Re: So Harbhajan is a Rascist is he?

by HH_pink Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:48

lardbucket wrote:
HH_pink wrote:
lardbucket wrote:There is no such thing as race, only racial (social) prejudice.

Oh? You can acknowledge the difference without being prejudiced about anything.

Or you can be honest and scientific and accept that we are all basically the same.

Yes, depends on what level you're looking at it. Semantics, and all that. On some level I'm not you, surely. On another, I certainly am. "Scientific" doesn't really come into the picture - I never said there needed to be a difference in a particular chromosome.

by HH_pink Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:49

furriner wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
lardbucket wrote:Let's see if he admits it, or Tendulkar admits that he knows the word was used.

If so, you can drop back to the second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection.

Why is this so difficult for you? I will be first in line to support crucifying the batsard if it is proved he said it. In the interim, you cannot crucify a man before his misdeeds are proved.

BTW the 'second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection' thing I find ironic since some forummers say they use the term 'subi' as a term of affection.

So Asian, African any other geographical reference to people is bad as well?

For the last time tac, I am not interested in scoring debating points or making 'smart' comments. Anything can be reduced to an absurdity unless all the parties involved make an honest effort to really talk about it.

I think tac's got a fair point there, furri. But just as we don't call you sheep shaggers 'antipodeans', tac, can we have a standard where you don't club us into 'subis'?

by lardbucket Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:49

What exactly is so offensive about the term 'subi' then, as it's clearly derived from a geographical abbreviation? Not a term I've used a lot, if at all, so I'm curious. Which peoples will be offended by it?

by furriner Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:51

lardbucket wrote:
furriner wrote:
lardbucket wrote:Let's see if he admits it, or Tendulkar admits that he knows the word was used.

If so, you can drop back to the second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection.

Why is this so difficult for you? It isn't. It seems to me that way, but that is interpretation

I will be first in line to support crucifying the batsard if it is proved he said it. maybe second

In the interim, you cannot crucify a man before his misdeeds are proved. I'm not. You did; you wanted to know whether Harby would fess up..you made the assumption that he was guilty. So tell me again- how do you know for certain Harby is guilty?

BTW the 'second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection' thing I find ironic since some forummers say they use the term 'subi' as a term of affection. Stay on topic, pleaseOK, so answer my question

by Invader Zim Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:51

Cos they are weak sooks.

by tac Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:52

HH_pink wrote:
furriner wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
lardbucket wrote:Let's see if he admits it, or Tendulkar admits that he knows the word was used.

If so, you can drop back to the second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection.

Why is this so difficult for you? I will be first in line to support crucifying the batsard if it is proved he said it. In the interim, you cannot crucify a man before his misdeeds are proved.

BTW the 'second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection' thing I find ironic since some forummers say they use the term 'subi' as a term of affection.

So Asian, African any other geographical reference to people is bad as well?

For the last time tac, I am not interested in scoring debating points or making 'smart' comments. Anything can be reduced to an absurdity unless all the parties involved make an honest effort to really talk about it.

I think tac's got a fair point there, furri. But just as we don't call you sheep shaggers 'antipodeans', tac, can we have a standard where you don't club us into 'subis'?

But antipodean isn't at all offensive . . . it just means those who live in a certain region. Go for it.

by Lara Lara Laughs Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:53

Just a guess, but probably because it smacks of an "I can't be bothered to make the effort to differentiate between the many different types of people on that huge mass of land known as the subcontinent" attitude. A simple lack of respect really.

by lardbucket Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:54

HH_pink wrote:
lardbucket wrote:
HH_pink wrote:
lardbucket wrote:There is no such thing as race, only racial (social) prejudice.

Oh? You can acknowledge the difference without being prejudiced about anything.

Or you can be honest and scientific and accept that we are all basically the same.

Yes, depends on what level you're looking at it. Semantics, and all that. On some level I'm not you, surely. On another, I certainly am. "Scientific" doesn't really come into the picture - I never said there needed to be a difference in a particular chromosome.

Good post, Pink. Personally I think we're all much more similar than we are different.

Symonds is clearly offended by the use of the word 'monkey' as some on this board are offended by the use of the word 'subi', and as Australian teams in the 80's were offended by some of the West Indian players frequently using the word 'honky'.

by HH_pink Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:54

tac wrote:
HH_pink wrote:
furriner wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
lardbucket wrote:Let's see if he admits it, or Tendulkar admits that he knows the word was used.

