Paul Staplewallet

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hitch wrote:

fascinating to see people getting down to the nitty gritty of pc bollocks.

Why would anybody be averse to that "PC bollocks"?

All PC is is an awareness that sometimes language offends and such language is best avoided as a result unless you are some sort of bigot deliberately trying to be insulting. When I was growing up my parents had a special word for it: "manners".

There were others that hit roughly the same spot: tolerancy, politeness, respect and decency being two of them.

What is so wrong with being polite, tolerant, well-mannered, decent and respectful?

What does anybody gain, anything that is worth having anyway, from being un-PC, from being ill-mannered, intolerant, rude, disrespectful and profane?

I understand that these people find resorting to a limited vocabulary easy and comforting, so let's just park that to one side, but what do they feel they have gained by abusing the right to free speech by causing deliberate offence?

In your world, ATD membership would be in single figures

beesrus wrote:

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

beesrus wrote:

As an aside, swedes in Cornwall are known as turnips, due to them being Swedish turnips. In England, a turnip is a turnip, and a swede a swede.
Deep down, us humans all know when we're abusing others with our language and actions, and life is full of people trying to justify that abuse, and people defending themselves. One overriding "morality" seems to hold sway across the board, and that is it's ok to kick up, but it's not ok to kick down. It's probably a natural herd necessity somewhere to follow that premise, or social structure fails and it all goes belly up. Quite clear to me in a clear way
Ho hum

Agree with this and especially in light of our previous exchanges, for which I apologise.

Thanks for that Innocent, much appreciated. We all get it wrong sometimes and I knew a roomy of Dick Trickle had to be a good sort.
No one likes continuing stand offs over very little.
As soon as anyone starts giving me the old anti pc fing, I instantly know what animal I'm dealing with. And that's as it should be. Reacting to, and describing someone's behaviour, rather than their creed, race, religion etc is where it's at. Funny it should be Graiser encouraging a Stapleton thread to descend into politics. And there was me thinking he was wanting to be apolitical on here. Naughty Graiser.

As far as Stapleton goes, he was nowhere near as bad as Todd and Kagami in my mind, but an effective pre pack 10 years on seeing Jones, Wrathall and Stapleton back, would be an insult to all Argyle fans. Stapleton, who I have known way back before he was chairman, made a big big mistake, and I don't see how he should come back in any role whatsoever apart from a bulk standard fan.
I wonder if Brent wants to stand back, once his investment is secure and hugely profitable, and hand over the boring football stuff for not much more than a £1 on a strictly contained budget and lucrative rent to the old guard. He originally wanted Ridsdale to play a similar role.

I think you'll find the descent away from the subject matter was started by others, which ive joined in, if that's ok with you, but never mind you carry on with your pretentiousness.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

What does anybody gain, anything that is worth having anyway, from being un-PC, from being ill-mannered, intolerant, rude, disrespectful and profane?

I understand that these people find resorting to a limited vocabulary easy and comforting, so let's just park that to one side, but what do they feel they have gained by abusing the right to free speech by causing deliberate offence?

Have you ever addressed your concerns about abusing free speech to the BBC?

They regularly allow the use of the C word in dramas. A word that was taboo in my younger days and a word I still refuse to accept.

This is so typical of your one sided bigoted view. You only see what you want to see.

We're in Alf Garnett territory here. Things are going cuntingly, aren't they!

You see anybody who ever drops the C bomb does so deliberately knowing the effect it will have whether that is to shock or offend. There is an openness, a decency and a legitimacy to using it. No sleight. Nothing hidden. It is proudly out there and we all know it is.

No words should be taboo for their own sake. As an example if you can't use the word "feck" then you can't say "feck the government". If you can't say "cnut" then you can't say "Nigel Farage is obviously a cnut". This trade-off is unacceptable. Art has many tools at its disposal and obscenity is just as valid as any other.

None of which is anything to do with PC. I'm not trying to ban the usage of any word at all. Merely pointing out that PC is so often derided by the very special form of knuckleheaded, knuckledragging, knuckle merchant, of which Nooly is but one and just as "patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" then so too "PC gone mad" is the last refuge of the intransigent bigot. Using, or defending, using words like "Japs" (especially when there was only one Japanese person concerned) is cowardly, lazy, deliberate, insinuating that there is something wrong with being Japanese and therefore racist, misleading and ugly.

So there's your difference

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hitch wrote:

fascinating to see people getting down to the nitty gritty of pc bollocks.

Why would anybody be averse to that "PC bollocks"?

All PC is is an awareness that sometimes language offends and such language is best avoided as a result unless you are some sort of bigot deliberately trying to be insulting. When I was growing up my parents had a special word for it: "manners".

There were others that hit roughly the same spot: tolerancy, politeness, respect and decency being two of them.

What is so wrong with being polite, tolerant, well-mannered, decent and respectful?

What does anybody gain, anything that is worth having anyway, from being un-PC, from being ill-mannered, intolerant, rude, disrespectful and profane?

I understand that these people find resorting to a limited vocabulary easy and comforting, so let's just park that to one side, but what do they feel they have gained by abusing the right to free speech by causing deliberate offence?

In your world, ATD membership would be in single figures

We don't know that, do we? And they'd be no loss if they went. Any website that needs to indulge casual racism to exist doesn't really deserve to, does it? feck the racists and bigots. I couldn't care less about their opinions or feelings.

We lose 3 or 4 bigots and could gain, in the long run, many more users put off, because I know I was for a very long time, by the bigots.

And once again I am not trying to ban anything. I have no interest in doing so. I have no power with which to implement or enforce such a ban.

All I'm doing is calling dodgy racist rhetoric, in this case in the post of Pasoti's self-acclaimed co-owner, for what it is.

Calling a spade a spade. Y'dig?

