to think mumsnetters have overreacted

No, but - and this is GREAT you said that unquietdad - would you if you realized the person hearing those words found them insulting and offensive?

Yes, the problem with trying not to be offensive is that there is always going to someone who's offended by the thing you least expect. Often it can come out of left-field. You may feel it's inappropriate for you to "apologise" for saying something which was not intended in an offensive manner to begin with. It's the intention that counts more than the vocab.

I mean, some people take blasphemy very seriously - e.g. in French, saying "nom de Dieu" (in the name of God) can be seen as worse than "putain", which is roughly equivalent to "fuck". I don't expect to havre to offer up an apology every time I say "God!" or "Christ!" as a mild expletive.

Well, I wasn't really talking about racism exclusively (I think I dealt with how I was on the OP's original comment very early on) I was talking about being 'offended' generally.

And no, of course a christian is insulted personally by attacks on their faith. Their faith is a very personal one, it is who they are.

it's the same thing. it's personally insulting and upsetting. It's offensive. deeply.

It's Prince Philip you should be castigating -and his they all have slitty eyes comment.

Well, yes, red herring - i dont' think any religion, institution or individual can ever or should ever be above criticism, but that is so different to hatred / racism / abuse. I also think that we can't really compare how we deal with an individual with how we deal with an institution/ religion. I do agree with you that sometimes to challenge and criticise will be to offend, and that this is necessary and inevitable - and this has to be. But this is another story, it's not relevant to racism.

I think what is worse, actually, is defending a racist word on the grounds that "everyone I know says it"

I can forgive ignorance, every time, but bull headed insistance that the term used isn't racist, despite the protestations of hundreds that it is, really makes me cross.

I agree, madamez.

100times: agree with you totally. Can never decide what is worse - people taking squawking, dummy-spitting offence on behalf of other people (who they haven't actually asked if they are offended) or people taking wild offence over stuff that was never meant to be offensive (such as criticising someone for asking for a black coffee.)
Sometimes people screaming "Racist" at others are really screaming "Look! Look at me! look how totally unracist I am!"
Couldn't some of this venom be more productively directed?

Des, I am in my 40s too. I did not use that expression at all; I can think of a few people who did, and probably still are.

Oh you don't have to answer that. It's a bit of a red herring to be honest isn't it?

Yes but what you 'deserve' and what you get are two totally different things aren't they? Yes it's illegal, and quite right too.

Do christians deserve to have their faith respected and not ridiculed. Should all anti-christian jokes/shows etc be banned or made illegal because they are insulting?

I can only SNORT at that last remark, Quat.

I will chose, on this occasion, not to be angry that you have just called me a racist, but don't make the mistake of doing so again.

It's not an orchestrated attack though. It's just lots of individuals posting. I suppose people could take the view that if 10 people have said it, they don't need to add anything. That would mean a lot of short threads though.

Desiderata You have explained that you are older, and that times have changed. I acknowledge that.

But your comment that "White people are no longer allowed to get away with it." is an apology and a justification for racism. It is an inherently racist remark.

You and I are so far apart in our opinions that no amount of discussion will get us close to any form of mutual understanding.

I am distressed by your post and I am not prepared to engage in this discussion any further.

It wasn't a slip of the tongue. It was the word she uses and she didn't know that it could offend. Now she does.

Oh blahblah - i took so long to write that with dd2 trying to comb my hair with a fork that it is no longer relevant so ignore me and i'll go and put the fork away.

Are you so convinced it was only used by white people, Quatt?

It isn't only white people who use terms to describe other races. It's just that white people are the only ones who're no longer allowed to get away with it

100 your i kind of see what you mean up to a point, but 'are you entitled to be not insulted' - in certain instances - yes.

You are entitled to not have racial hatred thrown at you. That's why it's illegal. Obviously being generally offended is part of life, you cannot expect and do not deserve undivided approval, you must learn to accept criticism, unkindness, rudeness.

But you do deserve to live without bullying and aggression, absolutely.

lol

you're offended by Huw Edwards he was veRY NICE IN SCHOOL!Azzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzza oops cat!

Quatt, I agree that racist language shouldn't be robustly absorbed. Over the last thirty years or so in this country, it has become to be understood as being hateful and prejudiced in the extreme, and a good thing too. (Though in that canny way that langauge has certain racist and homophobic words are being 'reclaimed' I notice.)

I'm just saying, not very coherently, that I have a problem with the current climate which says 'I'm offended' and everyone is supposed to instantly react immediately.
Christians are offended by Jerry Springer the Musical, Muslims are offended by the dutch cartoon, I'm offended by Huw Edwards and on and on we go.
I don't think it's a terrible thing to be offended that's all. I think it's part of living in a mixed society.