Is it illegal to call somebody a Chink?

[Svenne]

I'm doing some work renovating and modding some old Dell C6100 servers
and a lot of the spare parts come from China. All good quality and cheap
stuff. The people I'm working with refer to the Chinese parts as "the
Chink connecter" or "the Chink card" and I got to wondering, is this
illegal.

Maybe not for a computer card, but what if you called a Chinese person a
Chink? Could you be prosecuted? I don't think you could be prosecuted for
calling an American a Yank or, as I'm sometimes referred to over here, a
Britt. but what about Chink? Why should that be worse than Yank?

[burfordTjustice]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:38:28 -0000 (UTC)
Svenne <sve...@ingenstans.com> wrote:

> From: Svenne <sve...@ingenstans.com>
> Subject: Is it illegal to call somebody a Chink?
> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:38:28 -0000 (UTC)
> User-Agent: Pan/0.139 (Sexual Chocolate; GIT bf56508
> git://git.gnome.org/pan2)
> Newsgroups: uk.legal
> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider

chink1
/CHiNGk/
noun

noun: chink; plural noun: chinks

a narrow opening or crack, typically one that admits light.
"a chink in the curtains"

synonyms: opening, gap, space, hole, aperture, crack, fissure, crevice, cranny, cleft, split, slit, slot
"a chink in the curtains"

•a patch of light admitted by a narrow opening or crack.
"I noticed a chink of light under the door"

[Anarcho Dweeb]

granted a degree by the age of 15, that was what i wasn't to understand

[GB]

Is Chink derogatory? I don't think Yank or Brit is, so I'm not sure
that you are comparing like with like.

[AndyW]

It all depends on how people regard it.

Brit is pretty neutral but I know Americans who hate Yank as a term
particularly if they come from the southern states.

As a Scot I am OK with Scot, less so with Scotch and Jock, even less so
with porridge wog and Jocktard.
With everything it depends on how it is used, I call my mate Chink (he
is not Chinese, he is Thai but it is part of a private joke) but I would
never call anyone else it unless I was 100% it was OK and I would never
use it as a general term or as an adjective to describe something far
eastern. I call my mate a mincing poof but I would never use it for any
other gay bloke and never as a general term. not unless I wanted a good
kicking.... with fabulous shoes.

Andy

[GB]

There are lots of similar ones. Aussie is, as far as I know, completely
neutral, like Brit. I'm not sure that Chink is derogatory. If it is not
derogatory, then I can't see it being illegal to use it, particularly
referring to PC components.

[Svenne]

I've never understood Yank or Brit to be derogatory but somehow Chink
sounds like it might be. I don't think it should be derogatory but it's
in the same class as Paki, which I'm pretty sure is derogatory.

[Svenne]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 12:32:22 +0000, GB wrote:

Yank and Brit aren't derogatory but Chink sounds like it might be, a bit
like Paki which I'm pretty sure is derogatory. Perhaps you could even be
charged with an offense for using the term Paki. All of them are the same
class of term for an identifiable group and in that way should be equally
as value neutral. I don't see why using any of them should be an offense,
if any of them actually are an offense.

[Bod]

Being called a Limey/white honky/snowflake etc doesn't bother me at all.
Why ethnics get upset over a word is beyond me. Especially as Paki is
short for Pakistani, as is Brit short for British.
It's all PC nonsense IMO.

[GB]

On 15/02/2017 16:37, Bod wrote:

> Being called a Limey/white honky/snowflake etc doesn't bother me at all.
> Why ethnics get upset over a word is beyond me. Especially as Paki is
> short for Pakistani, as is Brit short for British.
> It's all PC nonsense IMO.

The Pakistan ambassador's residence is not far from me, and they have
their car outside with the PAK 1 number plate.

However, the term Paki is commonly used in a rude way, like yid. If you
come and call me a yid, you may find I take a swing at you. You imply
those terms are the same as Limey or Pom, but that's clearly a mistake.

[Ophelia]

"Bod" wrote in message news:egjedp...@mid.individual.net...

