[Closed] Is it racist...

As I said, it's a strange kind of liberal that wants to ban words and curtail free speech.

No it's not, most liberals would agree some limit on free speech, they might disagree where that limit is, but must would not support the idea of allowing abusive or hate mongering language

And you wanted to ban all use of the word "chink" regardless of the meaning, intent or context.

I didn't know that rape was an offensive word....

God.

PC gone mad.

Your original post pertained to the act, not the word. Completely different. The word rape can apply to other things and in and of itself is not offensive. This, however

Better reclaim rape then - maybe teh wimminz can re appropriate it by just learning to enjoy it?

Implies the act of raping an individual, specifically women. So, no, not PC gone mad.

Implies the act of rape. Either that or you struggle somewhat with written language.

It implies a crime, using language that can be deemed as offensive in some circumstances is a crime as well.

Now why is it okay to place the onus on the victim in one case (by asking them to rehabilitate the use of words and language) to deal with it but it's not okay to place the onus on the victim in the former?

What? Your argument makes no sense. A word and an act are two entirely different things and not comparable. I don't even know what else to say and that's really strange for me. I'm out 😯

You're equating "choosing to take offence" with "being violently sexually assaulted" in order to build a case about victim blaming?

FFS man, have a word with yourself. Seriously, step away and have a think before you come back.

Words, given historical context have the ability to cause physical harm through alarm, distress and terror.

You not being able to understand that, is a typical symptom of being white and never having grown up with it, or having your parents grow up with it, or stories of slave beatings being passed down through generations.

😆

And now I've offended you lot, which amuses me slightly given your relative disregard for offence so far.

its really illuminating to read the OP then skip to the current page and see where we are at

"lol"?

You're either drunk or disturbed.

And now I've offended you lot, which amuses me slightly given your relative disregard for offence so far.

Ah, the Edinburgh defence.

I wasn't offended, I was disgusted. If you were trolling to provoke a reaction / prove a point, I'm not sure whether that makes it better or worse.

Hey man, look at it this way, I've finally found something you lot are uncomfortable about - it just took getting to rape to get that point. You aren't a bunch of self centred sociopaths after all, I mean it took a while though!

its really illuminating to read the OP then skip to the current page and see where we are at

Because I'm in a totally different time-zone, every blockbuster thread is like that.

If I see the post count is above about 35, I know I'm going to see a circular firing squad of nasty witlessness with lots of quotation and [i]reducto ad hitlerum[/i] which has come completely unmoored from any apparent point. It's always the same people and it always makes me want to go and read delusional reviews of the latest short-travel 29er trail bikes on Pinkbike. I just hope y'all are enjoying yourselves. 🙂

wasn't offended, I was disgusted. If you were trolling to provoke a reaction / prove a point, I'm not sure whether that makes it better or worse.

+1 to this sentiment.

How can a word, a collection of syllables cause physical harm? They can definitely cause alarm, distress and terror, which can manifest with physical symptoms, but they can't physically hurt you, they have no presence or physical form and therefore can't interact physically in order to cause harm.

Unless, are you firing scrabble tiles from a catapult again or using a thesaurus as a blunt instrument?

I wasn't offended, I was disgusted.

To quote Hitches and Fry, so what? Why the whine?

"can't physically hurt you, they have no presence or physical form and therefore can't interact physically in order to cause harm."

Stress can and does physically harm people.

This is too easy.

Why do some people put so much effort in talking shit?

Read in reverse this thread reaches a conclusion as well. Clever stuff

[quote=CharlieMungus ]I suggested that there was some consistency in the banning of offensive terms. I would be happy to see Chink and Chinky banned, because of their racially charged meaning,might a consequence of that was that there was one less word to describe a small gap, then that would be an acceptable loss

That's a slippery slope (yes, I know I've already done that one, but it deserves repeating) which other of Graham's list of words would you like to ban, or is there something particularly special about "chink"? To borrow your own argument, why would chink be banned but not some other word which is deemed offensive when used in a limited context.

As for "acceptable loss", why don't you try doing a search (I even posted some handy links a bit earlier) and see if you can find "chink" being used in a racially charged way. Apart from discussion of whether it was racist I only found it being used in phrases such as "chink of light" or "chink in the armour", and despite your apparent expectations it does get used fairly often in those contexts. Meanwhile you completely failed in your quest to provide an equivalent colloquialism.

Why do some people put so much effort in talking shit?

I doubt it requires any effort on their behalf Tom and CM are always talking shit in order to provoke a reaction. Just look at CMs history he predominantly hunts for threads where he can talk utter crap.

