Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
11 January 2009
10:3112521Poor oul Prince Harry is in the wars again. No not the fighting shooting wars but the tabloid wars.
While making his own video and doing his own voice over, he clearly called another soldier his "little Paki friend". The result all over the media today, all the newspapers, the televison channels, the international papers and so on is... uproar. The Ministry of Defence are appalled, as is the Palace. The Army are shocked and have issued a statement etc etc.
But this is madness. While I know we should not use remarks that are offensive to other races and cultures, nevertheless in this case Harry clearly uses the term without any kind of malice. Its almost in affectionate terms for one of his fellow officers, one of his friends.
Of course the term Paki can be used in an offensive way by yobs, skinheads and what have you, but in this case it is easy to see the difference.
Up to very recently people throughout the length and breadth of the nation spoke like this anyway. It wasnt just the bad few. They still speak like this in the shires, so a certain amount of hypocrisy is on display here...especially by the tabloids( dont make me laugh!).
True a certain amount of political correctness is called for so that we can all go about our daily lives in some kind of harmony but is this an excessive case of over reaction?
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
11 January 2009
11:3312525Yeh, then there is a bit about "Prince Harry used the term 'raghead' to mean Taleban or Iraqi insurgent." - i'm sure in WW2 we regularly referred to those nice German people who are dropping bombs on us !
Been nice knowing you :)
11 January 2009
13:3012529We are in 2009, not 1939, and it is clear that intolerance, and the use of language that demeans or trivialises any group is unacceptable, no matter how "affectionately" (how patronising is that?!) it is used. However he meant it, in a social or work context it is not acceptable, and as he is such a public figure (and don't get me started on the Monarchy!!) he should be more aware of his language, his position, and his responsibilities. But we all know how racist the Royal Family are anyway, with very little justification given their own heritage. I will now sit back and wait for the storm.................I thank you!
11 January 2009
14:3312532No storm from me. Being married to a sikh (born in UK) I know how hurtful comments like the one Harry has made can be. My older daughter gets called "paki" on a daily basis. My little one suffers nothing.
My husband is called it, and was born in UK, does not follow his religion at all, but for some they just will not see past the clour issue, yet those who know him will tell ya he is an all round great guy.
I think your whole posting is spot on Bern. For a change we agree.
nationality should not make a dying bit of difference. Cut both persons hand and we all bleed exactly the same
Guest 650- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 542
11 January 2009
14:3712533I can't help thinking some people get more excited about this kind of thing than those of us to whom it refers. I'm more than aware of language and its uses - at the same time, right now, I'd suggest that some of the tabloid jumping and and down is really rather cosmetic.
Maybe I feel rather unmoved today about this report on Prince Harry as I still can't quite understand what exactly was in the head of the Conservative Future former member, who dressed up as Madeleine McCann for a fancy dress party. He even suggested a useful prop would be a phial of blood.
Tell me - at which moment, exactly, does someone realise what an appalling concept this is? To me, this would not even have been thinkable. Moreover, the person involved then attempted to justify himself by stating that someone else at the party had dressed as Baby P.
I know the person involved has now apologised unreservedly; nevertheless, the extreme lack of empathy, understanding, and even the most basic of moral discrimination is to me a far more fundamental problem, and a far more telling perspective on our contemporary society, than those raised by the press over a word used by Prince Harry.
(Sorry, Mandy, we posted at a similar time - no reference to your post intended! I am very sorry to hear about the problems your husband and daughter have from some people)
Guest 643- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,321
11 January 2009
14:4312534No storm from me either Bern, I totally agree. What Mandie says brings it home too, her family have suffered from racist remarks so she knows first hand how cruel it can be.
Mind you, if I remember rightly, wasn't his grandad in a similar storm some years ago for calling some Chinese people by an offensive name? Not a good example obviously.
You know it's strange, the children I take to school are all young ones. I have four children who are from other countries and "coloured" but I've not once heard any of my lot refer to the others by anything other than their christian names. I do hope that's a good sign for the future.
There's always a little truth behind every "Just kidding", a little emotion behind every "I don't care" and a little pain behind every "I'm ok".