====

Of course! But that doesn't take into account those who are looking to take
offence ... at anything and everything mostly!
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

[James Wilkinson Sword]

You need context to work out if it's rude. Everyone round here goes to the chinky to buy food. They obviously don't hate them or they wouldn't eat there.

--
"Why do the birds fly south to Africa in the autumn?"
"Because it's too far for them to walk."

[James Wilkinson Sword]

+1

--
Basic Flying Rules: "Try to stay in the middle of the air. Do not go near the edges of it. The edges of the air can be recognized by the appearance of ground, buildings, sea, trees and interstellar space. It is much more difficult to fly there."

[GB]

On 15/02/2017 17:01, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:45:22 -0000, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15/02/2017 16:37, Bod wrote:
>>
>>> Being called a Limey/white honky/snowflake etc doesn't bother me at all.
>>> Why ethnics get upset over a word is beyond me. Especially as Paki is
>>> short for Pakistani, as is Brit short for British.
>>> It's all PC nonsense IMO.
>>
>>
>> The Pakistan ambassador's residence is not far from me, and they have
>> their car outside with the PAK 1 number plate.
>>
>> However, the term Paki is commonly used in a rude way, like yid. If you
>> come and call me a yid, you may find I take a swing at you. You imply
>> those terms are the same as Limey or Pom, but that's clearly a mistake.
>
> You need context to work out if it's rude. Everyone round here goes to
> the chinky to buy food. They obviously don't hate them or they wouldn't
> eat there.
>

If you go to the local curry house and call them Pakis, you'd do well
not to eat the food they serve you.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

We have a few around here, they don't class it as rude. No more than them calling me a "white boy".

--
If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?

[GB]

On 15/02/2017 16:53, Ophelia wrote:

> Of course! But that doesn't take into account those who are looking to
> take offence ... at anything and everything mostly!

You hate it when people point out how incredibly stupid you are. Are you
just "looking to take offence"?

[GB]

On 15/02/2017 17:10, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

>> If you go to the local curry house and call them Pakis, you'd do well
>> not to eat the food they serve you.
>
> We have a few around here, they don't class it as rude. No more than
> them calling me a "white boy".
>

Of course, they don't get into a slanging match with you. They are more
subtle than that.

Never had any ill effects at all?

[James Wilkinson Sword]

I eat proper British food. I've done electrical work for pakis though.

--
How do you confuse a blonde?
You don't. They're born that way.

[Caecilius]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 12:32:22 +0000, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com>
wrote:

A lot depends on context: who is saying it, where they are saying it,
the tone, etc.

In Australia, the Pakistani cricket team are called "the pakis" I
believe, and that's not considered derogatory. But it is in many
situations in the UK, and I wouldn't use the term.

Rappers use the "N word", but I wouldn't use it in any context.

I've heard people in the pub saying things like "oi, wanker, what are
you having?" and it's obviously a bit of fun. Equally obviously, I
wouldn't use that term when addressing any of them.

I've seen someone use "Chink" in an obviously racist way: shouting
"oi, you chinky bastard" in the street. But I've used it with Chinese
relatives in a jokey way.

A lot of it is common sense. But there always seem to be some people
who insist on the right to say obviously offensive things; and some at
the other extreme who seem to take offense (often on behalf of others)
at things that are not offensive in the situation.

[Bod]

On 15/02/2017 16:53, Ophelia wrote:

Exactly.

[Bod]

That makes no sense. Ophelia has just inferred that she doesn't take
offence.

[Altroy1]

Law is the study of causation, proximity and effect. The duty of care
arises from the legal concept the neighbour principle. Who is my legal
neighbour? They are the persons that are or ought to be in my
contemplation when commiting acts or omissions.

An insult, particularly if objectively considered to be an insult, can
of course lead to legal consequences. An insult on the grounds of race,
colour,creed, gender and so on can in particular can lead to civil
and/or criminal liability on grounds of racial or sex discrimination.

But it depends on context. You go out into a field far out in the
country in the dead of night. You say out loud "these dammned blacks /
women / chinks / gays etc.... are taking our jobs!" unlikely to be
prosecuted as no legal neighbour around to raise a question of legal
wrong in law. On the Other hand: you go to your place of work and say
the same thing. Much more likely there may be some legal consequences.

