• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ed Do you like your cheese?

ISTM he substituted it for the 'w' - word which even then was considered offensive.
This is starting to get confusing. I don't even know an offensive "w" word. Unless you mean pulling your own chain if you know what I mean
 
This is starting to get confusing. I don't even know an offensive "w" word. Unless you mean pulling your own chain if you know what I mean

Seriously? It is also a common racial slur in Australia but usually aimed at a different demographic to who it is/was aimed at in the UK.
 
ISTM he substituted it for the 'w' - word which even then was considered offensive.

No he didn't, the character used "wog" as well. Coon and Wog were pretty much interchangeable back then, both used as racial pejoratives.

(For our Australian folk: I think "wog" has a different meaning these days for you lot, but it has only ever been used as a pejorative/insult in the UK.)

For non-UK folk or younger UK folk, this is a playlist on Youtube that has clips from some very popular TV shows from the 60s and 70s and it shows the language that was deemed acceptable to use on broadcast TV. I doubt the clips are going to be safe for work for the vast majority of folk so please be careful where you watch them.

Clip 5 is titled "I don't like wogs" and is being used by the character Albert Steptoe, since the clip is in black and white we can date it to pre-Alf Garnet so it shows the word was being used in very popular mainstream television.

Note: at the time if a character used a non-racial profanity such as say "piss" or the s-word in these shows it would have had society in an uproar. E.g.

In 1965 - so contemporaneous to the "I don't like wogs" clip someone used the f-word on a late night discussion show and this is what happened:

Wikipedia .....In response to public outcry, the BBC was forced to issue a formal apology. In the House of Commons, four censuring motions were signed by a total of 133 Labour and Conservative backbenchers. ...

It just shows how acceptable racism was in "polite" company back then.
 
Last edited:
No he didn't, the character used "wog" as well. Coon and Wog were pretty much interchangeable back then, both used as racial pejoratives.

(For our Australian folk: I think "wog" has a different meaning these days for you lot, but it has only ever been used as a pejorative/insult in the UK.)

For non-UK folk or younger UK folk, this is a playlist on Youtube that has clips from some very popular TV shows from the 60s and 70s and it shows the language that was deemed acceptable to use on broadcast TV. I doubt the clips are going to be safe for work for the vast majority of folk so please be careful where you watch them.

Clip 5 is titled "I don't like wogs" and is being used by the character Albert Steptoe, since the clip is in black and white we can date it to pre-Alf Garnet so it shows the word was being used in very popular mainstream television.

Note: at the time if a character used a non-racial profanity such as say "piss" or the s-word in these shows it would have had society in an uproar. E.g.

In 1965 - so contemporaneous to the "I don't like wogs" clip someone used the f-word on a late night discussion show and this is what happened:



It just shows how acceptable racism was in "polite" company back then.

“Wog” and “dago” were pejorative terms for Greek and Italian immigrants to Australia and later extended to other Eastern Europeans. It was reclaimed by ethnic comedians from about the 1970s with TV shows like “Wogs out of work”.

I don’t think it has ever been used in Australian to describe indigenous or black immigrants.
 
It is just different eras doing dim stuff.

There is even a Fawlty Towers episode with the old army dude spouting the n word they wanted banned.

Times change. Stupid people change.
 
It is just different eras doing dim stuff.

There is even a Fawlty Towers episode with the old army dude spouting the n word they wanted banned.

Times change. Stupid people change.

Not banned. Contextualised with an introduction that also warns the viewer that racist language is used in the episode.
 
Not banned. Contextualised with an introduction that also warns the viewer that racist language is used in the episode.
Why I said "wanted" and not "had"

Give it a generation and.

A) people just won't think those shows are funny or worth watching. I mean Alf Garnett is just tedious, even for me.

B) the new bad words will just go their way. I literally have not heard anyone say wog, gollywogs, or dago since I was a little kid.

Even then it was only on TV.

The English language boots out dim words.

Or we would still be saying "thou", "come hither" and "per chance" and ****
 
... My objection is to the self righteousness displayed by those people in this case and similar cases who demand that something be changed because they perceive something racist or vulgar when in fact there is nothing of the sort present in the name, and they persist in their demands even after their mistake has been pointed out. Their perception is what is significant to them. Reality be damned.

The reality is that word meanings are solely tied to current usage in a given population of native speakers, and their semantic mappings drift over time. Any word or name can suffer an "ignoble fate" in common usage, entirely irrespectively of its origin, traditional dictionary definition, commercial use, or possibly noble past in literature.

It's one major reason why dictionaries have new editions.

Simply put, reality entirely refutes your effort to impute.
 
Yes, I agree, because it's a good move and because these are the times we're in. People will still find and eat their cheese! It can't possibly hurt cheese sales overall. People want their cheese, and fans of the product will adapt.

I learned the word has racist connotations while working at a dog start up. People would tell me the kinds of dogs they had. Many people had a particular kind of hound. But one person told me that they didn't refer to their breed by the common name, as it was racist. I appreciate having been told that. I never uttered that dog breed name again.

It was bred to hunt racoons. It's a ra-Coon Hound.
 
Born 1986. I thought gentleman of your vintage had better manners than to ask a lady her age! (Insert appropriate smiley here.)

As said I am certainly aware of it as a predominantly US racist epithet. Like the discussion around Faggots*, as a Yorkshire lass this was something unpleasant that I never got from the chippy as it was almost certainly haram, it was not one of the many anti-gay terms widely bandied about. I would however be very careful about using the term.

*
1 lb. pig's liver2 onions
4 oz. fat pork e.g. belly
Sage, Thyme, Basil, Nutmeg, Pepper
Salt
1 egg
Breadcrumbs
Pig's caul

You lost me right there at the start...
 
It was bred to hunt raccoons. It's a ra-Coon Hound.
OFC a coon hound was bred to hunt raccoons. And when the hounds were instead used to hunt down human beings like animals, "coon hunting" has a whole new racist meaning.

There is nothing inherently racist about the word coon or racoon either one. It becomes racist only when used to call a fellow human being a name that degrades his dignity and compares him to a pest animal.

Roughly equivalent to calling someone a pig, except in the South they really did hunt down human beings like animals and treated them badly when caught.

So it is worse than just name calling. It was name calling with a very real threat of violence. The worst sort of racism.

To bring it back to the thread topic.... No, Coon cheese is not racist. It has nothing to do with either raccoons, runaway slaves, hunting humans, calling humans names of pest animals, threatening or doing violence to other humans, or anything else racist at all. And the term itself is not inherently racist either.
 
Last edited:
What does it even mean to say a word is “inherently racist.” Some sort of essentialist take on words and meanings?
 
It means that a word is racist regardless of what context it is used in.

For example, you can't say "The 'n-word' is racist and you should never use it".

Edited by Agatha: 
Edited for rule 10. For this word only we allow the construction 'n-word' where it is necessary (such as in discussing etymology) but the autocensor advice does not change; in the public sections, spell out swear words in full and correctly and allow the autocensor to catch them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It means that a word is racist regardless of what context it is used in.

For example, you can't say "The word 'n-word' is racist and you should never use it".

Is there meaning without context? Surely there is no essential or inherent meaning.

One of Aboriginal activist Stephen Hagan’s other campaigns was over the E. S. "******" Brown Stand at a QLD rugby ground. As we have seen with the word coon, supporters argued for a contextual meaning that wasn’t racist. In this case it was the nickname of a lauded rugby player. The word it’s isn’t racist in its etymology. It is so because of its use towards black slaves.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Back
Top Bottom