Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Max White]

Yeah... con-artist in general, though I was thinking that was kind of wrapped up in the thief thing.

Ah, so what you mean to say is that we have already addressed all of this.
Read back to where I asked for the Mexican example, and we all agreed that just because a word can be used as a slur when some people want to use it that way, such as people fearing immigration attacking Mexicans, or people fearing witches attacking Romani people, does not make it exclusively a slur.

I think the confusion here is that you think "gypsy" primarily means "traveling person". It doesn't. The only reason it means that at all is through association with a stereotype of Roma people. You're just so starkly unaware of the existence of the Roma people, or the prejudice against them, that you feel okay ignoring the connection between the people themselves and the word "gypsy". The word gypsy primarily refers to the Roma people and to stereotypical portrayals of them. This is not even a matter of debate here. Saying "a gypsy is not always a romani" is like saying "a wetback isn't always a mexican, sometimes they're just lazy agricultural workers"; one is, and has always been, related to a stereotype of the other.

See here is the thing, it does mean that, or at least here it means "a travelling person". I didn't even know that gypsy was a different genetic background from the rest of Europe, how could I have a stereotype of them? Seriously think about that, how am I making the connection in my mind between a race of people and the word gypsy, if I was unaware of this race of people.
And here is the thing, you keep saying that "Americans have a stereotype of these people!" but they don't even know who these people are, the stereotype doesn't exist, when anybody from outside of Europe says gypsy, they mean a traveller.
Common language is that a gypsy is a free spirited traveller. It is what people use and understand. I can't help it if your culture has it's own way of interpreting things, but you can't expect people to change their name just because it has a dirty translation in Japanese, so you can't really expect me to know every culture on earth and know how to avoid insulting them, because there are so many things that can be taken wrong in the wrong context that nobody would ever be allowed to speak.

I think reading the original post, it is very clear it means "Somebody in khaki shorts" "A traveller", not "An Australian" any number of a list of cultures.

[MaximumZero]

There's a type of plant called "Wandering Jew". Is it anti-Semitic to own one/call it that?

Does it live in the desert? Man, those guys were horrible about stopping for directions.

[GlyphGryph]

Here's a question - would you be okay with a country that calls anyone with non-white skin a nigger, based on them not really referring specifically to black people from Africa, and they've been calling them that for so long that the original connotation can be argued to be lost in their country?

Despite the fact that any person who visits from other countries would consider it an outright insult, and the rest of the world is trying hard to combat the stereotypes associated with it?

I mean... I guess you would be.

But it is very much essentially the same class of word, gypsy and nigger (or, as mentioned, wetback). That your local environment has decided on a new use for it doesn't change it's history, or the fact that it is still used in the perjorative sense in most of the world.

As such, fine, go ahead and use it locally - but since you're speaking to the world when you're on the internet, now that you're aware of the word's history you should probably be a bit more limited in your use of it here.

[Vector]

Hey, Max White, you aren't talking about what words mean in a foreign language.  You're talking about what they mean in English.

[Max White]

Here's a question - would you be okay with a country that calls anyone with non-white skin a nigger, based on them not really referring specifically to black people from Africa, and they've been calling them that for so long that the original connotation can be argued to be lost in their country?

Well if the majority of these people were unaware that the word "Nigger" had ever meant a black slave, or that there were even people on the earth with a dark skin tone, why would it be offensive? Maybe if I didn't know what they meant by the word, but that would be a mistake on my part.

Hey, Max White, you aren't talking about what words mean in a foreign language.  You're talking about what they mean in English.

English is a very broad topic, trust me, something as simple as a thong can be offensive in the wrong country, partly because it means something totally different here.

[DJ]

The Japanese basically have that with "gaijin". And I don't really give a damn about it.

[G-Flex]

I really have to disagree about the perception in the United States. In part because I think most Americans think of gypsies as one of those things that were around in the Middle Ages (also known as "when King Arthur led the Crusades against the Sheriff of Nottingham") and not really an extant people.