But what if the place of work involves repairing computers and the only
words used are "chink" or "chinks" to describe the origin of computer
parts? And the only people there are all of the same ethnic and national
origin. None are of chinese origin. Nobody takes offence. It would take
someone to take offence and report it I would have thought in order for
legal consequences to follow. For a criminal case there would have to be
some evidence of intent to breach the peace or unlawfully discriminate.
Without evidence of a legal neighbour that the speaker of alleged
offensive words knew or ought to have known would be offended, then it
could be rather more difficult to prove intent.

[Ophelia]

"Bod" wrote in message news:egjj77...@mid.individual.net...

===

LOL is that the thicko GB having a pop. I mean, read his crap:))

It seems to me that GB takes offence on behalf of very Jew and Jihadi in the
world. Watch him fight for them and make a fool of himself.

He is one of the most unpleasant,and spiteful pieces of work around here.
He knows I have him filtered but still can't help himself!

Piss off GB. I have no interest in you or your nasty mouth.


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

[Graham.]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:45:22 +0000, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com>
wrote:

Yid is an interesting one as it's almost universally perceived as
derogatory by gentiles, for good reason let me add, but as one Jew to
another I could call you a yid (yod daled) with impunity, and even yid
is not used in your everyday lexicon I bet the plural form is
(yidden), or pertaining to yids (yiddisher) are.

--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%

[GB]

It seems that she does take offence, despite thinking that others shouldn't.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

Basically you're just too sensitive.

--
I've got trouble with the wife again - she came into the bar
looking for me and I asked for her number.

[pensive hamster]

Implied

http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/imply-or-infer/

'If a speaker or writer implies something, they are suggesting it in an
indirect way rather than making an explicit statement. As a reader or
listener, you are left to draw your own conclusions from what has been
said or hinted. ...

'When someone infers something, they reach a conclusion or decide
that something is true on the basis of the evidence available. If they
are listening to or reading another person’s words, they come to a
conclusion about what is meant even though the writer or speaker
has not stated this explicitly.'

[This post is an experiment to see if anyone might be offended by
an implication that they might not know the difference between
imply and infer, without prejudice to anything that might be inferred
from any responses to this post.]

[GB]

On 15/02/2017 21:37, The Peeler wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 21:19:54 -0000, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
> the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

>
>>> Yid is an interesting one as it's almost universally perceived as
>>> derogatory by gentiles, for good reason let me add, but as one Jew to
>>> another I could call you a yid (yod daled) with impunity, and even yid
>>> is not used in your everyday lexicon I bet the plural form is
>>> (yidden), or pertaining to yids (yiddisher) are.
>>
>> Basically you're just too sensitive.
>

> Basically, you are just a blithering idiot!
>

But you can't fault him for being too sensitive! :)

[Handsome Jack]

pensive hamster <pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> posted

>[This post is an experiment to see if anyone might be offended by
>an implication that they might not know the difference between
>imply and infer, without prejudice to anything that might be inferred
>from any responses to this post.]

I doubt if anybody's offended by it, although many might be irritated by
its tedious, nugatory, nit-picking worthlessness.

--
Jack

[James Wilkinson Sword]

Pedantic sad git.

--
Mr Churchill is reputed to have once said
"It will be long, it will be hard, and there'll be no withdrawal"

[Paul Pot]

GB explained on 2/15/2017 :

> On 15/02/2017 11:38, Svenne wrote:
>> I'm doing some work renovating and modding some old Dell C6100
>> servers
>> and a lot of the spare parts come from China. All good quality and
>> cheap
>> stuff. The people I'm working with refer to the Chinese parts as
>> "the
>> Chink connecter" or "the Chink card" and I got to wondering, is
>> this
>> illegal.
>>
>> Maybe not for a computer card, but what if you called a Chinese
>> person a
>> Chink? Could you be prosecuted? I don't think you could be
>> prosecuted for
>> calling an American a Yank or, as I'm sometimes referred to over
>> here, a
>> Britt. but what about Chink? Why should that be worse than Yank?
>>
>

> Is Chink derogatory? I don't think Yank or Brit is, so I'm not sure
> that you are comparing like with like.