Just look at CMs history he predominantly hunts for threads where he can talk utter crap.

Seems to me that the main point of the discussion was made a long time ago and the only thing keeping to going is a few argumentative dicks. Aracer is correct, in that they've spectacularly failed to prove their point.

The thread still boils down to three things

Racists, racist apologists and ignorance.

Meanwhile you completely failed in your quest to provide an equivalent colloquialism.

Really? I thought Glimmer Of Hope was pretty good.

which other of Graham's list of words would you like to ban

Well as noted before, "Charlie" is an ethnic slur twice over.

And "Mungus" could be a reference to the reported sexual assault of a Black Lives Matter supporter by "Hugh Mungus".

Ban those next I say. 😉

No it's not, most liberals would agree some limit on free speech, they might disagree where that limit is, but must would not support the idea of allowing abusive or hate mongering language

But you're not just doing that, you are also attempting to shut down all discussion about those limits and that language by screaming "racist" at anyone who has the temerity to talk about it while being white.

Trump and Brexit has taught us that isn't a particularly effective strategy.

its really illuminating to read the OP then skip to the current page and see where we are at

I think we're still on topic: the OP was about a Chinese guy who doesn't find "chinky" offensive

So that's the "intent" and reclamation topic right there.

Tom and CM have explained why he isn't allowed to not find it offensive and why he must be a racist or racist apologist to think otherwise.

Empty barrels make the most noise?

But you're not just doing that, you are also attempting to shut down all discussion about those limits and that language by screaming "racist" at anyone who has the temerity to talk about it while being white.

Tom and CM have explained why he isn't allowed to not find it offensive and why he must be a racist or racist apologist to think otherwise.

And this exemplifies the problem, after 16 pages, you still seem to have misunderstood want we were saying and made unreasonable inferences

"can't physically hurt you, they have no presence or physical form and therefore can't interact physically in order to cause harm."

Stress can and does physically harm people.

This is too easy.

Okay, against my better judgement I'll bite. Selective quoting is brilliant isn't it? I agree stress does cause physical harm, words don't. Words cause the stress (to some people) they can't cause physical harm. You ever been hospitalised by a preposition, pronoun or adverb?

Everything is easy if you wilfully misinterpret it. 🙄

You ever been hospitalised by a preposition, pronoun or adverb?

Well as noted before, "Charlie" is an ethnic slur twice over.

no, Charlie is military slang for the Vietcong, Victor Charlie and slang for cocaine. The word you are thinking of is Gook.

no, Charlie is military slang for the Vietcong, Victor Charlie and slang for cocaine. The word you are thinking of is Gook

"Charlie" is listed on the aforementioned [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs ]Big Boy's List of Ethnic Slurs[/url]

Charlie

a. (African American, 1960s-1970s) white people as a reified collective oppressor group, similar to The Man or The System.

b. (Vietnam War military slang) Slang term used by American troops as a shorthand term for Vietnamese guerrillas, derived from the verbal shorthand for "Victor Charlie", the NATO phonetic alphabet for VC, the abbreviation for Viet Cong. The (regular) North Vietnamese Army was referred to as "Mr. Charles".

So we're back to who decides what words are too offensive to use and whether the intent or meaning matters at all.

I think most people agree that the meaning of words matter

Perhaps my definition of physical harm differs to yours? Harm to me would constitute cuts, abrasions, wounds, broken limbs and other injuries of that nature. So, no, not trivialising the emotional and psychological damage hateful words can cause in the slightest.

Can we kill this thread with fire now? I think lumping rape in with getting a Chinese takeaway has definitely ended all reasoned debate.

Well done all.

I thought we were never going to make 17 pages and I'd lost my wager.

I think most people agree that the meaning of words matter

Says the man that wanted to ban "chink" regardless of the meaning.

You haven't clarified where you stand on other dual-meaning words. Should the word "nip" also be banned? Or "slope"? Seems fairly equivalent.

Marmlade Sandwiches for everyone.

Is Robertson's Ok?

Why do some people put so much effort in talking shit?

🙂

Charlie" is listed on the aforementioned Big Boy's List of Ethnic Slurs

Charlie

a. (African American, 1960s-1970s) white people as a reified collective oppressor group, similar to The Man or The System.

didn't realise I was an African American living in the 1960-70's America. Thanks for clearing that one up.

What was I saying about bell ends a couple of pages ago?

Tom W - I'm guessing you're an angry young man in your 20s with a violent distrust of liberal values and of air suspension. I hope you can find a way to broaden your outlook.

Says the man that wanted to ban "chink" regardless of the meaning.

