Leave a comment

Comments 33

philmophlegm February 1 2012, 11:20:46 UTC
Rule 21 in my '55 Rules for Debate in the Modern World' was "Just because you were offended, or chose to be offended, by something that somebody said, does not mean that what was said was offensive. Quite often the fault is with the listener." That seems applicable to the "babe" thing.

When I first stayed with my now wife at her home in North Devon, I was more than a little taken aback when the middle-aged woman who served me in the local shop said to me "Thank you, my lover*". ("I'm sure I would have remembered..." I thought.)

It would be a shame if quaint little dialect expressions like "babe" or "my lover" disappeared from the language because of political correctness. Also, if the word "babe" is going to become offensive, then an awful lot of songs will need to be rewritten...

* Well actually in a North Devon accent, it was more like "moy luvver".

Reply

pigwotflies February 1 2012, 11:27:45 UTC
I don't mind being called 'babe' by random strangers, nor 'love', 'duck', 'pet', etc.
I would object to being called 'babe' or 'baby' by my husband. I'm not sure this is logical, but there you are. :)

Reply

andrewducker February 1 2012, 11:33:56 UTC
I don't think there's any fault. Nearly everyone is offended by some language, which language it is depends on context and history.

Do people have a right not to be offended? Well, no - and in situations where they can simply take their business elsewhere then that's fine. A publicly run service, on the other hand, has a monopoly and should generally strive to be as neutral as possible with language.

When I'm in the office I'm not going to use any kind of language that might cause anyone to be uncomfortable, because everyone has to be there, and it's not fair to them to go around wearing offensive t-shirts. And I'd feel the same way about people running my local buses, I'd want them to make everyone feel comfortable.

The people running the local corner shop can act how they like - and if their customers don't like it then there's generally another corner shop a little up the road.

Reply

innerbrat February 1 2012, 14:04:41 UTC
That rule annoys me. I've seen it used at worst by people who wield it as a weapon to excuse them using loaded slurs in their conversation, and at best by people who are refusing to accept responsibility for their words.

Some people just call people 'babe', it's true. However, words like 'babe', 'honey', 'dear' are frequently used in a condescending, belittling way to women, especially in disagreements. To turn around and add "well, it's your fault if you choose to offended, babe," is additionally insulting.

Reply


momentsmusicaux February 1 2012, 11:32:04 UTC
> And it might not even do that. The advantages of established First World industries are still formidable. The only reason developing countries have been able to compete with those industries is their ability to offer employers cheap labor. Deny them that ability, and you might well deny them the prospect of continuing industrial growth, even reverse the growth that has been achieved.

I am suddenly strongly reminded of the bit in Obelix & Co where someone says that 'A slave's only right is work; you cannot remove that right from him'. Huh, fancy that!

Reply


momentsmusicaux February 1 2012, 11:34:00 UTC
Re: move your money: I've had some money in Zopa for a while. I'm don't know what I've averaged, but I'm pretty sure it's over 5%.

Reply

channelpenguin February 1 2012, 11:49:27 UTC
interesting. I was intrigued when Zopa started up but never brave enough to take the plunge.

Reply

momentsmusicaux February 1 2012, 11:54:57 UTC
Just logged in to take a look.

I opened the account in 2009 (IIRC). My all-time summary shows £10 of bad debt. My tax statement for last year shows I made 41.34 on £500, after fees of 4.99. So actually more like 8%. I'd definitely recommend it.

Reply


momentsmusicaux February 1 2012, 11:43:35 UTC
I have wondered what would happen to the political landscape post-independence. The SNP splitting up seems a fairly likely possibility. And what would the other parties do? Would be get a pro-union party, even if a tiny minority one? I'm guessing they would rebrand in some way, but I've no idea how.

Reply

andrewducker February 1 2012, 11:51:40 UTC
I think there'd be massive rebranding, at the very least. After all, it's bad enough being punished at the polls for the actions of your London masters when you're all part of the same country...

Reply

danieldwilliam February 1 2012, 13:47:18 UTC
I think the centre-left become pretty crowded in Scotland in the 2016 or more likely 2020 general election ( ... )

Reply

andrewducker February 1 2012, 13:59:42 UTC
Of course, Labour have tended to be more authoritarian than the SNP have recently been trending, and I can see a swathe of their support heading liberal-wards again, post-independence.

Reply


marrog February 1 2012, 11:44:03 UTC
Transgender People are Completely Banned From Boarding Airplanes in Canada (unless they've had reassignment surgery)

I definitely shouldn't have read any of the comments on that one...

Reply

momentsmusicaux February 1 2012, 12:04:28 UTC
I've probably not scrolled down enough yet as so far I'm merely amused.

> Im appalled that you are appalled by this law and can’t think for yourself. A passport first of all: doesn’t read Gender…It reads Sex…a genetic male can identify themselves as female and vice-versa…that would be gender…but sex denotes your biology, not your gender - they are two different things but thats why they ask your sex not gender.

This is technically correct... thus the corollary is that *everyone* should be asked to drop their pants and show that their bits correspond with what's written in their passport... ROTFL!

Reply

marrog February 1 2012, 12:13:16 UTC
Sure, but that comment misses the mark completely because it overlooks the idea that you could be marked as 'Sex: M' but if your picture on the passport and you in real life match, what difference does it make if you're a 'Sex: M' in a dress? There are already rules about people looking similar enough to their passport photos - if you significantly change your appearance you're meant to get your passport changed - so all the argument about gender vs. sex is entirely irrelevant to the argument. It's not even about 'passing' or whatever - by this rule if I show up at the airport dressed in a tux (by no means out of the realms of possibility) I could be turned away for non-conformity ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up