The term "Mong"

[Gaspode]

stitchface said:

So in a social situation, if I spilled my pint and got called a mong by someone I was with, and i clearly wasn't bothered by it, would you be offended on my behalf? And if so, why?

For the purposes of the question, no one involved has any links to DS whatsoever.

I wouldn't give a toss about you. I'd think that the person who called you a Mong was an insensitive ahole and I wouldn't want to be in his company.

[9mm]

Snowboy said:

Centurion07 said:

So can someone point out to me why this is unacceptable, yet you don't hear anyone whining about big nose insults? Or ears, or teeth, or lack of hair or any other physical "abnormality". Why is one "defect" okay and another not?

Insulting someone for being bald is fair enough in the grand scheme of insults. But if you insulted them with reference to chemotherapy or a burn victim then it would be in very poor taste.

Can you list what are acceptable insults or 'fair enough' and those that aren't?

Is there a checking stage, such as "can I ask do you have alopecia before I call you chalkie?"

[Gaspode]

9mm said:

Can you list what are acceptable insults or 'fair enough' and those that aren't?

Is there a checking stage, such as "can I ask do you have alopecia before I call you chalkie?"

Now we really must be in trolling territory. Surely you aren't saying that you are so insensitive you are not able to make a judgement in a social situation as the effect your words might have on those around you? If you aren't trolling, and you are genuinely unable to tell, I can let you have the names of some decent psychiatrists who may be able to help.

[stitchface]

Gaspode said:

I wouldn't give a toss about you. I'd think that the person who called you a Mong was an insensitive ahole and I wouldn't want to be in his company.

Insensitive how?

Not trolling, interested.

[badgers_back]

Gaspode said:

stitchface said:

So in a social situation, if I spilled my pint and got called a mong by someone I was with, and i clearly wasn't bothered by it, would you be offended on my behalf? And if so, why?

For the purposes of the question, no one involved has any links to DS whatsoever.

I wouldn't give a toss about you. I'd think that the person who called you a Mong was an insensitive ahole and I wouldn't want to be in his company.

That does sound a bit boring rating someone as an insensitive ahole when they call you something in jest.

So if you did do something sightly 'special' and in the context funny, dropped something etc etc classic slapstick comedy..

(I realise is hypothetical as everyone here is perfect and nothing goes wrong for them)

What could your friends / acquaintances acceptably call you???

Without being tared with the insensitive / ahole brush??

[Snowboy]

stitchface said:

So in a social situation, if I spilled my pint and got called a mong by someone I was with, and i clearly wasn't bothered by it, would you be offended on my behalf? And if so, why?

For the purposes of the question, no one involved has any links to DS whatsoever.

I'm not "offended on your behalf".
That's a huge misunderstanding of the situation.

In fact. I'm less bothered when it's a serious insult. At that point people are using all the offence at their disposal.
They intend it to be horrible.

It's when it's just a loud casual insult or joke between mates that I find it more unpleasant. That some people think it's amusing to use it as an insult.

It's like people loudly taking jokes on the next table, and then someone tells a racist joke.

[Gaspode]

Snowboy said:

I'm not "offended on your behalf".
That's a huge misunderstanding of the situation.

In fact. I'm less bothered when it's a serious insult. At that point people are using all the offence at their disposal.
They intend it to be horrible.

It's when it's just a loud casual insult or joke between mates that I find it more unpleasant. That some people think it's amusing to use it as an insult.

It's like people loudly taking jokes on the next table, and then someone tells a racist joke.

+1

Snowboy and I are trying to make exactly the same point here. I don't like it when people use casual racism or sexism or ableist insults under the guise of "it's just a joke". People who do so are insensitive aholes, and I dislike them.

YMMV

[stitchface]

Fortunately, most of the people I know are able to take a bit of banter in the spirit in which it's intended, and equally capable of speaking up if someone goes too far.

[9mm]

Gaspode said:

Snowboy said:

I'm not "offended on your behalf".
That's a huge misunderstanding of the situation.

In fact. I'm less bothered when it's a serious insult. At that point people are using all the offence at their disposal.
They intend it to be horrible.

It's when it's just a loud casual insult or joke between mates that I find it more unpleasant. That some people think it's amusing to use it as an insult.

It's like people loudly taking jokes on the next table, and then someone tells a racist joke.

+1

Snowboy and I are trying to make exactly the same point here. I don't like it when people use casual racism or sexism or ableist insults under the guise of "it's just a joke". People who do so are insensitive aholes, and I dislike them.

YMMV

Try and have a debate without using the get out of "you must gave sociopathic tendencies or be a troll" when someone disagrees with you.

People understand that you have reservations about the use of language in the context of humour and insults. I'm struggling to understand your position and that of snowboy.

Is it a zero tolerance policy? That is, that anyone who uses a slang term is, in your words, "an insensitive ****" or are there terms which it is acceptable to use? If so, I go back to my typically unanswered question to snowboy - what are those terms?

If there are acceptable terms, are they only permissible in private situations where no potential offendee or proxy offendees may be present?

[Gaspode]

stitchface said:

Insensitive how?

Not trolling, interested.

Insensitive to the effect those words might have on other people around. You're in a bar. You knock over your mate's pint. He whirls round, and shouts "you bloody Mong!". Next down the bar is a sad-looking chap. He's a bit depressed. It turns out that he's just found out that the child his wife is expecting is going to have DS. How is hearing your mate fling a casual insult like 'Mong' around is hardly likely to cheer him up, is it?

There are hundreds of genuinely joking (dare I say affectionate?) ways of insulting your mates without risking upsetting people. Why not use them? Because you don't give a toss what effect you might have on other people? That's what I mean by insensitive.

