OT: Thinking about retirement? Go East, old man!...

[Sylvia Else]

On 11-May-23 2:04 am, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

Calling them \"abos\" isn\'t at all polite. \"Aboriginal Australians\" isn\'t all that popular either. \"Indigenous Australians\" is preferred.

While the words \"aboriginal\" and \"indigenous\" are not euphemisms, I
suspect they nevertheless suffer a euphemism treadmill effect.

After all, there was nothing inherently offensive about \"aboriginal\".
Shortening it to \"abo\" was, of course, but I expect that a pejorative
shortening if \"indigenous\" will occur in time, and then people will be
looking for a replacement for that word too.

Sylvia.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 4:53:19 AM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Wed, 10 May 2023 09:04:23 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Wednesday, May 10, 2023 at 6:15:28?PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Wed, 10 May 2023 15:00:16 +1000, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid
wrote:
On 08-May-23 8:06 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Australia - Australians

You need to be more precise. Here in Aussie land we\'re busy trying to
draw a constitutional distinction between indigenous[*] and
non-indigenous Australians.

Good point. I hope I didn\'t offend any Abbos reading this. ;-)

Calling them \"abos\" isn\'t at all polite. \"Aboriginal Australians\" isn\'t all that popular either. \"Indigenous Australians\" is preferred.

Since you are a half-wit Pom nobody will get all that upset - it isn\'t as if they get taken seriously here.

Possibly, but that\'s all Cultural Marxist BS and only applies between persons of a Left-leaning disposition engaged in virtue-signaling between themselves.

I\'m sure you like to think that. Most people think that being polite is worth doing just to keep social life running smoothly

> Conservatives like myself are not obliged to use the ever-changing daft labels people like you dream up, I\'m afraid.

Attention-getting creeps can\'t get the attention they crave without being rude. There\'s no obligation to be polite and considerate, but if you want people to be polite and considerate to you it\'s good idea to play by the local rules.

> Nice try anyway, sunshine.

You\'ve been informed. If you chose to run the risk of being perceived as a rude prick, that\'s your choice.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Thu, 11 May 2023 14:43:05 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
wrote:

On 11-May-23 2:04 am, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

Calling them \"abos\" isn\'t at all polite. \"Aboriginal Australians\" isn\'t all that popular either. \"Indigenous Australians\" is preferred.

While the words \"aboriginal\" and \"indigenous\" are not euphemisms, I
suspect they nevertheless suffer a euphemism treadmill effect.

After all, there was nothing inherently offensive about \"aboriginal\".
Shortening it to \"abo\" was, of course, but I expect that a pejorative
shortening if \"indigenous\" will occur in time, and then people will be
looking for a replacement for that word too.

Normal people won\'t. People like Bill with nothing better to do with
their time no doubt will. Why do they feel the need to so frequently
revise their weird nomenclature? If the original names acquire
pejorative connotations, why do you think that is? If the subsequent
contractions, in time, acquire them also, why do you think that is?
I\'m of the belief that it\'s the *behavior* of the people whose names
require frequent changing that causes them to be seen in a negative
light in the first place - nothing else. But of course, as usual, \'old
whitey\' gets the blame for it all.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 7:13:06 PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 11 May 2023 14:43:05 +1000, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid
wrote:
On 11-May-23 2:04 am, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

Calling them \"abos\" isn\'t at all polite. \"Aboriginal Australians\" isn\'t all that popular either. \"Indigenous Australians\" is preferred.

While the words \"aboriginal\" and \"indigenous\" are not euphemisms, I
suspect they nevertheless suffer a euphemism treadmill effect.

After all, there was nothing inherently offensive about \"aboriginal\".
Shortening it to \"abo\" was, of course, but I expect that a pejorative
shortening if \"indigenous\" will occur in time, and then people will be
looking for a replacement for that word too.

Normal people won\'t. People like Bill with nothing better to do with their time no doubt will.

Not offending people unnecessarily is normally regarded as sensible way to spend time.

> Why do they feel the need to so frequently revise their weird nomenclature?

Language shifts with time. \"Abo\" was tolerably offensive when I was kid some seventy years ago, so \"frequent\" doesn\'t cone into it.

> If the original names acquire pejorative connotations, why do you think that is?

It was an offensive contraction when it was first used.

> If the subsequent contractions, in time, acquire them also, why do you think that is?

