****** in the woodpile.

[Bob001]

Robert Byrd kept his U.S. Senate seat after using he phrase "White *******" in an interview on Fox:

Well, he said it 2001, and he apologized immediately. Without excusing him in any way, he was using the n-word as a old southernism for a low-class person. He had been a member of the KKK before he entered politics, and that didn't keep him from getting elected and re-elected either.

Here's a interesting response at the time about the uses and misuses of the word:
http://blackelectorate.com/articles.asp?ID=337

 

[Ian Osborne]

She's my MP. I hope she has to resign, but I doubt it will happen. May won't want a potentially damaging by-election and the possible loss of another MP. As someone else postulated earlier, it will all blow over.

 

[quadraginta]

dup

 

[quadraginta]

Is there another Andy Capp? The one I know from the cartoon is a feckless layabout, fond of drinking and gambling but not especially known for racism.


Well, Christie originally used the word in title of the book that was called And Then There Were None in the US. The use of the word was regarded differently in the UK in 1930s (and even much later, into the 70s at least).

<snip>

I am reminded of the story about the movie Dam Busters. Wing Commander Guy Gibson had a black Lab named "******", who was a darling of the Lancaster squadrons being trained for the eponymous dam attacks. He would accompany Gibson on training flights, and hung out with the pilots. He had a reputation for liking his beer. (Yeah. The dog.)

The dog was popular enough that his name was used as the code word to signal the success of the mission against the Möhne Dam, " -. .. --. --. . .-.". (I hope I just didn't get in trouble for trying to evade the auto-censor. )

By tragic coincidence the dog was killed by an automobile the night before that mission.

All in all this made it somewhat inevitable that the dog would become a notable character in both the book published in 1951 about the raids and the movie that was made from it only four years after the book came out.

The dog's name was used ... unaltered ... in both the book and the movie without causing any particular notice. As one of the actors in the film commented in an interview about the movie half a century later, when asked if anybody had made any comments about the name when the movie was being made, "No, none at all. Political correctness wasn't even invented, and an awful lot of black dogs were called ******."

This changed with airings of the movie decades later, starting with an ITV showing in the late 90s, in which all references to the dog's name were cut.

Many people were not pleased, and ITV blamed it on an overzealous underling.

Since then showings of the movie have ranged from leaving it alone to dubbing in alternate names. "Trigger" has been used as a replacement.

(But they still aired the Morse Code signal "-. .. --. --. . .-." without change. )

 

[quadraginta]

Well, he said it 2001, and he apologized immediately. Without excusing him in any way, he was using the n-word as a old southernism for a low-class person. He had been a member of the KKK before he entered politics, and that didn't keep him from getting elected and re-elected either.

<snip>

To tidy up the record a bit, he was only involved with the KKK for a few years and publicly disavowed any contemporary involvement with them when he first ran for national office in 1952.

It isn't clear whether this generated a net gain or a net loss of votes. Being opposed to the KKK in 1952 wasn't necessarily an admirable position to take among white voters in the early '50s. Not in West Virginia at any rate, where the public sensibilities about race relations tended to be more aligned with Southern viewpoints than not.

 

[Trebuchet]

I'm old enough that I learned the "eenie meenie" rhyme with the N-word. But that's the only place I actually recall using it.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Is this thread meant to exclude the USA? Shouldn't it be in SI/CE?

There's a different standard in the USA, perhaps because our racial battles were more prominent earlier. Terms that were acceptable in the USA in the 30s to 50s, albeit eschewed in "polite company" are nearly totally banned in common usage now. The N-word is the most famous, but the f-word for gay people, d-word for lesbians, spick, beaner, chink, wetback, trannie, pollack, kike,... etc... are all pretty much considered bigoted comments at worst and culturally/sociologically insensitive at best.

The Aussies and Kiwis are the last holdout, I've found. It's probably from the blood rushing to their heads having to hang upside down on the bottom of the earth, but the "didn't mean nothin' by it, it's just what we've always called 'em" stubborn defense is still entrenched.

Times change... get with 'em.

 

[The Atheist]

The Aussies and Kiwis are the last holdout, I've found.

Aussie: yes, NZ: no.

It's never been a term of endearment in NZ, with a variety of other racial epithets at our disposal. The n-word was almost never used here and it still isn't. The only time I ever hear it is when ******* are talking to other *******, calling each other "******".

Beats me.

 

[angrysoba]

To tidy up the record a bit, he was only involved with the KKK for a few years and publicly disavowed any contemporary involvement with them when he first ran for national office in 1952.

It isn't clear whether this generated a net gain or a net loss of votes. Being opposed to the KKK in 1952 wasn't necessarily an admirable position to take among white voters in the early '50s. Not in West Virginia at any rate, where the public sensibilities about race relations tended to be more aligned with Southern viewpoints than not.

"Were you ever a member of the KKK?"

"Yeah, but only for a few years."

 

[angrysoba]

Is this thread meant to exclude the USA? Shouldn't it be in SI/CE?

There's a different standard in the USA, perhaps because our racial battles were more prominent earlier. Terms that were acceptable in the USA in the 30s to 50s, albeit eschewed in "polite company" are nearly totally banned in common usage now. The N-word is the most famous, but the f-word for gay people, d-word for lesbians, spick, beaner, chink, wetback, trannie, pollack, kike,... etc... are all pretty much considered bigoted comments at worst and culturally/sociologically insensitive at best.

The Aussies and Kiwis are the last holdout, I've found. It's probably from the blood rushing to their heads having to hang upside down on the bottom of the earth, but the "didn't mean nothin' by it, it's just what we've always called 'em" stubborn defense is still entrenched.

Times change... get with 'em.

