Not so much. If you impose restrictions upon the use of certain words and remove context from the equation, there you have draconian hate speech legislation. You mention courtesy, well, I'm afraid courtesy has long since left the building and it's now a matter of law and people fearing expressing themselves no matter how innocently.


So you have said it yourself. It is "potentially" offensive. It doesn't have to be seen as such. But we now have a situation where context and intent are sidelined in favour of assumption, inflexibility, illegality and censorship.


No it's not. By insisting that the term can never, ever be used in certain situations, regardless of the context and intent then you are permanently assigning to that term its offensive meaning instead of appreciating its alternate, innocent definitions.


I know all the history thank you very much. But to compare the term monkey to the N-word is a straw man. You know full well the situations aren't comparable.


What? Are you kidding me? The entire implication of this thread and many of the posts in it is that she should not have said it, and therefore should not be allowed to say it.


But as mentioned earlier. These are only connotations. They do not have to be accepted or reacted upon. This is why context and intent are fundamental to our language and social interactions. There is also courtesy and decency in understanding a person's meaning and intent before condemning them.


Well, sorry, but it is illegal. And it is so because people have insisted on ignoring context and assuming offense.


My rant was in response to those people who automatically assumed the position of shock and horror, even though they know full well that she did not mean it to be offensive. It was directed towards those whose reactions to certain trigger words/situations demonstrate social conditioning to the point where independent thought is secondary to subservience and unquestioning conformity.

But, you're right, this probably isn't the place to be discussing it so seriously, so I've made my standpoint clear and I appreciate yours; I just don't agree with it. So I'm going to leave it at that.

And it could be said that Rosemary was unwittingly speaking in a derogatory way. The point is under race relations law if someone deems something is racist then the police are obliged to treat it as such and investigate accordingly.

That is why the police had to investigate the John Terry \ Ferdinand affair because someone at home made a complaint of racism. Similarly why the police had to investigate Mark Clattenberg because a Chelsea [player said he had heard the referee refer to another Chelsea player as a monkey.

So on that basis if someone now makes a complaint to the police about Rosemary's alleged racism then the police will have to inbvestigate - as indeed will OFCOM if a formal complaint is made to them

But that is not how it works. You NEVER refer to black people as monkeys of gorillas as it is offensive to some and there is always someone who will make an allegation of racism

If there was no racist intent, just a flippant or rather insensitive remark, there shouldnt be any recourse. Rosemary has suffered ageist and fatist remarks for many days and if she is pulled up for her comments, it should be a level playing field that others should have the same treatment.

As it was Rosemary who obviously had a brain flip and loves David, it shouldnt be viewed seriously.

100% agree.

Most of the people who slag off the Daily Mail probably read that left wing piece of PC toilet paper, more commonly known as The Guardian.

The people who say "Oh my god, did she say whatever" are the people to blame. The hysterical PC side of them comes out and they keep going on and on and on about it and won't let it drop. You feel like shaking some common sense into them and saying stop making a mountain out a mole hill. It's not as if she murdered anyone is it. Just talk about something else.

Fair enough, we will just have to agree to disagree, we've both said our piece and no doubt if we pursued it further it would just turn into one of those tortuous, circular internet arguments that go nowhere and drive both participants up the wall

I've come to the conclusion that rosemary never meant any harm or malice towards david. she got carried away and described him like a monkey in shape and size not anything else. Had it been vladimer klitshko she would have said the same thing,its the people who notice davids skin colour that has made the comment assumption it was do with race. This debate could go on all day with valid points for both arguments with no ending to the matter

perhaps Rosemary isn't aware of that ... not everyone will be ... especially those who haven't followed the latest incidents in the football world

I'll cut her some slack as I doubt she meant offence

This x 1000000.

Nail- head.

I think it's clear if you watch the interview that there was no racist intent - conscious or subconscious. She obviously thinks David is lovely, both to look at and as a person.

And in response to the poster who asked if muscle-bound white people are ever compared to apes, then the answer is 'yes', they get referred to as gorillas to indicate their physique. It has nothing to do with skin colour.

