A Bogus ID in Keywords

[Russell Watkins]

 

 

 

Oh, the irony...

Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on.  Good Christmas forum fodder.

 

 

Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self.

 

I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here.

 

I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else.

[John Mitchell]

 

This is a bit of an aside, but it shows how strange and complicated this type of thing can get. In Canada, it is considered politically incorrect to call an indigenous person an "Indian," as is often done in the USA.   Ironically, I've never met a First Nations person who doesn't call him or herself an "Indian." 

 

Most people I've met in Latin America consider themselves to be "Americans" in the larger sense of the word -- i.e. citizens of the Americas.

That's another thing. If you belong to an ethnic minority, you can use a term which is generally considered derogatory to describe yourself but it is taboo for others to use the term. There are many examples of this. 

 

On the second point,I have found that is true - Chileans consider themselves to be American in the broadest sense - gringos (I love that word) are often distinguished as Norte Americanos (even if they're European).

 

I've spent a lot of time in Mexico, where Americans, Canadians, Europeans, and even Australians are usually called gringos. Interesting, because a popular explanation of the derivation of the term "gringo" (green-go) is that it referred to the green uniforms invading U.S. soldiers used to wear -- i.e. "green go home."

 

P.P.S. I've yet to use "gringo" as a keyword.

[MDM]

 

 

 

 

Oh, the irony...

Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on.  Good Christmas forum fodder.

 

 

Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self.

 

I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here.

 

I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else.

 

 

EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people.  I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely. 

[MDM]

 

 

This is a bit of an aside, but it shows how strange and complicated this type of thing can get. In Canada, it is considered politically incorrect to call an indigenous person an "Indian," as is often done in the USA.   Ironically, I've never met a First Nations person who doesn't call him or herself an "Indian." 

 

Most people I've met in Latin America consider themselves to be "Americans" in the larger sense of the word -- i.e. citizens of the Americas.

That's another thing. If you belong to an ethnic minority, you can use a term which is generally considered derogatory to describe yourself but it is taboo for others to use the term. There are many examples of this. 

 

On the second point,I have found that is true - Chileans consider themselves to be American in the broadest sense - gringos (I love that word) are often distinguished as Norte Americanos (even if they're European).

 

I've spent a lot of time in Mexico, where Americans, Canadians, Europeans, and even Australians are usually called gringos. Interesting, because a popular explanation of the derivation of the term "gringo" (green-go) is that it referred to the green uniforms invading U.S. soldiers used to wear -- i.e. "green go home."

 

P.P.S. I've yet to use "gringo" as a keyword.

 

 

Interesting. I've never heard that. I just looked it up on WIkipedia and there are several other explanations as well. 

[Russell Watkins]

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, the irony...

Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on.  Good Christmas forum fodder.

 

 

Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self.

 

I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here.

 

I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else.

 

 

EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people.  I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely. 

 

 

I wasn't getting at you, mate. It's the English language's fault, not yours. And I don't think you should worry about causing offence - it's obvious you were using the accepted Alamy abbreviation.

 

It was just an ironic (non-Freudian) linguistic juxtaposition in this thread. And my brain seems to be wired to see such things. And then post about them. And cause others to shout "EEEK" and swear at computers. Sorry about that.

[John Mitchell]

 

 

 

This is a bit of an aside, but it shows how strange and complicated this type of thing can get. In Canada, it is considered politically incorrect to call an indigenous person an "Indian," as is often done in the USA.   Ironically, I've never met a First Nations person who doesn't call him or herself an "Indian." 

 

Most people I've met in Latin America consider themselves to be "Americans" in the larger sense of the word -- i.e. citizens of the Americas.

That's another thing. If you belong to an ethnic minority, you can use a term which is generally considered derogatory to describe yourself but it is taboo for others to use the term. There are many examples of this. 

 

On the second point,I have found that is true - Chileans consider themselves to be American in the broadest sense - gringos (I love that word) are often distinguished as Norte Americanos (even if they're European).

 

I've spent a lot of time in Mexico, where Americans, Canadians, Europeans, and even Australians are usually called gringos. Interesting, because a popular explanation of the derivation of the term "gringo" (green-go) is that it referred to the green uniforms invading U.S. soldiers used to wear -- i.e. "green go home."

