Filmscanners mailing list archive (email@example.com)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[filmscanners] Re: was: RE: SS4000 & ...now: mean people suck
Before moving on, and to further belabour this point (note both the "u"
in belabour and in my earlier posting with the word behaviour - I don't
use those spellings, but I figured George Harrison might) I do believe
Tony has hit the nail on the head, in terms of this being a cultural
issue, but it is more complex than it may appear on the surface.
I am a dual citizen (US and Canadian) having lived first in the US and
then in Canada, about half of my life each. I was always under the
impression that English people were very "proper", especially with their
use of language and in personal interaction. Well, that illusion got
blown away the first time I traveled to London. I was absolutely shocked
by the rude and profane mouths I encountered, and some were people in
the service industry dealing with clients or complete strangers! I am
on many newsgroups and lists and am quite active in some of them, and
almost without exception, the people who are most aggressively hostile
toward me and make the meanest, rudest and most profane comments are
Brits, almost without exception.
I would probably agree that some of it is just cultural use of the
language, which almost seems to be overcompensation for that previous
assumption by your ex-colonies (the US and Canada for two, plus many
others) of that prim and proper manner of Brits. I think part of this
might actually be because the Brits who visited and settle in the
colonies during early periods tended to be upper crusters (diplomats,
ambassadors, priests, government agents, high echelon military, etc) who
were "well bred" and did speak an upper class language.
Having said that, however, I do believe that some of the current
"cultural" differences are based upon an elitism which still remains
within Brit culture, which allows some people to feel they have the
right, due to falsely presumed superiority of thought and ability, to be
disrespectful and belittling of others.
Let me just say to that, that those of us who now occupy the lands which
were once colonies aren't all a bunch of "boobs", in fact, some of us
aren't even of British stock! And we do not need to be "redressed" by
the previous masters of the lands we now live within, anymore than we
need to teach our first peoples how to fish better.
So, to Brits who feel the need or right to put us "in our place", know
that the children have developed their own lives and value systems,
whether you approve or not.
Present company excepted, of course...
Tony Sleep wrote:
>On 16/02/2008 Arthur Entlich wrote:
>>I won't quote it, but George's comment was as clear as the nose on my
>>face. It was hostile, very directed, and IMHO, very inappropriate.
>On a hunch, I just checked, and George is a Brit, posting from a
>BTinternet address. There is actually a cultural collision here in style
>of expression. Americans are, IME, extremely polite (perhaps because you
>never know who is carrying a concealed handgun:) and do have a certain
>formality to their writing style. You see this not only on lists but
>across US publishing, serious newspapers maintain a formality of style
>that has largely disappeared in UK after the London 'Times' began using
>photos on the front page about 30 years ago. To Brits, US prose often
>seems turgid and verbose. I guess UK expression must often seem uncouth
>and intrusively direct.
>I think maybe that accounts for the different perceptions here. To my mind
>George's expression was tetchy and direct but not intended to cause
>offence, just to make a frustrated point - which I took to anyway be about
>quoting. However for Art in Canada and Laurie in USA, it seems to have
>crossed a line.
>Not making excuses, but hoping we can understand and move on.
Unsubscribe by mail to firstname.lastname@example.org, with 'unsubscribe
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or