Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Using the term Paki

1…89101113

Comments

  • #362
    Reekwind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    Tony EH wrote: »
    If one group is using a particular word, even in a jestful manner, then they absolve all notions of "offence" when another group uses it.
    Just because a group has 'reclaimed' a word for their own use, doesn't permit others to continue using the original insult. If you want to prove me wrong then get yourself down to Harlem and do a John McClane


  • #363
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,924 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    "Reclaiming" is bull****. Language is not something that is controlled by one group or another.


  • #364
    Reekwind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    And who are you to tell various cultures/groups that they're wrong to take offence at a term?


  • #365
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,924 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    I'm not telling anyone that they cannot take offence at anything.

    However, if you choose to use a word, you lose any right to be upset when you hear that word being used by others.

    That's simply being disingenuous.

    That doesn't mean that everyone should go around saying "nigger" all the time, because some fool in South Central L.A. thinks he's "taking the word back". But that same fool has no right to any "offence" if he hears someone else using it.


  • #366
    Reekwind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    So you think there's no difference in a black person referring to a friend as '******' and a white person casually using the term? No difference in context?


  • Advertisement
  • #367
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,924 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    No, I believe that said person has absolved themselves of "offence".

    If someone finds a word offensive, then that offence should be forthcoming no matter who is saying it.


  • #368
    Xeyn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭Xeyn


    Tony EH wrote: »
    No, I believe that said person has absolved themselves of "offence".

    If someone finds a word offensive, then that offence should be forthcoming no matter who is saying it.

    Im sorry but I dont buy that at all. If my brothers called me a 'd*ckhead' I would definitely not take offence, but if a stranger or acquaintance did then I would.
    Just because people are comfortable enough around others that they can say something without offence, does not make the word less offensive and certainly does not 'absolve' them of taking offence from that word.


  • #369
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,924 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    "Dickhead" doesn't have the same historical connotation as "nigger", does it?

    The latter word is charged with so much, that it's use is immediately front and centre, no matter who is using it and in what context. It's one of those words that quite rightly heightens tension, no matter who uses it, because of its history. "Paki" has the same charge, as does "wog".

    if your brother jokingly calls you a silly dickhead, no you wouldn't automatically take offence. I don't think anyone would expect you to. But, if you were to complain about somebody else's brother using it aginst their sibling, you'd need to STFU, frankly.

    You're not comparing like with like.

    Your offence is more to do with the action and intent, rather than the word "dickhead".


  • #370
    old_aussie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭old_aussie


    Strituck wrote: »
    First off it is not my intention to be insulting, and I am not trying to offend ?

    Please tell them I didn't put you up to this, snigger

    I had no intention of insulting and got an infraction.

    Good luck!@ :rolleyes:


  • #371
    old_aussie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭old_aussie


    Strituck wrote: »

    Can perhaps anybody from Pakistan explain ?

    What's up Skippy?


  • Advertisement
  • #372
    Tzardine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,885 ✭✭✭Tzardine


    old_aussie wrote: »
    Please tell them I didn't put you up to this, snigger

    I had no intention of insulting and got an infraction.

    Good luck!@ :rolleyes:
    old_aussie wrote: »
    What's up Skippy?

    I have no idea what you are on about ?


  • #373
    Xeyn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭Xeyn


    Tony EH wrote: »
    "Dickhead" doesn't have the same historical connotation as "nigger", does it?

    The latter word is charged with so much, that it's use is immediately front and centre, no matter who is using it and in what context. It's one of those words that quite rightly heightens tension, no matter who uses it, because of its history. "Paki" has the same charge, as does "wog".

    if your brother jokingly calls you a silly dickhead, no you wouldn't automatically take offence. I don't think anyone would expect you to. But, if you were to complain about somebody else's brother using it aginst their sibling, you'd need to STFU, frankly.

    You're not comparing like with like.

    Your offence is more to do with the action and intent, rather than the word "dickhead".

    No its not. Its to do with a word that has very negative connotations. It is comparing one derogatory word with another. I could easily say I would allow my brother or sister to call me 'Paki' or 'Ni*ger' or 'Chink' but no one else. People who accept being called derogatory words like 'Paki' from people they are comfortable with like close friends does not give anyone else carte blanche to use the word against them. I fail to see the logic.


  • #374
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,924 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Xeyn wrote: »
    ...I fail to see the logic.

    Unfortunately, you do.

    I'm saying that if someone is going around using a particular word, in this case, "nigger" and then tries to profess "offence" when they hear it elsewhere. Then I call bullshit.

    What someone allows their intimate circle refer to them as, is up to that person.


  • #375
    Xeyn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭Xeyn


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Unfortunately, you do.

    I'm saying that if someone is going around using a particular word, in this case, "nigger" and then tries to profess "offence" when they hear it elsewhere. Then I call bullshit.

    What someone allows their intimate circle refer to them as, is up to that person.

    Right, so say you see a black person using that word, you would be comfortable enough going up to him and using it back at him?
    You dont get a free pass to use an incredibly offensive word just because some idiot feels he is justified in using it because the negative connotations apply to him directly.


  • #376
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,924 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Xeyn wrote: »
    Right, so say you see a black person using that word, you would be comfortable enough going up to him and using it back at him?
    You dont get a free pass to use an incredibly offensive word just because some idiot feels he is justified in using it because the negative connotations apply to him directly.

    And I've already said that in a previous post.

    However, said "black person using that word" has lost his/her "right" to take offence when they hear it being used elsewhere, if they're using it in their own speech on a regular basis.