Ignorance doesn't excuse much. The fact that they're not even treated as real is, in itself, a bad thing. And even if they aren't seen as real, the stereotypes about them very much are, and I've encountered them both in real life, in the English language in general, and in the media.

I still maintain that in the US and Australia, absent any other context like a hunched old woman with an evil eye, the phrase "gypsy" does simply mean "wandering/traveling person". The etymology may derive from a stereotype, but that connotation has been lost.

You would be wrong. If you say "gypsy", you are bringing up far more connotations than that. I live in the US, and can say for sure that if you call someone a "gypsy" you are not only bringing up more imagery than simply a "wandering/traveling person", but you're also bringing up a perception of a particular group, whether people think that group is real/extant or not.

There's a type of plant called "Wandering Jew". Is it anti-Semitic to own one/call it that?

Please stop bringing up these red herrings that don't actually make any points. This is completely freaking irrelevant, has nothing to do with any jewish stereotypes at all, and... you know what, I don't even know why I'm responding to it.

Read back to where I asked for the Mexican example, and we all agreed that just because a word can be used as a slur when some people want to use it that way, such as people fearing immigration attacking Mexicans, or people fearing witches attacking Romani people, does not make it exclusively a slur.

You're right. It doesn't. Using it to refer to a stereotype of the group does make it a slur, especially when that group and the stereotypes surrounding it are 1) extant, and 2) a serious problem throughout much of the world.

See here is the thing, it does mean that, or at least here it means "a travelling person". I didn't even know that gypsy was a different genetic background from the rest of Europe, how could I have a stereotype of them? Seriously think about that, how am I making the connection in my mind between a race of people and the word gypsy, if I was unaware of this race of people.

I'm aware you didn't know that. However, even if you don't know that gypsies are real people, you can still have a stereotypical image of them as a false people. Years back, before I knew that the Roma people actually existed, I still pictured "gypsy" as having the same connotations as I do now: Swindlers, thieves, and otherwise immoral traveling types. And that character archetype is still offensive toward the actual people it's based on even if I don't know it's a stereotype of them, because some people do.

And here is the thing, you keep saying that "Americans have a stereotype of these people!" but they don't even know who these people are, the stereotype doesn't exist, when anybody from outside of Europe says gypsy, they mean a traveller.

I already told you that I've personally encountered the stereotype myself. If Americans had no historical stereotype of gypsies as a people, the pejorative verb "gyp" would not exist, Stephen King wouldn't have written a book about a gypsy woman cursing people, and I wouldn't have heard about people's parents joking about "selling them to the Gypsies" as children. And again, even if the stereotype is treated as a purely fictional/fantastical group of people, how the fuck is that any better? How is it any better for people to be so unaware of your actual cultural/ethnic group that they treat it a stereotype of it as being a fantasy trope with no regard for your actual people or culture?

Seriously, don't talk about "common language" here. You can't speak for how the word is used in the US or anywhere else, except maybe your own country. I have no idea how it's used in Australia, but even then, it's still linked to a stereotypical image of actual Gypsies, and the fact that you're speaking on an international forum such as the Internet means you should maybe be aware of how things are perceived outside your own narrow linguistic sphere.

Common language is that a gypsy is a free spirited traveller. It is what people use and understand. I can't help it if your culture has it's own way of interpreting things, but you can't expect people to change their name just because it has a dirty translation in Japanese, so you can't really expect me to know every culture on earth and know how to avoid insulting them, because there are so many things that can be taken wrong in the wrong context that nobody would ever be allowed to speak.

I don't give a damn where you're from; if "gypsy" means "free spirited traveler", it's because "free spirited traveler" is a common, historically relevant, and extant stereotype of gypsies. That is where that meaning comes from. There is no denying this. The meaning of "gypsy" you are using comes from an ethnic stereotype, whether you like it or not.

