|
Post by tisbearself on Nov 9, 2022 23:27:33 GMT
No, it's a word beginning with M that also at one point was applied to people with a developmental disability (because their eyes looked slanty) and later was the title of a well-known Devo song. As a child I read an old children's encyclopedia that told me with pictures there were three races: Caucasoid (white people), N-word-oid (black people of African origin), and M-word-oid (Chinese, Japanese, etc). Those were the scholarly terms then. The association with the disability ruined the term as people used it in a rude way.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on Nov 9, 2022 23:38:45 GMT
Ah yes, I know what word you are thinking - of that word is also considered offensive in the UK and no longer used here. The word for black people varies in offensiveness and amusingly has none in some parts of Eastern Europe and my wife has a friend whose kids speak Russian and English and in Russian they'd use a variation on the N word as it has no offensive overtones in that language -although there are terms for black people that do.
This encylopedia sounds like the kind of stuff we had around the house as well, much of it authored in the era when people like Francis Galton and Sir Flinders Petrie were knocking about. The latter is great for reading about Egyptian history, for racial theory...er, not so much really -especially his recommendations that poor people be sterilized if they reproduced too often.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on Nov 9, 2022 23:45:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 10, 2022 0:47:47 GMT
Africa and Asia are also highly diverse. There's a large amount of cultural variation in Africa and a Nigerian and an Egyptian for example will have very different cultural backgrounds and outlooks. Asian is a term I find problematic when talking with Americans as what Irish and British people mean when we use the term is different and we would include people from the Indian sub-continent in the term whereas Americans do not I believe. I find the term 'Asian' so wide as to be increasingly meaningless myself in British use since it includes Japan, China, India, Pakistan, Thailand, Korea and numerous other nations. "Asian" in US essentially is a racial term referring to those who would have been previously called "Oriental" or another scientific term that, although it was in its day a scientific term, would now be viewed as incredibly rude so I won't use it here. Many US people with ancestry from China, Japan, Viet Nam, Korea etc don't really like the term either because it lumps people together from many countries who often have had very different cultures and sometimes contentious relationships between said countries. People from India, Pakistan etc would likely be called by educated US people the name of whatever their country is ("Indian", etc.) and by uneducated US people, "Arabs" or something equally stupid. It's only been in recent decades that we've started to get large numbers of these folks coming into USA especially in the medical, tech, hotel, and convenience store/ donut shop industries (They seem to run just about every Dunkin' Donuts in my county) and they tend to go straight into professional neighborhoods or otherwise blend in rather than forming some kind of ethnic enclave, so they never really got a group term here. I know East Asians don't like it, but I fail to see what is wrong with the word "Oriental". It simply means "of the East". Nonetheless, in today's world, if a group doesn't like an exonym, they get veto power over it, at least in the US. I would be deeply flattered if someone referred to me as "European" or "European-American", but European-blooded people in Anglo-America have little if any sense of being European-descended, instead regarding themselves, if they bother to do so, as being hyphenated based upon the ancestral country with which they identify, e.g., "Italian-American" or "Irish-American". Sadly, a pan-European identity is more the province of white supremacists than anyone else. I refuse to be intimidated by that unfortunate fact.
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Nov 10, 2022 0:51:58 GMT
"Summorum Pontificum" (SP) gave two points: the EF was never abrogated and some miss it. "Traditionis Custodes" (TC) via not just Pope Francis but the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments correctly defined what "miss it" means. In addition, they correctly argued that Vatican II has to be followed because most Catholics have for the past 50 years. In which case, the conditions for granting it in SP are wrong. The ones given in TC are logical. Never mind the Bishop's admission that he never celebrated the EF himself. His reasons for questioning the OF are themselves questionable: For example, he refers to the content of the Mass as part of organic continuity. That's not how personalities like Pope Benedict XVI see organic continuity: www.patheos.com/blogs/voxnova/2007/07/07/pope-benedict-xvi-likes-the-novus-ordo/He next refers to breaking with liturgical tradition. He is not aware that the Church has been doing that for centuries: catholiccommonsense.freeforums.net/thread/1866/forbidden-translations-brief-historywhich also gives new meaning to the word "tradition." He mentions that the EF attracts "large, devout families," which is correct, but he never argues why the OF does the same in poor countries. He believes that the stance of the Pope (he probably means the Vatican) is ideological, but it's more likely legal. The point that the EF is needed to evangelize makes no sense, as the Church has been using the vernacular to do that.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 10, 2022 0:58:11 GMT
