Does the term 'British Isles' bother you? (Poll attached)

MakeEmLaugh

A straightforward question. Does the term 'British Isles', referring to the whole islands of Ireland and Britain, bother you?

Also, is there any term you would prefer to 'British Isles', or that you think would be more appropriate?

RossyG

Short answer: No.

What's in a name?

Seaneh

Britain and Ireland.

Hande hoche!

Someone will have to mention Boxing day and Londonderry.

Gambas

No. I see these islands as being a geographical unit, and the most common name for it is the British Isles. Just like the most common name for the water that lies between Dublin and Liverpool is the Irish Sea. It's a label. No big deal.

Cavehill Red

It's Britain and Ireland.
If you don't believe me, ask our own Dept of Foreign Affairs, or the British Guardian or Times newspapers.
'Atlantic Archipelago' is also acceptable in some circumstances.
'British Isles' refers to off-shore islands of Britain, such as Skye or Wight, and does not relate to Ireland in the slightest.

iDave

Home Nations?

Fr_Dougal

No. And we have our own sea.

meoklmrk91

No because Ireland isn't in the British isles.

summerskin

Gambas wrote: »

No. I see these islands as being a geographical unit, and the most common name for it is the British Isles. Just like the most common name for the water that lies between Dublin and Liverpool is the Irish Sea. It's a label. No big deal.

As an Englishman i don't really care what the islands are called, Britain and Ireland seem ok to me though.


As the poster above says, it's not like we are bothered by the "Irish sea", or should we campaign for it to be the "British and Irish sea"?


Before anyone mentions the "English channel" that name is not used in France, it's "La Manche" there.

summerskin

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

No. And we have our own sea.

How exactly? The waters are shared with Britain.

gurramok

Gambas wrote: »

No. I see these islands as being a geographical unit, and the most common name for it is the British Isles. Just like the most common name for the water that lies between Dublin and Liverpool is the Irish Sea. It's a label. No big deal.

No humans live in the Irish Sea. The humans on land in Ireland are labelled.

GLaDOS

From wiki

The term British Isles is controversial in Ireland,[8][13] where there are objections to its usage due to the association of the word British with Ireland.[14] The Government of Ireland does not use the term[15] and its embassy in London discourages its use.[16] As a result, Britain and Ireland is becoming a preferred description,[14][17][18] and Atlantic Archipelago is increasingly favoured in academia,[19][20][21][22] although British Isles is still commonly employed.[17]

I use the term British Isles myself.

BQQ

iDave wrote: »

Home Nations?

Ugh! That's worse.

BraziliaNZ

I don't care about it, but no one ever bleedin' uses it anyway so how could you possibly give a sh*t?

Cavehill Red

Poll options are inaccurate.
The usage is NOT globally accepted, and the term is not used by the British government nor authorised by them any more than it is by the Irish government.

road_high

Not again......

Reoil

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

No. And we have our own sea.

Aye, cause it's full of ****e.

gurramok

ScienceNerd wrote: »

I use the term British Isles myself.

Nothing wrong with Irish Isles either, agreed?

summerskin

gurramok wrote: »

Nothing wrong with Irish Isles either, agreed?

That'd make sense, just as the "Irish Sea" does...

RADIUS

It is a geographical term not a political one. So no it doesn't bother me at all. If some Geographists want to call it the British isles than that's OK, if they want to call it the Manx Isles it wouldn't bother me either. I don't care and don't understand how anyone could. It's a reference to an archipelago and doesn't imply ownership. Anybody who gets offended by these things in this day and age are just looking to be offended.

The sooner the people on these islands get over all this British/Irish crap the sooner we can all just get on with living in peace.

Pal

The term only upsets fools

the purple tin

RossyG wrote: »

Short answer: No.

What's in a name?

Letters and maybe one of these -.

gurramok

summerskin wrote: »

That'd make sense, just as the "Irish Sea" does...

Call it the British Sea if you like, no-one lives there.

Britain is part of the Irish Isles, British people don't like that? Heaven knows why? :rolleyes: Shoe on the other foot there

summerskin

gurramok wrote: »

Call it the British Sea if you like, no-one lives there.

Britain is part of the Irish Isles, British people don't like that? Heaven knows why? :rolleyes: Shoe on the other foot there

Yes dear boy, it'd make perfect sense to name the group of Islands after one that is not the largest or most populous...