[RedKing]

Here's a question - would you be okay with a country that calls anyone with non-white skin a nigger, based on them not really referring specifically to black people from Africa, and they've been calling them that for so long that the original connotation can be argued to be lost in their country?

Despite the fact that any person who visits from other countries would consider it an outright insult, and the rest of the world is trying hard to combat the stereotypes associated with it?

I mean... I guess you would be.

But it is very much essentially the same class of word, gypsy and nigger (or, as mentioned, wetback). That your local environment has decided on a new use for it doesn't change it's history, or the fact that it is still used in the perjorative sense in most of the world.

As such, fine, go ahead and use it locally - but since you're speaking to the world when you're on the internet, now that you're aware of the word's history you should probably be a bit more limited in your use of it here.

Okay, that's a somewhat better argument. International context might mean being a bit more sensitive to varying meanings.

But that made me remember a classic miscommunication example: the British usage of the word "fag" to mean a cigarette. Granted, it's a bit different here because we're talking about a word for an inanimate object in one context and a pretty toxic slur in the other (although one that is used within the gay community itself as a mild insult or even as a pride word).

Bottom line: Language is a complicated thing, especially when combined with intent. Let's all try to be respectful, but let's also have some understanding that sometimes things are simple misunderstandings.

[Max White]

G-Flex, remembering that Vector is moving away from our forum, when I referred to her as a gypsy, do you think I meant "A traveller", or "A dirty rotten child stealing witch that isn't very nice and probably smells bad!"

Now remember, we have already determined that a word can have several meaning, some offensive, some not, and you need to read context to figure out what one, so with that in mind, what definition is more fitting?

[G-Flex]

Whether a stereotype is positive or not, it is still harmful to the group in question. What matters here is less whether I thought you were saying something bad, and more whether I thought you were using an ethnic stereotype in the process.

[Andir]

There's a type of plant called "Wandering Jew". Is it anti-Semitic to own one/call it that?

It depends, am I racist for calling a large rock just poking out of a field a "niggerhead"?

[Max White]

See that is the problem, you have it set in your mind that it must mean a certain thing!

I still pictured "gypsy" as having the same connotations as I do now: Swindlers, thieves, and otherwise immoral traveling types. And that character archetype is still offensive toward the actual people it's based on even if I don't know it's a stereotype of them, because some people do

Well no! I never had that picture in my head! I never connected gypsy to swindlers, thieves, or otherwise immoral travellers. You may have, but that doesn't mean everybody does. In fact a lot of people don't make that connection at all.

[DJ]

The first gypsy stereotype that comes to my mind is musicians.

[G-Flex]

See that is the problem, you have it set in your mind that it must mean a certain thing!

No, I don't. I just understand where the word actually comes from.

I could understand if the inoffensive meaning has been around so long that it's lost any connection to the ethnic group it was a stereotype of, but in this case, that's not true, as "gypsy" is still a very common term to refer to the Roma people in the anglophone world, and prejudice against them is still very recent (even ongoing) even outside Europe.

Well no! I never had that picture in my head! I never connected gypsy to swindlers, thieves, or otherwise immoral travellers. You may have, but that doesn't mean everybody does. In fact a lot of people don't make that connection at all.

Whether or not "a lot of people" do, that meaning of the word still comes from an ethnic stereotype that is still a very significant problem in the world, even the anglophone world. As such, it would be very wise for you to not use it. Your own ignorance of this prejudice, or even the group of question, does not change this. You're speaking internationally here, and if even multiple people here from the US can pick up on the stereotypical language, then it sure as hell isn't a dead topic that you don't have to worry about.

I'm also skeptical that your own ignorance reflects Australian linguistics as a whole. I'd have to talk to more people about it.

[Max White]

The first gypsy stereotype that comes to my mind is musicians.

Pretty much this, free spirits, into music and art, not materialistic, not likely to settle down. It is more of a complement over here. If you wanted to put a negative spin on it, you would call somebody a hippie.