 

P.P.S. I've yet to use "gringo" as a keyword.

 

 

Interesting. I've never heard that. I just looked it up on WIkipedia and there are several other explanations as well. 

 

Yes, there are all kinds of explanations. I kind of like the "green-go" theory, though. Interestingly enough, now that I have a grey/gray beard and silver hair (what's left of it), I don't get called a gringo as much as I used to. I was in a taxi in Mexico City a couple of years ago, and the driver asked me if I was cubano (Cuban). I thought, "Gee, my Spanish must be really improving." Later, I discovered that Mexicans think Cubans speak terrible Spanish and can barely understand them.

[MDM]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, the irony...

Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on.  Good Christmas forum fodder.

 

 

Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self.

 

I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here.

 

I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else.

 

 

EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people.  I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely. 

 

 

I wasn't getting at you, mate. It's the English language's fault, not yours. And I don't think you should worry about causing offence - it's obvious you were using the accepted Alamy abbreviation.

 

It was just an ironic (non-Freudian) linguistic juxtaposition in this thread. And my brain seems to be wired to see such things. And then post about them. And cause others to shout "EEEK" and swear at computers. Sorry about that.

 

 

Oh no I understood and never thought you were being anything but funny. I should have got it first time. I've enjoyed our conversations before. Have a good veggie Christmas 

[MDM]

 

 

 

 

This is a bit of an aside, but it shows how strange and complicated this type of thing can get. In Canada, it is considered politically incorrect to call an indigenous person an "Indian," as is often done in the USA.   Ironically, I've never met a First Nations person who doesn't call him or herself an "Indian." 

 

Most people I've met in Latin America consider themselves to be "Americans" in the larger sense of the word -- i.e. citizens of the Americas.

That's another thing. If you belong to an ethnic minority, you can use a term which is generally considered derogatory to describe yourself but it is taboo for others to use the term. There are many examples of this. 

 

On the second point,I have found that is true - Chileans consider themselves to be American in the broadest sense - gringos (I love that word) are often distinguished as Norte Americanos (even if they're European).

 

I've spent a lot of time in Mexico, where Americans, Canadians, Europeans, and even Australians are usually called gringos. Interesting, because a popular explanation of the derivation of the term "gringo" (green-go) is that it referred to the green uniforms invading U.S. soldiers used to wear -- i.e. "green go home."

 

P.P.S. I've yet to use "gringo" as a keyword.

 

 

Interesting. I've never heard that. I just looked it up on WIkipedia and there are several other explanations as well. 

 

Yes, there are all kinds of explanations. I kind of like the "green-go" theory, though. Interestingly enough, now that I have a grey/gray beard and silver hair (what's left of it), I don't get called a gringo as much as I used to. I was in a taxi in Mexico City a couple of years ago, and the driver asked me if I was cubano (Cuban). I thought, "Gee, my Spanish must be really improving." Later, I discovered that Mexicans think Cubans speak terrible Spanish and can barely understand them.

 

 

 I think it's like that across the Spanish-speaking world. Those who don't lisp laugh at those who do and so on. Similarly the English speaking world of course. Pots and kettles. The origin of accents and dialects is fsacinating. 

[Ed Rooney]

Actually, the origin of the word 'gringo' is much older than that.  There are several other romantic stories about the origin, one being the Irish soldiers at the Alamo who sang 'Green Grow the Rushes O."  I feel no sting when someone calls me 'gringo' or 'haole' in Hawaii. In Rome I was a straniero, in Oxfordshire a Yank. 

[Russell Watkins]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, the irony...

Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on.  Good Christmas forum fodder.

 

 

Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self.

 

I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here.

 

I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else.

 

 

EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people.  I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely. 

 

 

I wasn't getting at you, mate. It's the English language's fault, not yours. And I don't think you should worry about causing offence - it's obvious you were using the accepted Alamy abbreviation.

 

It was just an ironic (non-Freudian) linguistic juxtaposition in this thread. And my brain seems to be wired to see such things. And then post about them. And cause others to shout "EEEK" and swear at computers. Sorry about that.

 

 

Oh no I understood and never thought you were being anything but funny. I should have got it first time. I've enjoyed our conversations before. Have a good veggie Christmas 

 

 

You too, you bluddy.....carnivore...

