Originally posted by northernladyuk
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Give the man a medal, don't arrest him...
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
"According to the World Health Organization in 2008, the life expectancy for men in the Calton area of Glasgow was 54 years.[1] A local doctor attributed this to alcohol and drug abuse, and a violent gang culture.[8]"Hard Brexit now!
#prayfornodeal -
The usage of chairman has changed in my lifetime, another word was substituted to solve perceived sexism which of course was baseless.Originally posted by northernladyuk View PostYes, Chair has the meaning you describe:
So does Chairman
Language changes and a respected institutions whose job it is to define and describe English words updates its definition.
'Import' however is a word that is used for goods and services. To use it for humans is to dehumanise. That may be my OPINION, but it's a clearly reasoned one. You seem to have no convincing alternative position. Instead you appear to Google and then quote other similar uses of dehumanising language. And then you give some examples of words that have in fact changed their meaning, as evidences by the OED, which is contrary to the case with 'import'.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/chairman
explanation:The word chairman found itself accused of sexism in the 1970s, with critics opposed to the way it combined the notion of power with a grammatical gender bias. Two neutral alternatives were proposed, chair (which was actually recorded in this sense in the 17th century) and the neologism chairperson. Both terms faced initial resistance, and although they have now become accepted in standard English, the Oxford English Corpus shows that they are still far less common than chairman
His and hers, wyf and wer | Macmillan Dictionary BlogComment
-
FTFYOriginally posted by northernladyuk View PostI didn't say you did mean to be offensive and neither am I offended. I have not misunderstood your use of the word.IN MY OPINION It is clearly dehumanising, whatever the intent.
That does not mean that they IN MY OPINION are using the word in a dehumanising way. The logic I have presented that it is dehumanising IN MY OPINION unassailable. Continuing to give other examples does not shake that logic.Comment
-
Sure. But import is a word used for goods and services. To use it for people is to dehumanise them. It is worth expanding on this. 'Import' turns migrants into the objects of the verb, removing the idea of their personal agency in moving country. Look at the difference between:Originally posted by vetran View PostThe usage of chairman has changed in my lifetime, another word was substituted to solve perceived sexism which of course was baseless.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/chairman
explanation:
His and hers, wyf and wer | Macmillan Dictionary Blog
The UK imports migrants in quantity.
...and...
Migrants move to the UK in large numbers.Comment
-
As I blame the UK government for allowing it to happen I see it as an import, I am not attacking the criminals directly as scum will be scum. The reality is we should not permit it.Originally posted by northernladyuk View PostSure. But import is a word used for goods and services. To use it for people is to dehumanise them. It is worth expanding on this. 'Import' turns migrants into the objects of the verb, removing the idea of their personal agency in moving country. Look at the difference between:
The UK imports migrants in quantity.
...and...
Migrants move to the UK in large numbers.
If you believe the important part is that the word import removes responsibility of the action from the immigrant and therefore in your opinion dehumanises them let us rephrase it.
Foreign convicted scumbag criminals move to the UK because many are likely to be fleeing justice or looking for a chance to commit more crimes. The UK Government in its lunacy permits this. They are incompetent at protecting our borders & prevented by the EU from doing so.
That better?Comment
-
You mean importing criminals? I thought you meant importing migrants in general! My mistake. Sorry about that!Originally posted by vetran View PostAs I blame the UK government for allowing it to happen I see it as an import, I am not attacking the criminals directly as scum will be scum. The reality is we should not permit it.
If you believe the important part is that the word import removes responsibility of the action from the immigrant and therefore in your opinion dehumanises them let us rephrase it.
Foreign convicted scumbag criminals move to the UK because many are likely to be fleeing justice or looking for a chance to commit more crimes. The UK Government in its lunacy permits this. They are incompetent at protecting our borders & prevented by the EU from doing so.
That better?Comment
-
ok I thought as we were talking about the criminals attacking an old man and someone accused me of being disappointed it wasn't a foreign born criminal it was clear who I meant.Originally posted by northernladyuk View PostYou mean importing criminals? I thought you meant importing migrants in general! My mistake. Sorry about that!
I do believe we are failing to manage immigration overall properly but that is hardly the fault of the migrants themselves. If you lived in an country with no work, safety or expensive healthcare and could get into the UK legally why shouldn't you? I would if I had to.
Its the job of the government to manage that and make sure there are enough housing, jobs & services so no one suffers. They don't and this breeds resentment, I worry this will cause the far right to rise and we will end up with more unpleasantness.Comment
-
FTFYOriginally posted by vetran View Postok I thought as we were talking about the criminals attacking an old man and someone accused me of being disappointed it wasn't a foreign born criminal it was clear who I meant.
I do believe we are failing to manage immigration overall properly but that is hardly the fault of the migrants themselves. If you lived in an country with no work, safety or expensive healthcare and could be imported into the UK legally why shouldn't you? I would if I had to.
Its the job of the government to manage that and make sure there are enough housing, jobs & services so no one suffers. They don't and this breeds resentment, I worry this will cause the far right to rise and we will end up with more unpleasantness.Comment
-
nice try! Not all are solely under their own steam. I would use recruited abroad as the workers are just doing what is best for themselves and its all legal.Originally posted by northernladyuk View PostFTFY
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...the-cheap.htmlComment
-
Case has been NFAd by the police, as predicted: No further action after 'burglar' death
Now that the cause of your outrage has been removed, you can get back to all the other causes of outrage you've managed to drag in to it for no very good reason
Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers

Comment