Gordon Barlow

Bats. The best response I can make to that is to quote from my post #40 in another Maple Leaf thread - the one about accents, where I wrote "...once in a while I come across a new [Australian slang] phrase that appeals to me, and I adopt it readily. The latest one is the endearing custom of saying "yeah... nah". "Yes I understand what you said, but no I don't want to, or don't agree." "Do you want another drink?" "Do you think this batsman will make a century today?" "Yeah... nah."

Will I let this thread die? Yeah... nah.

Partially discharged

I find it one of the more interesting threads on this forum which seems to have less and less traffic these days. I find the main posters input to be interesting to read. I would think that only the forum moderator can make the decision to lock the thread.

Former Lancastrian

If British Airways keep on pissing around with my flights for March then that could be a life turning point for some BA Staff

Gordon Barlow

I'm stretching the definition of "Turning Point" a bit here, but I think it's justified... The whole English-speaking world seems to be at a turning point these days - turning the English language on its head in the name of political correctness. A prestigious US university - USC, University of Southern California - has ruled that the word "field" is racist. Terms such as "field work" may be offensive to "descendants of slavery" and immigrant workers. Good grief!

I'd say you wouldn't read about it, except that I have just read about it. There must surely be no limit now to the range of trigger-words that could conceivably remind someone somewhere of ancestral woes. And even the word "slavery" must remind those of Slavic descent of word's origin. Whatever next?

Jingsamichty

That sounds preposterous, and it is. However I take comfort from the fact that younger generations - on the whole - take care to avoid the causing of offence. No doubt there will be many older folks who will read about this and simply refuse to consider that offence could possibly be caused and continue using the word in question.

It's the old "well, it never did me any harm so why should I change?" mentality, and there's no harm in challenging that whenever possible.

Former Lancastrian

I guess Liverpool will now be changing the name of their ground seeing as it is currently called Anfield? Oh how about where they play rugby at Murrayfield? Is it still The Field Of Dreams for the Kevin Costner movie?

dbd33

Location specific, innit? In the south the field <<<SNIP>>> was the bottom of the barrel, below the house XXX. Of course people will still be sensitive about use of any of the three words. Acceptability depends on the context. "I live in a house" shouldn't be a problem but "We don't have a nanny we have a house boy" certainly would. In your Liverpool example, it wouldn't be mention of fields that might clash with local sensibilities but other historical references. For example, in Toronto, when cramming into a crowded subway train or elevator one might exclaim "Hillsborough Crush" or just "Hillsborough". One might choose not to do that on Merseyside.

BristolUK

Curious about this I googled. Immediately I noticed something in common for the results.
Fox News. Daily Mail. UK Daily Telegraph. Washington Examiner (something that looks respectable but which is known for pushing conspiracy theories and climate change denials). Infowars. Breitbart and so on.

So I looked in a little more detail and find that it is not the University itself but a small part called the school of social work and even the Mail reports that it is not even an academic department of the university.

The Mail also reports So really, all that's happened is that the university has not ruled the word racist but they will simply not be using it in certain, very limited, circumstances.

In the news next week Christmas is banned.

Gordon Barlow

Well! thanks for doing all the dog-work, Bristol! I mustn't believe all I read in the papers, eh? A few days before posting about the "field" controversy, I had used the word "lynching" in a post on this same thread - in full knowledge of its generally accepted origin in the US South. So I guess I was lucky to get away with that. The problem is that there are so many exaggerated charges of racism and other "woke" targets, that one risks jumping to false conclusions. No excuses though; I should have checked.

BristolUK

That's a coincidence. Earlier today I had lynch mob in a comment and then changed it to contract hit but not for that reason.
Yeah, this one just stood out to me when the results included so many of those dodgy media sources.

Partially discharged

In Canada

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...bers-1.6710193

The Brownies are to be called the Embers. You couldn't make this stuff up. A solution looking for a problem.

Jerseygirl

The cake will be next.

Gordon Barlow

"The Girl Guides of Canada has renamed its Brownies branch after current and former members said the name caused them harm and prevented or delayed their decision to join."

Better check it out for me, Bristol! If it's true, it's rather risky that they retained the name "Girl Guides". Surely that's offensive to the millions of non-binary female-born and formerly-male members!

This really is a Turning Point, this wholesale adoption of wokeness.

Watch out, the Cleveland Browns of the NFL!

Gordon Barlow

It used to be, that one got Brownie-points for doing something nice. Not any more! Embers-points don't carry the same cachet, do they? A quick Google search for a definition of "embers" gives "a small piece of burning or glowing coal or wood in a dying fire". In a dying fire! Not much of an incentive for adventurous little girls, you'd think! I expect the clowns who instigated the change are currently petitioning the dictionaries to change "dying fire" to "roaring fire". Sigh... Oh, what a tangled web...!

Former Lancastrian

Many years ago ancient Egyptians used the mummification process of preserving a dead body which was basically removing all the moisture from the body leaving only a dried form that would not easily decay. Somewhere along the line the bodies became known as Mummies. Fast forward to today and now museum's according to the Daily Fail are now using the term mummified person as someone(s) has decided that the term Mummy is dehumanizing to those who died and is an unwelcome throwback to Britains Colonial past.

So I wonder how many complaint's have been received by Museums complaining about this egregious term?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-old-dead.html

https://www.si.edu/spotlight/ancient-egypt/mummies

I suppose it would have been a life turning point if one of the Mummies had complained.