If so, you can drop back to the second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection.

Why is this so difficult for you? I will be first in line to support crucifying the batsard if it is proved he said it. In the interim, you cannot crucify a man before his misdeeds are proved.

BTW the 'second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection' thing I find ironic since some forummers say they use the term 'subi' as a term of affection.

So Asian, African any other geographical reference to people is bad as well?

For the last time tac, I am not interested in scoring debating points or making 'smart' comments. Anything can be reduced to an absurdity unless all the parties involved make an honest effort to really talk about it.

I think tac's got a fair point there, furri. But just as we don't call you sheep shaggers 'antipodeans', tac, can we have a standard where you don't club us into 'subis'?

But antipodean isn't at all offensive . . . it just means those who live in a certain region. Go for it.

Of course I know it doesn't offend you, duh, but I'm not calling you that. So, as a deal, treaty if you will, it would be very un-convict-like of you to not call me a subi, is the point.

by doremi Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:55

Has someone said the word 'monkey' was used?

by lardbucket Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:55

Lara Lara Laughs wrote:Just a guess, but probably because it smacks of an "I can't be bothered to make the effort to differentiate between the many different types of people on that huge mass of land known as Australia attitude. A simple lack of respect really.

analogy

by lardbucket Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:56

doremi wrote:Has someone said the word 'monkey' was used?

Yes. Stay tuned for further developments.

by tac Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:56

HH_pink wrote:
tac wrote:
HH_pink wrote:
furriner wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
lardbucket wrote:Let's see if he admits it, or Tendulkar admits that he knows the word was used.

If so, you can drop back to the second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection.

Why is this so difficult for you? I will be first in line to support crucifying the batsard if it is proved he said it. In the interim, you cannot crucify a man before his misdeeds are proved.

BTW the 'second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection' thing I find ironic since some forummers say they use the term 'subi' as a term of affection.

So Asian, African any other geographical reference to people is bad as well?

For the last time tac, I am not interested in scoring debating points or making 'smart' comments. Anything can be reduced to an absurdity unless all the parties involved make an honest effort to really talk about it.

I think tac's got a fair point there, furri. But just as we don't call you sheep shaggers 'antipodeans', tac, can we have a standard where you don't club us into 'subis'?

But antipodean isn't at all offensive . . . it just means those who live in a certain region. Go for it.

Of course I know it doesn't offend you, duh, but I'm not calling you that. So, as a deal, treaty if you will, it would be very un-convict-like of you to not call me a subi, is the point.

Only if you explain at length exactly why you find subi so disagreeable (of course, I find subis disagreeable at times as well, but let's not go there).

by Invader Zim Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:56

Lara Lara Laughs wrote:Just a guess, but probably because it smacks of an "I can't be bothered to make the effort to differentiate between the many different types of people on that huge mass of land known as the subcontinent" attitude. A simple lack of respect really.

Australia is probably about as big as the sub-continent...so why don't you refer the the different cities/states instead of using the term "Australia" or "Aussies"?

by lardbucket Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:57

Beat you to it, you silly Wozzie

by tac Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:58

lardbucket wrote:Beat you to it, you silly Wozzie

zimmy likes being "beaten" to it . . .

by HH_pink Sat 05 Jan 2008, 02:59

tac wrote:
HH_pink wrote:
tac wrote:
HH_pink wrote:
furriner wrote:
tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
lardbucket wrote:Let's see if he admits it, or Tendulkar admits that he knows the word was used.

If so, you can drop back to the second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection.

Why is this so difficult for you? I will be first in line to support crucifying the batsard if it is proved he said it. In the interim, you cannot crucify a man before his misdeeds are proved.

BTW the 'second level defence ... it's a term of praise/affection' thing I find ironic since some forummers say they use the term 'subi' as a term of affection.

So Asian, African any other geographical reference to people is bad as well?

For the last time tac, I am not interested in scoring debating points or making 'smart' comments. Anything can be reduced to an absurdity unless all the parties involved make an honest effort to really talk about it.

I think tac's got a fair point there, furri. But just as we don't call you sheep shaggers 'antipodeans', tac, can we have a standard where you don't club us into 'subis'?

But antipodean isn't at all offensive . . . it just means those who live in a certain region. Go for it.

Of course I know it doesn't offend you, duh, but I'm not calling you that. So, as a deal, treaty if you will, it would be very un-convict-like of you to not call me a subi, is the point.

