Has the Cancelled Thread Explanation itself been cancelled??

Back to Forum
Viewing 12 posts - 16 through 27 (of 27 total)

  • GivingupBA
    Participant

    FormerBA said “It is simply common decency in the modern world.” Yes, but it is also more than that. Some comments are illegal in the UK. This is quoted directly from the Crown Prosecution Service:
    “Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person’s disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity or perceived transgender identity.”

    People have been prosecuted for verbal statements made to others.

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    TupeloKid
    Participant

    I must admit that I had not realised the so-called R-word was regarded as offensive, having always used it in a general literal way, without intending offence. Of course, there are words we used in the school playground, over 50 years ago, which would undoubtedly be understood to be offensive now. The S-word and the M-word spring to mind.

    To see how far behind the curve I may have been, I researched how and when the R-word came to be offensive. According to Wikipedia,

    “Up until around the 1960s, the terms “moron”, “idiot”, “cretin” and “imbecile” were all genuine, non-offensive terms to refer to people with mental intellectual disabilities and low intelligence. These words were discontinued in that form when concerns arose that they had developed negative meanings, with “retard” and “retarded” replacing them.”

    So the R-word was originally a non-offensive term (to replace some terms which had become offensive), which is how I had used it, although I confess to still using the word “idiot”.

    However, while researching, I came across an article in Forbes Magazine on the subject of the R-word, which outlined the case (or at least the conclusion) for not using it, and which went on to say that no one could use the words “crazy” or “stupid” either, or should I say another C-word and another S-word, without realising that these words would inevitably cause offence in normal conversation.

    So, I am now genuinely at a loss on how to describe someone or an action which I genuinely believe has been sub-optimal.


    cwoodward
    Participant

    I enjoy the forum greatly and wholeheartedly applaud Tom for moderating it so well for so long.
    It is I believe a thankless job particularly I suspect in the past couple of years where some contributors are so easily offended and instead of delivering a robust reasoned response to the perceived offence go winning to the umpire “its not fair sir” “its not legal sir” – “I’m offended sir” etc etc ad nauseum.

    The contributors to this forum are a broad church and invariably deliver to the reader a wealth of valuable insights advise and travel anecdotes sometimes delivered in a robust worldly way that some may find mildly offensive – ‘so what’ I say! ether respond in grown up way to make your point and be judged by the response, keep your piece or go away -but above all please please don’t whine to the umpire at the drop of a hat or this valuable forum will be unable to be moderated and thus destroyed.

    Prior to writing this I took some time and read some of the threads from around 20 years ago and without doubt they were often robust but the better for it in my view.
    I have contributed to the forum under my present handle for some years and previously as ‘oldchinahand’ and while I hesitate to offer advise I do feel rather strongly that all contributions that are relevant, broadly legal and not directly insulting personally to another named contributor must continue to be allowed or the woke whiners will destroy this, what has become a valuable institution and data base for business travellers.


    FormerBA
    Participant

    I must admit that I had not realised the so-called R-word was regarded as offensive, having always used it in a general literal way, without intending offence. Of course, there are words we used in the school playground, over 50 years ago, which would undoubtedly be understood to be offensive now. The S-word and the M-word spring to mind.

    To see how far behind the curve I may have been, I researched how and when the R-word came to be offensive. According to Wikipedia,

    “Up until around the 1960s, the terms “moron”, “idiot”, “cretin” and “imbecile” were all genuine, non-offensive terms to refer to people with mental intellectual disabilities and low intelligence. These words were discontinued in that form when concerns arose that they had developed negative meanings, with “retard” and “retarded” replacing them.”

    So the R-word was originally a non-offensive term (to replace some terms which had become offensive), which is how I had used it, although I confess to still using the word “idiot”.

    However, while researching, I came across an article in Forbes Magazine on the subject of the R-word, which outlined the case (or at least the conclusion) for not using it, and which went on to say that no one could use the words “crazy” or “stupid” either, or should I say another C-word and another S-word, without realising that these words would inevitably cause offence in normal conversation.

    So, I am now genuinely at a loss on how to describe someone or an action which I genuinely believe has been sub-optimal.

    A process or procedure can be retarded and it is entirely acceptable to describe it as such, but an individual or group of people should never be described using the R word.

    The English language is rich and varied and there is generally another word or phrase which can be used.

