h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

For the record, despite Mr Ed & I disagreeing on pretty much everything, I'm not the yikeser.

Well once they are properly hidded you ought to have had an email automatically (I have some experience with this sort of thing due to the Della Wars).

I would email Jimster and ask him what is going on.

>>"Say somebody were to refer - in passing - to an individual as 'English' and then somebody were to pick up on this and gratuitously point out that he can't be considered English because his parents were not English born."

EtB,
If you're referring to SS's post #1427, which I think you were in post #1428, SS wasn't saying that people can't be considered English, but suggesting that anecdotally, many people don't want to be called English, and asking if such people were idiots.

Not quite. There was a previous post in which he suggested that Yusuf Islam isn't English. In the post you refer to, he tried to justify it in a 'some of my best friends are black' way. The post [someone] then Yikesed included a rebuttal which pointed out that identity is multi-faceted, that identities are not mutually exclusive (eg one can be Black British *and* British), and that it is not for anyone to say that someone whom clearly is English - and would probably define himself as English - isn't.

Am I wrong to suggest that the original assertion was both idiotic and smacks of racism?

Meanwhile...I haven't had a Yikes e-mail and can't find either Jimster's or the mods' addresses. Anyone? I'm trying to clarify in what way my posts broke the House Rules. Does 'eejit' count as flaming, defined as "posting something that's angry and mean-spirited"?

(SWL - no, I didn't think you were the Yikeser. It's not one of your faults. Myself...I'll Yikes offensive racist material, but I'll let abuse against myself stand.)

Incidentally...I'm not quite sure of Richard Thompson's parentage, but I *think* at least one of his parents might have been Scottish-born. So SS has been slipping up.

See Post 1415 to see how this silly unpleasantness started.

<<"Now, is this positive or just a ratings grab?">>



I like it

Let's just hope she's interesting.

Ali G's been my favourite so far I think.

>>"In the post you refer to, he tried to justify it in a 'some of my best friends are black' way."

Are you suggesting SS shouldn't be allowed to put forward any anecdotal evidence for fear of being accused of racism?

I took what SS said to be more of an illustration of the complexity - that there are some people who don't feel 'English' despite being citizens, though that could be because they see 'English' as more a cultural thing they don't feel affinity with, (or feel excluded from) rather than a case of nationality.
However, it would have been interesting to hear what such people thought their nationality (culturally or otherwise) really was, whether they felt nationality was relevant, or whether they felt British but not really English.

Especially in the context of sub-British nationalities, it is at least worth debating whether people born in one part of the Britain but with neither parent from that part of Britain actually identify with the smaller nationality, or with Britain as a whole.
If someone had both parents born elsewhere in mainland Europe, but was born in Wrexham, they may feel rather less Welsh than more local people, even if they feel as British.
Likewise, someone born and brought up in Wrexham who has English parents may be considered by many locals as English, and may not feel particularly Welsh.

EtB: >Which is of these behaviours is most unpleasant:
- Racism?
- Ignoring racism?
- Calling a racist an eejit?<

This actually is a very interesting question, the answer to which is not so cut and dried as it may first appear, I suspect. Of course, we immediately dispense with option three. A no-brainer.

One is tempted by a knee jerk reaction to choose option #2, ignoring racism. On further thought, however, it leaves me wondering whether some people make racist statements simply as a way to draw attention to themselves in some perverted way, perhaps being unable to garner attention through more admirable means. In cases such as this, it might be a dose of medicine simply to ignore them ... the one thing they would least desire. From their perspective, any attention, even negative attention, might be preferabel to being ignored.

And of course if there were no racism to begin with, then there'd be no racism to ignore. So from this vantage point the original racism is the root cause. But does this make it worse than ignoring it? Is murder worse than ignoring murder? In this case, I'd have to say yes, of course; the murder ends a life, ignoring it doesn't (at least in the short-term). So by analogy, I'd guess that racism is worse than ignoring racism. Even so, I see it as not being totally an open and shut case either way. Opposing/alternate views?