There is too much real racism to fight (such as the vile incidents in and around football that several posters have mentioined) to undermine the case by actively seeking to infer racist intent where none was intended and by taking offence - particularly on others' behalf - where none is implied.

Im white and get called monkey all the time because I look like Helena Bonham Carter when she was in Planet of the Apes. I dont know what thats got to do with anything but I thought id put it out there

Lol, how cute!

Check this out:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...arassment.html

Amongst all classes within white societies there is a "school of thought" as Ron Atkinson put it, where black people are seriously considered to be monkeys/gorillas/apes etc (i.e sub-human) or at least not far off it. That's the way some people seriously think, they look upon black people as sub-human and try to ensure that the cap fits by making an association between black people and monkeys over and over again as a form of abuse, until it sticks in the subconcious mind as something to be somehow associated with black people.

Ordinarily there wouldn't be any problems or possibility for misunderstandings where comments like this were concerned if the people who subscribe to this "school of thought" didn't continue to abuse black people by associating them with primates on racial grounds. It is because there's no history or similar "school of thought" amongst white people whereby whites are considered sub-human apes based on their race that these type of comments when made between whites can be easily passed off as just banter. It's not so easy for those who are frequently on the end of such comments to be able to know other people's intentions when there's a "school of thought" in white society whereby people continue to be associated with monkeys, apes etc and considered sub-human because of their race.


I'm pretty sure those with the financial means actually live in houses across Africa, the Rothschild/Rockefeller/Li etc controlled world monetry system is simply not built for Africans whose "leaders" are mere puppets of the money masters. I also didn't realise that "sticking out ears" was exclusive to any particular race. The last time I checked black people also are not very hairy people, whereas monkeys/apes/gorillas etc are extremely hairy creatures. There are others who bear far closer physical resemblance if you ask me, not due to their race. But basically the root of problems like this is the fact that within all classes of white societies there has existed for hundreds of years and continues to exist a "school of thought" whereby some people think it's legitimate practice to associate black people with monkeys/apes etc because they consider them sub-human. Without that everyone would laugh and joke with each other and wouldn't bat an eye lid.

I think all these 'oh dear', opps', 'disgraceful' and 'lets hope it gets picked up on' remarks, say so much more about the writers than it says about Rosemary. Once again, people jumping on the bandwagon. I hope if something comes of it, Rosemary will be given the chance to explain what she meant, I bet my bottom dollar, it will not be anything to do with colour.

No I simply think she opened her mouth without thinking as the vast majority of posters agree it was an innocent remark. But even it that were not the case, she'd hardly admit to it.

Having read all the replies I still believe it was said without intent to offend and I think thats the crux of the issue.

Football yobs making monkey noises when black players touch the ball is clearly unacceptable and racist as its done with intent to offend.

Rosemary opened her mouth without thinking. She adores David & would not wish to offend him .

Interested in what you actually mean by

say so much more about the writers than it says about Rosemary

I would venture it says nothing about such people all he says is whatever interpretation you put on it, rightly or wrongly

As to people jumping on the bandwagon I agree. However I think there are several reasons for this

1. Some people will jump on any passing bandwagon.

2. There is a large degree of inconsistency in how these episodes are dealt with and understandably some people cannot understand why it is an heinous crime when one person says it and acceptable when another person says it

3. Some people will use any event like this to further their own agenda and will not be particularly concerned About what has been said or by whom just how they can use it to their own advantage


Personally I don’t believe there was an ill intent in what she said. However as she is an ill mannered obnoxious person IMO I won’t worry if she gets a little flack over it. Who knows it might even teach her to be less judgemental of and offensive to people

After having read a few of the page 1 posts... jumping to the end of this thread:

I am a proud and unapologetic member of the "PC brigade" as many morons like to refer to those of us who want a world in which we are sensitive to the very real and very current issues that are highlighted and perpetuated by the slights, innuendo and insidious shit that is all too present in the language of those set on keeping up the wrongheadedness that continues to separate us...