\"Aborginal\" Australians have been treated badly since the British first invaded their country, and stole all the tolerably fertile land. We have finally started moving toward a situation where their kids can get decently fed and educated while they are growing up - the stolen generation were taken from their parents and stuck into underfunded boarding schools, where they weren\'t well looked after, and frequently exploited and abused. Complaining that people put through that process didn\'t always grow up into exemplary citizens (though quite a few of them did) is what you\'d expect from a creep like Cursitor Doom.

> I\'m of the belief that it\'s the *behavior* of the people whose names require frequent changing that causes them to be seen in a negative light in the first place - nothing else.

Doing anything else takes time and costs money, which has to paid for by the tax-evading classes, of which Cursitor Doom is clearly a member.

> But of course, as usual, \'old whitey\' gets the blame for it all.

Deservedly so, in this case. I grew up in Tasmania where the last known full-blooded Tasmanian aboriginal died in 1876.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truganini

I didn\'t get to find out much of the revolting detail until I was at university on the mainland in the late 1960\'s, and only because I was stagehand for play about the subject,

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Thu, 11 May 2023 04:46:21 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 7:13:06?PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2023 14:43:05 +1000, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid
wrote:
On 11-May-23 2:04 am, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

Calling them \"abos\" isn\'t at all polite. \"Aboriginal Australians\" isn\'t all that popular either. \"Indigenous Australians\" is preferred.

While the words \"aboriginal\" and \"indigenous\" are not euphemisms, I
suspect they nevertheless suffer a euphemism treadmill effect.

After all, there was nothing inherently offensive about \"aboriginal\".
Shortening it to \"abo\" was, of course, but I expect that a pejorative
shortening if \"indigenous\" will occur in time, and then people will be
looking for a replacement for that word too.

Normal people won\'t. People like Bill with nothing better to do with their time no doubt will.

Not offending people unnecessarily is normally regarded as sensible way to spend time.

Why do they feel the need to so frequently revise their weird nomenclature?

Language shifts with time. \"Abo\" was tolerably offensive when I was kid some seventy years ago, so \"frequent\" doesn\'t cone into it.

If the original names acquire pejorative connotations, why do you think that is?

It was an offensive contraction when it was first used.

If the subsequent contractions, in time, acquire them also, why do you think that is?

\"Aborginal\" Australians have been treated badly since the British first invaded their country, and stole all the tolerably fertile land. We have finally started moving toward a situation where their kids can get decently fed and educated while they are growing up - the stolen generation were taken from their parents and stuck into underfunded boarding schools, where they weren\'t well looked after, and frequently exploited and abused. Complaining that people put through that process didn\'t always grow up into exemplary citizens (though quite a few of them did) is what you\'d expect from a creep like Cursitor Doom.

I\'m of the belief that it\'s the *behavior* of the people whose names require frequent changing that causes them to be seen in a negative light in the first place - nothing else.

Doing anything else takes time and costs money, which has to paid for by the tax-evading classes, of which Cursitor Doom is clearly a member.

But of course, as usual, \'old whitey\' gets the blame for it all.

Deservedly so, in this case. I grew up in Tasmania where the last known full-blooded Tasmanian aboriginal died in 1876.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truganini

I didn\'t get to find out much of the revolting detail until I was at university on the mainland in the late 1960\'s, and only because I was stagehand for play about the subject,

Sigh. I already know what *your* opinion is going to be on any given
subject, Bill. I was rather hoping to hear what Sylvia\'s view on the
matter is.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 10:47:16 PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 11 May 2023 04:46:21 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 7:13:06?PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2023 14:43:05 +1000, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid
wrote:
On 11-May-23 2:04 am, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

Calling them \"abos\" isn\'t at all polite. \"Aboriginal Australians\" isn\'t all that popular either. \"Indigenous Australians\" is preferred.

While the words \"aboriginal\" and \"indigenous\" are not euphemisms, I
suspect they nevertheless suffer a euphemism treadmill effect.

After all, there was nothing inherently offensive about \"aboriginal\".
Shortening it to \"abo\" was, of course, but I expect that a pejorative
shortening if \"indigenous\" will occur in time, and then people will be
looking for a replacement for that word too.

Normal people won\'t. People like Bill with nothing better to do with their time no doubt will.

Not offending people unnecessarily is normally regarded as sensible way to spend time.

Why do they feel the need to so frequently revise their weird nomenclature?

Language shifts with time. \"Abo\" was tolerably offensive when I was kid some seventy years ago, so \"frequent\" doesn\'t cone into it.