I remember my friend's wife Jane who is Chinese (that isn't her real name by the way, it's an Anglicized version of her name Quian which is difficult to pronounce for some Westerners)trying to explain to her mother-in-law shortly after marriage some of the history between Japan and China. Jane is from the borders of China where there is a population of Chinese with mixed Chinese/Russian ancestry and she was trying to explain this as well. Her mother-in-law is (and forgive the expression) what you would in America call a hick. She came from a small village of a few hundred people in what is now Slovenia and she was not overly pleased with her son for marrying someone Chinese. I knew most of what Jane was going on about because I'm a history buff but of course, Jane had takes on it from 'inside the culture' that wouldn't have occurred to me which was interesting. Sadly Janes's new mother-in-law just couldn't deal with the notion of a Chinese daughter-in-law in the long term and when Jane got pregnant realized her grandkids would be part Chinese and there was a massive screaming row which I sadly saw first-hand in which talk of blood pollution popped up and nonsense like this and this led to Jane and her husband moving away. A sad situation that seems to have no happy outcome as granny is still talking racist rubbish in Canada where she lives with her older daughter and talking about how the Slavic peoples should not mix their blood. Amusingly Pakistanis formed an enclave of low-paid workers here in the East End for a long time (and still do to some extent) in areas like Whitechapel and Bethnal Green. These people came to London in the late 50's onwards and worked in low-paid industries, although their kids prospered as they valued education. This sort of stuff is underlying some of the racist blowback Rishi Sunak gets at times. You are not thinking about the term 'C***stial' are you - that never had much provenance in the UK or Ireland but I am aware of its usage in US history. I looked up "Celestial" in that context, and it's archaic, I'd never heard it applied to East Asians before. It comes from the Chinese word "Tianchao", meaning precisely that, and derives from China's poetic name "Celestial Empire". There's nothing obviously offensive about it, bizarre, yes, but not intrinsically a slur. (But then again, neither is "n*****", it's just a laconic, drawled pronunciation of the Latin word for "black", but due to malicious usage, it's become toxic.) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_Empire
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2022 3:37:16 GMT
The Dutch Church has historically had a lot of problems, particularly in the 1970s, when it seemed most of the Dutch episcopate was on the verge on schism. The "Septuagint" group of priests did an enormous amount of damage to the Dutch Church as well.
Thankfully, the episcopate in the Netherlands is in a much better position now, with the orthodox Cardinal Eijk being the Metropolitan Archbishop of Utrecht and Primate of the Netherlands.
I believe that Bishop Mutsaerts' bishop is considered more liberal, and that there have been conflicts between him and his bishop in the past.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on Nov 10, 2022 11:09:04 GMT
The term celestial became a slur due to usage ins yellow journalism. I ran into it as a kind (in of all places) in an old comic book series from DC Comics called Jonah Hex, the title character Jonah is married to a Chinese woman for a time in the series and at one point people start insulting his wife using the term. The writer of this series was noted for chucking in obscure historical stuff and so a trip to the library later I found out about the history of prejudice against Chinese people due to the expansion of the railroads etc. in the US. Who says comics can't be educational? Jonah was an ex-Confederate officer whose face had been horribly disfigured due to him being framed for a crime he never committed. There is a rather woeful move about the character from about a decade back which totally fails to capture the mood of the original series. DC comics imply at times that Jonah may be Batman's ancestor but I'd rather they didn't do that as it makes little sense, there's no need for every character to be related and Jonah is a bounty hunter living on the edge of society. The character is also famous for a massive legal tussle by the rock musicians Johny and Edgar Winter over a more recent writer's usage of thinly veiled parodies of these two in a story. Neither was reported to be amused.
