Zadkiel wrote: » But its not the same, you know that calling someone a Yank has no negative connotations and actively describing someone as a Paki is very very different.
mattser wrote: » So you've been there yourself ?
FTA69 wrote: » I never said that Paki and n*gger mean the same. I said that 'n*gger' is also an abbreviation of the word negro which is basically the defence you're offering for using the term Paki, namely that it's simply a shortening of an innocuous word..
FTA69 wrote: » As you said yourself, you don't know any Pakistanis but yet feel entirely comfortable deciding what words they would or wouldn't mind being referred to as. The history of the use of the word 'Paki' isn't a good one, it's a slur. If you used that term around British Asians of any hue you'd be pulled up on it straight away...
FTA69 wrote: » You're just doing mental gymnastics and being a pedant for the sake of it. I dunno is it because you think you're making some sort of stand against political correctness or whatever but the reality is that you're just jumping up and down over your perceived right to call people racial slurs..
FTA69 wrote: » y all means go around calling people Pakis or Chinks or whatever, but don't pretend you don't know what you're doing.
AndyBoBandy wrote: » That’s because there are usually asleep, and then 2-3 guys run around in front of them waving their arms and telling them to clap
sbsquarepants wrote: » I'm not being disingenuous at all. Of course I know it can be (and often is) used as a racial slur. My point is it can also be used otherwise, and it can. If I was to describe your wife to someone as "zadkiels wife is a Paki" - it would be the same as me describing someones Canadian wife as a yank, a simple mistake, I would have no malicious intent whatsoever. I have absolutely nothing against Pakistanis, or Bangladeshis or anyone else for that matter. I just would not be using it as an insult - that's the truth. If I was to shout at her in the street "Hey, Paki" that would be a slur and I indeed would be an asshole for doing so, that's why I wouldn't do it. I just don't see the contradiction to be perfectly honest with you.
Zadkiel wrote: » The fact that you knew one Pakistani person once and you wouldn't refer to them as such to their face suggests to me that you know that it's a racial slur. It's disingenuous to say otherwise.
sbsquarepants wrote: » Edgelord :D It is absolutely nothing like the word nígger, nothing at all. I don't personally know too many Pakistanis to be honest with you! A girl I had a brief fling with years ago and a family who rent an apartment off me is the sum total of my Pakistani aquaintances! I wouldn't call or address anybody as "Paki" - how could that be anything but derogatory? But I would have zero problem with describing them as one - it is after all what they are!
sbsquarepants wrote: » Edgelord :D It is absolutely nothing like the word nígger, nothing at all. I don't personally know too many Pakistanis to be honest with you! A girl I had a brief fling with years ago and a family who rent an apartment off me is the sum total of my Pakistani aquaintances! I wouldn't call or address anybody as "Paki" - how could that be anything but derogatory? But I would have zero problem with describing them as one - it is after all what they are! Of course intent comes in to it, don't be ridiculous! Yes it can be used as a racial slur, but it can also be used differently. Or Pakis for short! You don't think the word Brit can be used derogatorily? It comes down to our old friend intent again! "Jaysus, I wouldn't go to magaluf, it's full of brits" - doesn't sound like a compliment to me! So let me get this straight, you're saying that intent can change the meaning of the word?
Poor_old_gill wrote: » Where was that supposed to be on?
mattser wrote: » aroundthehouse wrote: » Can we not just focus on Johnny Connors being a bit of a wanker lads? Well the LLS audience didn't seem to think so.
aroundthehouse wrote: » Can we not just focus on Johnny Connors being a bit of a wanker lads?
mattser wrote: » Well the LLS audience didn't seem to think so.
FTA69 wrote: » Yeah and ‘n*gger’ is just a colloquialism derived from the word negro, no problem there. Jeez why are people so sensitive? Out of curiosity have you ever referred in person to a Pakistani as a Paki or asked them how they feel about the word? You know full well the significance of the word, you just take some sort of pleasure in throwing it about because you think it makes you sound like some edgelord.