[Centurion07]

Gaspode said:

Snowboy said:

I'm not "offended on your behalf".
That's a huge misunderstanding of the situation.

In fact. I'm less bothered when it's a serious insult. At that point people are using all the offence at their disposal.
They intend it to be horrible.

It's when it's just a loud casual insult or joke between mates that I find it more unpleasant. That some people think it's amusing to use it as an insult.

It's like people loudly taking jokes on the next table, and then someone tells a racist joke.

+1

Snowboy and I are trying to make exactly the same point here. I don't like it when people use casual racism or sexism or ableist insults under the guise of "it's just a joke". People who do so are insensitive aholes, and I dislike them.

YMMV

I still don't understand how you can find one offensive but not the others I listed?

It's either ok to insult someone based on their "abnormalities" or it's not.

[stitchface]

Gaspode said:

Insensitive to the effect those words might have on other people around. You're in a bar. You knock over your mate's pint. He whirls round, and shouts "you bloody Mong!". Next down the bar is a sad-looking chap. He's a bit depressed. It turns out that he's just found out that the child his wife is expecting is going to have DS. How is hearing your mate fling a casual insult like 'Mong' around is hardly likely to cheer him up, is it?

There are hundreds of genuinely joking (dare I say affectionate?) ways of insulting your mates without risking upsetting people. Why not use them? Because you don't give a toss what effect you might have on other people? That's what I mean by insensitive.

First off, I did say that no one involved had any links to DS, but never mind. It was the word itself i was getting at.

Must be exhausting being worried about everyone else all the time? In your scenario, I would hope your man would say something himself like a grown up, at which point I'd apologise. Like a grown up. No harm, no foul.

[Gaspode]

9mm said:

Try and have a debate without using the get out of "you must gave sociopathic tendencies or be a troll" when someone disagrees with you.

People understand that you have reservations about the use of language in the context of humour and insults. I'm struggling to understand your position and that of snowboy.

Is it a zero tolerance policy? That is, that anyone who uses a slang term is, in your words, "an insensitive ****" or are there terms which it is acceptable to use? If so, I go back to my typically unanswered question to snowboy - what are those terms?

If there are acceptable terms, are they only permissible in private situations where no potential offendee or proxy offendees may be present?

People who do not care what other people think of their behaviour are sociopathic by definition, it's not an insult, it's an observation.

As I said, it's racism, sexism, and ableism that I find offensive. I don't refuse to tolerate them, I wouldn't seek to ban people from using them, I simply form my own judgement about them - which is almost invariably negative. There are hundreds of other joking insults one can use. I favour "wazzock" or "prawn" myself. Obviously I mean no disrespect to any other crustaceans within earshot...

[stitchface]

Gaspode said:

People who do not care what other people think of their behaviour are sociopathic by definition, it's not an insult, it's an observation.

Bit more to it than that, me old china. (massive apologies if you are actually Chinese, or anyone Chinese happens to be reading this., or if you've eaten a Chinese meal recently)

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201305/how...

[Gaspode]

stitchface said:

Bit more to it than that, me old china. (massive apologies if you are actually Chinese, or anyone Chinese happens to be reading this., or if you've eaten a Chinese meal recently)

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201305/how...

You may wish to read a bit deeper, like all pathologies, social dysfunctionality is a spectrum. Not all sociopaths exhibit all traits, and there isn't a minimum set to qualify. Psychology isn't an exact science. Actually, of course, it barely qualifies as a science at all. But I've got a BSc in it, so it must be

[stitchface]

Gaspode said:

You may wish to read a bit deeper, like all pathologies, social dysfunctionality is a spectrum. Not all sociopaths exhibit all traits, and there isn't a minimum set to qualify. Psychology isn't an exact science. Actually, of course, it barely qualifies as a science at all. But I've got a BSc in it, so it must be

Fair enough. What does being over concerned with what other people think qualify someone as then?

[shakotan]

Snowboy said:

shakotan said:

But if you weren't told the language was unacceptable, then you wouldn't find it unacceptable, and therefore you wouldn't be upset about it. Therefore the words would have no power.

So your suggesting ignorance as a way to avoid offence?
Some language is unnaceptable, if your not taught about it then you become part of the problem.

It's not ignorance, its removing the negative connotation.

Someone calls you a to hurt your feelings or promote anger. If you don't get upset because the word isn't offensive to you, they've lost.

[Gaspode]

stitchface said:

Fair enough. What does being over concerned with what other people think qualify someone as then?

If it interferes with their ability to relate sensibly to other people, and cause dysfunctional social behaviour, then that too would be considered sociopathic.

So some PC weirdo who goes around pubs saying "you can't call someone a prawn, it's demeaning to crustaceans" would be considered to be exhibiting sociopathic behaviour.

Unless all the other lobsters in the bar agree with him/her, of course.

[Snowboy]

Centurion07 said:

I still don't understand how you can find one offensive but not the others I listed?

It's either ok to insult someone based on their "abnormalities" or it's not.

It's fine to insult people based on their abnormalities if you want to insult them.
It's not fine to insult people based on other peoples abnormalities or differences.

Some increasingly unpleasant examples below;
You swim like a house brick.
You swim like a kid with down syndrome.
You swim like a mong.


There's a point where you're not just insulting your target, but your insulting others too.

[Centurion07]

Snowboy said:

It's fine to insult people based on their abnormalities if you want to insult them.
It's not fine to insult people based on other peoples abnormalities or differences.

Some increasingly unpleasant examples below;
You swim like a house brick.
You swim like a kid with down syndrome.
You swim like a mong.


There's a point where you're not just insulting your target, but your insulting others too.

So your criteria for being offended is based on how many people are being insulted? Really?