Potholer:
Look back at the context. Do you *really* think that picking up on a tangential reference to someone's Englishness and doubting it on the basis of parentage is not an everyday symptom of petty racism? It's the kind of thing that can happen in any pub conversation, and you can be pretty sure where someone's coming from. (and btw - I would make the same objection to someone's face). For me, such remarks certainly go beyond 'The Bonobo Limit'. No question. And OK - so I may have but my shite-tinted glasses on thereafter, but the 'justification' looked somewhat half-hearted and disingenuous to me.

JCN:
>>it might be a dose of medicine simply to ignore them

Possibly. I happen to disagree. It's my opinion that people who spout such guff should be publically ridiculed (hence my choice of 'eejit'). We should make it plain that such people - who, one speculates, see a special virtue in their own, limited brand of Englishness - are out of step with polite, decent society. "Not in my name."

Correction. The term is 'The Bonobo Threshold'. (not my own coinage)

>>I believe his parents are Greek or Turkish or somthing similar.<< SS

I'm still curious to know what is similar to Greek or Turkish. Two peoples that have been at psychological and warring, loggerheads for quite sometime I believe. A bit like saying, 'Israeli or Palestinian or something similar'

Or maybe this just means all the Mediterranean peoples are to be lumped together. I mean it's not even geographically accurate in that most of Turkey is in Asia, Greece is in Europe. Or religiously similar. Greeks are traditionally Orthodox Christians, Turks are Muslims.

It may seem like I'm being pedantic to some people, but when I read this phrase, it made me cringe.

Lister > Like the ancient Turkish legend.

Kryten > I think that legend is Greek sir...

Lister > Whatever, some country big on curly shoes and humous.

I have many Cypriot friends. They insist that they're not Greek Cypriot or Turkish Cypriot. They're Cypriot.

(That's Cypriot Cypriot, btw - not British-Cypriot But then...they live in Cyprus.)

There was also the film 'Mediterraneo' about the Italians occupying a Greek island. Throughout the film, various characters, Italian, Greek and Turkish said to one another, "One face, one race!"





(Again apropos of nothing - I noticed yesterday that pretty much all Scottish Executive literature includes the 'One Scotland' logo from their anti-racism campaign).

>> I have many Cypriot friends<< Edward

I have many black and Jewish friends.

And I have many Cypriot relatives. But I don't know most of 'em.

TRiG.

Seriously it's really quite sad what has happened in Cypress. I went there on holiday a few years ago and in the mountain villages there are numerous houses that are falling into decay, awaiting the return of their Turkish Cypriot owners.

I told the people in my local Turkish Cypriot shop I had visited Polis in the south. They said most of their relatives came from there originally. They told me the situation is being complicated by Turkish mainlanders being re-housed in Northern Cypress. The UN greenline between the north and south is still absolute. And most of the world refuses to recognise Northern Cypress

>> I would email Jimster and ask him what is going on. <<


I wouldn't recommend doing that; I won't reply to personal emails about moderation.

However, once the complaint has been processed by the Moderators, you'll be sent an email if they feel the post shuld be removed, so you can reply to that instead,

However, it would really help things if in future everyone stops resorting to insults.

And, er, Merry Christmas.

Sorry Jim, I didnt mean to you personally I meant at the "feedback" email address that has always been used when I have corresponded with you complaining (usually fruitlessly) about why my post should be re-instated.

>>However, it would really help things if in future everyone stops resorting to insults.

Ooh! 'ark at 'er!

I'd have pur 'eejit' more in the class of ridicule than insult - and fair comment at that. But chacun as son gôut. It does raise the issue of what is an acceptable level of ridicule when faced with flagrant racism. Perhaps we could have some guidance on that?

I would take it that we're not expected to simply ignore racism. Might we also need some guidance on what are deemed appropriate strategies for dealing with it?

I believe there should be a rule that a yikeser should post an explanation as to why he had the offensive post removed (if only so that the offensive poster can rephrase his or her opinion in milder terms).