Bagpuss Had It Right

[roubaixtuesday]

Point of order..

Why do our magnificent lady parts, so often get used as a slur against people (often chaps) who really aren't very nice..

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/twat

It seems a deeply unfair comparison ..🙄

Fair point, he's definitely a cockwomble rather than a twat.

 

[Andy in Germany]

Not 'should' learn , but might choose to, if they wish to be more considerate in future..

But generally yes, I think it's a good idea to consider possible power imbalances in any given situation, and act accordingly.

It's just a form of 'good manners' or even exersising empathy.

Therein lies the problem: I'm not convinced assuming the theories of a "power imbalance" based on the groups people come from is a very helpful approach, in fact I'm concerned it may result in making the situation worse. The theory assumes that it's then legitimate to try and "redress the balance" which may or may not exist, and that leads to people being told they shouldn't offer an opinion that is considered in line with the alleged imbalance, or because of the group they come from.

There are several problems with this, but one is that it will inevitably result in a reaction from people who feel they are being discriminated against because they are in an allegedly "privileged" group, as defined by someone else.

If I offended you, or anyone else by saying this Andy I'm very very sorry.

The humour intended clearly didn't land,

Perhaps you would do me the honour of explaining which parts felt the most challenging for you 👍🏼

My question* was rather more, why is that acceptable, but if we substitute another racial, gender or minority group for "Boyz" many of us would feel highly uncomfortable?

I think we would both agree that our goals are broadly the same; where I think we disagree is some of the theory of why we aren't there yet, and therefore the best way to move forward.

*Expressed rather more sharply than clearly now I come to read it back.

 

[Andy in Germany]

Point of order..

Why do our magnificent lady parts, so often get used as a slur against people (often chaps) who really aren't very nice..

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/twat

It seems a deeply unfair comparison ..🙄

Thank you for pointing that out @mudsticks, I'm embarrassed to say that I wasn't aware of that origin (or I'd forgotten it in the last two decades, along with a worrying amount of English).

It's not a word I'd regularly have cause to use anyway, especially in south Germany, but I will be aware of this in future.

 

[winjim]

Point of order..

Why do our magnificent lady parts, so often get used as a slur against people (often chaps) who really aren't very nice..

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/twat

It seems a deeply unfair comparison ..🙄

Spoiler for a word considered offensive by some.

Spoiler

 

[mudsticks]

Therein lies the problem: I'm not convinced assuming the theories of a "power imbalance" based on the groups people come from is a very helpful approach, in fact I'm concerned it may result in making the situation worse. The theory assumes that it's then legitimate to try and "redress the balance" which may or may not exist, and that leads to people being told they shouldn't offer an opinion that is considered in line with the alleged imbalance, or because of the group they come from.

There are several problems with this, but one is that it will inevitably result in a reaction from people who feel they are being discriminated against because they are in an allegedly "privileged" group, as defined by someone else.



My question* was rather more, why is that acceptable, but if we substitute another racial, gender or minority group for "Boyz" many of us would feel highly uncomfortable?

I think we would both agree that our goals are broadly the same; where I think we disagree is some of the theory of why we aren't there yet, and therefore the best way to move forward.

*Expressed rather more sharply than clearly now I come to read it back.

Well yes I think we're broadly on the same page, but we also know that boyz / guys / chaps have had, and in many situations still have the upper hand in public discourse..

Or do you truly think that is not the case..?


So it wouldn't be appropriate to use a minority, or disadvantaged group in that place would it??

Whereas 'boyz' used in what I'd hope was an obviously lighthearted tone has a different implication.

I don't really have a 'theory' on this, it's more observational of what actually happens.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Point of order..

Why do our magnificent lady parts, so often get used as a slur against people (often chaps) who really aren't very nice..

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/twat

It seems a deeply unfair comparison ..🙄

I agree with you, lady parts are indeed magnificent.

However, in some parts of the country, as per the link, the word 'twat' has nothing whatsoever to do with those lovely feminine anatomical features.

Down Sarf it is merely a very mild word for stupid.

I remember when first moving up North using the word 'twat' in a mixed company setting and the room went silent - it was amusing when local variations on word meanings were explained.

But, back to your point, the same thing can be said re the magnificent boy bits - the various names for these parts are also used as slurs.

My surmise is that both sets of reproductive organs suffer equally at the hands (mouths?) of those who wish to denigrate others.

 

[mudsticks]

I agree with you, lady parts are indeed magnificent.