What about 'Limey' or 'Pom'? How can Chink or Paki be derogatory?

--
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[Paul Pot]

The Peeler wrote on 2/15/2017 :
<snip>

>> I've done electrical work for pakis though.
>

> ONLY in your sociopathic dreams, Birdbrain!


It's true, it burned down soon after.

[pensive hamster]

On Wednesday, 15 February 2017 22:26:16 UTC, Handsome Jack wrote:
> pensive hamster posted

> >[This post is an experiment to see if anyone might be offended by
> >an implication that they might not know the difference between
> >imply and infer, without prejudice to anything that might be inferred
> >from any responses to this post.]
>
> I doubt if anybody's offended by it, although many might be irritated by
> its tedious, nugatory, nit-picking worthlessness.

Nugatory? You're showing off now ...

[harry]

And even on behalf of others!

[harry]

Hardly surprising, you're so brain dead.

[AndyW]

On 15/02/2017 15:53, Jeff wrote:
>
>> As a Scot I am OK with Scot, less so with Scotch
>
> I never really understood the relatively modern dislike of 'scotch'.
> OK for whiskey eggs pancakes and beef etc, but not for a person, makes
> no sense to me, particularly as even Rabbie Burns frequently used to term.

Using someone who lived in the 1700s as yardstick for acceptability in
modern speech is not really helpful considering that many, if not most,
modern Scots would struggle to understand his use of language due to the
changes in the intervening 300+ years.
Yes Burns used Scotch for people but he also used a huge list of words
that have fallen out of use

Scotch and Scots were used interchangeably but Scotch is less preferred
and is less accepted now. You don't really have to understand just
accept that it is the case. Some people prefer the use of Scots and some
don't care. Language changes and acceptance of the change is not universal.
My sister is disabled and accepts the term disabled, some people prefer
'physically challenged', some the hideous 'differently abled', some use
the less accepted 'crippled'. She has had lots of deliberately insulting
terms such as 'the cripple', spastic (there is an accepted term that has
changed), hopalong or 'shaking stevens' (she is epileptic). I used to
use spastic as a term, that was the accepted term it was even the
charity name but I would not now because language has moved on. Scotch
is moving but I have no idea where it will end up; it may be a proper
insult or it may be reclaimed and used as a term with pride. Time will tell.

I work all over the UK and Ireland and occasionally abroad. In most
cases if I point out to people that Scots is preferred then most people
are happy with it. In a few cases that has riled people and they
pointedly and repeatedly use Scotch. However these people were always
going to be a problem and were just looking for a weapon. Only in one
case have I had to go to HR but that was due to an escalation from
Scotch to 'the Porridge Wog', 'the immigrant', 'the migrant labourer'
and finding packets of microwave porridge tipped onto my desk in the
morning when I came in. But he was a dick and lost his job after my
report, partly due to me but mostly because he had a long history of
sailing close to the wind with bullying and this was his final warning.
Normally people who pointedly use a term that others find insulting
after being told have a deeper problem.

Andy

[Svenne]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 23:16:37 +0000, Paul Pot wrote:

>> Is Chink derogatory? I don't think Yank or Brit is, so I'm not sure
>> that you are comparing like with like.
>
> What about 'Limey' or 'Pom'? How can Chink or Paki be derogatory?

I've absolutely no idea why Chink or Paki should be considered
derogatory. They are diminutives referring to an identifiable group
exactly as do Yank, Brit, Limey and Pom. I just have this feeling that
you could well be prosecuted for a hate crime if you started calling
people from the relevant group Chink and Paki.

It seems irrational and illogical, but there is so much that is
irrational and illogical where political correctness is involved. Maybe
it should be tested in court. I wonder what a jury would make of it, the
verdict could go either way.

[AndyW]

On 15/02/2017 16:53, Ophelia wrote:

> Of course! But that doesn't take into account those who are looking to
> take offence ... at anything and everything mostly!

