These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

[JamesWales]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

Do you think it would be racist to comment on someone's eczema or a skin allergy?

No, but I think it would be racist to call a black person a chocolate biscuit, or a white person a gammon when used as an insult. Or is it okay to call people names based on the colour of animals now?

I mean, ideally Bob and the others could engage without insulting at all, but I understand that might be a bit much to ask.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

A typical response from someone with your demographic makeup .

Read the whole article for balance , people with children , who have their own business etc

Decisions were being made by unelected people based on wild predictions and algorithms.

Seems to me that your missing my point which was twofold - first a politician who imposed a policy which caused Covid infections to rise

https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/centres/cage/news/30-10-20-eat_out_to_help_out_scheme_drove_new_covid_19_infections_up_by_between_8_and_17_new_research_finds/

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/oct/30/treasury-rejects-theory-eat-out-to-help-out-caused-rise-in-covid

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-vouchers-idUKKBN27F1IR

and, second, a Conservative party leadership candidate yet again pitching their public utterances solely at the tiny proportion of the population who choose who becomes our new Prime Minister these days - I made and make no comment about the claims Sunak makes except to note that he kept quiet about them while he was in the Cabinet.

[jon1959]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

It is not an expression I ever use but I don’t see it as racist at all. It is a label to describe a certain type of almost cartoonish behaviour amongst mainly white, male, older, Tory-voting, Home Counties reactionaries.

It comes from cartoon portrayals of someone spluttering into their beer at the golf club over the latest woke ‘outrage’ and reddening as their ire rises. Those cartoons often appeared in the Mail or Telegraph in the past.

The caricature has its cultural roots but is about a mindset and behaviours - and gets applied to anyone who matches them. To call it racist, or sexist, or ageist is, ironically, another example of manufactured outrage. Something like what the word was used to describe in the first place? Too close to home, James?

[the other bob wilson]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

Bob, you are insulting people based on the colour of their skin. It's not on.

I know you struggle with people with different opinions, but that's a new low.

And I don't rush to their defence - I said the PM should resign, I just wasn't hysterical about it.

I bit once, I won't bother again.

[lardy]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

No, but I think it would be racist to call a black person a chocolate biscuit, or a white person a gammon when used as an insult. Or is it okay to call people names based on the colour of animals now?

I mean, ideally Bob and the others could engage without insulting at all, but I understand that might be a bit much to ask.

A black person is born black. A 'gammon' is not born red.

You can make a perfectly good point about how belittling someone's physical appearance that they cannot help just undermines an argument. That's reasonable, but calling it racist is silly.

[JamesWales]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

A black person is born black. A 'gammon' is not born red.

You can make a perfectly good point about how belittling someone's physical appearance that they cannot help just undermines an argument. That's reasonable, but calling it racist is silly.

Lardy,

Gammon. Pig. Pink Skin.

Like I said, it's better if more of you could engage without insults at all, but if you must, then at least don't resort to racist terms, or even dubiously racist ones.

You are trying to defend it like people would often say 'oh it's only a shortened version of pakistani'. I appreciate it might not be intended as such, but it's an insult based on skin colour and it's as simple as that. Best to steer well clear.

Get it?

[JamesWales]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

It is not an expression I ever use but I don’t see it as racist at all. It is a label to describe a certain type of almost cartoonish behaviour amongst mainly white, male, older, Tory-voting, Home Counties reactionaries.

It comes from cartoon portrayals of someone spluttering into their beer at the golf club over the latest woke ‘outrage’ and reddening as their ire rises. Those cartoons often appeared in the Mail or Telegraph in the past.

The caricature has its cultural roots but is about a mindset and behaviours - and gets applied to anyone who matches them. To call it racist, or sexist, or ageist is, ironically, another example of manufactured outrage. Something like what the word was used to describe in the first place? Too close to home, James?

I'm not outraged. It is Bob who considered Sunaks perfectly reasonable opinion and illustrated it with words such and phrases such as "brainless", "eat out to catch covid", "pathetic" and "gammon".

I merely said that Gammon is considered a racist term, it's an insult based on skin colour and best not used.

Thats reasonable in my opinion. And I'll repeat, all of this is better if you can refrain from insults entirely, but racist ones are certainly best left alone.

[lardy]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

Lardy,

Gammon. Pig. Pink Skin.

Like I said, it's better if more of you could engage without insults at all, but if you must, then at least don't resort to racist terms, or even dubiously racist ones.

You are trying to defend it like people would often say 'oh it's only a shortened version of pakistani'. I appreciate it might not be intended as such, but it's an insult based on skin colour and it's as simple as that. Best to steer well clear.

Get it?

I haven't defended it at all. I haven't used it. I've even given a reason why it's not good to use physical appearance as a stick to hit someone with.

I'm going to ignore your Pakistani comment as that is just way beyond where our discussion is. I'll put it down to getting a bit carried away - unless you really are accusing me of what it seems?

