‘Pakis' and ‘porkies' – life in a Moslem ‘ghetto' in Yorkshire
halcombe
Manningham is a Pakistani ghetto in Bradford, and one of the few areas
in Britain approaching levels of segregation in, say, 1950s Chicago.
Other ethnic groups have to stick together. It seems [1] that they
call themselves ‘porkies' – for obvious reasons.
[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1073698,00.html
John Dean
> The terms are new on me.
>
> Manningham is a Pakistani ghetto in Bradford, and one of the few areas
> in Britain approaching levels of segregation in, say, 1950s Chicago.
>
> Other ethnic groups have to stick together. It seems [1] that they
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1073698,00.html
Both terms? 'Porkies' is new to me, but 'Pakis' has been around for half a
century.
Why would you, BTW, say it is a 'ghetto'? Is Hampstead a white ghetto?
And even the Guardian article only goes so far as to say 'predominantly
Asian ... Pakistani and Bengali ...'. Why would you single out Pakistani?
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
Ross Howard
<john...@frag.lineone.net> wrought:
Is the OP a Northerner? Much as I gather all Chinese, Koreans,
Vietnamese etc. are unfortunately often all grouped as "chinks" and
"slopes" over to our left, anybody of Indian-subcontinent extraction
is unfortunately usually referred to as a "Paki" oop Nahth -- even
Sikhs, Sri Lankans, etc.
Ah, anyone with a vaguely Russian surname is a "Ukey", too. (Except
Poles, who are, er, "Poles". My childhood barber -- whose
shop/salon/styling centre was in Lees, nr. Oldham -- was known as "Joe
the Pole", 'cause he was -- and, yes, he had a striped one.)
--
Ross Howard
david56
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 16:26:33 -0000, "John Dean"
> <john...@frag.lineone.net> wrought:
>
> >halcombe wrote:
> >> The terms are new on me.
> >>
> >> Manningham is a Pakistani ghetto in Bradford, and one of the few areas
> >> in Britain approaching levels of segregation in, say, 1950s Chicago.
> >>
> >> Other ethnic groups have to stick together. It seems [1] that they
> >> call themselves 'porkies' - for obvious reasons.
> >>
> >> [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1073698,00.html
> >
> >Both terms? 'Porkies' is new to me, but 'Pakis' has been around for half a
> >century.
> >Why would you, BTW, say it is a 'ghetto'? Is Hampstead a white ghetto?
> >And even the Guardian article only goes so far as to say 'predominantly
> >Asian ... Pakistani and Bengali ...'. Why would you single out Pakistani?
>
> Is the OP a Northerner? Much as I gather all Chinese, Koreans,
> Vietnamese etc. are unfortunately often all grouped as "chinks" and
> "slopes" over to our left, anybody of Indian-subcontinent extraction
> is unfortunately usually referred to as a "Paki" oop Nahth -- even
> Sikhs, Sri Lankans, etc.
I'm not convinced it's a Northern thing. More like white, working
class, city inhabitants (if we're going to pigeonhole people).
We have also to note that most UK Indian restaurants are run by
Bengalis, not some sort of generic "Indian".
> Ah, anyone with a vaguely Russian surname is a "Ukey", too.
I never heard that.
--
David
=====
Ross Howard
<bass.c...@ntlworld.com> wrought:
>> Ah, anyone with a vaguely Russian surname is a "Ukey", too.
>
>I never heard that.
Post-war Oldham had a relatively large Ukranian community. When I were
a teenager me and me mates we used to go down to t' Ukey Club a lot
like for a few swift 'alves of mild, cause they weren't right fussed
about yer age. (Polkas a-go-go, too.)
--
Ross Howard
R F
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, halcombe wrote:
> Manningham is a Pakistani ghetto in Bradford, and one of the few areas
> in Britain approaching levels of segregation in, say, 1950s Chicago.
BTW, when I first m*ved to Chicago I expressed shock and horror at how
racially segregated it was, but I've since found that it's not actually as
racially segregated as it seemed at first to be, at least with respect to
neighborhoods or sections that are not predominantly African-American.