IME there are a lot of people just waiting to take somebody else's
offence. My sister experiences it often including a woman who took
offence to her using the term 'disabled' to describe herself despite the
fact that she was in the DSS offices for an interview about her
disability for disability living allowance since she has a card saying
she is disabled and is registered disabled and can use disabled parking
spaces since she has a disabled parking badge. However this arse of an
able-bodied woman stopped the interview because she was upset at the
term disabled used by a disabled woman and as a result my sister
temporarily lost her benefit which allowed her to travel to work (and
also triggered some other benefits).

At the other end you have people taking terrible offence at the fact
that their rights and freedoms to call a black person a 'filthy nigger'
have been infringed.

I have had anti-scots insults while working in some places in England
and northern Ireland but they are minor annoyances like being called
Jock, haggis man, or Porridge with question about my kilt. It is banter
until it is pointed out a few times that I don't like it; after that
then it is deliberate attempt to rile. I usually let it wash over me, it
still annoys a little but I have worked alongside people who take it to
HR. They have a less tolerant limit. The offence line moves a lot from
person to person.

Andy

[Norman Wells]

"AndyW" <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote in message news:nScpA.18626$2n6....@fx41.am4...

>
> I have had anti-scots insults while working in some places in England
> and northern Ireland but they are minor annoyances like being called
> Jock, haggis man, or Porridge with question about my kilt. It is banter
> until it is pointed out a few times that I don't like it;

What do you expect if you go to work in your kilt?

[Ophelia]

"Handsome Jack" wrote in message news:LS33s8Ii...@invalid.com...

Jack

====

That sounds about right!

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

[Ophelia]

"harry" wrote in message
news:58b0d996-fbad-4e00...@googlegroups.com...

====

Particularly on behalf of others. Don't some people revel in it?


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

[Ophelia]

"AndyW" wrote in message news:ADcpA.551411$IW6.2...@fx11.fr7...

===

Yes, he was a nasty bully. You can see it around here too. I bet this
won't be the last. Somebody will poke at you with it.



--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

[GB]

On 16/02/2017 07:35, AndyW wrote:

> My sister is disabled and accepts the term disabled, some people prefer
> 'physically challenged', some the hideous 'differently abled', some use
> the less accepted 'crippled'.

There used to be a road sign outside John Groom's Crippleage on the A41:
"Caution: Cripples Crossing". This was 50 years ago.

These things move on, and John Groom's is still there, but with a new
name, and the sign has gone.

> She has had lots of deliberately insulting
> terms such as 'the cripple', spastic (there is an accepted term that has
> changed), hopalong or 'shaking stevens' (she is epileptic).

Shame on the people who said that!

[AndyW]

On 16/02/2017 08:58, Jeff wrote:
>>
>> Scotch and Scots were used interchangeably but Scotch is less preferred
>> and is less accepted now. You don't really have to understand just
>> accept that it is the case. Some people prefer the use of Scots and some
>> don't care. Language changes and acceptance of the change is not
>> universal.
>

> You miss the point; why it it pretty much universally accepted for
> whiskey, beef, eggs, pancakes etc, but not for a person? Makes no sense
> to me.

Because beef does not get annoyed when people call it Scotch.
It just is.
Other than Americans who generally don't know the difference (but accept
when it is pointed out) must of the time I get called Scotch is by
people trying to be amusing or insulting. If I let it slide then it
often progresses onto more overt insults. Most normal people use Scots
or 'a Scot' or Scottish.

I don't like the term but it is a useful filter to point out that it is
not the accepted term. People who continue to use it after that I know I
am going to have trouble with.
Bear in mind that I work in heavy industry (current marine power plants
and shipbuilding) and it tend to be a very very masculine environment
where being the hard man is a badge of honour. Even in offices low level
bullying and establishing the pecking order is common but slowly dying out.

Andy

[burfordTjustice]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:38:28 -0000 (UTC)
Svenne <sve...@ingenstans.com> wrote:


Well if you have the balls you could do so in
a public way, via newspaper ad, radio announcement
or UK based blog and then see what happens.