    Sub-optimal means not of the highest standard or quality, and it may be appropriate to describe an individual’s performance in a specific role as such. It would not however, be an acceptable description for an individual or group of individuals who may have learning difficulties.

    Its not woke to be decent and inclusive, but I appreciate that its a fine line at times. That said, I rather ere on the side of inclusiveness, decency and kindness.

    4 users thanked author for this post.

    Johnnyg
    Participant

    Having being involved in a trainer / consultant capacity for many years I must admit to having sympathy with people nowadays. Whilst many names were acceptable in the playground, and even workplace years ago they are quite rightly abhorrent now.

    IMO the way the English language, particularly urban language has evolved over recent years is staggering. One only has to look at the gender / transgender / pansexual debate and what pronoun a person would like to be called is a nightmare if you are not up to date.

    So yes it is good to be up to date, yes certain words and names should be not used and have no right to be used but it is entirely acceptable to the majority that not everyone will be au fait with the way that the English language is developing at the rate it is.

    For business it must be a nightmare having to change, or be expected to change not only facilities to cater for all but to also change documentation and policies etc to cater for all.

    Who would be H.R now.

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    Montysaurus
    Participant

    What is the R word? There is a suggestion in one post that it is “retard” which to me means to slow down as in a motor vehicle or a chemical reaction or similar. Surely this isn’t offensive.

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    Alsacienne
    Participant

    Should the word ‘retard’ be the word causing such offence, it will be necessary to edit all automated voice instructions/statements from aircraft flight decks the world over, regardless of model or company being featured. And whoops! I almost posted the word ‘cockpit’ for ‘flight deck’ … but realised just in time (I hope) that this would inflame some parts of the readership.

    4 users thanked author for this post.

    TupeloKid
    Participant

    It is indeed a fine line. I was reading an article in the Spectator today about the governor of the Bank of England, in which he was described as “lame”. With this discussion in mind, I wondered whether anyone would be complaining to the Spectator about it.

    (By the way, I was using the word “sub-optimal in jest, albeit a sub-optimal one.)

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    CathayLoyalist2
    Participant

    As a former Football Referee (Football League/Premier League)there is a word in the laws that might help and that is “intent” – was there a deliberate intent to commit a foul/ a deliberate intent to offend /insult someon, both without any regard to that players/persons, “well being”. I know, as I said in an earlier post, what I am about to say is or is not going to be offensive. That said sometimes people find the truth offensive

    4 users thanked author for this post.

    esselle
    Participant

    Should the word ‘retard’ be the word causing such offence, it will be necessary to edit all automated voice instructions/statements from aircraft flight decks the world over, regardless of model or company being featured. And whoops! I almost posted the word ‘cockpit’ for ‘flight deck’ … but realised just in time (I hope) that this would inflame some parts of the readership.

    I don’t think the word itself when used in a technical context, as you describe, is problematic.

    The issue arises where it is used to reflect aspects of a person’s capacity. It may, many moons ago, have been a handy catch-all, but it has absolutely no place in today’s world.

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    Poshgirl58
    Participant

    “Sometimes people find the truth offensive”

    Yes, because it’s not their truth.

    The article I used to “re-educate” myself dealt with Down’s Syndrome and the now unacceptable words used to describe those who have it. Years ago, there was an M-word used. That seems to have disappeared naturally as people become more aware. Same with other words for physical challenges; the S-word for limited mobility such as paraplegia, but still used to describe IBS.

    The English language is indeed complex with words having multiple meanings/uses. Whether a word is offensive or not usually depends on the context in which it is used. An example, I have a relative of far eastern heritage. He cannot accept the use of the word “nip” to describe a chill in the air or a quick trip to the shops. All attempts to reassure that we’re not being derogatory fall on deaf ears. That’s his truth, as opposed to ours.

    As for the place where pilots sit, I much prefer flightdeck but it’s just personal choice.

    7 users thanked author for this post.

    TupeloKid
    Participant

    Optimal!

Viewing 12 posts - 16 through 27 (of 27 total)
This topic is marked as closed to new replies, however your posting capabilities still allow you to do so.
The topic ‘Has the Cancelled Thread Explanation itself been cancelled??’ is closed to new replies.
Business Traveller July / August 2022 cover
Business Traveller July / August 2022 cover
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls