University Tells Students Britain 'invaded' Australia

[naomi24]

And there’s me thinking the Aussies were down to earth, sensible people immune to the nonsense of political correctness. How disappointing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-35922858

[Svejk]

This is what happens when people are brought up on a diet of Disney Films.

[sp1814]

What words offend you here naomi24?

Rather than 'invaded', do you think 'settled' is more accurate?

Or perhaps we should use, 'popped by'?

I think that 'invaded' is closer to the truth than 'settled', but perhaps a compromise word (so as not to offend those who don't want to hear the unsavoury truth about what actually happened to those native to Oz) is 'colonised'.

Is that sanitised enough for those who would rather not know about Australian history?

[sp1814]

Incidentally - the idea that Aborigines were living in some Garden of Eden, all getting along with each other is ridiculous.

As ridiculous as the idea that European history is built from hundreds of year of everyone rubbing along together in a happy-go-lucky manner.

[naomi24]

SP, as you well know, I don’t ‘do’ politically correct ‘offence’, and I’ve already said I am well aware of the history, so your sarcasm is misplaced. I am simply incredulous at the ever increasing, and decreasing, elasticity of our language. For example, I was under the impression that it’s considered correct to refer to indigenous peoples as ‘Native American’, ‘Native Australian’, ‘etc., but the word ‘Native’ has now been deemed inappropriate by this university. Similarly, at one time we were taught that it was very rude to refer to black people as black. Coloured was the preferred term, but now, even though 'The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People' in the USA is still very much in evidence, ‘coloured’ is deemed offensive, so we are obliged to say ‘black’. The whole thing strikes me as utter nonsense. As the introductory voice-over in the old US television comedy, ‘Soap’, would have it - “Confused? You will be!”

Incidentally, your post at 12:13 should be addressed to Steg. I can’t recall anyone claiming that everyone in Europe rubbed along together in a happy-go-lucky manner, but I think he’s under the impression that Australia was some sort of Utopia before the wicked British happened upon it.

[Gromit]

I wonder if our grandparents railed against having to use politically correct terms like 'World War I' instead of what they had always referred to as 'The Great War'?

Language and terms are not fixed in time, and change constantly

[Ellipsis]

*We* didn't invade it. *We* are still here in the UK. *They* invaded it - the Australians ...

[sp1814]

naomi24

If I were you, I wouldn't expend any energy on intractable semantics.

Know this - everyone is different. Some words and phrases that one person would find offensive, someone else won't.

Some women hate being called a 'lady'. Some don't.

You know what I do? I tailor my language to my audience. It's something that most sensible people do.

When I'm with my mates in a bar in Shoreditch on a Friday night, the words I use are quite different to those I use when I'm round my mum's on a Sunday afternoon.

For God's sake - you've got one set of people quibbling on about which words to use, and there's other people grizzling about the quibbling.

What a ridiculous waste of flipping energy. Who cares about a university in another continent. Surely this is a matter where we should read the story, perhaps comment - but avoid getting worked up about it?

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

/// I wonder if our grandparents railed against having to use politically correct terms like 'World War I' instead of what they had always referred to as 'The Great War'? ///

Politically correct doesn't come into your example.

'Great' can be defined differently, just as the word 'Gay' can.

[sp1814]

And this thing about changing terms...

So what if a word which was deemed acceptable in 1972 is now seen as outdated.

That's because it IS outdated.

Tell me - if a friend had a child who was mentally handicapped, would you refer to them as a retard?

[sp1814]

AOG

Good example - the word 'gay' has been redefined a number of times since its first inception.

I believe it's original meaning was 'a man who consorts with (female) prostitutes.'

Those who yearn for its early 20th century meaning 'happy / carefree' don't realise that was the third or fourth time it changed meaning.

[naomi24]

SP, all these posts in a short space of time from someone who wouldn't expend any energy on intractable semantics. :o)

[Gromit]

AOG
The meaning of 'Great' didn't change. Another war even greater can along, so the first conflict was renamed. I cannot imagine anyone making a fuss like they would today.

[Old_Geezer]

Grandparents should have approved of the renaming of the first world war from the Great War to World War One, as otherwise it would be sharing a name with the Napoleonic War, which had been given it first.

[Svejk]

I blame the fishes that invaded the land 450 million years ago. ;(

[sp1814]

naomi24

But you get the point about the way that words change and fall out of favour, right?

Would you call a mentally handicapped child a retard?

That was quite acceptable in the 50s.

You see what I mean?

[naomi24]

sp, //You see what I mean? //

..... but the black/coloured thing has changed back again. You see what I mean?

[sp1814]

naomi24

The NAACP isn't going to change it's name to reflect current semantic standards because it's a brand.

Remember back in the 1980s there was a company called 'Radio Rentals'? Well, it only rented out televisions and television equipment, but because the brand name had already been established, it kept with it.

Same with the Radio Times. The name would imply that it focuses on the schedule for radio programmes, and that simply isn't the case.

A more considered answer to your question can be found here:

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-NAACP-still-use-colored-people-in-the-organizations-name-Should-they-change-their-name-Why-is-the-C-still-allowed

But back to the question I posed to you - would you use the term 'retard' to describe a mentally handicapped person?

[naomi24]

SP, you’ve lost me with Radio Rentals and Radio Times ….I don’t see the correlation between that and 'offence' …...but moving on…… the point is we used to call Native Americans Red Indians. That is no longer acceptable, so we call them Native Americans. This university has now deemed the word ‘Native’ to be unacceptable, so in order to comply with their pronouncement, what are we to call the indigenous people of North America? We actually have no idea of the identity of those who originate these ideas, but nevertheless we all kowtow because to do otherwise would be considered politically incorrect, and therefore unacceptable.

In answer to your question, no, I would never use the term ‘retard’. I would, however, deem people who are retarded, retarded.

Your link says it all. “Why is the C still allowed?” The author means Coloured. See what I mean?