Main Menu

How to make a healthy vibrant forum?

Started by Colin YNWA, 22 August, 2019, 07:41:27 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

I, Cosh

Anecdotally, I find "Bloody Jock!" much more intentionally insulting than "Bleedin' Scotch git!" but that's probably more to do with times and places.
We never really die.

Funt Solo

Quote from: I, Cosh on 19 March, 2021, 06:25:59 PM
Don't really have a conclusion here so I'll just stop.

I'm willing to accept that I've possibly misconstrued intent and am perhaps over-sensitive to that word-use. It still comes across as willfully ignorant (to me), but I don't want to bog the board down in any long-winded negativity (despite any appearances to the contrary).

I could easily just block people who insist on using it - although I'm aware that, over time, I might find myself whistling alone on a desolate island with only a (gagged) coconut for a friend.

I also have no conclusion and will stop.
++ A-Z ++  coma ++

Definitely Not Mister Pops

Quote from: I, Cosh on 19 March, 2021, 06:25:59 PM
In the same, if someone on this board says that something which doesn't affect me is upsetting them - referring to Irish as "Paddys", let's say - then there's no question about it: I wouldn't do it.

I honestly can't imagine myself giving a fuck while still taking myself seriously.

Mind you, ye should hear what we say about the English.
You may quote me on that.

The Enigmatic Dr X

A lot of it comes down to whether the person speaking is an arse or not.
Lock up your spoons!

Tjm86

Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 March, 2021, 02:02:59 PM
... And why stop there? There are all sorts of words we can use for people with different cultural histories or skin pigmentation.

[...]  Because it's okay to denigrate some cultures and not others. I'm still trying to figure out the exact rules.

I think this is where I was aiming for when I started the "are we allowed to question 'woke'" thread a while back.  We do seem to be in rather curious territory in terms of what is/nt acceptable. 

Having grown up in a forces family and served myself, I find it even more peculiar since the cultural makeup from different parts of the UK meant that regional nicknames were a part of the squadron landscape.  So Jock, Taff, Brummie, Paddy, Geordie, Scouse etc were ever-present.  It wasn't denigration, just a recognition of their roots.

I'm with Dr X in terms of the intent / persona of the user.  As a general rule an arse will look to cause offence intentionally.  Not really something I see as a problem on these parts.

I think the bigger issue we have round here is that there are some strong and passionately held beliefs around certain issues.  Sharkie's position on government and politics is generally well enough known and 'understood' that most of us don't generally tend to engage with it too deeply.  That's where he comes from.  We may not agree with it / accept it but he isn't going to change in a hurry.

I know a lot of folks round here have an issue with most religious groups and Christianity in particular.  Understandable to my way of thinking.  So religion is generally a topic that is best left alone.  it's just not worth getting bogged down in clearly well-defined positions. 

I've made the mistake of misjudging people's sense of humour on these parts myself.  This is something I've learnt from and take care when I interact with some boarders.  This isn't judging them as hypersensitive, rather as treating them with respect.  So I do think that a lot of these nicknames that I grew up around and used myself quite freely back in the day are ones that I would not choose to use these days.

Dog Deever

I'd say context is everything. When the intent is to belittle it's belittling, when it's done in ignorance it's ignorant and when it's an elbow-in-the-ribs joke it's just banter.

I find 'Jock' more irritating than 'Scotch'-'Scotch' seems like standard issue banter with the expectation of some sort of pseudo-angry reply about Scotch being a drink typed in faux-Scotch by at least one itinerant Jock. Like a ritual jokey piss-take on the entire concept by both parties.
Back when I was a window cleaner, the general reply would be "shut it ya Guffy prick" and everyone would laugh and move along, the ritual enacted for the day and there was no malice to be found at any point.

But I do hate 'Jock' - it's irrational, it just reminds me of 'Stop Your Tickling Jock', grainy black & white film of an old guy in a kilt with a ridiculous hat, tweed jacket a massive brogues, or The Goodies- I've only ever seen anyone looking like that on TV and I'm a sheepshagger (by birth, not by practice- that was never proved).
I don't know I just find it denigrating for, admittedly, completely incoherent reasons. It just seems heavily laden with negative, sneering national stereotyping, where as 'Scotch' has none of that baggage, IMO.
But it's unlikely to get a reaction out of me, except a fleeting look of minor irritation.

I don't have a conclusion either, I just thought a couple of Sweaty Socks drunkenly swinging their sporrans at each other about haggis or chips or whatever was too hilarious to miss out on.

;)
Just a little rough and tumble, Judge man.

CalHab

I'm a bit late to this, but I'll say that using Scotch for anything other than a drink is usually a sign that the user wants to niggle, offend or irritate a Scot. It's part of "banter" culture now, which I despise.

I personally don't like it and people who use it go way down in my estimation.