AIBU to see his reaction to being called boy as a red flag?

@QuintadosMalvados
Posters who try to justify discriminatory behaviour and claim that this is 'Bantz' and light hearted, are almost certainly likely to be accepting of other forms
From AI which gives references to the research this is based on.
People who hold sexist and homophobic views are significantly more likely to be racist. Psychological research shows these forms of prejudice rarely happen in isolation. Instead, they stem from a fixed mindset.
You cannot excuse one type of discrimination is ok. Discriminatory attitudes will be there across the board.

I know.
And as I said given that they're hairdressers and unlikely to have servants. Not a dig at hairdressers I'm saying this to highlight that they're unlikely to be of the class of people to have servants.
Not many people are!
I'd say the same if they were teachers or nurses or your average solicitor.

Blooming heck unless wealthy, who does?

You're not considering the context, though: these are all youngish, white British people.
Probably of roughly the same background. I'll hazard a guess that this guy, if not of equal social standing, has a higher social standing than they do as I've observed that woman date across and up the social scale as a general rule.

What if he's a lawyer?
Surely if he is it could be argued that as he's of a higher socioeconomic class she didn't seriously be there to serve them?

It just doesn't seem right to me that a typical British hairdresser (not that there's anything wrong with being a hairdresser would have servants. Unless rich, who does?) would be thinking that this guy is her servant.

All on an equal level in the sense that they're all there eating the same food etc.
There's no social imbalance.

They're in a situation where they're all equals.

Surely you can see that?

OP, he is fragile, moody and juvenile.
It's clear it was meant in jest.

I think this is him showing you who he is.

I would be cringing for him having a sulk over something so small that he felt the need to sour the mood.

This will not be the last time you will see this side to him.

This is the most useful comparison - indeed it's not a comparison, it's the actual point of the "joke". They're treating him as staff or a servant. Of course it's meant to be belittling.

In fact gender is a bit of a red herring because you can imagine the exact same thing happening if a group of men wants to pick on one particular man who doesn't fit in.

This thread is a good example of why men still hide their feelings.

As for red flags. No that you and your friends know that he doesn't like it will you still be using it?

Because still calling him "boy" would be a red flag.

It sounds like school kids with all the talk of bantz. I bet the OP and all the other minimisers and defenders of using terms to belittle and undermine would never do it in a setting where they would be held accountable. I gave an example upthread of guests at posh hotels calling middle aged male members of staff 'boy'. It is unacceptable. I am shocked by the posters who dismiss it and I am sure they also dismiss other forms of discrimination as 'bantz'.

I was going to ask about this. Anyone questioning why this is being raised is truly fucking ignorant. Things like ‘boyo’ are completely different.

Even if it doesn’t apply he’s not a dick for not wanting to be called boy.

"Calling someone you don't know well - and who is the newest member of the social group - "boy" and ordering them around is rude, impolite and extremely poor social etiquette. It's designed to belittle them and make them feel like an outsider. It's the opposite of making them feel welcome. It doesn't matter who's doing the calling; if this was an all-male group we'd see it for the bullying it is, especially when justified by "it's just light-hearted bants"."

This comment from another poster @Poppies2222x can you really not see this perspective at all?

Did @Poppies2222x bring him along to wait on friends. Depends how she said it. You might think it's 'funny' but others might not. I find some of these 'fun' girls pretty immature personally.

Lots of 'girls' together drinking can behave badly as lots of men together drinking can. Seems strange for you to want him there when the 'fun' girl and other/s didn't have any partners, boyfriends etc. Strange mix.

Solipsism - not being able to comprehend that other people may experience things differently to you.

Thus whilst I'm sure that the women who disagree with me can indeed appreciate that other people experience things differently to them, in this instance they cannot as they believe that as they'd perhaps justifiably feel offended in these circumstances if the genders were flipped a man would automatically feel the same.

He is a young white British man, they are young white British women.
To bring slavery into it is ridiculous.

In this context notions of slavery are absurd.
If he were a black or mixed race man, I'd be on his side.

And it's obviously not a quote from OP's boyfriend it is an imagining of what Tate might say.

I've said this before but you're doing a LOT of imagining, and embellishing. And ignoring - are you going to acknowledge that white male servants and staff have historically been - and in fact still are - called "boy" by their employees as a means of reinforcing the social difference?

There was no hissy fit. The man did not say "bitch". This has fuck all to do with Andrew Tate. You don't know what the word "solipsism" means.

I can’t believe how many people are coming up with the “banter” excuse straight out of the misogyny playbook. Being called “boy” has tones of slavery and it’s so offensive - ask any black American man. It’s a huge red flag - for him.

If you're going to get personal about this, I'm going to suggest that you are incapable of not being solipsistic.

So now it's reduced to being merely impolite.
Yet this man has such a low tolerance for perceived slights he has a hissy fit over it.