11 January 2009
15:1912537Hopefully so Jacqui - we are in a different place now to where we were a few years ago. But there are still some dangerously stupid and bigotted people left, sadly. The McCann incident is an entirely different thing rooted in appalling taste and no sensitivity at all, whereas the Paki remark from a senior royal is about institutional racism and abuse. We canniot afford to just believe it has gone away because our friends are ok - the harry incident simply highlights how deeply rooted it still is.
11 January 2009
15:2012538PS - it's nice to be on the same side as you two!!!!! I am sure we have much more in common too, if we only knew it!
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
11 January 2009
17:2012545pc has gone mad again,i used to work with a coulerd chap when we asked what his name was he replyed chalky white,i thought he was joking but later that day he showed me his birth certificate and low and behold that was what his name was.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
11 January 2009
17:2012546pc has gone mad again,i used to work with a coulerd chap when we asked what his name was he replyed chalky white,i thought he was joking but later that day he showed me his birth certificate and low and behold that was what his name was.
11 January 2009
18:1212548And?
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
11 January 2009
18:1912550and what bern.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
11 January 2009
19:2412553This whole thing is a non-issue. Harry was in no way abusive and has nothing to apologise about, certainly not regarding the Paki remark. As for his 'raghead' comment, so what? We are at war with 'ragheads' as we were with 'Argies' in 1982 and, 'Jerries and Japs' in WW2.
How long before the increasingly absurd pc brigade start objecting to us referring to the Nazis when discussing WW2?
What Harry is guilty of is insulting the sensitivities of the metropolitan BBC left wing pc mob. So what.
Brian - its pc 'gone mad' pc is mad full stop.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
11 January 2009
20:1312556for once we agree on somthig ay barry.
Sid Pollitt
11 January 2009
20:4312557Sorry but I dont agree, when Jade Goody made, in my opinion, less serious remarks than this it was widely agree that what she said was unacceptable. Was the fury over Brand and Ross really about who made the comment rather than what was said and because Harry is a royal he can say what he wants? The comments by Brand and Ross were about an individual and not focussed on their race [I believe the woman in question is the granddaughter of a former asylum seeker] so arent these comments by Harry worse?
If it is politically correct to find it distasteful when people shout racist remarks in the playground or in the street, or mutter them under their breath in this case, then I am proud to be politically correct.
11 January 2009
21:0412559Wog, Nigger, Paki, Dyke, Queer, Gimp, Spaz, Nutter, Jew, Kyke, Fuzzywuzzy, Freak, Blimp. These words have one thing in common - they are designed to keep people in their place. They are unacceptable, particularly if endorsed by senior members of society. Any senior members of society, who get paid to represent their country abroad, using them deserves at the very least the full disapproval of the people who pay their wages. Words hurt, they can kill if they reinforce the reduced status of anyone in a society. It is only a few months since a young lad with learning disabilities was beaten to death for fun by people he trusted who bought into the implication endorsed by the words used to describe him.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
11 January 2009
21:5312562you do know some words bern!!
i shudder to think who you mix with.
i think that the prince harry remark comes down to his idiot family and forebears.
they are trained to be able to avoid causing strife.
this is one of the things we pay them for.
prince harry is simply carrying on the tradition of insensitivity.
11 January 2009
21:5512564Sadly true, Howard. It is simply a reflection of what they are really thinking, and I use the term thinking very very loosely.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
11 January 2009
23:1912570Sid - you cannot be serious. To compare the Brand affair with this is utter nonsense, leaving abusive messages on someones phone is not the same at all so just come off it. I do not remember exactly what the Big Brother incident was all about and I did not watch it but was the girl not directly insulting to someone? That is simply nothing like what Harry said.
The context is important, not the words said. It is pathetic to effectively try to outlaw words rather than to judge the way in which they are used. If Harry was being insulting towards the Asian soldier then fair enough but he was not. As for insulting the enemy, referring to them as ragheads, fair enough. They are the enemy. I am quite sure that he was not directing the insults to our allies in Afghanistan.
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
12 January 2009
02:1312571I have to agree with you on this one Barry W, the whole issue is somewhat absurd.