I've already explained this

That combine with things like this

Tom and CM have explained why he isn't allowed to not find it offensive and why he must be a racist or racist apologist to think otherwise.

Make me think either you are not paying attention or are prone to misunderstanding.

didn't realise I was an African American living in the 1960-70's America.

I didn't realise you were a GI in the Vietnam war in the 1950-70s.

According to OED, the derogatory meaning of "chink" goes back at least as far as 1879.

Are older insults okay or worse?

I think that it's enlughtening that this conversation - like the Trump campaign - only became unaceptable when rape got mentioned or inferred.

Oh and funkmaster, again - more medical ignorance - high levels of stress can be argued to cause a physical injury to the brain as stress can proceed substantial structural changes.

Perhaps my definition of physical harm differs to yours? Harm to me would constitute cuts, abrasions, wounds, broken limbs and other injuries of that nature.

So, no, not trivialising the emotional and psychological damage hateful words can cause in the slightest.

Recognising that they're at least equal to physical harm?

I've already explained this

As I understand it you've said it does no harm to ban innocent use of a word which has an alternate meaning that can be used to offend (but demonstrably isn't on here).

How does that to also apply to the words "slope" or "nip"?

Make me think either you are not paying attention or are prone to misunderstanding.

I pay close attention, but do have trouble understanding your perspective on some points.

Graham,I get the impression you may have left your engagement in this for philosophical and intellectual interest behind you a little

I pay close attention, but do have trouble understanding your perspective on some points.

That's probably because you are making some of them up. Where did I explain or even say the op's friend is not allowed to not be offended, or that he was a racist or a racist apologist?

I think that it's enlughtening that this conversation - like the Trump campaign - only became unaceptable

It's enlightening that you thought the conversation was [i]"unacceptable"[/i] before this point.

I thought it was largely amicable and fairly interesting.

Is Robertson's Ok?

You farking what mate?!

[quote=GrahamS ]no, Charlie is military slang for the Vietcong, Victor Charlie and slang for cocaine. The word you are thinking of is Gook
"Charlie" is listed on the aforementioned Big Boy's List of Ethnic Slurs
Charlie
a. (African American, 1960s-1970s) white people as a reified collective oppressor group, similar to The Man or The System.
b. (Vietnam War military slang) Slang term used by American troops as a shorthand term for Vietnamese guerrillas, derived from the verbal shorthand for "Victor Charlie", the NATO phonetic alphabet for VC, the abbreviation for Viet Cong. The (regular) North Vietnamese Army was referred to as "Mr. Charles".
So we're back to who decides what words are too offensive to use and whether the intent or meaning matters at all.

Ignore Poah

He uses "gay" as a slur and then tries to claim it means "girly or unimpressive"

[img] [/img]

How does that to also apply to the words "slope" or "nip"?

Given that the discussion of Chinky has run to 17 pages, I dont think it would be useful to discuss them here.

Graham,I get the impression you Amy have left your engagement in this for philosophical and intellectual interest behind you a little

Nope - still here for precisely that reason.

The point about dual-meaning words like "nip" and "slope" being equivalent to "chink" is precisely that: an interesting philosophical one.

i.e. Is it better to completely ban [i]all[/i] words that have any alternate meanings which are ethnic/racial/religious/homophobic/etc slurs, or rely on self-policing and social pressure to make those offensive meanings obsolete, or some solution in between?

ffs you boring set of ****ers, give it a ****ing rest.

Ton wins!

ffs you boring set of *, give it a * res

Here's an idea, if you find it boring, don't read it. Then it's like it's not even there.

Watching Guy Martin mixing with locals in Chong-Ching the other day, I was so nearly offended.

Evidence that a thread is shite and should die.

1. original discussion is all but lost
2. use of google to find spurious quotes backing up position yet ignores much more obvious contrary ones.
3. Arbitrary last word point scoring between a limited number of protagonists.
4. multiple quote trees.
5. Willful and deliberate misinterpretation.
6. no light, all heat.

Have I missed anything?

Oh and funkmaster, again - more medical ignorance - high levels of stress can be argued to cause a physical injury to the brain as stress can proceed substantial structural changes.

WTF is wrong with you? I agree with that and have said so. I was stating that your assertion that words, in and of themselves, can cause physical injury is horse shite. They can't, end of. Even CM agrees on this count.

Nip and slope originally had alternative meanings, chink and chinky according to wiki - never have - it makes a pretty good argument for the word originating in the USA during the 1880s - not 1970s Britain.

And if you argue that "chinky" is a different word to "chink" - then I'm sure you'd find saying "Im going down to the ****y" acceptable for referring to a Jamaican resteraunt?