I wonder why the rest of the world don't call it the Irish Isles?

It's a geographical name, it's the british isles to 99% of the world.

Personally, I don't give a monkeys what it's called, but find the "little Irelander" outrage hilarious.

Chips Lovell

Do people really have such a chip on their shoulder to be bothered by the term?

Seaneh

gurramok wrote: »

No humans live in the Irish Sea.

Ahem?

gurramok

summerskin wrote: »

Yes dear boy, it'd make perfect sense to name the group of Islands after one that is not the largest or most populous...

I wonder why the rest of the world don't call it the Irish Isles?

It's a geographical name, it's the british isles to 99% of the world.

Personally, I don't give a monkeys what it's called, but find the "little Irelander" outrage hilarious.

Thats interesting how you know the criteria. One has to be bigger than the other and most populous, like domination. No coincidence that the term was invented by an Englishman in service of the British Empire without the consent of the population that live here.

Dodge

The sometimes offered alternative of "Islands of the North Atlantic" is worse

Iwasfrozen

Seaneh wrote: »

Ahem?

Exactly, no humans.

RADIUS

gurramok wrote: »

Thats interesting how you know the criteria. One has to be bigger than the other and most populous, like domination. No coincidence that the term was invented by an Englishman in service of the British Empire without the consent of the population that live here.

Fair play to the Englishman in service of the British Empire then, it makes sense. An Englishman also invented the World Wide Web but you appear to have no problem using that.

summerskin

gurramok wrote: »

Thats interesting how you know the criteria. One has to be bigger than the other and most populous, like domination. No coincidence that the term was invented by an Englishman in service of the British Empire without the consent of the population that live here.

How are demographics and geography like domination?

That chip, remove it from your shoulder.

Iwasfrozen

gurramok wrote: »

Thats interesting how you know the criteria. One has to be bigger than the other and most populous, like domination. No coincidence that the term was invented by an Englishman in service of the British Empire without the consent of the population that live here.

Oh ffs when were populations ever asked to name their own geographic entities. Africans never penned the name of their continent. Or Americans theirs. Get over yourself. It's a geographic term. Nothing more.

summerskin

RADIUS wrote: »

Fair play to the Englishman in service of the British Empire then, it makes sense. An Englishman also invented the World Wide Web but you appear to have no problem using that.

He probably only invented it so me and Fratton Fred etc could oppress the Irish masses on boards.ie, eh Gurramok....

ejmaztec

Paging Seanchai

Franticfrank

How do you differentiate to someone the difference between the geographical term and the political one? Imagine labelling Austria 'the southern German highlands' or Belgium 'western Dutch plain' and you'd have a lot of angry people. Britain is an island geographically. Ireland is also an island geographically. T

There is no reason to label these two entities 'British'. And defending that label by saying its a geographical rather than political term doesn't add up. What's the difference when its mentioned in casual conversation? Our government doesn't use the term, its banned from school books and our neighbours should accept that and get over it. I for one never use the term, because the islands simply are not British.

Dravokivich

Damn right it bothers me!

RADIUS

Franticfrank wrote: »

How do you differentiate to someone the difference between the geographical term and the political one?

A primary school education.

summerskin

Franticfrank wrote: »

How do you differentiate to someone the difference between the geographical term and the political one? Imagine labelling Austria 'the southern German highlands' or Belgium 'western Dutch plain' and you'd have a lot of angry people. Britain is an island geographically. Ireland is also an island geographically. T

There is no reason to label these two entities 'British'. And defending that label by saying its a geographical rather than political term doesn't add up. What's the difference when its mentioned in casual conversation? Our government doesn't use the term, its banned from school books and our neighbours should accept that and get over it. I for one never use the term, because the islands simply are not British.

Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados etc are in a group of islands named the West Indies, and don't seem to have a problem with that. Why would you have a problem with a geographic name for a group of islands? There's more than just the islands of Britain and Ireland, you know?

summerskin

Franticfrank wrote: »

How do you differentiate to someone the difference between the geographical term and the political one? Imagine labelling Austria 'the southern German highlands' or Belgium 'western Dutch plain' and you'd have a lot of angry people. Britain is an island geographically. Ireland is also an island geographically. T

There is no reason to label these two entities 'British'. And defending that label by saying its a geographical rather than political term doesn't add up. What's the difference when its mentioned in casual conversation? Our government doesn't use the term, its banned from school books and our neighbours should accept that and get over it. I for one never use the term, because the islands simply are not British.