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Nov 10, 2022 13:41:26 GMT
theguvnor and homeschooldad it's as I originally thought. You cannot simply become a citizen of the EU. You must be a citizen of a country which is a member state of the EU. I was a citizen of the EU until the end of January 2020 because I am a British citizen. When the UK left the EU I ceased to be an EU citizen. theguvnor you may still be an EU citizen if you are an Irish citizen. homeschooldad I assume your son must have citizenship of some EU member state.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 10, 2022 14:05:47 GMT
theguvnor and homeschooldad it's as I originally thought. You cannot simply become a citizen of the EU. You must be a citizen of a country which is a member state of the EU. I was a citizen of the EU until the end of January 2020 because I am a British citizen. When the UK left the EU I ceased to be an EU citizen. theguvnor you may still be an EU citizen if you are an Irish citizen. homeschooldad I assume your son must have citizenship of some EU member state. Yes, he does, Poland to be exact. That's what I was talking about. I am fully aware, and always have been, that you cannot have EU citizenship as a stand-alone status. You have to be a citizen of some EU country. I just assumed everyone knew that, and that I didn't have to explain that I was referring to being a citizen of an EU member state, and thus having EU citizenship as well as that of one's country. Just as an aside, it doesn't work exactly the same way in the US. There are parts of the US that do not belong to any state, yet their natively-born residents are US citizens --- Puerto Rico, Guam, the US Virgin Islands, and even the District of Columbia. The US Constitution makes specific reference to being a citizen of one's state, which obviously wouldn't apply to those places. Furthermore, residents of American Samoa are not US citizens, but US nationals.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on Nov 10, 2022 14:07:11 GMT
I think homeschooldad's missus is Polish if I recall. His kids could therefore easily apply for Polish citizenship.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 10, 2022 14:23:10 GMT
I think homeschooldad's missus is Polish if I recall. His kids could therefore easily apply for Polish citizenship. She is, and our son (we only have the one child) is already a Polish citizen by jus sanguinis, it just needs to be officially certified. Incidentally, our annulment is in process. She applied for it a couple of months ago (after living in an irregular marriage for 11 years), and I did not challenge it. So in the Eyes of God I may soon be a bachelor once again. Our son asked if that would make him a bastard, and I told him, no, the Church provides a legal fiction by which children of putative marriages, later declared null, are considered legitimate, but even if he were a bastard, that would in no way diminish him --- it's not the child's fault --- and he would have just as much dignity as a human person.
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Nov 11, 2022 15:43:29 GMT
theguvnor and homeschooldad it's as I originally thought. You cannot simply become a citizen of the EU. You must be a citizen of a country which is a member state of the EU. I was a citizen of the EU until the end of January 2020 because I am a British citizen. When the UK left the EU I ceased to be an EU citizen. theguvnor you may still be an EU citizen if you are an Irish citizen. homeschooldad I assume your son must have citizenship of some EU member state. Yes, he does, Poland to be exact. That's what I was talking about. I am fully aware, and always have been, that you cannot have EU citizenship as a stand-alone status. You have to be a citizen of some EU country. I just assumed everyone knew that, and that I didn't have to explain that I was referring to being a citizen of an EU member state, and thus having EU citizenship as well as that of one's country. Just as an aside, it doesn't work exactly the same way in the US. There are parts of the US that do not belong to any state, yet their natively-born residents are US citizens --- Puerto Rico, Guam, the US Virgin Islands, and even the District of Columbia. The US Constitution makes specific reference to being a citizen of one's state, which obviously wouldn't apply to those places. Furthermore, residents of American Samoa are not US citizens, but US nationals. Probably not a safe assumption to make as I believe the majority on here are from the US. Therefore, they may have thought there was such a thing as EU citizenship apart from the citizenship of an individual country.
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Nov 11, 2022 15:46:02 GMT
I think homeschooldad's missus is Polish if I recall. His kids could therefore easily apply for Polish citizenship. She is, and our son (we only have the one child) is already a Polish citizen by jus sanguinis, it just needs to be officially certified. Incidentally, our annulment is in process. She applied for it a couple of months ago (after living in an irregular marriage for 11 years), and I did not challenge it. So in the Eyes of God I may soon be a bachelor once again. Our son asked if that would make him a bastard, and I told him, no, the Church provides a legal fiction by which children of putative marriages, later declared null, are considered legitimate, but even if he were a bastard, that would in no way diminish him --- it's not the child's fault --- and he would have just as much dignity as a human person. You could perhaps show your son this about annulment and its effect on children. If your son is anything like my children, and the children of many others I know, he may be more inclined to believe an alternate source of information than his parents.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 12, 2022 4:44:30 GMT
She is, and our son (we only have the one child) is already a Polish citizen by jus sanguinis, it just needs to be officially certified. Incidentally, our annulment is in process. She applied for it a couple of months ago (after living in an irregular marriage for 11 years), and I did not challenge it. So in the Eyes of God I may soon be a bachelor once again. Our son asked if that would make him a bastard, and I told him, no, the Church provides a legal fiction by which children of putative marriages, later declared null, are considered legitimate, but even if he were a bastard, that would in no way diminish him --- it's not the child's fault --- and he would have just as much dignity as a human person. You could perhaps show your son this about annulment and its effect on children. If your son is anything like my children, and the children of many others I know, he may be more inclined to believe an alternate source of information than his parents. Thanks, but he took my comments at face value, and did not challenge them. In some countries (not the US), whether the Church declares the marriage null or not has civil effects, so it's probably necessary to create that sort of legal fiction. Though there shouldn't be, there is also the stigma of finding oneself to have been a bastard. In some subcultures, there is no stigma whatsoever, and the phenomenon is so commonplace, as to be unremarkable. There are no illegitimate children, only illegitimate parents.
|
|