Funkmaster - I quote

"Perhaps my definition of physical harm differs to yours? Harm to me would constitute cuts, abrasions, wounds, broken limbs and other injuries of that nature. So, no, not trivialising the emotional and psychological damage hateful words can cause in the slightest."

As evidence that you do not think that stress causes physical harm.

chink in one's armor
A vulnerable area, as in Putting things off to the last minute is the chink in Pat's armor and is bound to get her in trouble one day. This term relies on chink in the sense of “a crack or gap,” a meaning dating from about 1400 and used figuratively since the mid-1600s.

Also if you want to use Wiki.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chink_in_one%27s_armor

Jonny, you missed one,

Pointless grandstanding by an increasingly small, and increasingly vocal number of posters determined to be more right than everyone else, even when almost everyone else has lost the will to live.

drac, please close this shyte boring mind numbing bollox.
I am proper offended by the total mind numbing shyte being posted.
watching jism dry on the carpet is far far more interesting.

Jonny, you missed one,

Pointless grandstanding by an increasingly small, and increasingly vocal number of posters determined to be more right than everyone else, even when almost everyone else has lost the will to live.

I'll take that as a suitable expansion of my point 3. 🙂

Nip and slope originally had alternative meanings, chink and chinky according to wiki - never have

So the phrases "chink in the armour", "chink of light" or "chinking glasses" are literally derogatory terms for a Chinese person wearing armour or appearing as a sliver of light or making a noise?

No.

OED offers ten definitions for "chink", only one of them is a derogatory term for a Chinese person:

1. chink, n.
...A convulsive gasp for breath, or spasmodic losing of the breath, as in hooping-cough; a convulsive fit of coughing or laughing....

2. chink, n.
...A fissure caused by splitting; a cleft, rift, or crack; a crevice, gap.

3. chink, n.
...An imitation of the short, sharp sound produced by pieces of metal or glass striking one another; hence a name for this sound....

4. chink, n.
... apparently a variant of kink n.1, a twist: compare the corresponding chink v.4...

5. Chink, n.
...A Chinese person. Also attrib. (Derogatory.)...

6. chink, n.
...Short for chinkerinchee colloq....

7. chink, v.
...intr. To gasp convulsively for breath, lose one's breath spasmodically in coughing or laughing....

8. chink, v.
...intr. To open in cracks or clefts, to crack....

9. chink, v.
...intr. To emit a short, sharp, ringing sound, as coins or glasses do in striking each other....

10. chink, v.
...trans. To give a twist to (the vertebral column); to crook slightly, sprain....

([url= http://www.oed.com/search?browseType=sortAlpha&page=1&pageSize=50&q=chink&quickSearch=true&scope=ENTRY&sort=entry&type=dictionarysearch ]Linky[/url] - may not work properly)

Given that the original use of the term chink is only found widely in old english and is almost always only ever used in the context of a single phrase, Id argue that its original meaning is obsolescent.

Would you go for a ****y?

Id argue that its original meaning is obsolescent.

Except as aracer pointed out, a search of this forum shows lots of people using those "obsolescent" meanings and no one using the derogatory one (outside of threads like this discussing it).

if any of you lot are married (of which I doubt) I bet your wives/girlfriends ****ing love it when you leave the house.

I'll take that as a suitable expansion of my point 3.

So, I was right! See? I'm right and EVERYONE else is WRONG!

😉

watching jism dry on the carpet is far far more interesting.

#strangest 😆

All I can say is that if J*remy Cl*rkson pulled his Ford Transit off the road into a drainage-channel so as to hurriedly Tweet a picture of a chinese soldier statue along with the label 'Chink in his armour' ...

...this would automatically (if not irrevocably) alter the meaning of 'Dick Van Dyke'. Language is fluid. Sometimes lubricant. Sometimes brake fluid. Sometimes liquid shite.

I thankyew. This thread is over.

So, I was right! See? I'm right and EVERYONE else is WRONG!

I'm not sure you are. I'm going to find some dodgy wiki quotes to prove you wrong.

"Except as aracer pointed out, a search of this forum shows lots of people using those "obsolescent" meanings and no one using the derogatory one (outside of threads like this discussing it)."

Got the numbers? Ive never heard it used unless in the context of that single ohrase.

Would you use the term ****y?

It falls in the 'if you have to ask' category for me - but I do wonder about national identity tags in general.

Is kraut derogatory?
Yank?
Saffa?
Jap?