Only if you explain at length exactly why you find subi so disagreeable (of course, I find subis disagreeable at times as well, but let's not go there).

He's just a pretender. Can never be as good as tgm.

by tac Sat 05 Jan 2008, 03:01

Fair enough, Pinky, I've got to agree with you on that! Wink

by HH_pink Sat 05 Jan 2008, 03:03

Cheers, taccy.

by Lara Lara Laughs Sat 05 Jan 2008, 03:11

lardbucket wrote:
Lara Lara Laughs wrote:Just a guess, but probably because it smacks of an "I can't be bothered to make the effort to differentiate between the many different types of people on that huge mass of land known as Australia attitude. A simple lack of respect really.

analogy

The differences being that Australia is a nation-state and I assume that everyone there has or has access to Australian citizenship and the majority identify themselves as Australian. The subcontinent isn't a nation and people there aren't "subcontinental citizens". They don't have a subcontinental passport and the majority identify with the country they live in.

I'm sure the same is true of almost anywhere. Egyptians see themselves as Egyptian first and African second.

Besides, the Indian (see that's not so hard is it?) forummers on this board obviously have a problem with being called "subis" whereas Australians don't have a problem with being called Australians. And don't start the "I'd quite like to be called a wozzie, tozzie, crozzie, wiggedly-bum, rubbish". They're not even words.

Put it this way, if you had an Indian friend, you wouldn't introduce him to other friends as a subcontinental. You'd say he's from India. Same goes for someone from one of the African countries. Or Europe.

by furriner Sat 05 Jan 2008, 03:24

lardbucket wrote:What exactly is so offensive about the term 'subi' then, as it's clearly derived from a geographical abbreviation? Not a term I've used a lot, if at all, so I'm curious. Which peoples will be offended by it?

Identity: I am an Indian. Not Pakistan, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan, or any of the others. I will not be lumped into a catch all term that tries to contain differences in cultures, ideals, political ambitions and nationalities. Give me that respect or don't; but I do not think of myself as a subi, neither does anyone from this vast and very diverse region.

Usage: When someone uses the phrase 'subi sook' for example, it offends me. It tries to ascribe a single perjorative idea (offensive in itself) to everyone regardless of nationalities or cultures. To me it displays an unpleasant if not ugly POV.

Those are the top two.

by tac Sat 05 Jan 2008, 03:27

furriner wrote:
lardbucket wrote:What exactly is so offensive about the term 'subi' then, as it's clearly derived from a geographical abbreviation? Not a term I've used a lot, if at all, so I'm curious. Which peoples will be offended by it?

Identity: I am an Indian. Not Pakistan, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan, or any of the others. I will not be lumped into a catch all term that tries to contain differences in cultures, ideals, political ambitions and nationalities. Give me that respect or don't; but I do not think of myself as a subi, neither does anyone from this vast and very diverse region.

Usage: When someone uses the phrase 'subi sook' for example, it offends me. It tries to ascribe a single perjorative idea (offensive in itself) to everyone regardless of nationalities or cultures. To me it displays an unpleasant if not ugly POV.

Those are the top two.

Can I call you Asian or is that also offensive?

by furriner Sat 05 Jan 2008, 03:33

tac wrote:
furriner wrote:
lardbucket wrote:What exactly is so offensive about the term 'subi' then, as it's clearly derived from a geographical abbreviation? Not a term I've used a lot, if at all, so I'm curious. Which peoples will be offended by it?

Identity: I am an Indian. Not Pakistan, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan, or any of the others. I will not be lumped into a catch all term that tries to contain differences in cultures, ideals, political ambitions and nationalities. Give me that respect or don't; but I do not think of myself as a subi, neither does anyone from this vast and very diverse region.

Usage: When someone uses the phrase 'subi sook' for example, it offends me. It tries to ascribe a single perjorative idea (offensive in itself) to everyone regardless of nationalities or cultures. To me it displays an unpleasant if not ugly POV.

Those are the top two.

Can I call you Asian or is that also offensive?

I wrote what I believed in and you ask a one line smart question? How about you take the time and effort to react to what I said, take the time and effort to write something I can really respond to,and take the time and effort to give me reason to either elucidate or rethink my position?

I am out of here.

by Henry Sat 05 Jan 2008, 03:45

You Oceas crack me up.

by tac Sat 05 Jan 2008, 03:50

Henry wrote:You Oceas crack me up.

Hey, you have citizenship as well, farkwit!

by Sponsored content