[Incubus]

On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 12:52:38 PM UTC, AndyW wrote:

> On 15/02/2017 12:32, GB wrote:
> > On 15/02/2017 11:38, Svenne wrote:
> >> I'm doing some work renovating and modding some old Dell C6100 servers
> >> and a lot of the spare parts come from China. All good quality and cheap
> >> stuff. The people I'm working with refer to the Chinese parts as "the
> >> Chink connecter" or "the Chink card" and I got to wondering, is this
> >> illegal.
> >>
> >> Maybe not for a computer card, but what if you called a Chinese person a
> >> Chink? Could you be prosecuted? I don't think you could be prosecuted for
> >> calling an American a Yank or, as I'm sometimes referred to over here, a
> >> Britt. but what about Chink? Why should that be worse than Yank?
> >>
> >
> > Is Chink derogatory? I don't think Yank or Brit is, so I'm not sure
> > that you are comparing like with like.
>

> It all depends on how people regard it.
>
> Brit is pretty neutral but I know Americans who hate Yank as a term
> particularly if they come from the southern states.
>
> As a Scot I am OK with Scot, less so with Scotch and Jock, even less so
> with porridge wog and Jocktard.

'Scotch' is just a rather more archaic term for Scottish and I see nothing wrong with it. Scotch people complain that 'Scotch' refers to a drink but in actual fact, where the beverage is concerned, 'Scotch' is an abbreviation of 'Scotch (i.e. Scottish) Whiskey'.

[Incubus]

On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 4:45:24 PM UTC, GB wrote:

> On 15/02/2017 16:37, Bod wrote:
>
> > Being called a Limey/white honky/snowflake etc doesn't bother me at all.
> > Why ethnics get upset over a word is beyond me. Especially as Paki is
> > short for Pakistani, as is Brit short for British.
> > It's all PC nonsense IMO.
>
>

> The Pakistan ambassador's residence is not far from me, and they have
> their car outside with the PAK 1 number plate.
>
> However, the term Paki is commonly used in a rude way, like yid. If you
> come and call me a yid, you may find I take a swing at you.

Look at the mighty keyboard warrior.

> You imply
> those terms are the same as Limey or Pom, but that's clearly a mistake.

No, it's not a mistake. They are just as offensive but you seem to think that it's worse because you're Jewish. In other words, you are racist with a sense of entitlement and expect special treatment.

[Incubus]

On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 12:30:04 PM UTC, AndyW wrote:
> On 16/02/2017 08:58, Jeff wrote:
> >>
> >> Scotch and Scots were used interchangeably but Scotch is less preferred
> >> and is less accepted now. You don't really have to understand just
> >> accept that it is the case. Some people prefer the use of Scots and some
> >> don't care. Language changes and acceptance of the change is not
> >> universal.
> >
> > You miss the point; why it it pretty much universally accepted for
> > whiskey, beef, eggs, pancakes etc, but not for a person? Makes no sense
> > to me.
>
> Because beef does not get annoyed when people call it Scotch.
> It just is.
> Other than Americans who generally don't know the difference (but accept
> when it is pointed out) must of the time I get called Scotch is by
> people trying to be amusing or insulting. If I let it slide then it
> often progresses onto more overt insults. Most normal people use Scots
> or 'a Scot' or Scottish.
>
> I don't like the term but it is a useful filter to point out that it is
> not the accepted term. People who continue to use it after that I know I
> am going to have trouble with.

Perhaps they dislike the fact that you are trying to control how they speak.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

They're all like that.

--
He was a very clumsy lover. So the girl had to put him in her place.

[Svenne]

I'd probably be prosecuted for a hate crime if I routinely referred to
Chinese as Chinks and Pakistanis as Pakis. My use of the words Yanks,
Pommies and Aussies would be ignored. The words Paddies, Krauts and Frogs
would possibly be a gray area.

[burfordTjustice]

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:13:56 -0000 (UTC)

Svenne <sve...@ingenstans.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 07:47:27 -0500, burfordTjustice wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:38:28 -0000 (UTC)
> > Svenne <sve...@ingenstans.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Well if you have the balls you could do so in a public way, via
> > newspaper ad, radio announcement or UK based blog and then see what
> > happens.
>
> I'd probably be prosecuted for a hate crime if I routinely referred
> to Chinese as Chinks and Pakistanis as Pakis. My use of the words
> Yanks, Pommies and Aussies would be ignored. The words Paddies,
> Krauts and Frogs would possibly be a gray area.

