very off the wall but just been walking my dog and an old lady in the park calling to her (loaner) black lab “Nigg’s”, I really didn’t like to ask her to elaborate.
Just weird, as I wouldn’t have even given it a moment thought without this thread.

Did we learn nothing about racial harmony from Leathal Weapon 2.

Which goes back to my original point – people didn’t call their dogs **** because they were racist, they called them it because it was simply a popular dog’s name at the time.

So your contention is that it was used as a name for black dogs and as a derogatory name for black people – but that was pure coincidence?

Even if I bought that, and I’m not sure I do, it is still and interesting historical context and still a point that is worth talking about rather than masking over.

Hang on, I got lost on page 2.
Is Professor Griff a real Professor or what?

Dr Fox is twice as bad if you ask me, being neither a Doctor, or indeed a Fox.

So your contention is that it was used as a name for black dogs and as a derogatory name for black people – but that was pure coincidence?

Not co-incidence no, as they both refer to something that is black, the point being that it was a popular name for black dogs. Like jet or sooty or shadow or blackie or ebony or inkie or…

Or are you suggesting that people called their dear companions a derogatory term because they hated black people so much?

EDIT: They called them **** because of the original connection with the word black
The variants neger and negar, derive from the Spanish and Portuguese word negro (black), and from the pejorative French nègre (****). Etymologically, negro, noir, nègre, and **** ultimately derive from nigrum, the stem of the Latin niger (black) (pronounced [?ni?er] which, in every other grammatical case, grammatical gender, and grammatical number besides nominative masculine singular, is nigr-, the r is trilled).

It’s not like the dog is that key to the story, apart from getting run over just before the raid and gettings it’s name used as the codeword for a successful breach,it didn’t do much, it’s not like it flew one of that damn planes or owt.

It’s not even as if the damn dog was black anyway, oh hang on……bugger

Of course I do you cretin.

Oh, so a black person calling another black person ‘****’ in an ironic manner is the same as using a derogatory term for black people as the name for a dog is the same, is it? Oh, right…

Interesting that you seem to imply I have some form of mental disability simply because I suggested you possibly don’t fully understand an issue…

Ok, seeing as how there are quite a few hard of thinking and culturally ignorant people on here, i’ll try to explain…

Right, we’ll start with this:

people didn’t call their dogs **** because they were racist, they called them it because it was simply a popular dog’s name at the time

Whist this may well have been true, many people in that period would not have met or encountered any black people in their lives. So, they would have been pretty ignorant of any terms which might possibly have actually been offensive to the very people the words were used to describe.

The word ‘****’ is a biologically determinate expression; a word used to describe someone based purely on the colour of their skin. The term dates back to times when black people were victims of slavery. It was a word used to describe not even people, but objects, possessions, currency.

Of course it’s origins are purely descriptive; it just means, ultimately, ‘black’.

However, a ‘****’, in Western Anglophone society, was seen as sub-human by many white people. In a very similar manner to how the Nazis saw Jews, inferior to the pure Aryan race.

So, calling a dog ‘****’ may have been likened to comparing a black person to a dog; an inferior species, subservient to Man, something without equal rights with other people. Little more than a possession, a plaything.

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

So, changing the name of a dog in a film, in consideration to the fact our society has changed somewhat, isn’t really ‘PC Gawn Mayd’, it’s just a polite concession to the fact we’re all equal, surely? TBH, I doubt most black people I know would be all that bothered, and some might even say ‘why change facts’, but there you go. It’s not a big deal really, is it? ‘Digger’ is fine, surely? ‘****’ might make people feel uncomfortable, because of the association with the historical treatment of and struggle for emancipation by black people throughout the Globe.

So, don’t let it worry you.

I wonder how many on here crying ‘ooh why change history’ are actually black themselves?

As for Snoop Dog etc;

Black people re-appropriated the word ‘****’ to use amongst themselves, in an ironic manner. Take away the hate in a word, and it becomes innocuous, even a term of affection. It no longer causes pain in the way it once did. See also ‘Queer’ amongst homosexual people. But people from outside that ethnic group using the word is in variably in an insulting and derogatory manner.

Hope

This

Helps.

So, calling a dog ‘****’ may have been likened to comparing a black person to a dog; an inferior species, subservient to Man, something without equal rights with other people. Little more than a possession, a plaything.

‘may’

Purely supposition there Elfin.

Elfinsafety – Member

Of course I do you cretin.

Oh, so a black person calling another black person ‘****’ in an ironic manner …

I can’t believe there’s anybody who’s even only slightly educated, who doesn’t know all this as simple general knowledge.

I’m glad you typed it. I wouldn’t have had the patience.

TuckerUK – Member

It’s probably not possible to be less PC than me, I try to avoid being PC at all costs.

Really? Seems a bit weird to base your own position so much on the opinions of others.

Yes, Listen to Elfin, he’s one of them.

I try to avoid being PC at all costs.

Even when you know it’s the right thing to do?

Listen to Elfin, he’s one of them.

A Nazi sympathising labrador?

I’m glad you typed it. I wouldn’t have had the patience.

Merely trying to bring light where previously there was darkness…

‘may’
Purely supposition there Elfin.

Of course. But I’m just trying to consider the reaction of a modern audience to something they may have little understanding of. And the subsequent need for lengthy explanation to try to avoid confusion and angry reaction.

Merely trying to bring light where previously there was darkness…

Oh right! Get rid of Darkiness now is it!!!?

Racist!

A Nazi sympathising labrador?

I see myself as more of a cat person….

Agreed with Elf – can’t see that changing it is a big deal really. We live in more enlightened times (one hopes) so why not avoid the needless upsetting of sensibilities? The name of a dog in the context of the story is a piffling detail.

Totally irrelevant, but there is a similarly named cat in a rather good story called ‘The Rats in the Walls’ (1924) by H.P. Lovecraft – I commend it to all connoisseurs’ of gothic horror.

Take away the hate in a word, and it becomes innocuous, even a term of affection

And there’s the rub. It’s not the word, it’s the intent.

so why not avoid the needless upsetting of sensibilities?

It appears that is not possible

The name of a dog in the context of the story is a piffling detail

You’d have thought so… 🙄

And there’s the rub. It’s not the word, it’s the intent.

And backhander should know, he was in tents when he was in the army.

that is all.

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 ‘****’ 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 ****”. 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?

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 intended with any malice.
It was just what everyone 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 Pakistan 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 Pakistani 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?

“You used to call us ‘****’…”

“No we didn’t. We said.. umm… “diggers” .. yeah because.. err… we really dug your clothes…”

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. 🙂

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?

you are referring to the style of food sold there not the racial origins of the owners. I go for an Indian this does not make me a racist going for an Indian from the **** may make me racist or ignorant or blunt and certainly stupid – not very good at geography or the schism between the two countries

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

Not sure why you think it is offensive to not call a dog **** in a film. Could you explain why this is offensive? We are hardly rewriting history here or denying the holocaust are we.

Twoundred! 😀

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdo79znnHl8[/video]