Swirl baby - a third way
Posted by Word Camel on January 15, 2003
In Reply to: Swirl baby posted by Bob on January 14, 2003
: : : : : SWIRL BABY - Multiracial. "She's bummed because she isn't a 'swirl baby'- the term at school for being half white and half something else. It is the 'in' thing here - not boring all white!" From an online discussion group, accessed Jan. 13, 2003.
: : : : : I'm guessing it refers to the ice cream swirl of vanilla and chocolate.
: : : : This has all the hallmarks of a phrase that will, in the near future, be roundly condemned by the great and the good and certainly mark any user as a racist of the worst kind. I speak from experience since I find it unwise to openly discuss the activities of my childhood as a wartime evacuee when I roamed the hills and byways with '[word removed in order to comply with Google's Publisher Policy]', my beautiful black curly haired spaniel, without substituting with the name Rex - they might have waited until I was dead before outlawing that word.
: : : You'd have to be roughly 175 years old to have that make sense.
: : Plainly you didn't major in maths or history given that I was sent to the country in 1941, the war in question was WWII, the country being bomber was the UK, the nice people doing the bombing were the Germans and the city I was evacuated from was London. I can perhaps forgive you if you are an American since I have, over a lifetime, discovered that events happening outside the continental US normally remain a mystery to approximately 80% of Americans: never did figure out why.
: If I might interrupt the xenophobic huffing and puffing for a moment, I am quite aware of the chronology of wars in our century. What you seem to be unaware of (and why you missed my point) is that "that word" did not become offensive in your lifetime. It has been offensive and unacceptable in polite company for far more than a century. Ergo (do I really need to spell this out? Probably...) you are either 150+ years old, or blissfully insensitive. (Perhaps both?)
I think there is a third way...
"[word removed in order to comply with Google's Publisher Policy]" did indeed become offensive earlier than the second world war, but it was more commonly appreciated in the United States where race has always been a central issue.
It's possible that many people in the UK were not atuned to this. For one thing, there were very few black people in the UK until the 50's. Prior to that racism in the UK mainly expressed itself in the colonies. There is one famous story of how American comanders in WW II Manchester told local publicans to impose the colour bar because they were concerned about Black GI's dating local girls. The publicans imposed a colour bar, but of white American soldiers.
Today the idea that the word [word removed in order to comply with Google's Publisher Policy] is offensive is widely understood in the UK and is not used much except by elderly people who are very out-of-touch or racists. Sadly people have come up with coded ways of expressing racist ideas - not the work [word removed in order to comply with Google's Publisher Policy] but the meaning is loud and clear. In my experience this is true on both sides of the pond.