As for ethnic segregation, I have the disturbing sense that Chicago
combines both extremist assimilationism with a possibly self-imposed
segregation by certain minority ethnic groups, in a way that just wouldn't
happen Beeack Home. This seems to be characteristic of the whole Midwest.
John Dean
>
> Ah, anyone with a vaguely Russian surname is a "Ukey", too. (Except
> Poles, who are, er, "Poles". My childhood barber -- whose
> shop/salon/styling centre was in Lees, nr. Oldham -- was known as "Joe
> the Pole", 'cause he was -- and, yes, he had a striped one.)
I don't wish to know that, kindly leave the post-Freudian discussion group.
Stanislaus aka Stan the Man, foreman at the local bakery where I picked up
some Uni vacation spending money, was known behind his back as 'The Sausage
Roll' which, as a combination of rhyming slang and vocational and physical
stereotyping, wasn't bad for the 60s.
Adrian Bailey
news:d7fa3848.03103...@posting.google.com...
> The terms are new on me.
>
> Manningham is a Pakistani ghetto in Bradford, and one of the few areas
> in Britain approaching levels of segregation in, say, 1950s Chicago.
Have you ever been to Easington?
> Other ethnic groups have to stick together.
What do you mean by "have to"?
> It seems [1] that they
> call themselves 'porkies' - for obvious reasons.
Including Jews?
Adrian
Pat Durkin
"R F" <rfon...@alumni.wesleyan.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.53.03...@alumni.wesleyan.edu...
So, Richard. You are saying that the ethnic neighborhoods of New York
didn't exist?
Actually, Spanish Harlem is all that I can think of right now. Oh, yes...
Chinatowns all over the country. And isn't there a district in NY where San
Gennaro rules? Isn't there an entire town in Connecticut or Massachusetts
almost ruled by ultra-conservative Jews. And don't forget the Hamptons. On
LauraNorder they mentioned a location overrun by Russian mafiosi. Brighton
Beach?
Don't people new to a country or city find they are more comfortable living
amongst their fellows? I mean, aside from the ghetto-ization caused by low
income/low rents and other outside forces. Where in the Midwest does your
characterization hold true, as differentiated from almost any other area?
Let me know if I have misunderstood your description of self-imposed
segregation. I realize that at times I get emotional to the point of
missing a point.
Charles Riggs
wrote:
> Much as I gather all Chinese, Koreans,
>Vietnamese etc. are unfortunately often all grouped as "chinks" and
>"slopes" over to our left, anybody of Indian-subcontinent extraction
>is unfortunately usually referred to as a "Paki" oop Nahth -- even
>Sikhs, Sri Lankans, etc.
A Korean or a Vietnamese being referred to, or called, a Chink? I
don't think that would be correct usage. I haven't heard it, anyway.
--
Charles Riggs
R F
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Pat Durkin wrote:
> > As for ethnic segregation, I have the disturbing sense that Chicago
> > combines both extremist assimilationism with a possibly self-imposed
> > segregation by certain minority ethnic groups, in a way that just wouldn't
> > happen Beeack Home. This seems to be characteristic of the whole Midwest.
>
> So, Richard. You are saying that the ethnic neighborhoods of New York
> didn't exist?
They did, and many do. But they're different: they're *open*. Not
closed, isolated, hidden, removed, sanitized, whitewashed. I may not be
expressing this well, but there *is* a difference.
> Actually, Spanish Harlem is all that I can think of right now. Oh, yes...
> Chinatowns all over the country.
Especially Out West. Chicago has a Chinatown, supposedly, but it's hidden
away somewhere. New York's Chinatown is conveniently located between the
upper part of Lower Manhattan and the lower part of Lower Manhattan. Then
there's Flushing.
> And isn't there a district in NY where San
> Gennaro rules? Isn't there an entire town in Connecticut or Massachusetts
> almost ruled by ultra-conservative Jews.
There's a district in New York where they have a "San Gennaro Festival",
but this is strictly for the outoftowners and tourists. Typically you
have some people pretending to be Italian selling some substandard
sausage 'n' peppers heroes. Anyone who has to go to a street festival for
sausage 'n' peppers is not on the right path. You can quote me on that.
