Thanks again for raising some interesting points...
>1. In what circumstances is it necessary or helpful to identify
>someone?s racial or national attributes?
>From the clip I heard, it was to draw attention an individual in a group
just before naming him - which I would have thought was useful in a
video diary
Perhaps using the person's preferred name would work?
>2. As we all know, nationality and race are very different things of
>course.
>Am I allowed to be insulted by being called a Brit or a Pom? ;->>
I hope that you are 'allowed' to be insulted by whatever you choose to be
insulted about. AFAIK there is no law proscribing your feelings. I
definitely know that lots of people are insulted every day by being
thoughtlessly treated by other people. Their feelings are often ignored.
As you are (I'm guessing) someone of some power and respectability and able
to communicate your concerns, I’d expect that any complaint you made would
be treated seriously.
>3.What do you mean by ?politically correct?? I genuinely do not
>know what it means. (I do know what the hard-of-thinking suggest it
>means.)
?Actually what I was looking for were terms that were acceptable to the
groups involved - and could be used without offending the Daily Mail by
the rest of us!
>I was in the USA for 5 years, and the acceptable term for US citizens
with some African descent kept changing.
Is African-American now acceptable?
On the other hand, perhaps all educated people could take it as a major
objective to do things that are guaranteed to upset the Daily Mail. :)
I wouldn't worry about offending the Daily Mail - they do not have a heart
and soul. In fact, some people use them as counter-barometer of what is
decent in society. It is often said that a good rule of thumb is: if the
Mail supports it, it is probably evil.
I have seen the Daily Mail use the term 'politically correct' with abandon.
I have yet to see it defined.
http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/ is a good site.
As for Prince Harry .... well, I'd better get to work...
Sandra
|