To think that if you’re told a phrase is offensive, you don’t insist on using it?

[changehere]

Yes, a TAAT. The context is that we explained to mumsnet HQ that the phrase ‘beyond the Pale’ is found eyebrow-raising by many (but not all) Irish people.

The Pale was the name given to an area of Ireland under English rule and those outside that area were considered uncivilised aka ‘beyond the pale’. This is a phrase that is only used with raised eyebrows in Ireland and certainly feels inappropriate, if not offensive, coming from an English person.

Mumsnet use it as part of their racism guidelines as in that they only ban language that is ‘beyond the pale’. Mumsnet accept the origins of the phrase. However, they insist on using this phrase to describe whether something is or is not racist.

Given the context, AIBU in requesting that Mumsnet find another phrase in their racism guidelines?

Are we taking Urban Dictionary as etymological evidence now? Riiiiiight.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond_the_Pale

www.dictionary.com/browse/beyond--the--pale

Pale derives from Palisade - as in a fence around a settlement
so anything outside it was "beyond the pale"
as in "beyond the fence"

Please stop finding problems where there are none
and focus on the REAL problems

it can also be a very personally niche thing so it's hard to legislate for every possible thing that might offend only one or two individuals.

This isn’t one or two individuals though, is it?

You claim you are offended by the use of this phrase because you associate it with only one of several possible meanings

Nope. Never have only associated it with one of several possible meanings.

appropriating it only to your particular agenda

Again, no. Not only to “my particular agenda”. As stated already on this and other threads.

People telling me there are other associations for that phrase aren’t telling me new information. I am aware of the other associations. None of those associations means the one I have a personal connection with doesn’t exist. Irish people are not a homogenous mass. We don’t all feel the same way and the fact that some choose not to be offended has no bearing on others. This not bothering some people does not mean the issue does not exist. It exists. That phrase has been a bone of contention on MN going back years. I am not just sitting at home deciding I don’t like some phrases. This isn’t not just me. MNHQ could very easily remove from their guidelines (about approppriate language!) an unnecessary phrase that makes some of their Irish users uncomfortable. It would upset no-one for that phrase not to exist in their talk guidelines.

I'm Irish in my 40s and learned in primary school history lessons about part of Dublin been called The Pale by the English government.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pale

Regardless of how many Pales there were and where the first one originated it is an offensive term.

I have an issue with being told that MN want me to feel "welcome" here as if I am an outsider.

MN have a legal duty to abide by the Equality Act, and for me it's that simple. They aren't. I would like them to change their behaviour and moderate all of the protected characteristics as robustly as they moderate the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

talkin you need to warn people what they’re going read when they open that link!

In fact I’m reporting it. You know that word will offend people.

Not the Sri Lankans though - they never get American visitors so are utterly un bothered

The world has many facets. It is cultural imperialism to force our memes on everybody else.

The Pale predates Ireland. It means fence.

No one is denying they have the same root, Giant. But that the evidence of derivation is incredibly shaky.

The first known written use of the phrase ‘beyond the pale’ is in 1657, in ^The History of Polindor and Flostella’ by John Harrington. At that point the phrase was being used literally - to mean fence/boundary: "Both Dove-like roved forth beyond the pale to planted Myrtle-walk".

No link to the Irish Pale (which predates the poem by some years) and no clear sense of the pejorative.

The first idiomatic use was in 1720, and well into the Victorian times it was being used as a straight substitution for ‘beyond the boundary’ (eg in the Pickwick Papers, 1837: ‘I look upon you, sir, as a man who has placed himself beyond the pale of society...’ - clearly pejorative but still no sense of the phrase having origin or link to in the Irish Pale.

Earlier idiomatic use also supports a more neutral original, as it seemed to be synonymous with ‘sphere of influence’ in Freeman’s History of the Norman Conquest: ‘By its conversion England was first brought, not only within the pale of the Christian Church, but within the pale of the general political society of Europe.’

Look, I've said all along, I didn't start my thread about this phrase, I think there is a bigger issue about the attitude to the Irish on here.

But given that some Irish people (myself included) find the phrase offensive, why would MN not just use a different phrase in their talk guidelines, especially since they are claiming to want Irish people to feel welcome?

But given that some Irish people (myself included) find the phrase offensive, why would MN not just use a different phrase in their talk guidelines, especially since they are claiming to want Irish people to feel welcome?

I don’t disagree with that, as I’ve said all along - that if the phrase has the potential to cause offence and hurt it should be avoided, and I agree it’s an easy shift for MNHQ.

Made up ‘facts’ piss me off though and are likely to alienate people.

I’m neither British nor Irish, though I have ancestry from both, for what it’s worth.

Well, I am not making up that when I was taught the history of Ireland at school, The Pale and Beyond the Pale had very definite negative connotations and were considered offensive.

I still dont understand why, if some people find the phrase offence, it isnt simply changed. There are nine pages here of debate, and whilst some people view it as perfectly acceptable, others are clearly upset by it. Why would you knowingly -
and therefore, deliberately - cause distress and upset when it would be easy to prevent, even if you, yourself dont feel the distress but wont be adversely affected by the change either?

Giantbanger
History changes though.
New interpretations are added and old ones nuanced.
New facts put others into different perspectives.

We cannot stick rigidly to what we were taught at school
That way stagnation lies.

Well, I am not making up that when I was taught the history of Ireland at school

I was taught all sorts of things at school that turned out not to be factual.

The Pale and Beyond the Pale had very definite negative connotations and were considered offensive.

But you accept that different countries find different things offensive? And that it might be difficult for an English person to know that a phrase which has both innocent origins and connotations in English could have very different connotations in Ireland.

I don’t expect English or Irish people to know things that are offensive in my home country (which has strong historical and immigration links to both). Many English and Irish people find plenty of things to be offensive about nonetheless, to be honest, so I have sympathy with where you’re coming from.

What Norma said.

Some people - a significant minority - are offended by it. it's an easy change so why not? Why continue to deliberately cause offence having be told - repeatedly - that a proportion of people who post here find it offensive.

I don't get it.

NormaNameChange
It is not possible to please all of the people all of the time.
Phrases that upset one person are utterly meaningless to another.
The world is a many and varied place.

Where I live the Pale runs around the New Forest - when it was the king's hunting park. You can still walk parts of the bank and ditch.
Poor folks lived beyond the pale, the king hunted within it.

Jassy I have never said that other countries don't find other things offensive.

I don't think this particular phrase is pleasant, and I don't understand why MN won't just use a different word.

I see it set in the wider context of anti-Irish sentiment that seems to me to pervade here, and I intend to challenge.

Some people are just full of issues today and looking for things to get offended by. Yes, there were were terrible things committed against the Irish in years gone by and there's no excuse for that but the people on this forum are not responsible for the actions of previous generations. How can anyone move on if it keeps getting dragged up? It just perpetuates the divide.

Some people - a significant minority - are offended by it.
A very vocal minority maybe, but certainly not a significant minority.

That implies that over 25% of MN posters are offended by it
which is clearly not the case (even among those of Irish extraction)

Are we no longer allowed to discuss the Pales in other parts of the world and what lies / lay beyond them ?

And that it might be difficult for an English person to know that a phrase which has both innocent origins and connotations in English could have very different connotations in Ireland.

Not after they’ve been told.

I didn't say you couldn't talkin

Perverse I was on a thread from 22nd October that wasn't deleted until last week, and I started a thread on site stuff on Tuesday of last week about a different thread that was started to goad and which had a post on it from a mod that showed that the mod in question did not understand the nuance of anti-Irish sentiment that was in that OP, it isn't just a matter of me looking for things to get offended with today.