But I guarantee you Rosemary meant nothing of the sort.

While those trying to make an issue of this, I'm afraid, are either just busybodies or they are bent on using this to insidiously stir up the aforementioned ugliness the "PC brigade" would like to do away with.

LSS: Take it from a someone who is unabashedly politically correct: there is nothing sinister in what Rosemary said; but, sadly, there probably is in those feigning concern, here.

You don't have to associate them yourself to know that describing a black person as a monkey, given the history of racists doing just that and the West using talk like that to justify slavery and segregation, to know it's f***ing stupid to do so.

I think when determining someones meaning from their language... context and intent should be the most important things considered.

I also think that using the word monkey in a descriptive sense in relation to a black person is bloody stupid given the negative connotations the word has in that context.
It doesn't matter if you are the least racist person on the planet...

The context of the word monkey has evolved to be racist in relation to describing black people.

My friends sons nick name is orangutan... he is a ginger haired rugby player... this use is purely descriptive.

Calling a black person is not purely descriptive it has far deeper connotations that refer to them as being less than human... it is never going to be ok.

I don't personally think Rosemary was being racist... she was clearly admiring... I also don't think David should ever be described using the word monkey no matter what the intent was... the English language is vast... find a more appropriate adjective... manly physique... marvelous muscles... hulky etc. Better yet engage your brain before opening your mouth.

More nonsense.

This foolish misunderstanding of offensive language is a problem.

It is entirely okay when the connotation is *inoffensive*. Because it is a term that people have used to describe other people *inoffensively* for ages. Your insistance that "they" will never be able to be able to bear the inoffensive use of the term "monkey" is nothing but a trouble-making perpetuation of the offensive use of the term.

The word monkey is not offensive... when put in the context of describing someone who is black it is offensive... the history of the word monkey when used in relation to black people is derogatory.

It is more foolish to staunchly defend a word without applying context... I am not saying the word is offensive in any other way but in describing black people... sometimes the way a word has been misused is more powerful than its meaning... take swastika for example its meaning is 'to be good' how many people would use it in that context?

Why is it trouble making to respect the right of anyone to not want to be referred to by using a descriptive that has traditionally been used as a derogatory comment?

You may be of the opinion that the word is innocuous and should be applied regardless of race without fear of being labelled racist... I am of the opinion it cannot be used in this way because of its history of abuse.

Because you misunderstand.

This term has not traditionally, as many other specific terms have, been used derogatorily. It has been used that way. It has been used that way to hurt those with "Asian" features as well..

But it has through history not necessarily been so.

And to exclude the innocuous use of the term in all it's many forms being used on "black" or "Asian" folks is to stir up the ugliness that the derogatory use of the term intended. It's perfectly fine to use the term in an innocuous complimentary way. It must be or we will continue to keep the spirit of the ugly hurtful use alive.

IOW, if you start gasping at the innocuous use of the term you lend credence to the stupid and hurtful misuse of the label.

Do you really not see?

We all look like monkeys -- they are some of our closest relatives! We needn't worry about it so or we bolster the idiotic and dehumanizing point those who use the term intend.

Rosemary did not mean anything of the sort. We needn't gasp. It only serves to resurrect the ugly and stupid.

No I really do understand... I just don't agree with you.

The term monkey used in a derogatory way to describe black or Asian people has been used for a significant period time... language constantly evolves the meaning of words are constantly adapting... in relation to describing anyone who is Black/Asian it is considered insulting by the vast majority of people... for very good reasons.

I would not consider using the word monkey as a description for Black/Asian people no matter how innocuously... as a matter of respect.

There are far better ways to fight against racism than to redefine a word when used in this context... challenge ideology rather than semantics.

I didn't gasp at Rosemary's use of the word... I rolled my eyes... I stated quite clearly I did not think she was being racist... that doesn't mean I think her choice of word was right.

The ugly and stupid do not need resurrecting they are on our streets every day... spilling out their bile... until there are none of them left and their poison is lanced... language and how it is used offensively will continue to be censored.