Ok okies was a bad example
You literally shortened British to Brits in order to complain about Pakistanis being shortened to Pakis
2 Likes
Limeys suck.
1 Like
Ironically limes aren’t very good at preventing scurvy (whereas lemons are) so they ended up with that nickname because of shoddy science.
I’m inclined to lean toward @now_samantha in not using it anymore given only this discussion, but I laughed.
It’s all about context and history, some shortenings are ok and some aren’t. Where do you rate using the first three letters for “Japanese person”?
2 Likes
That’s my point though. I don’t see it as inherently racist but if you add context and history it can become racist.
The term Pakis is especially inappropriate to people from India because you are being identified by a contraction of your archenemy (at the time). If it was only ever used to describe people from Pakistan, I don’t see how it would be any more insulting than calling Serbians Serbs, Croatians Croats or even shortening other peoples to Afghanis, Kazakhs, Uzbeks etc
“Paki” is definitely a slur over here in the UK
1 Like
I would default to “If Pakistani people don’t like it and at least some Brits concede it as a slur, it’s a slur.” Regardless of whether the person’s Pakistani or Indian.
Anyway back to the coup. 4 defected lawyers now?
I saw Trump tried to delay his trial because somebody got COVID, while they sat unmasked in court.
1 Like
Canuck can be a pejorative depending on the context. For example, if it is preceded by a word like f&&&ing. Paki, in contrast, is always a slur.
IFYP for all Leafs fans
4 Likes
I struggle to think of an occasion when “canuck” can be used as an insult/pejorative term.
“Newfie” comes to mind (people from Newfoundland)
Lots of jokes about them in HS.
But thats it really. This was back in the 90s so things may have changed.
Same. I have honestly never heard the term Paki before and just thought it was convenient. Given this new knowledge, I’ll continue not saying it.
1 Like
It’s all about context. It’s like Yank, which can sometimes be used as a pejorative term for Americans.
My experience was that if someone wanted to use “Yank” pejoratively they’d just use “septic” instead. But that might just be the class of folks I associated with…
It’s racist because it has a history of being used in a racist way in a way that “Brit” and “Canuck” do not.
I mean, the n-word isn’t inherently racist… it’s derived from the Latin word for “black”. It’s racist because it has a history of being used in a racist way. In the year 1400 it probably wasn’t racist. (I’m not exactly sure when it started to be used in a racist way, but I think 1400 probably predates such usage.)
1 Like
I never said it wasn’t used as a racist term. For someone who was not aware of racist terms in England, it would seem to be a legitimate descriptor, given that people from Afghanistan are referred to as Afghanis, people from Kazakhstan Kazakhs, Uzbekistan Uzbeks etc. George W Bush referred to the people of Pakistan with that term, before he was quietly corrected. It’s not a term I would use because when we played them in cricket it was always the Pakistanis.
According to Wikipedia, the name Pakistan means “land of the Paks”, so it’s not a stretch to use the word with an “i” added without knowing the historical context of racism in England. That’s why I said it’s not inherently racist, just as the swastika is not inherently fascist, having been used for milennia before it was appropriated by the Nazis.
I’ve since found out that Canuck used to be a slur, which surprised me.
1 Like
I always thought this was a funny term, as, at least around those I’ve known, it is almost never used by Americans (other than when referring to baseball). It’s the term that nobody outside the country realizes we don’t call ourselves.
Have you seen their hockey team play? Of course its a slur. jeez.
Sooory
2 Likes