If the original names acquire pejorative connotations, why do you think that is?

It was an offensive contraction when it was first used.

If the subsequent contractions, in time, acquire them also, why do you think that is?

\"Aborginal\" Australians have been treated badly since the British first invaded their country, and stole all the tolerably fertile land. We have finally started moving toward a situation where their kids can get decently fed and educated while they are growing up - the stolen generation were taken from their parents and stuck into underfunded boarding schools, where they weren\'t well looked after, and frequently exploited and abused. Complaining that people put through that process didn\'t always grow up into exemplary citizens (though quite a few of them did) is what you\'d expect from a creep like Cursitor Doom.

I\'m of the belief that it\'s the *behavior* of the people whose names require frequent changing that causes them to be seen in a negative light in the first place - nothing else.

Doing anything else takes time and costs money, which has to paid for by the tax-evading classes, of which Cursitor Doom is clearly a member.

But of course, as usual, \'old whitey\' gets the blame for it all.

Deservedly so, in this case. I grew up in Tasmania where the last known full-blooded Tasmanian aboriginal died in 1876.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truganini

I didn\'t get to find out much of the revolting detail until I was at university on the mainland in the late 1960\'s, and only because I was stagehand for play about the subject,

Sigh. I already know what *your* opinion is going to be on any given subject, Bill.

You are perfectly confident about that. You seem to think I\'m a Cultural Marxist and spend my time virtue-signaling.

You haven\'t noticed that I point out from time to time that Karl Marx lost the plot late in his career and got thrown out of the International Socialist Movement in 1871.
Right-wing nit-wits like you are much too fond of equating socialism with communism to notice this inconvenient fact. Your delusions of intellectual competence fall down in this kind of obvious way at frequent intervals, but this doesn\'t dent your self-confidence

> I was rather hoping to hear what Sylvia\'s view on the matter is.

That could be interesting, but why would she bother telling you? You won\'t learn anything from it. Your learning days are long past - and the rubbish you keep churning out doesn\'t suggest that you were exposed to well-informed teachers back then.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Thu, 11 May 2023 07:03:42 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 10:47:16?PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2023 04:46:21 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 7:13:06?PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2023 14:43:05 +1000, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid
wrote:
On 11-May-23 2:04 am, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

Calling them \"abos\" isn\'t at all polite. \"Aboriginal Australians\" isn\'t all that popular either. \"Indigenous Australians\" is preferred.

While the words \"aboriginal\" and \"indigenous\" are not euphemisms, I
suspect they nevertheless suffer a euphemism treadmill effect.

After all, there was nothing inherently offensive about \"aboriginal\".
Shortening it to \"abo\" was, of course, but I expect that a pejorative
shortening if \"indigenous\" will occur in time, and then people will be
looking for a replacement for that word too.

Normal people won\'t. People like Bill with nothing better to do with their time no doubt will.

Not offending people unnecessarily is normally regarded as sensible way to spend time.

Why do they feel the need to so frequently revise their weird nomenclature?

Language shifts with time. \"Abo\" was tolerably offensive when I was kid some seventy years ago, so \"frequent\" doesn\'t cone into it.

If the original names acquire pejorative connotations, why do you think that is?

It was an offensive contraction when it was first used.

If the subsequent contractions, in time, acquire them also, why do you think that is?

\"Aborginal\" Australians have been treated badly since the British first invaded their country, and stole all the tolerably fertile land. We have finally started moving toward a situation where their kids can get decently fed and educated while they are growing up - the stolen generation were taken from their parents and stuck into underfunded boarding schools, where they weren\'t well looked after, and frequently exploited and abused. Complaining that people put through that process didn\'t always grow up into exemplary citizens (though quite a few of them did) is what you\'d expect from a creep like Cursitor Doom.

I\'m of the belief that it\'s the *behavior* of the people whose names require frequent changing that causes them to be seen in a negative light in the first place - nothing else.

Doing anything else takes time and costs money, which has to paid for by the tax-evading classes, of which Cursitor Doom is clearly a member.

But of course, as usual, \'old whitey\' gets the blame for it all.

Deservedly so, in this case. I grew up in Tasmania where the last known full-blooded Tasmanian aboriginal died in 1876.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truganini

I didn\'t get to find out much of the revolting detail until I was at university on the mainland in the late 1960\'s, and only because I was stagehand for play about the subject,

Sigh. I already know what *your* opinion is going to be on any given subject, Bill.