I think certain subcultures such as those rappers seem to get a pass on not only the n-word, which they will often claim an entitlement to but also the f-word for gay people and a probably a few other ethnic slurs which will be defended as "keeping it real".

 

[Brainster]

Is there another Andy Capp? The one I know from the cartoon is a feckless layabout, fond of drinking and gambling but not especially known for racism.

The point is that he's an unintelligent lout, and that is mostly my impression of the kind of people who used the n-word back in the 1970s. It just marked the person as low-class.

The point is not to knock Andy Capp--I loved that strip. But would I want to be that type of person? No thanks.

 

[quadraginta]

"Were you ever a member of the KKK?"

"Yeah, but only for a few years."

I know it is hard to believe these days, but some people rethink the errors of their youth and change.

 

[zooterkin]

Is this thread meant to exclude the USA? Shouldn't it be in SI/CE?

Well, it is about a specific incident involving a British MP, and the ramifications of what might happen given the fact that the Tories have a minority government.

 

[angrysoba]

I know it is hard to believe these days, but some people rethink the errors of their youth and change.

Yes, that is a fair point, and his change was in the right direction. I just think the "only for a few years" bit detracts from that.

 

[jimbob]

My understanding is that the expression was more accurately: "the ******" in the woodshed" and implied a secret past sexual liaison leading to a "tainting" of one's gene pool. It is therefore manages to be racist and deeply offensive at multiple levels.

As to the OP- yes, suspending the MP would be the minimum I would see as appropriate. What one blurts out reflects what is rattling around one's head.

Some context.

http://www.devonlive.com/anne-marie...0365953-detail/story.html#X7t5LH6VfdDH8G9T.99

Newton Abbot Tory candidate Anne Marie Morris has distanced herself from comments made by her electoral agent and partner who claimed 'that the crisis in education was due entirely to non-British born immigrants and their high birth rates'.

Given that, I don't think this was just an antiquated expression that was rattling round her subconscious. Although I am actually trying to think of some equivalent phrase in common use* that implies something nasty deliberately hidden.

How about "Racism in the Tory party is like the horsemeat in the lasagne"?

Over on badscience, one poster (TomP) came up with the phrase, "Vice-signalling" for deliberate use of offensive terms. I think this is part of it. Signal one's membership of the (((bigoted))) group by peppering one's speech with such terms when one thinks it's off the record.






*that one I was aware of, possibly due to reading old books - I certainly can't recall hearing it.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Aussie: yes, NZ: no.

It's never been a term of endearment in NZ, with a variety of other racial epithets at our disposal. The n-word was almost never used here and it still isn't. The only time I ever hear it is when ******* are talking to other *******, calling each other "******".

Beats me.

I wasn't exclusively discussing the N-word in that paragraph. You can replace with any number of euphemisms I've heard (and you've heard) commonly uttered by Kiwis and Aussies. I was speaking solely as a comparison to other countries in the Anglosphere (don't want to say Commonwealth because that excludes the USA). I just think the antipodeans have an ornery streak and it's taking longer to change... but changing, it is.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Well, it is about a specific incident involving a British MP, and the ramifications of what might happen given the fact that the Tories have a minority government.

Is it? Or, more accurately, was it? It now seems to be about something that belongs in SI/CE.

 

[The Atheist]

I wasn't exclusively discussing the N-word in that paragraph. You can replace with any number of euphemisms I've heard (and you've heard) commonly uttered by Kiwis and Aussies.

There's quite a difference in racial pejoratives between us and Oz, and I have no idea why, because other colloquialisms are generally shared.

They have "boongs", which is a term never used in NZ, and the n-word was (and as you say, still is) used there, while we had the Maori-specific "hori" and the old faithful "coconut" for Pasifika people.

I just think the antipodeans have an ornery streak and it's taking longer to change... but changing, it is.

I'm not sure that outside of public speech much has changed anywhere.

Take Stormfront as a good example - you can't say ****** there any more, despite swearing being ok. You just replace "******" with any noun that then becomes an epithet.

I remain unconvinced that enforcing public changes makes any difference to the underlying racism.

 

[jimbob]

There's quite a difference in racial pejoratives between us and Oz, and I have no idea why, because other colloquialisms are generally shared.

They have "boongs", which is a term never used in NZ, and the n-word was (and as you say, still is) used there, while we had the Maori-specific "hori" and the old faithful "coconut" for Pasifika people.



I'm not sure that outside of public speech much has changed anywhere.

Take Stormfront as a good example - you can't say ****** there any more, despite swearing being ok. You just replace "******" with any noun that then becomes an epithet.

I remain unconvinced that enforcing public changes makes any difference to the underlying racism.

I used to think it, but have changed my mind. You won't change the diehards, but others will. If open racism is accepted ("No Blacks, No Irish, No Gypsies" signs in bars for example) then the next generation will grow up feeling that's fine until they maybe decide to challenge it.

If you don't grow up surrounded by racist attitudes, then you are unlikely to develop them later. Non-acceptance of casual racism would make a difference.

There is also the "fake it to make it" approach, where pretending emotions actually leads to them.

 

[Belgian thought]

When I was in England in the 1970s, I was asked by at least 4-5 people (men and women, but all university-educated, intelligent folks), if it was true that the n-word was considered taboo in polite conversation in the US. Their baffled replies to my affirmative were mostly along the lines that it was just a word. By the third time, I found how to express it. How would they like being associated by people with someone like Andy Capp? Well, of course they were appalled and I said that's the kind of person who uses the n-word in the US.

I have heard the expression about one in the woodpile, but I don't even know what it means, that's how archaic it is here.

It does not surprise me - one of the most popular programmes at the time was this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Thy_Neighbour and a bit later, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_Your_Language.

Love thy Neighbour was truly offensive even if it was trying to create an ITV equivalent of Alf Garnet.