You aren't thinking far enough ahead. The 'Thought Police' are coming ever closer. You seem to be encouraging it by giving all thoughts and sayings a name. Be it racist, sexist, xenophobic etc.
The press are clearly under threat. It's only a matter of time before social media is regulated and policed. You are being foolish.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

.

We lose 3 or 4 bigots and could gain, in the long run, many more users put off, because I know I was for a very long time, by the bigots.

Bit rich coming from you. You're one of the biggest 'political' bigots ever! In fact, your viewpoints on so many subjects almost define the word bigot.

But you would never ever see that. You have no self awareness at all.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hitch wrote:

fascinating to see people getting down to the nitty gritty of pc bollocks.

Why would anybody be averse to that "PC bollocks"?

All PC is is an awareness that sometimes language offends and such language is best avoided as a result unless you are some sort of bigot deliberately trying to be insulting. When I was growing up my parents had a special word for it: "manners".

There were others that hit roughly the same spot: tolerancy, politeness, respect and decency being two of them.

What is so wrong with being polite, tolerant, well-mannered, decent and respectful?

What does anybody gain, anything that is worth having anyway, from being un-PC, from being ill-mannered, intolerant, rude, disrespectful and profane?

I understand that these people find resorting to a limited vocabulary easy and comforting, so let's just park that to one side, but what do they feel they have gained by abusing the right to free speech by causing deliberate offence?

In your world, ATD membership would be in single figures

We don't know that, do we? And they'd be no loss if they went. Any website that needs to indulge casual racism to exist doesn't really deserve to, does it? feck the racists and bigots. I couldn't care less about their opinions or feelings.

We lose 3 or 4 bigots and could gain, in the long run, many more users put off, because I know I was for a very long time, by the bigots.

And once again I am not trying to ban anything. I have no interest in doing so. I have no power with which to implement or enforce such a ban.

All I'm doing is calling dodgy racist rhetoric, in this case in the post of Pasoti's self-acclaimed co-owner, for what it is.

Calling a spade a spade. Y'dig?

I was mainly referring to your comments " ill mannered, intolerant, rude, disrespectful and profane where a lot of commentary from ATDers could fall into those categories and when anyone of us are on the end of such comments and get a hissy fit about it ATD could be a lonely place.

Additionally I'm surprised in your so PC world that you didn't think more deeply about the wording of your last sentence.

Why?

Ahhh, this thread, Safe space* needed




*That IS PC bollox.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Why?

I won't respond to that.

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Why?

I won't respond to that.

Quite, pointless... .At this stage of the game if he has to ask 'why', he's never going to understand.

Can't beat a good old bit of after dinner male badinage, masquerading as serious debate.

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Why?

I won't respond to that.

If it is good enough for Plutarch, Erasmus, Oscar Wilde, Charles Dickens, W. Somerset Maugham, and Jonathan Swift then it is good enough for me.

Admittedly the deviation from the original Greek in Udall's 1542 translation from Plutarch's Apophthegmata grates a little but figs were not widely identified in 16th century Britain so it is understandable.

I think you are seeing things that were never there.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Why?

I won't respond to that.

If it is good enough for Plutarch, Erasmus,  Oscar Wilde, Charles Dickens, W. Somerset Maugham, and Jonathan Swift then it is good enough for me.

Admittedly the deviation from the original Greek in Udall's 1542 translation from Plutarch's Apophthegmata grates a little but figs were not widely identified in 16th century Britain so it is understandable.

I think you are seeing things that were never there.

LOl... Using google to save your argument...

Why didn't you mention the University of Vermont's Wolfgang Mieder's. 2002 case study Call a Spade a Spade: From Classical Phrase to Racial Slur.

Jeez Frannie. You're a racist and you don't even know it!.

LOL... Using facts to support your argument is a bad thing? How can that be?

Just goes to show that words and phrases can evolve new meanings or in the case of "spade" have new meanings forced upon them where it was never originally intended.

Just like "Brit" did.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/13/london-tube-scraps-ladies-gentlemen-make-announcements-gender/

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Why?

I won't respond to that.

If it is good enough for Plutarch, Erasmus,  Oscar Wilde, Charles Dickens, W. Somerset Maugham, and Jonathan Swift then it is good enough for me.

Admittedly the deviation from the original Greek in Udall's 1542 translation from Plutarch's Apophthegmata grates a little but figs were not widely identified in 16th century Britain so it is understandable.

I think you are seeing things that were never there.

You google whatever question you wish to ask, your PC brigade have hijacked many words and phrases over the years and unfortunately the "Spade" word is another, I'm surprised your not aware of this as you put yourself across as a person of such infinite knowledge, but perhaps my impressions incorrect.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Just goes to show that words and phrases can evolve new meanings or in the case of "spade" have new meanings forced upon them where it was never originally intended.

Just like "Brit" did.

As do several of the modern racist terms.

To be honest I suspected that the "spade" thing had originated in Contract Bridge playing. Whatever. It has nothing, in origin, to do with race.

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Just goes to show that words and phrases can evolve new meanings or in the case of "spade" have new meanings forced upon them where it was never originally intended.

Just like "Brit" did.

As do several of the modern racist terms.

What terms are used by modern racists then?

"Japs", obviously, any others?

Spade.

I'd hardly call that modern. Or racist as I have already explained.

Les Miserable wrote:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/13/london-tube-scraps-ladies-gentlemen-make-announcements-gender/

A perfect example of PC'ness.

C'mon people.. That bigoted Wimbledon tournement should be shamed into doing the right thing.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'd hardly call that modern. Or racist as I have already explained.

Who cares. You're still wrong.  You make racist statements and you're not even aware of it.

Clueless.

I did not make a racist statement. You forced your own interpretation on to it. Not the same thing at all.