You and other women here are projecting how you'd feel at being called a girl onto white men being called a boy.
Which is understandable as women have historically expected to serve men in the domestic sphere.

It is pure solipsism.

You are doing, in my opinion, the
rather childish thing of flipping the genders and because you'd feel offended you're assuming a man would feel the same about being called a boy at a social (not professional where it could be a power play) event with women.
(It could be argued that it could be a power play if another man called him boy, too. I get that).

He really f* ing wouldn't unless he's a complete drip.
Or just abusive.
"Don't you dare call me a boy, bitch."
Andrew Tate springs to mind.
That's who I imagine with this guy, not that he's a victim.

Is your friend from Cork by any chance OP?

People call each other boy and girl a lot there, as you can see in this clip from The Young Offenders:
www.facebook.com/share/r/19Dj4L6KLT/?mibextid=wwXIfr

On top of your weird ideas about what a man is, you don't seem to have much reading comprehension.

Try reading the OP again. He spoke up in the moment, and then replied when the OP asked him about it later. This is not "whining" by any stretch of the imagination.

Your friend was rude,if you have only been dating a while, presumably your partner wouldn't be aware she was being jokey. My DH was called boy in his 30s by an uncle, and it was meant as an insult, talking down to him. I have a friend with a rather unpleasant son of 41, she excuses his terrible behaviour and rudeness says ",oh,these young boys". I reply "he's a middle aged man.

He didn't speak out though. He was whining to his girlfriend about it after.

Why on earth didn't he say to the person that offended him that they had offended him, if he is the man he is claiming to be?

They absolutely would.

I'm mixed-race and I recall very well several events where 1) stereotypes were made about my race and I was told it was just a joke when I objected, 2) someone was outright racist but I was told it was OK, I wasn't like "the rest of them" whatever the fuck that was meant to mean (presumably being middle-class and speaking fluent, unaccented English).

I also remember a party where the only Black woman there was told "jokingly" to "get up and do some R&B dancing". She left very shortly afterwards. I didn't have time to check if she was OK and I didn't know her well enough to have her contact details. I told the woman who'd made that comment she was out of order, and she said "it was just light-hearted". I left very shortly after that too.

It doesn't have to be any of those things to be unacceptable.

Calling someone you don't know well - and who is the newest member of the social group - "boy" and ordering them around is rude, impolite and extremely poor social etiquette. It's designed to belittle them and make them feel like an outsider. It's the opposite of making them feel welcome. It doesn't matter who's doing the calling; if this was an all-male group we'd see it for the bullying it is, especially when justified by "it's just light-hearted bants".

As has been explained many times to you - and you continue to ignore this - it also has classist and servant/staff connotations regardless of race.

But the -isms and historical connotations aren't actually that important. What it comes down to is that it's rude, belittling behaviour - and standing up for oneself in the face of that is not "whining", it's to be commended for having normal boundaries.

Well you assume wrong.

Calling an adult white man boy is not comparable to the things you mention.
As has been said many times, if he were a black person it would be different and I'd be on his side.

Not comparable.
No white man is 'oppressed' on account of him being called boy ffs.

It's not a f*cking slur on his sexuality, ethnicity, or background.
'Male victim'. Lol.

@QuintadosMalvados.I am reminded of the contestant chucked out of big brother for using the term ‘wigga’ during light hearted banter. It was a ‘joke’. Racism is never light hearted. It makes people uncomfortable . At school, teachers fought hard to get casual sexism and homophobia treated in the way that racism was treated. Calling people ‘gay lords ‘ and worse was described as ‘banter’. Some boys routinely called girls ‘bitches’. Teachers fought so hard to stop this supposed banter. Anything like this is not casual banter. It makes people uncomfortable. Saying it is banter to call a man ‘boy’ is not banter. Neither is it banter to refer to girls as ‘bitches’. It is demeaning and designed to belittle. I remember when terms like Taffy and Paddy were casually used as nicknames for Welsh and Irish members of staff. Light hearted banter. Only it is isn’t light hearted for the person on the receiving end. The male victim here did not like being addressed as ‘boy’. It was out of order and makes me wonder if the posters defending it would still be using racist and homophobic terms if they could get away with it. I suspect they would if they could.

It was light-hearted banter. How many more times does that have to be pointed out.
The lack of imagination to picture the scene as presented by the OP is astounding.
It's not a boardroom. It's a party.

This is not a flip the gender thing, as men are not usually expected to serve women.drinks.
Even now women do more domeatic labour.
How can you not see that?
How can't you see that flipping the genders does not always work?
To fully answer a question posed earlier put forward to me earlier by @AutumnHazel :
From what I can see, they weren't demanding he constantly serve him drinks.
Yes, I'd be pissed off if I was expected to serve drinks ALL The Time.
As a one-off, let's get this party started comment, not an issue.

I think it's weird to take you bf on a girly trip to get to know them