Well then you answered your own question.

[Handsome Jack]

Svenne <sve...@ingenstans.com> posted

The rational basis as far as the law is concerned is that a term should
be considered offensive if it is intended to offend the person being
addressed, otherwise not.
--
Jack

[GB]

On 16/02/2017 16:18, Handsome Jack wrote:

>
> The rational basis as far as the law is concerned is that a term should
> be considered offensive if it is intended to offend the person being
> addressed, otherwise not.

I am happy enough with that, with minor change:

A term should be considered offensive if *a reasonable person would
consider that* it is intended to offend the person being addressed,
otherwise not.

[Svenne]

Not really, I said "probably" what actually would happen is still
uncertain.

[Richard McKenzie]

On Wednesday, 15 February 2017 17:08:24 UTC, GB wrote:
> On 15/02/2017 17:01, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

> > On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:45:22 -0000, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 15/02/2017 16:37, Bod wrote:
> >>
> >>> Being called a Limey/white honky/snowflake etc doesn't bother me at all.
> >>> Why ethnics get upset over a word is beyond me. Especially as Paki is
> >>> short for Pakistani, as is Brit short for British.
> >>> It's all PC nonsense IMO.
> >>
> >>
> >> The Pakistan ambassador's residence is not far from me, and they have
> >> their car outside with the PAK 1 number plate.
> >>
> >> However, the term Paki is commonly used in a rude way, like yid. If you

> >> come and call me a yid, you may find I take a swing at you. You imply

> >> those terms are the same as Limey or Pom, but that's clearly a mistake.
> >

> > You need context to work out if it's rude. Everyone round here goes to
> > the chinky to buy food. They obviously don't hate them or they wouldn't
> > eat there.
> >
>
> If you go to the local curry house and call them Pakis, you'd do well
> not to eat the food they serve you.

Or let them near your daughter(s)

[JNugent]

On 15/02/2017 15:53, Jeff wrote:
>

>> As a Scot I am OK with Scot, less so with Scotch
>

> I never really understood the relatively modern dislike of 'scotch'.
> OK for whiskey eggs pancakes and beef etc, but not for a person, makes
> no sense to me, particularly as even Rabbie Burns frequently used to term.
>

> Jeff

Indeed.

Scotch House
Scotch egg.
Scotch Corner (even though it's in England).
"Scotch" as a term for a dialect spoken in parts of Scotland.

I'm sure there must be more.

Perhaps some people believe that these terms have nothing to do with
Scotland.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[Jeßus]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:10:42 +0000, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com>
wrote:

>On 15/02/2017 16:53, Ophelia wrote:
>
>> Of course! But that doesn't take into account those who are looking to
>> take offence ... at anything and everything mostly!
>

>You hate it when people point out how incredibly stupid you are. Are you
>just "looking to take offence"?

She *loves* to take offence.

[Ophelia]

"Jeßus" wrote in message news:g5ufac9fqn1qjqpth...@4ax.com...

=====

Ahhh here comes my stalker:))


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

[Bod]

He's one of the saddos on here.

[Ophelia]

"Bod" wrote in message news:egr24d...@mid.individual.net...

===


Ahh you know him too?


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

[Bod]

I've seen a few of his posts.

[Ophelia]

"Bod" wrote in message news:egr3be...@mid.individual.net...

===

Ahh. He usually posts in the cooking group but not been for a while. I
never understood the way he thinks. One day he wants to be friendly and the
next he can turn on you. After seeing his lecture on drugs it now becomes
clear.


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

[Bod]

>>> She *loves* to take offence.
>>>
>>> =====
>>>
>>> Ahhh here comes my stalker:))
>>>
>>>
>> He's one of the saddos on here.
>>
>> ===
>>
>>
>> Ahh you know him too?
>>
>>
> I've seen a few of his posts.
>
> ===
>
> Ahh. He usually posts in the cooking group but not been for a while. I
> never understood the way he thinks. One day he wants to be friendly and the
> next he can turn on you. After seeing his lecture on drugs it now
> becomes clear.
>
>

I see.