Using that chain of thought, if UK schools taught it as being the British Isles, and the government called it the British Isles you should just accept it and get over it. you know, as neighbours?

Or do you just want everyone to bow to little old Ireland?

Anyone

When Scotland leaves are they still going to call it Britain?

davetherave

Doesn't bother me in the slightest.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/28/British_Isles_Euler_diagram_15.svg/300px-British_Isles_Euler_diagram_15.svg.png

Do Canada and mexico get upset over the fact that they are referred to as "North America"

summerskin

Anyone wrote: »

When Scotland leaves are they still going to call it Britain?

They never will. And geographically the island would always be Britain.

Just as Hispaniola is the island containing Haiti and the Dominican Republic.

davetherave

Anyone wrote: »

When Scotland leaves are they still going to call it Britain?

England, Wales and Scotland make up Great Britain. England and Wales make Britain.

Anyone

davetherave wrote: »

England, Wales and Scotland make up Great Britain. England and Wales make Britain.

Makes sense I guess, when they lose the celts, they will lose their "great"

gurramok

summerskin wrote: »

How are demographics and geography like domination?

That chip, remove it from your shoulder.

Great as an Englishman, you have no objection to Britain being part of the Irish Isles then, no chip on your shoulder.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Oh ffs when were populations ever asked to name their own geographic entities. Africans never penned the name of their continent. Or Americans theirs. Get over yourself. It's a geographic term. Nothing more.

Ireland is an Irish Isle, not a British one. Just like in your eyes Britain is a British Isle but you like Ireland being a British Isle, no surprise from you with your posting history on the relations between Britain and Ireland.(oops never used British Isles just there :rolleyes:)

Duckworth_Luas

Seaneh wrote: »

Ahem?

The Irish language name for the sea was originally the Sea of Mann. The name "the Irish Sea" is the English language name for it meaning the sea you cross to get to Ireland, nothing to do with Irish ownership of the entire body.

However, the term British Isles originally was used as a term of ownership, these are the islands belonging to Britain. When studying cartography, in a British university no less, it was used as an example of how maps can be used as one of the most powerful propaganda tools.

The English claimed ownership of Ireland after Henry VIII's break with Rome. The British Isles was coined to establish this claim, to lump the two islands together and reduce the idea of a seperate Ireland. If you stick something on a map people will believe it.

The problem with the term today is that it confuses foreign people (yes there are a lot of stupid people in the world). For example, British beef is banned in Egypt - Ireland is in the British Isles - therefore Irish beef must also be banned. For reason like this the government discourages its use.

MakeEmLaugh

summerskin wrote: »

Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados etc are in a group of islands named the West Indies, and don't seem to have a problem with that.

True, but the peoples of those islands are frequently collectively referred to as 'West Indians' (or 'Afro-Caribbeans'). If 'West Indies' is to be used as an analogy for the term 'British Isles', would it be wrong for people (including those from Ireland) to object to being referred to as 'British Islanders'?

Just a question.

marco_polo

Poll lacking in who gives a ****/Atari Jaguar options.

summerskin

gurramok wrote: »

Great as an Englishman, you have no objection to Britain being part of the Irish Isles then, no chip on your shoulder.



Ireland is an Irish Isle, not a British one. Just like in your eyes Britain is a British Isle but you like Ireland being a British Isle, no surprise from you with your posting history on the relations between Britain and Ireland.(oops never used British Isles just there :rolleyes:)

You seem to have trouble reading. I have no problem with the term the Islands of Britain and Ireland. Ireland is not a British Isle, I've never said that in my eyes it is.

Historically there'd be no point or justification in trying to claim Britain is an "Irish Isle" though, as Ireland has never ruled Britain, but of course Britain ruled Ireland for "800 years".... rabble rabble...

Believe me, anything with NI in it, you're welcome to.

MakeEmLaugh

marco_polo wrote: »

Poll lacking in who gives a ****/Atari Jaguar options.

Don't take the poll, then.