You are perfectly confident about that. You seem to think I\'m a Cultural Marxist and spend my time virtue-signaling.

You haven\'t noticed that I point out from time to time that Karl Marx lost the plot late in his career and got thrown out of the International Socialist Movement in 1871.
Right-wing nit-wits like you are much too fond of equating socialism with communism to notice this inconvenient fact. Your delusions of intellectual competence fall down in this kind of obvious way at frequent intervals, but this doesn\'t dent your self-confidence

I was rather hoping to hear what Sylvia\'s view on the matter is.

That could be interesting, but why would she bother telling you? You won\'t learn anything from it. Your learning days are long past - and the rubbish you keep churning out doesn\'t suggest that you were exposed to well-informed teachers back then.

With all due deference and respect to you, Bill, I would simply like
to hear what Sylvia thinks for a change. I\'m not going to be rude to
her like I sometimes have to be with you. I will respect her views,
whatever they might be. Sylvia?

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, May 12, 2023 at 2:41:39 AM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 11 May 2023 07:03:42 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 10:47:16?PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2023 04:46:21 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 7:13:06?PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2023 14:43:05 +1000, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid
wrote:
On 11-May-23 2:04 am, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

Calling them \"abos\" isn\'t at all polite. \"Aboriginal Australians\" isn\'t all that popular either. \"Indigenous Australians\" is preferred.

While the words \"aboriginal\" and \"indigenous\" are not euphemisms, I
suspect they nevertheless suffer a euphemism treadmill effect.

After all, there was nothing inherently offensive about \"aboriginal\".
Shortening it to \"abo\" was, of course, but I expect that a pejorative
shortening if \"indigenous\" will occur in time, and then people will be
looking for a replacement for that word too.

Normal people won\'t. People like Bill with nothing better to do with their time no doubt will.

Not offending people unnecessarily is normally regarded as sensible way to spend time.

Why do they feel the need to so frequently revise their weird nomenclature?

Language shifts with time. \"Abo\" was tolerably offensive when I was kid some seventy years ago, so \"frequent\" doesn\'t cone into it.

If the original names acquire pejorative connotations, why do you think that is?

It was an offensive contraction when it was first used.

If the subsequent contractions, in time, acquire them also, why do you think that is?

\"Aborginal\" Australians have been treated badly since the British first invaded their country, and stole all the tolerably fertile land. We have finally started moving toward a situation where their kids can get decently fed and educated while they are growing up - the stolen generation were taken from their parents and stuck into underfunded boarding schools, where they weren\'t well looked after, and frequently exploited and abused. Complaining that people put through that process didn\'t always grow up into exemplary citizens (though quite a few of them did) is what you\'d expect from a creep like Cursitor Doom.

I\'m of the belief that it\'s the *behavior* of the people whose names require frequent changing that causes them to be seen in a negative light in the first place - nothing else.

Doing anything else takes time and costs money, which has to paid for by the tax-evading classes, of which Cursitor Doom is clearly a member.

But of course, as usual, \'old whitey\' gets the blame for it all.

Deservedly so, in this case. I grew up in Tasmania where the last known full-blooded Tasmanian aboriginal died in 1876.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truganini

I didn\'t get to find out much of the revolting detail until I was at university on the mainland in the late 1960\'s, and only because I was stagehand for play about the subject,

Sigh. I already know what *your* opinion is going to be on any given subject, Bill.

You are perfectly confident about that. You seem to think I\'m a Cultural Marxist and spend my time virtue-signaling.

You haven\'t noticed that I point out from time to time that Karl Marx lost the plot late in his career and got thrown out of the International Socialist Movement in 1871.
Right-wing nit-wits like you are much too fond of equating socialism with communism to notice this inconvenient fact. Your delusions of intellectual competence fall down in this kind of obvious way at frequent intervals, but this doesn\'t dent your self-confidence

I was rather hoping to hear what Sylvia\'s view on the matter is.

That could be interesting, but why would she bother telling you? You won\'t learn anything from it. Your learning days are long past - and the rubbish you keep churning out doesn\'t suggest that you were exposed to well-informed teachers back then.

With all due deference and respect to you, Bill, I would simply like to hear what Sylvia thinks for a change. I\'m not going to be rude to her like I sometimes have to be with you. I will respect her views, whatever they might be. Sylvia?

An implausible claim. Cursitor Doom respects other peoples views to the extent that they mimic his own.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney