Who's Been Running The United States?
News1 min ago
Are you proud to be English?
104 Answers
http://
Those who are English are constantly called British, why are they trying to wipe the English from the map?
But if some continue to class us as British why do they then shorten this by referring to us as 'Brits'?
If it is offensive to shorten the word of Pakistanis, then surely it is just as offensive to shorten the word of British by calling us 'Brits'?
Those who are English are constantly called British, why are they trying to wipe the English from the map?
But if some continue to class us as British why do they then shorten this by referring to us as 'Brits'?
If it is offensive to shorten the word of Pakistanis, then surely it is just as offensive to shorten the word of British by calling us 'Brits'?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'm with you on Brits. This is an American introduction, I suspect. It suits headline writers. 'Britons' does sound old-fashioned and 'British' is not a noun; pedants might object that we are not 'the British', but 'the Britons', just as 'the Spanish' are, correctly, 'the Spaniards'. But the practice of using the adjective as a noun, the noun it describes being understood, is established in English now.
It is not a term of racial abuse, though. The short form of Pakistani has long been used as a derogatory term; it has probably only ever been so used.
The change from England for the UK or Great Britain to Britain has been gradual. 'England expects every man..' was not 'Britain expects...' and older people, in particular, still use England so. To me, 'England' only means the country as part of the UK, and that's how I use 'England' and 'English'.
It is not a term of racial abuse, though. The short form of Pakistani has long been used as a derogatory term; it has probably only ever been so used.
The change from England for the UK or Great Britain to Britain has been gradual. 'England expects every man..' was not 'Britain expects...' and older people, in particular, still use England so. To me, 'England' only means the country as part of the UK, and that's how I use 'England' and 'English'.
Allow me to stir the pot even more....LOL
I am proud to be British - because I was born in Scotland - and to me the term British is inclusive of all those born in the United Kingdom.
As for being referred to as Brits - so what - those of us born in Scotland are referred to as Scots and it doesn't bother us - and certainly it is not an offensive term - just a slovenly modernism.
It is only because there is not an easy shortened version of the word English that those of you born south of the border are referred to as Brits.
I am proud to be British - because I was born in Scotland - and to me the term British is inclusive of all those born in the United Kingdom.
As for being referred to as Brits - so what - those of us born in Scotland are referred to as Scots and it doesn't bother us - and certainly it is not an offensive term - just a slovenly modernism.
It is only because there is not an easy shortened version of the word English that those of you born south of the border are referred to as Brits.
-- answer removed --
Looking at this a slightly different way, couldn't you argue that England doesn't exist as a separate country, but as a constituent part of four territories?
Therefore the terms 'English' and 'British' are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps the problem lies with people assuming that they are interchangeable (which of course is not true). As an example, someone from New York has the option of saying "I'm a New Yorker" or "I'm American" and both would be true.
Regarding the shortening of British to 'Brits', as RATTER15 has correctly pointed out - it to do with context. The shortened term for Pakistani has never been a 'neutral' word. It still has the smell of 70s racism about it.
Also, I don't ever remember it being used specifically in relation to people from Pakistan. It was a derogatory term for anyone 'Asian-looking', which included Indians.
That shortened word for 'Pakistani' sits somewhere between 'w*p' denoting anyone from a Meditterean country and the N word (for anyone darker than say, Leona Lewis).
Therefore the terms 'English' and 'British' are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps the problem lies with people assuming that they are interchangeable (which of course is not true). As an example, someone from New York has the option of saying "I'm a New Yorker" or "I'm American" and both would be true.
Regarding the shortening of British to 'Brits', as RATTER15 has correctly pointed out - it to do with context. The shortened term for Pakistani has never been a 'neutral' word. It still has the smell of 70s racism about it.
Also, I don't ever remember it being used specifically in relation to people from Pakistan. It was a derogatory term for anyone 'Asian-looking', which included Indians.
That shortened word for 'Pakistani' sits somewhere between 'w*p' denoting anyone from a Meditterean country and the N word (for anyone darker than say, Leona Lewis).