[MDM]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, the irony...

Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on.  Good Christmas forum fodder.

 

 

Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self.

 

I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here.

 

I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else.

 

 

EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people.  I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely. 

 

 

I wasn't getting at you, mate. It's the English language's fault, not yours. And I don't think you should worry about causing offence - it's obvious you were using the accepted Alamy abbreviation.

 

It was just an ironic (non-Freudian) linguistic juxtaposition in this thread. And my brain seems to be wired to see such things. And then post about them. And cause others to shout "EEEK" and swear at computers. Sorry about that.

 

 

Oh no I understood and never thought you were being anything but funny. I should have got it first time. I've enjoyed our conversations before. Have a good veggie Christmas 

 

 

You too, you bluddy.....carnivore...

 

Yo?? I've been veggie since 1977. 

[MDM]

Actually, the origin of the word 'gringo' is much older than that.  There are several other romantic stories about the origin, one being the Irish soldiers at the Alamo who sang 'Green Grow the Rushes O."  I feel no sting when someone calls me 'gringo' or 'haole' in Hawaii. In Rome I was a straniero, in Oxfordshire a Yank. 

The Wikipedia article has two versions of this - one with the Irish fighting against the Mexicans and the other deserting and fighting for the Mexicans. 

[Ed Rooney]

Well, one of those stories must be bogus, which means we've circled around and arrived back at my original premise. Sort of. 

[John Mitchell]

Well, one of those stories must be bogus, which means we've circled around and arrived back at my original premise. Sort of. 

Actually, it all sounds like blarney to me. Mexicans can compete with the Irish in that department.

[Russell Watkins]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, the irony...

Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on.  Good Christmas forum fodder.

 

Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self.

 

I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here.

 

I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else.

 

EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people.  I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely.

 

I wasn't getting at you, mate. It's the English language's fault, not yours. And I don't think you should worry about causing offence - it's obvious you were using the accepted Alamy abbreviation.

 

It was just an ironic (non-Freudian) linguistic juxtaposition in this thread. And my brain seems to be wired to see such things. And then post about them. And cause others to shout "EEEK" and swear at computers. Sorry about that.

 

Oh no I understood and never thought you were being anything but funny. I should have got it first time. I've enjoyed our conversations before. Have a good veggie Christmas 

 

You too, you bluddy.....carnivore...

Yo?? I've been veggie since 1977.

EEEK. *Swears at computer iPad*

 

Apologies.

[MDM]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, the irony...

Let's call it objectivity. Actually ethnic categorisations are quite a fascinating subject - unscientific and vague for the most part and almost impossible to agree on.  Good Christmas forum fodder.

 

Sorry, I was being my usual obtuse self.

 

I was referring to your use of "WOP" and its (ironic given the current thread) derogatory connotations for a certain group of Southern Europeans. Wiki entry here.

 

I agree that ethnic categorisation (along with language) is fascinating. Of course historically, anthropological research was driven by the desperate need to prove the inherent supremacy of whitey over everything else.

 

EEEK. Various expletives uttered - thanks for pointing that out Russell. My wife is wondering why I'm swearing at the computer. It wasn't a Freudian slip - purely accidental and I blame Alamy for using it in the first place (WOP means without people - maybe they should have used NP - no people.  I've edited it to explain what was meant just in case it offends although I think that is unlikely.

 

I wasn't getting at you, mate. It's the English language's fault, not yours. And I don't think you should worry about causing offence - it's obvious you were using the accepted Alamy abbreviation.

 

It was just an ironic (non-Freudian) linguistic juxtaposition in this thread. And my brain seems to be wired to see such things. And then post about them. And cause others to shout "EEEK" and swear at computers. Sorry about that.

 

Oh no I understood and never thought you were being anything but funny. I should have got it first time. I've enjoyed our conversations before. Have a good veggie Christmas 

 

You too, you bluddy.....carnivore...

Yo?? I've been veggie since 1977.

EEEK. *Swears at computer iPad*

 

Apologies.

 

No worries. 

[DavidC]

As a Wily Old Person I'd confirm that no offense was taken here - and congrats on what will probably be the MultiQuote Record Posting for 2013 although there are a few days to go.........sensitive - skin of a Rhino ........and they are veggies too !