> And don't forget the Hamptons.
The Hamptons is more like the Midwest, or was, in that it was segregated:
Southampton was where the WASPs went, and Easthampton was where the Jews
went because they weren't allowed in Southampton. People considered even
more undesirable (like my relatives) had to settle for Hampton Bays. You
might not know this, as it may be inapplicable to a Great Lakes
setting, but a bay is *always* inferior. You can quote me on that too.
(Why are bays inferior? Because they have no waves.)
Because 98% of the white folks in Chicago have light blond hair and
vaguely Nordic features, and because of the odd reference here and there
to Goethe and Schiller, it's occurred to me that all of Chicago may be
one gigantic German ethnic neighborhood and I just don't realize it. In
New York in my day, though not in my parents' day, German-Americans were
sort of semi-invisible, I believe as a result of the effect of the two
Wars. I wonder whether something similar happened in cities like Chicago
where German-American communities were, if anything, larger in
proportion. Nevertheless, if Chicago is one gigantic German ethnic
neighborhood, where then are all the nize German bakeries? (Where, for
example, one might purchase a Bavarian?)
> On
> LauraNorder they mentioned a location overrun by Russian mafiosi. Brighton
> Beach?
So they say. Of course I'm old enough to remember Brighton Beach when it
was just a Pre-Soviet Russian Jewish neighborhood. That was before the
'Eighties. (See also N. Simon's _Brighton Beach Memoirs_.) I tend not
to do the right thing (unlike Spike Lee[TM]) and voice my criticism of
television's overdoing it with the "Russian mafiosi/Brighton Beach"
thing, since they do it partly because of the grand success of the
Anti-Italiansploitation Movement. I thought _Without A Trace_ really went
too far last week or two when they mentioned going through police
photographs of "scary-looking middle-aged Russian guys with beards", or
something along those lines. At least you don't see too much anti-Islamic
or anti-Arab stuff on TV, which I think you would have years ago had
the nine-eleven attacks taken place beeack then, and in fact TV
has been pretty active in injecting anti-anti-Arab stuff into episodic
drama.
Pat Durkin
"R F" <rfon...@alumni.wesleyan.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.53.03...@alumni.wesleyan.edu...
>
>
> > > As for ethnic segregation, I have the disturbing sense that Chicago
> > > combines both extremist assimilationism with a possibly self-imposed
> > > segregation by certain minority ethnic groups, in a way that just
wouldn't
> > > happen Beeack Home. This seems to be characteristic of the whole
Midwest.
> >
> > So, Richard. You are saying that the ethnic neighborhoods of New York
> > didn't exist?
>
> They did, and many do. But they're different: they're *open*. Not
> closed, isolated, hidden, removed, sanitized, whitewashed. I may not be
> expressing this well, but there *is* a difference.
But, (as I beat the dead horse) what examples of minority ethnic groups with
a "possibly self-imposed segregation" or extremist assimilationism can you
refer us to in the whole Midwest?
If an ethnic group like a Chinatown lures tourists into their areas, then it
is no longer a hidden area. But if a neighborhood does not draw attention
to itself through crime or exotic atmosphere and architecture, or a music
culture that grabs the attention of the US media, then it is "closed,
isolated, etc."
I really don't see you have stated any difference at all. You may be
ignoring a difference of scale, however. There are hundreds of small towns
across the nation with their own little ethnic neighborhoods. Those ethnic
minorities often center their displays of culture and ethnic pride in their
churches and community centers, and at bazaars and folk fests. I expect
that driving through the areas, one would not know of their existence. So
many of them, you know, lived in houses very much like ours.
(I should probably point out that in my very mixed neighborhood you can
identify a number of residences as Tibetan. For some reason the 3 or 4
houses--out of 200--where they live have banners or scarves over the doors
and at some windows.)
Well, and what is extremist assimilationism, pray tell? How does it differ
from normal, run-of-the-mill gradual assimilation of the tiny minorities by
majority?
