[Misc] Words we mustn't utter or type or probably even think

[beorhthelm]

I hate it when people go to the bar and say "can i get a beer"; its "can i have".

in a bar even "can i have" sounds awkward, a question, suggest you're unsure in the right place or old enough to be there.

 

[Garage_Doors]

in a bar even "can i have" sounds awkward, a question, suggest you're unsure in the right place or old enough to be there.

Eh? can you explain that in more depth, What do you mean.
Can i have & can i get are both questions.
Can i get sounds like you want to get it yourself without being served.

 

[Hampden Park]

shitbuggerbastardpissfvckfart

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Eh? can you explain that in more depth, What do you mean.
Can i have & can i get are both questions.
Can i get sounds like you want to get it yourself without being served.

Whereas “could I get” is full bellendery.

 

[Weststander]

And physical disability. The term spastic is no longer used. It's now cerebral palsy. Even the charity The Spastic Society changed its name to Scope in 1994.

Cack Handed, was still commonly used for left-handed 25 years ago and not an insult.

 

[cloud]

Dustcart , dustman

 

[Bob'n'weave]

There aren't any words that you're simply not allow to say. Some are not allowed to said in certain places (such as expletives on TV before the watershed).

But there are many words that were freely used in the past when people were unable to speak up and say 'I don't like that term', or words that hark back to eras of slavery or imperialism, but as culture has evolved and colonies fought for and earned freedom, that these days show an insensitivity to the past and the effect the past has had and continues to have on society.

There are no laws banning you from saying these things. If, knowing the impact of certain words, you choose to use them (as you are free to do), it will reflect on you as a person and your character and other people will respond accordingly. Maybe those responses will be negative (people not spending money on your product, or wanting to know you) or maybe they won't (you could get welcomed into the wide arms of a group of like-minded individuals looking to preserve the purity of their country and get a whole bunch of new friends who embrace you and your choice of words!)

May as well lock up everyone over 50 now then.
Throwing around the 'N' word like a hand grenade is not going to get you anywhere in life (depending on what colour your skin is of course), but being labelled as a cultural nazi scumbag because you can't name the latest 20 gender specific pro-nouns is not what where we want to go. I hope.

 

[Weststander]

Fireman. At some stage, Americanised to Firefighter.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

Dustcart , dustman

Don't you mean Garbologist?

 

[albionfan37]

Y’all

 

[The Lemming Stomper]

So (starting a sentence) Holibobs and Nom Nom Nom would be life imprisonment...

Ta Muchly the death penalty

 

[rogersix]

cringeworthy

 

[Whitley Bayster]

Leave in an orderly fashion

 

[Acker79]

May as well lock up everyone over 50 now then.
Throwing around the 'N' word like a hand grenade is not going to get you anywhere in life (depending on what colour your skin is of course), but being labelled as a cultural nazi scumbag because you can't name the latest 20 gender specific pro-nouns is not what where we want to go. I hope.

My instinctive reaction to that is "did you even read what you've quoted?" I said people are allowed to say whatever they want (generally speaking). And from that you've got 'lock people up for saying things'?!

My second thought is "what, older people can't learn? can't grow and evolve as people along with society? Can't simply take 'I'd prefer you to refer to me as [whatever]' on board?" I think you'll find most people who take issue with terms or phrases that have been common in people's lives for a while are actually quite forgiving if you're making an effort to respect them. If you won't even make that effort at respecting them just because "I'm old and it's not what we did when I was younger" well, like your choice of language that will reflect on you. No one will lock you simply for choosing to use outdated terms, but your unwillingness to offer even a basic level of respect to someone else will reflect on you.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

My instinctive reaction to that is "did you even read what you've quoted?" I said people are allowed to say whatever they want (generally speaking). And from that you've got 'lock people up for saying things'?!

My second thought is "what, older people can't learn? can't grow and evolve as people along with society? Can't simply take 'I'd prefer you to refer to me as [whatever]' on board?" I think you'll find most people who take issue with terms or phrases that have been common in people's lives for a while are actually quite forgiving if you're making an effort to respect them. If you won't even make that effort at respecting them just because "I'm old and it's not what we did when I was younger" well, like your choice of language that will reflect on you. No one will lock you simply for choosing to use outdated terms, but your unwillingness to offer even a basic level of respect to someone else will reflect on you.

Yes I agree with the gist what you're saying. I am more concerned about conversations being shut down depending on who you may be potentially offending. Compelled speech legislation is being passed into law in Canada and Australia. At no point in the history of English common law has compelled speech ever been implemented but we are seeing it happen. Yes, it would be courteous to refer to someone's identifying pro-noun, but to be arrested for not doing so is a very dangerous doctrine. If you are not sure then best keep you mouth shut. So much for freedom of speech.

 

[darkwolf666]

Relegation...

 

[Super Steve Earle]

in a bar even "can i have" sounds awkward, a question, suggest you're unsure in the right place or old enough to be there.

'Can I have' sounds awkward because it should be 'may I have'.

 

[goldstone]

Why is "coloured person" apparently unacceptable while "person of colour" is apparently OK?