In many cases the word yank or kraut could be used in a derogatory statement, i.e., 'trust the bloodys yanks to commit friendly fire' - yet unless I'm mistaken, Yank is a commonly used inoffensive term amongst American people and the rest of the world, used to shorthand 'american'
Are single syllable monikers somehow immune?

It's fascinating to me that there are so many acceptable shorthands amongst a few dubious ones that no-one seems to be certain about.

The weirdest one for me is ****, which the English managed to recycle as a derogatory term - yet ****stani's regularly refer to themselves as ****'s without any negative connotation attached, and rightly so - it being an abrivieation of '****stan'
I feel a little joy every time I see ****stani cricket fans holding up placards stating '**** Power!'

[quote=Tom_W1987 ]Given that the original use of the term chink is only found widely in old english and is almost always only ever used in the context of a single phrase

<only replying because we've not yet beaten mumsnet>

Graham's comment needs expanding on slightly - if any of those wanting to ban "chink" had bothered to follow my suggestion and do a search they'd find it being used in at least 3 different ways (chink of light, chink in the armour, chink of coins in a pocket).

[quote=Tom_W1987 ]Got the numbers?
Would you use the term ****ly?

Why don't [b]you[/b] try searching to see. I even gave handy links a few pages back if you can't cope with using the search on here or google all by yourself. Your second point is irrelevant to the discussion - as I pointed out to CM what seems like years ago, my very first post on here was to support his suggest that n**** could be added to the swear filter without causing any harm as there are no alternate non-offensive uses.

[I]ton - Member
watching jism dry on the carpet is far far more interesting. [/I]

How uncharacteristically descriptive of you!

[I]CaptainFlashheart - Member

So, I was right! See? I'm right and EVERYONE else is WONG![/I]

Isn't "[I]Nip[/I]" just a truncation of "[I]Nippon[/I]"?

Anyway, inbeforethelock!
8)

Solo,

[img] [/img]

Tips Stetson towards deadlydarcy then *chink chink chink*...walks out of the room.

Or how CM would want to see that old post.

Tips Stetson towards deadlydarcy then * * ****...walks out of the room.

LOL ^^

Aracer - you're neglecting to use context in your argument. No one is saying that a chink of armour should be abolished from the dictionary

CM and now Tom (though I'm now wondering if there is any difference...) appear to think the word should be banned. For all uses, because one very minor one (which doesn't ever seem to be used on here) is offensive.

Isn't "Nip" just a truncation of "Nippon"?

Interesting, and as Britons don't mind being referred to as Brits, are Nippons offended by Nip?
Confused.
Must be a context thing again.

Apologies aracer - I didn't have enough context to hand.

[I]slimjim78 - Member
Must be a context thing again. [/I]

Just as Cougar was trying to explain, much, much, very, much earlier.

Tom_W1987 » Got the numbers?

I'm sure you can use google but here are a few examples to get you started:

"Shite buckets - bike stolen, but a little chink of positive"
- from http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/shite-buckets-bike-stolen-but-a-little-chink-of-positive

"+1 for a solar eclipse. I went to Portland Bill in 99 for the UK one and we got lucky as a small chink opened up in the clouds just before totality. BIG CHEER."
- from http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/wow-things-that-actually-did-make-you-go-wow#post-4663947

"Can't imagine the sense of hope that seeing that chink of light in what was starting to look like an ever darkening tunnel must feel like."
- from http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/so-ive-just-found-out-i-too-have-cancer/page/5#post-8351407

" If I have coins in my shorts the constant 'chink-chink-chink-arrghbastudlog-chink-chink-oolookasquirrel!' gets on me tits."
- from http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/man-bags-not-really#post-2667998

"country pub, went in during (tandem ) ride to get a drink, studiously ignored for a long time, eventually served when another customer commented on how expensive tandems were (= chink chink for pub). "
- from http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/smelly-cyclists#post-1884007

"Tips Stetson towards deadlydarcy then *chink chink chink*...walks out of the room"
- from http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/so-i-now-own-a-pair-of-cowboy-boots-anyone-else-is-this-the-start-of-the-end/page/2#post-1457894

Would you use the term ****ly?

Nope. I have no idea what it is and it's not in the OED. And I've already said that I agreed with CM that the N-word seems like a reasonable candidate for the swear filter as it doesn't really seem to have any alternative non-offensive meanings.

Aracer - you're neglecting to use context in your argument. No one is saying that a chink of armour should be abolished from the dictionary

Charlie is suggesting it should be added to the swear filter regardless of meaning or context and Tom seems to agree.

watching jism dry on the carpet is far far more interesting.

You say that but ... aaahhh .... yesss .... in fact you're correct.