As another question, if my brother gets jaundice and I take the piss, am I being racist?

[JamesWales]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

I haven't defended it at all. I haven't used it. I've even given a reason why it's not good to use physical appearance as a stick to hit someone with.

I'm going to ignore your Pakistani comment as that is just way beyond where our discussion is. I'll put it down to getting a bit carried away - unless you really are accusing me of what it seems?

As another question, if my brother gets jaundice and I take the piss, am I being racist?

I'm sorry for being unclear, yes perhaps you aren't defending it, and I merely point out the 'its only a shortened version of pakistani', because it's another example of something that people tried to justify, but is now considered a racist slur.

I don't think your jaundice example works. The term Gammon is a slur aimed at white people. A specific sub section some may argue, but it's still a slur based on skin colour and considered racist by many. I certainly consider it a racist slur.

[lardy]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

It doesn't work because jaundice is a temporary condition which changes the skin colour and is not about race. Same as gammon.

Unless you know different, there's been no legal cases for racial discrimination related to being called gammon. There's no legal definition of it as a race or ethnic group. There is no box for it on a diversity form and we all know, deep deep down, there never will be.

Now this whole conversation is so stupid that it's on the verge of making my day worse, so I am out.

[JamesWales]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

It doesn't work because jaundice is a temporary condition which changes the skin colour and is not about race. Same as gammon.

Unless you know different, there's been no legal cases for racial discrimination related to being called gammon. There's no legal definition of it as a race or ethnic group. There is no box for it on a diversity form and we all know, deep deep down, there never will be.

Now this whole conversation is so stupid that it's on the verge of making my day worse, so I am out.

It's using an animal or food in a disparaging way to mock skin colour and is aimed only at one race.

It may be newer than calling someone a monkey or chocolate biscuit, it may (or may not) be said with less bile behind it, but the principle is the same.

It's a slur based on skin colour and is best well avoided.

Even at best, if it isn't a slur on skin colour (which is is) then it's mocking someone's physical appearance.

None of it seems reasonable to use in discussion of whether lockdowns were two intense or not, as there are perfectly reasonable opinions on both side of that debate, even if Bob can't see it.

[Rjk]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

It's using an animal or food in a disparaging way to mock skin colour and is aimed only at one race.

It may be newer than calling someone a monkey or chocolate biscuit, it may (or may not) be said with less bile behind it, but the principle is the same.

It's a slur based on skin colour and is best well avoided.

Even at best, if it isn't a slur on skin colour (which is is) then it's mocking someone's physical appearance.

None of it seems reasonable to use in discussion of whether lockdowns were two intense or not, as there are perfectly reasonable opinions on both side of that debate, even if Bob can't see it.

A white man calling another white man a gammon is completely incomparable with someone calling a black man a monkey.

If you call someone ginge is that also racial abuse in your books, as only white people typically have ginger hair?

[JamesWales]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

A white man calling another white man a gammon is completely incomparable with someone calling a black man a monkey.

If you call someone ginge is that also racial abuse in your books, as only white people typically have ginger hair?

There may or may not be different scales within racial slurs, but it is not acceptable to insult a group of people (wholly of one race) people based on a characteristic of the colour of their skin.

It's as simple as that. Am surprised people are so keen to try and keep justifying which is at very best a fairly grim insult based on someones appearance, at worst a racial slur.

It's not a good word to use, not a particularly good look to try and defend it IMO

[the other bob wilson]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

Having had a bit of time to think this through, I’d say that I would be upset to be called a gammon. However, my upset would be entirely down to the term’s political connotations. As for the so called racial implications, that wouldn’t bother me at all - as an overweight sixty odd year old who has drank too much beer and ate too much of the wrong types of food in my life, I reckon I’m fair game for someone taking the piss over the colour of my skin at certain times. The point as I see it is that I’ve contributed to making myself look the way I sometimes do and so I don’t get how that can be a basis for claims of racism.

Also, Rjk’s point about ginger hair is a very good one in this context. For about the first twenty five years or so of my life, I had bright ginger hair. I used to get the odd comment about it, but it was like water off a duck’s back because I was quite proud of it and was disappointed when it started to turn to a mousey brown colour. As a result, most of those who wanted to make something of it didn’t bother taking it any further because they saw there wasn’t a lot to be gained from it.

In saying that, I know there are lots of people with red hair whose lives are made a misery by what’s said about an aspect of their appearance and it is clearly a form of discrimination, but I don’t believe that any of them would think for a second that they were the victims of racial discrimination.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Re: These anti Lockdown conspiracy theorists

There may or may not be different scales within racial slurs, but it is not acceptable to insult a group of people (wholly of one race) people based on a characteristic of the colour of their skin.

It's as simple as that. Am surprised people are so keen to try and keep justifying which is at very best a fairly grim insult based on someones appearance, at worst a racial slur.

It's not a good word to use, not a particularly good look to try and defend it IMO

James, you are making a bit of a fool of yourself, old fruit.