  • #377
    Xeyn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭Xeyn


    You didnt answer whether or not you would feel comfortable using it


  • #378
    Unre4L
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30 ✭Unre4L


    The media turned it into a slur through years of libelous "news", so it depends entirely on the context someone uses it. But when you consider the fact that Media still portrays Pakistanis largely in a bad light I cant help but think the person has sinister motives. It gets worse when some Freedom-of-speech/truth/justice campaigner insists Pakistanis are at fault for being offended at the use. We didnt ask for this. Just the other day some UK politician singles out Pakistanis in UK for corruption. The mindset really hasnt changed.


  • #379
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,924 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Xeyn wrote: »
    You didnt answer whether or not you would feel comfortable using it

    Outside of this conversation, I wouldn't be using that word anyway. It's just not a term I utilise.

    However, I don't have a problem with the actual word itself. It's just a word and I believe that in an ideal world, people shouldn't allow words to have power over them. Even though, I would be aware that certain words trigger emotive responses in some people.

    Given the history of the word "nigger" and the history of the word "Paki", I would automatically refrain from their usage, in the same manner as I would pause before saying the word "cunt".


  • #380
    Xeyn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭Xeyn


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Outside of this conversation, I wouldn't be using that word anyway. It's just not a term I utilise.

    However, I don't have a problem with the actual word itself. It's just a word and I believe that in an ideal world, people shouldn't allow words to have power over them. Even though, I would be aware that certain words trigger emotive responses in some people.

    Given the history of the word "nigger" and the history of the word "Paki", I would automatically refrain from their usage, in the same manner as I would pause before saying the word "cunt".

    Its a fair enough stance to have. However unless youve been a victim of such hateful terms I dont think its fair to say whether or not people should allow them to have power over them.
    Words are incredibly powerful and id be very careful to dismiss things as 'merely words'.
    It doesnt hurt anyone not to use those words, but the opposite is not true.


  • #381
    poundapunnet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,119 ✭✭✭poundapunnet


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Given the history of the word "nigger" and the history of the word "Paki", I would automatically refrain from their usage, in the same manner as I would pause before saying the word "cunt".

    The word "queer" has a pretty colourful history too you know. Personally it depends totally on the intentions of the person saying it whether or not I'd be hurt (and it doesn't get used as much towards lesbians anyway), but if I were you I'd be aware that it definitely has the capacity to offend coming from a straight person's mouth.


  • Advertisement
  • #382
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,924 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Oh, I agree. "Queer" was originally a putdown of grave consequence.

    However, today we have "Queer Cinema", "Queer Literature" and whole host of other "Queer" stuff. It's a moniker that's bestowed upon such things by the gay community themselves.

    When I talk to gay people I know, "queer" is not taken as an insult in any way. It's a word that's as harmless as "qay", or "queen" nowadays.

    "Faggot" seems to have taken its place. Probably due to the pervasiveness of American culture on European shores.


  • #383
    old_aussie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭old_aussie


    Apparently you can just say Pak, without the i and it's ok.

    http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/all-eyes-on-new-pak-army-chief-raheel-sharif/article1-1156532.aspx


  • #384
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    old_aussie wrote: »
    Apparently you can just say Pak, without the i and it's ok.

    http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/all-eyes-on-new-pak-army-chief-raheel-sharif/article1-1156532.aspx


    That refers to the Pakistan army....


  • #385
    jellyboy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 615 ✭✭✭jellyboy


    Reekwind wrote: »
    Indeed, After Hours has hit a new low...

    ...no wait, that would be the point where people argue that 'Paki' is actually no more racist than 'Paddy' and that it's just double standards at play. White people are the real victims here


    When ever did it reach a high ?

    Trust me , After hours was born of hell and toasted morals...


  • #386
    Frank Grimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,556 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    Nodin wrote: »
    That refers to the Pakistan army....
    In an Indian newspaper too, I'm not sure how what he presented is 'proof' of anything really.


  • #387
    The Rad Runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88 ✭✭The Rad Runner


    Grew up with a lad who affectionately called The Jap. He wasn't even Japanese, he was a quarter Chinese.
    "Heading up to The Japs", "Pass it to Jap first", were common phrases used back then. Different times


  • #388
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 36,124 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    Is 'Pak' not a correct term for the people (analogous to Tadjik, Uzbek, Afghan, Kazakh etc.)?
    What's the origin of those -stan names and who coined them? Why would they make an exception for just one?


  • #389
    Frank Grimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,556 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    pickarooney wrote: »
    Is 'Pak' not a correct term for the people (analogous to Tadjik, Uzbek, Afghan, Kazakh etc.)?
    What's the origin of those -stan names and who coined them? Why would they make an exception for just one?
    I've usually seen Stan translated as 'land of' or 'home of'. Pakistan is ethnically heterogeneous so the Pak bit doesn't refer to an ethnic group (e.g.link) unlike Tajik/Uzbek/Kazakh/Turkmenistan. I can't remember offhand what Afghan refers to but that's also ethnically heterogeneous.


  • #390
    Frank Grimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,556 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    Curiosity got the better of me so I looked up Afghan, apparently it is a word that has been, and still is, used synonymously with Pashtun. The Pashtun are the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan and often refer to themselves as Afghans and their language as Afghani. The other ethnic groups in Afghanistan do not really use that term to describe themselves.


  • Advertisement
  • #391
    Carson10
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 556 ✭✭✭Carson10


    my neighbour is called Packie and he is a rural Irish farmer. Dont think his name would work in London.


Advertisement