STB. wrote: » Intent doesn't come in to it. Use of the word is recognised as a racial slur. .
STB. wrote: » The use of the word Paki originated in the 60s in Britain when they were experiencing mass immigration. Its hardly used anywhere else. By nationality they are referred to as Pakistanis..
STB. wrote: » Brits is recognised as a word to describe people from Britain and used by the Brits themselves. Just because you saw Brits Out on walls over the last 30 years doesn't mean that the word is derogatory.
STB. wrote: » Given the thread title, you may already know this but the word "knacker" isn't exclusive in slang in its use against some people from the travelling community as it has a wider meaning in society as it can describe gougers from every walk of life.
FTA69 wrote: » Paki is also a catch all slur for all South Asians, it isn’t a cute abbreviation for Pakistani nationals.
Rennaws wrote: » So can we get back to calling John connors a wanker :-) He was booked to turn up for a local showing of Cardboard Gangsters near me here.. It sold a few tickets but he never showed.. No apology no nothing.. And he ****es on about not getting an agent ?
sbsquarepants wrote: » Start shouting anything at anyone and they're likely to have an issue with it. As far as I'm concerned it is perfectly acceptable to describe someone by using their nationality, especially if it's the most obvious differentiator.
sbsquarepants wrote: » I'm not an idiot - I know full well it's used as in insult by some people. I'm just saying it's possible for it to have a less sinister use - it is a shortened version of Pakistani, similar to Brit or Aussie. In the southern USA for example the word boy is seen as an insult, not so much in Cork. Meanings are in the intent as much as in the word itself. Anyway - this is all very much off topic.
sbsquarepants wrote: » It's just short for Pakistani, it's no more derogatory than Brit or Aussie.
RabbleRouser2k wrote: » I hope there's a change, tbh. I think there definitely is, but its slow. More girls are doing the Leaving Cert for one thing. Wonder if we'll see more lads doing the same? Unfortunately, it's girls who suffer the most in the traveller community. Similar to other cultures, the guys can be 'players' while the girls have to remain 'pure'. I remember going to school with a number of travellers. One family moved in close to where I grew up. Genuinely nice people, my father used to give em a lift to school, and one of them he drove to her communion. They worked around the area, didn't do any damage and genuinely thought they'd assimilate into the area. (I think they moved to a halting site/ settled down). On the other hand, there were others who were just....yeah. Didn't cause violence, but were kind of a nuisance. Ah, no. We criticise many outdated elements of many cultures-circumcision, in Jewish and Muslim culture, for one. Traveller culture is an outdated practise at the best of times, and utterly neanderthal at the worst. When it genuinely oppresses one gender over the other-it should be called out.
Lollipops23 wrote: » I was in school with a girl who was 1st gen settled Traveller. She was lovely, sweet and very bright. She did quite well in school, but was absent a lot. I sat next to her in 5th Year Biology and she had a keen interest. Then one day she stopped coming to school, about midway through the year. Found out a few months later she'd been pulled out to get married. Next time I saw her, a year later, she was 8 months pregnant. What a waste of potential. There was time enough for marriage and babies, why did she need to sacrifice her education, something she clearly valued? I can never get passed the Traveller treatment of women. If they even attempted to treat them equally I'd take their opinions on other matters of discrimination a bit more seriously.
Edgware wrote: » It's their culture It's racist to criticise it
Mickeroo wrote: » Convincing yourself a word isn't derogatory is not the same as a word not being derogatory.
sbsquarepants wrote: » Like most words it's meaning is in it's intent. I've personally used it and have never used it as a derogatory term. It's short for Pakistani - that's it when I use it, just like Brit is short for British. Where's the problem?
Deebles McBeebles wrote: » Fly over to Birmingham and start shouting it, you'll soon see.
yourdeadwright wrote: » So its ok to call John an idiot for making a sweeping statement about the Garda being scum but then do the same when talking about travellers and branding them all the same ? Yes I called someone out for making a statement on a local traveller that was simply not true of that one particular guy ,
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4c2f272c464d99a9eee64a80fbe71a0c.svg)