Sara Moffat Lorimer
Is there any point in posting follow-up questions to halcombe? (Straight
question.)
--
SML
ess el five six zero at columbia dot edu
http://pirate-women.com
R F
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Pat Durkin wrote:
> But, (as I beat the dead horse) what examples of minority ethnic groups with
> a "possibly self-imposed segregation" or extremist assimilationism can you
> refer us to in the whole Midwest?
Okay, just take the obvious case of Jewish communities. I mean,
this is something I knew about long before I moved away from
th'East Coast. There's a really blatant difference between Jewish
communities in cities in the Midwest and Jewish communities on th'East
Coast (or at least in the New York area), and it goes to this
self-imposed (maybe historically non-self-imposed) segregation thing.
This is so obvious to me that I don't really know how to explain it
without just saying that it's obvious. In New York Jewish culture is
completely *there*, everywhere. It *defines* what mainstream culture is.
There's no true self-imposed segregation because there's nothing to
segregate from, whatever may have been the case 100 years ago. Now, does
this have to do with Jews making up a larger percentage of the New York
area population than the Chicago area population? I don't even know if
that's true. This isn't limited to Chicago; it seems to be true of
Detroit, Cleveland, Milwaukee, based on my exposure to persons from those
places.
> If an ethnic group like a Chinatown lures tourists into their areas, then it
> is no longer a hidden area. But if a neighborhood does not draw attention
> to itself through crime or exotic atmosphere and architecture, or a music
> culture that grabs the attention of the US media, then it is "closed,
> isolated, etc."
I don't know. I feel that there's some basic difference between Chicago
and New York in this regard. These are very similar cities,
superficially, note, so I can focus on these subtle sorts of distinctions.
> Well, and what is extremist assimilationism, pray tell? How does it differ
> from normal, run-of-the-mill gradual assimilation of the tiny minorities by
> majority?
I don't know, but this goes to the essence of how Chicago *feels*
different from New York. Everyone seems *the same* here, in way that's
hard to explain. I'm reminded of the "melting pot" metaphor and how
former New York mayor David Dinkins (First African-American Mayor of New
York) referred to New York as a "gorgeous mosaic". In Chicago *there's no
mosaic*. Everyone's assimilated to some sort of uniform Midwestern norm,
whether they realize it or not. (Recent immigrant groups, such as the
large Mexican community, are an important exception, but one that proves
the rule, as they say.) I don't know, maybe I'm just misperceiving
something. Chicago seems almost like a *European* city, for Reysake. You
know, how you want to say, "Where *is* everybody?"?
There's something ironic or contradictory in all this, in that you seem to
have hyper-assimilationism combined with self-imposed segregation of
certain groups with sufficiently distinct cultural identities. In New
York you have anti-assimilationism, basically, as the core of the urban
culture, yet you also don't really have the same sort of self-imposed
segregationism.
Evan Kirshenbaum
I have. People who dislike all Asians are often remarkably bad at
making distinctions among them.
This, for some reason, reminds me of the WWII _Time Magazine_ bit,
"How to tell your friends from the Japs", which detailed ways of
distinguishing Chinese and Japanese people. Ah. The Web comes
through again.
http://www.josephluk.com/scrapbook/time1941/howtotell-bw.pdf
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |A handgun is like a Lawyer. You
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |don't want it lying around where
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |the children might be exposed to
|it, but when you need one, you need
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |it RIGHT NOW, and nothing else will
(650)857-7572 |do.
| Bill McNutt
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
[...]
> Okay, just take the obvious case of Jewish communities. I mean,
> this is something I knew about long before I moved away from
> th'East Coast. There's a really blatant difference between Jewish
> communities in cities in the Midwest and Jewish communities on th'East
> Coast (or at least in the New York area), and it goes to this self-
> imposed (maybe historically non-self-imposed) segregation thing.
> This is so obvious to me that I don't really know how to explain it
> without just saying that it's obvious. In New York Jewish culture is
> completely *there*, everywhere. It *defines* what mainstream culture
> is. There's no true self-imposed segregation because there's nothing to
> segregate from, whatever may have been the case 100 years ago.
