worried about about certain militant Nationalist groups using Race to try to gain support for their evil aims.

all over my head now
i'm off to talk about 29rs, tyres and arse surgary 😆

You were doing quite well, up to that point...

If you don't think it goes on, then you're at best naive...

A friend in the Police says that practically everytime there's an Asian youth involved in the usual Friday night drunken affray, they claim that they're the victim of a race attack. Whereas normally both parties might receive a stern bollocking from an officer or an on-the-spot fine before being sent on their way, the Police are now obliged to make an arrest, based purely on one person's say-so.

Are you telling me that isn't going to be used as a weapon?

AFAIK*
**** is abusive because of it's widespread use in the past as a term of abuse of anyone who was asian (i.e. not just ****stanis).
Like spastic would describe someone with MS but was used as abuse for so long it's now considered a no no even if you are using it in the context of an MS sufferer.

*Don't flame me if I'm wrong

im mixed white/indian. wog is without a doubt an offensive term. rudeboy how old are you? as back in the day, seeing it used in everyday parlance, nothing short of a derogatory term. not so sure on the history part either.

tang, I grew up in the 70s. my earliest experience of racism awas at about 5, when I was learning to read. Someone had written 'Wogs out' on the wall of the lift, and I asked my mum what it meant. She replied that it was something silly, written by someone very stupid, who didn't like people like my dad, because he was from another country.

Made as much sense to me then, as it does now. None.

I am more than aware of it's nasty, abusive connotations. But I no longer care. If I chose to appropriate it, it's my choice. And if someone were to try and use it against me, it wouldn't have any effect. All they would be doing, would be reinforcing my own identity, which would be fine! Blunt the arrow...

Snigle (although I suspect this is your usual attempt to get a good row going), "a friend in the Police", hmm, ok...

I'm not denying it happens. And it's out of order. but I suspect false claims of racism are pretty rare. In my own experience, rows in pubs (very rare, these days, thank God) have quite often involved me or someone who isn't white, being racially abused by some ****. Often the only thing a thick bastard can try and use against someone, is their difference. I dare say fat people, those with red hair, those who wear glasses etc, have had their personal traits used against them.

Personally, I wouldn't even bother with 'using the race card', as the poor sad **** who's abused me is worse off than me, in my onion. I can feel superior in the knowledge that I'm not a thick ignorant **** like them, and that as such, I am probably happier in life than them.
But the laws are there for a reason, and rightly so. And whilst there are laws, there are those who will exploit and abuse them.

However, you seem to be suggesting, somehow, that Asians are getting preferential treatment over Whites. I'd like to hear more...

However, you seem to be suggesting, somehow, that Asians are getting preferential treatment over Whites. I'd like to hear more...

Really? You've already questioned my integrity, why would you want to hear more?

I have 4 close friends in the Police and a father who's a retired CID officer of 25 years service. They all tell frighteningly similar stories.

In Preston, there's an area of mostly large, detached houses that has in recent years become almost exclusively populated by Asian families. None of these houses - some of the highest rated properties in the area - are paying council tax. Why? Because they have a 'prayer room' and as such, are considered a place of worship and exempt from council tax.

A white English house owner in the area decided to try and have a bit of that, and applied for exemption on the grounds that he too had made one of his rooms into a prayer room. His application was rejected because 'he was a Christian and there were plenty of Christian places of worship in the area'!!! How is that fair? There are perhaps a dozen Mosques in the area, but councillors are too afraid to reject these applications from Asian families for one reason - fear of being labelled racist.

One of the BBC commentators on the Obama situation just called him a coconut, referring to his race?! Now ive no idea if thats offensive or not, but I've never heard it before!