Gotta Put somewhere

[antichrist]

If you are referring to the Spastic Centre changing its name (and you weren't at all clear), that has nothing to do with harrassment of spastics. It was a marketing issue — and although I am not totally au fait, I'd hazard that the community-at-large has won that war and stolen the word from its original users.
edit: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-02-0...centre/1935116

FM radio, facebook, workplaces and indeed this BB are full of people declaring they were spastic on the weekend (meaning they couldn't control their limbs) and I think spastic people have decided that the term is now one of derision.

Well gee they are over sensitive, who cant take a word in it's intended context. They should be forced to accept it just as other minorities should cop being called names they dont like. PC has gone way too far.

[Basil]

Cautiously agree on that basis, assuming context/intent can in fact cause no offence. Gratuitous use is not an option.

Detente!

I'd never heard ranga before.

Oh come one! The media's been rife (but perhaps not the left-coddling variety that you digest though!).

However my cringing is colour-blind - I also object to terms like wog...

Well back to decringing school for you. One of my good frinds refers to himself (very happily) as a wog (he's from Serbia), while my wife and her kids (born in Sweden and Australia respectively) refers to herself very happily and regularly as a wog. I'll let them know that apologist cringing on their behalf is alive and well in some quarters. They will be amused.

What about imitation of non-white accents? What about imitation of foreign white accents?

[antichrist]

Uneducated Mohammed Ali was more alert then your friend - he would not tolerate slave name of Cassius Clay bestowed on him - he did not bend with racists, that is why he is respected. Just like spastics dont like to be called spastics

[Basil]

Well gee they are over sensitive, who cant take a word in it's intended context.

I think they should have tried to embark on a campaign to reclaim the word as opposed to abandon it. With that discussion out of the way, what's your opinion on the hijacking of the term as described?

[antichrist]

I think they should have tried to embark on a campaign to reclaim the word as opposed to abandon it. With that discussion out of the way, what's your opinion on the hijacking of the term as described?

why should they have to debate with insensitive hateful souls who will laugh at them even more. Just like that Aussie Olympic official, Arthur Tunstill was it? Or the Duke of Edinburgh your mate

[Basil]

Uneducated Mohammed Ali was more alert then your friend - he would not tolerate slave name of Cassius Clay bestowed on him - he did not bend with racists, that is why he is respected. Just like spastics dont like to be called spastics

Confused dribble. In the first instance, CC denouncing his slave name has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

You're grappling and fudging in ever-increasing and tenuous circles to justify the abolition of certain words in certain circumstances on behalf of people who themselves are very comfortable using.

[Basil]

why should they have to debate with insensitive hateful souls who will laugh at them even more.

Which side of the Spastic Centre debate are you taking? Are you saying that they shoud have abandoned the name or hardened-up and stood firm? As usual far too may bodged analogies and hanging questions from your half-cooked world.

[antichrist]

Confused dribble. In the first instance, CC denouncing his slave name has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

You're grappling and fudging in ever-increasing and tenuous circles to justify the abolition of certain words in certain circumstances on behalf of people who themselves are very comfortable using.

exactly the opposite, spastics changed their name because they did not like the word, they were forced to change it due to insensitive in-PC people.

Mohammed changing his name has everything to do with it. He wasn't going to let other different condescending pr.cks define him. JUst like he called Frazier a gorilla etc, and Uncle Tom

[antichrist]

Well back to decringing school for you. One of my good frinds refers to himself (very happily) as a wog (he's from Serbia), while my wife and her kids (born in Sweden and Australia respectively) refers to herself very happily and regularly as a wog. I'll let them know that apologist cringing on their behalf is alive and well in some quarters. They will be amused.

What about imitation of non-white accents? What about imitation of foreign white accents?

__________________

AC
they dont realise that accepting their or their parents abusive'label they are going along with Uncle Tom and Dick and Harry as well. It is like women accepting wife bashing it is an insult to all women. As those women wearing the chaldor out of choice is also an insult to those women who are forced to wear it. That is those wearing out of choice is going along with the abuser in other situation.

Probably but I have forgotten coz Mod deleted my first effort

[antichrist]

I know elderly Ukrainians, who 50 years after being labelled w...s for their lack of English, still feel very hurt by it and never felt part of Australia because of that. And still keep to themselves because of it.

[Basil]

exactly the opposite, spastics changed their name because they did not like the word, they were forced to change it due to insensitive in-PC people.

Duh! We know that — because I informed you about of the background facts about 6 posts back. What I am asking you is whether you support their change or whether you believe they should have defended their name. I'm not looking for a running commentary of what happened.

Mohammed changing his name has everything to do with it. He wasn't going to let other different condescending pr.cks define him.

Bzzzt. See if you can miss the point a third time. Mohammed. Condescending pricks. Slavery bad. Name change. All good. No issue.

Your analogy (unsurprisingly) has nothing to do with terms that
- aren't intended as derogatory
- aren't received as derogatory
- but decided as derogatory by a third party (viz cringing apologist do-gooding white boys such as you)

[Basil]

they dont realise that accepting their or their parents abusive'label they are going along with Uncle Tom and Dick and Harry as well.

Playing God again Peter? So your God-list to date is:
- spending other people's money
- euthanasing some people with a disability who can't be supported privately
- disallowing/ critisizing some people the right to refer to themselves as wog

[Kevin Bonham]

Playing God again Peter? So your God-list to date is:
- spending other people's money
- euthanasing some people with a disability who can't be supported privately
- disallowing/ critisizing some people the right to refer to themselves as wog

-stopping ten year olds playing in the Aus Champs

Frequently astonishes me that such a strident opponent of organised religion is such a moralistic paternalist.

[antichrist]

Duh! We know that — because I informed you about of the background facts about 6 posts back. What I am asking you is whether you support their change or whether you believe they should have defended their name. I'm not looking for a running commentary of what happened.

AC
(only dong few things at once) they should not have had to do anything if insensitive pr.... had become PC, just as all people of injustice should not have had to suffer a particular injustice and to have to waste their life to struggle against such injustice. They are not queing up to be JC on the cross you know (kb pls dont mind this analogy)

[Basil]

they should not have had to do anything if insensitive pr.... had become PC

For the third time (geez you're a waste of bandwidth) ... forget they and should have.

What would you have done? A or B?
a) Change name to avoid connotations
b) Not changed name and defended the turf