[...]
Richard, I'm surprised that you haven't mentioned a very segregated
Jewish community in your former neighborhood: New Square, N.Y., in
Rockland County. One of the posters had asked for such information,
but in your replies you didn't mention that city.
You ought to remember that this Jewish community was in the national
news, because in 2001, on his last day in office, the super-corrupt
whore Bill Clinton pardoned four Jewish men from that place who had
defrauded the U.S. Government and had been convicted of having stolen
federal housing subsidies worth about $40 million.
On August 7, 2000, Hillary "The Criminal Bitch" Clinton visited New
Square during her Senate campaign. In order to get the Jewish vote
for his so-called wife, that immoral scumbag Bubba pardoned the four
criminals a few hours before he left office on January 20, 2001 --
thus deviously bypassing the usual pardon procedures and reviews --
and thereby helped buy Hillary's election. (Liberals are still
whining about Bush allegedly having stolen the election, but those
shameless bastards don't say one word about Hillary's election, which
was blatantly bought by her fellow criminal, Bubba, the presidential arch-swine.)
Anyway, English-language-wise, my interest is in that city's name, New
Square. Do you know why they gave it that strange name? Because the
sect living there are *Skver* Hasidim, whose name is pronounced almost
identical with *square*. How does the average, Yiddish-speaking Hasid
pronounce "square"? -- "Skver." You're velcome.
--
Reinhold (Rey) Aman
Tony Cooper
(Sara Moffat Lorimer) wrote:
>Is there any point in posting follow-up questions to halcombe? (Straight
>question.)
About as much point as there in trying to figure out Richard's
"serious question"s.
R F
I ask no "serious" questions. I sometimes ask "straight questions", a tip
of the chapeau to P*lar.
Halcombe is a very odd character, one of a long line of eccentric
Englishmen. But that's about all we know about him. I think he has good
intentions.
R J Valentine
} On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Pat Durkin wrote:
...
}> So, Richard. You are saying that the ethnic neighborhoods of New York
}> didn't exist?
}
} They did, and many do. But they're different: they're *open*. Not
} closed, isolated, hidden, removed, sanitized, whitewashed. I may not be
} expressing this well, but there *is* a difference.
...
Could it be that it's the non-ethnic neighborhoods that aren't so open?
Wasn't there someone a few years back spotted walking through one?
(Boward Heach springs to mind, but I may have something crossed.)
--
R. J. Valentine <mailto:somethin...@wicked.smart.net>
R F
On Sat, 1 Nov 2003, R J Valentine wrote:
> Could it be that it's the non-ethnic neighborhoods that aren't so open?
> Wasn't there someone a few years back spotted walking through one?
> (Boward Heach springs to mind, but I may have something crossed.)
I've never been to Howard Beach (unless you count IDL), but my
sense is that it isn't or wasn't an ethnic neighborhood, yes. You could
be right about that. But there it's more like you're talking about a
totally isolated, remote place. I mean, I'm not really thinking about
Staten Island either.
Anyway, that was a million years ago, too.
Charles Riggs
<kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>Charles Riggs <chr...@eircom.net> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 18:50:52 +0100, Ross Howard <ggu...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Much as I gather all Chinese, Koreans, Vietnamese etc. are
>> >unfortunately often all grouped as "chinks" and "slopes" over to
>> >our left, anybody of Indian-subcontinent extraction is
>> >unfortunately usually referred to as a "Paki" oop Nahth -- even
>> >Sikhs, Sri Lankans, etc.
>>
>> A Korean or a Vietnamese being referred to, or called, a Chink? I
>> don't think that would be correct usage. I haven't heard it, anyway.
>
>I have. People who dislike all Asians are often remarkably bad at
>making distinctions among them.
True. I've also found that people who haven't known a number of Asians
tend to think they all look alike, even if they don't dislike one
group of them or another, extending to having trouble differentiating
individuals within one group. Similarly so for Caucasians who haven't
known a number of Negroes. Some Blacks, I've been told, think Whites
all look alike. So it goes.
--
Charles Riggs