However, in some parts of the country, as per the link, the word 'twat'has nothing whatsoever to do with those lovely feminine anatomical features.

Down Sarf it is merely a very mild word for stupid.

I remember when first moving up North using the word 'twat' in a mixed company setting and the room went silent - it was amusing when local variations on word meanings were explained.

But, back to your point, the same thing can be said re the magnificent boy bits - the various names for these parts are also used as slurs.

My surmise is that both sets of reproductive organs suffer equally at the hands (mouths?) of those who wish to denigrate others.

It's interesting how women are rarely called after the male member..

Even when their behaviour might justify it.

But lady part slurs can be used either way..
All very odd.

Where's Susie Dent when you need her??

 

[mudsticks]

I agree with you, lady parts are indeed magnificent.

However, in some parts of the country, as per the link, the word 'twat'has nothing whatsoever to do with those lovely feminine anatomical features.

Down Sarf it is merely a very mild word for stupid.

I remember when first moving up North using the word 'twat' in a mixed company setting and the room went silent - it was amusing when local variations on word meanings were explained.

But, back to your point, the same thing can be said re the magnificent boy bits - the various names for these parts are also used as slurs.

My surmise is that both sets of reproductive organs suffer equally at the hands (mouths?) of those who wish to denigrate others.

Well I wouldn't chuck it around too freely when 'darn sarf' ( fnarr)

If I were you



Even us southerly sistas can get a bit annoyed about it 🧐

 

[Jody]

Point of order..

Why do our magnificent lady parts, so often get used as a slur against people (often chaps) who really aren't very nice..

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/twat

It seems a deeply unfair comparison ..🙄

Not sure this is a female spefic issue.

Plenty of insults contain references to male genitalia.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Well I wouldn't chuck it around too freely when 'darn sarf' ( fnarr)

If I were you



Even us southerly sistas can get a bit annoyed about it 🧐

Probably, in fact certainly, should've said London/SE from whence I came and which I wrongly consider to be the true South - I'm a total twat.

 

[mudsticks]

Not sure this is a female spefic issue.

Plenty of insults contain references to male genitalia.

And it's generally male on male..
So to speak..

But the worst of the insults against chaps, seems to be invoking lady parts..

Oh my..

And all this on the 'family freindly' forum..


Will no one think of the chillldrrrennn 😱

 

[mudsticks]

Probably, in fact certainly, should've said London/SE from whence I came and which I wrongly consider to be the true South - I'm a total twat.

Well point of geography yes..
us southwesterners..

Are more southerly...

And best you not call us tw@ts ok ???

 

[Mo1959]

Probably, in fact certainly, should've said London/SE from whence I came and which I wrongly consider to be the true South - I'm a total twat.

I actually use it quite a lot about others and myself. I have never even thought of it as offensive.

 

[Andy in Germany]

Well yes I think we're broadly on the same page, but we also know that boyz / guys / chaps have had, and in many situations still have the upper hand in public discourse..

Or do you truly think that is not the case..?

I think the current situation probably always was and certainly is a lot les simple and more nuanced than a binary case of a "power imbalance" or men "having the upper hand" in a public discourse. I certainly haven't experienced that. I think that assuming a "power imbalance" could be a very convenient way for bad actors to control the public discourse.

So it wouldn't be appropriate to use a minority, or disadvantaged group in that place would it??

I think if we are going to say a certain joke or statement is "offensive" when it refers to one group, then it would be offensive to all groups; if it's fine to use a certain brand of humour with reference to one group, then it should be fine in the case of any group.

My concern again is the assumption that it's fine when it refers to members of certain groups, because that group is allegedly "more powerful" or because a person has "more power" because of being part of that group, because that can lead to a society no-one wants to live in, well, except those who actively advocate for that.

I think I may have exceeded my monthly quota for the word "group" in that paragraph.

I don't really have a 'theory' on this, it's more observational of what actually happens.

I think it would be fair to say it's an interpretation of what you are seeing, as is mine. We don't disagree on what we see, but we may disagree on the reasons and where the "power" lies.

Either way I was thinking of "theory" as in "critical theory" or "intersectional theory" as I was seeing echoes of its ideas about power imbalances in what you were saying. Indeed, its founders and influencers advocate(d) the solutions I mentioned.

 

[Andy in Germany]

It's interesting how women are rarely called after the male member..

Even when their behaviour might justify it.

But lady part slurs can be used either way..
All very odd.

Where's Susie Dent when you need her??

Just looked it up: "Pillock" is apparently referring to gentlemen's parts and comes from a Swedish word for... um that.