NationStates Jolt Archive

Since, as many people have pointed out in the original of this poll, not everyone here is a citizen of the United States of America, I decided to make a poll that would demonstrate whether the aformentioned citizens found it offensive.

There are things to get offended about. This isn't one of them.

There are things to get offended about. This isn't one of them.

Because you say so, and your word is above all else?

I've got news for you: I find it offensive, because it is. Most of the posters who use it, no matter how often they deny it, are doing so to piss us off.

US Citizen - No.

It's just another way of saying "American," one that makes a worthwhile distinction between residents of the US and people in all of the Americas.

I prefer "estadounidense," but "United Statesian" is even more awkward than "USian."

Because you say so, and your word is above all else?

I've got news for you: I find it offensive, because it is. Most of the posters who use it, no matter how often they deny it, are doing so to piss us off.

No Pot, I criticise Geddy Lee to piss you off, I use the term USian, because it works for me, not to piss anyone off.

Because you say so, and your word is above all else?

I've got news for you: I find it offensive, because it is. Most of the posters who use it, no matter how often they deny it, are doing so to piss us off.
Does the word 'paranoia' mean anything to you? Other than being a term to describe the political climate of the 1950s?

Because you say so, and your word is above all else?

I've got news for you: I find it offensive, because it is. Most of the posters who use it, no matter how often they deny it, are doing so to piss us off.
Yes. Because I said so. Don't get offended by it. There is real stuff out there to be worked up about.

Its the fact that a Brit invented the term becuase the British can't seem to get over the fact that America is better than them, and yeah, they are still bitter cuz they lost the Revolution to us, and the war of 1812. Cuz we whoopd they're asses. GET OVER IT! Americans already got over Vietnam, and that is still within living memory, YOU HAVE NO EMPIRE ANYMORE, BECUASE OF US. AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!:gundge:

Its the fact that a Brit invented the term becuase the British can't seem to get over the fact that America is better than them, and yeah, they are still bitter cuz they lost the Revolution to us, and the war of 1812. Cuz we whoopd they're asses. GET OVER IT! Americans already got over Vietnam, and that is still within living memory, YOU HAVE NO EMPIRE ANYMORE, BECUASE OF US. AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!:gundge:
For all those who voted yes, note the company you keep.

Since, as many people have pointed out in the original of this poll, not everyone here is a citizen of the United States of America, I decided to make a poll that would demonstrate whether the aformentioned citizens found it offensive.

Offensive? No, just stupid. This is the kind of debate college sophomores have after they have tired of asking whether or not god can create a boulder too heavy for god to pick up or exploring the possibility that we are all just living in a really tiny universe in the hands of some cosmic giant.

Take another hit off the bong and move on to something else.

Its the fact that a Brit invented the term becuase the British can't seem to get over the fact that America is better than them, and yeah, they are still bitter cuz they lost the Revolution to us, and the war of 1812. Cuz we whoopd they're asses. GET OVER IT! Americans already got over Vietnam, and that is still within living memory, YOU HAVE NO EMPIRE ANYMORE, BECUASE OF US. AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!:gundge:

Urgh...

Its the fact that a Brit invented the term becuase the British can't seem to get over the fact that America is better than them, and yeah, they are still bitter cuz they lost the Revolution to us, and the war of 1812. Cuz we whoopd they're asses. GET OVER IT! Americans already got over Vietnam, and that is still within living memory, YOU HAVE NO EMPIRE ANYMORE, BECUASE OF US. AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!:gundge:
^-^ Is that what they really teach you? That Britain lost their empire (in the 1950s) because of the American War of Independence! Hahahahaha. :rolleyes:

What I find most funny about this BS is that the people that are most against it are the PC is rubbish-types.

^-^ Is that what they really teach you? That Britain lost their empire (in the 1950s) because of the American War of Independence! Hahahahaha. :rolleyes:

Sad, isn't it?

I'm not offended by it, but those who call Americans USians should have no problem with me calling them UKians, Federal Republicans, Republicans, United Mexicans, People's Republicans, Commonwealth of Independent Statesians, EUians or anything else.

In my opinion, it's incorrect to call someone USian because that is the name of the political structure, not the nation. The nation is America and its political structure is comprised of a union of states, or the United States. It sounds idiotic to call a resident of Germany a Federal Republican and it sounds equally as stupid to call Americans USians.

Its the fact that a Brit invented the term becuase the British can't seem to get over the fact that America is better than them, and yeah, they are still bitter cuz they lost the Revolution to us, and the war of 1812. Cuz we whoopd they're asses. GET OVER IT! Americans already got over Vietnam, and that is still within living memory, YOU HAVE NO EMPIRE ANYMORE, BECUASE OF US. AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!:gundge:

Let's review the war of 1812, shall we?

June 18th, 1812 Madison declares war.

July 12, Hull invades Canada

August 16,

American Surrender of Detroit
In one of the worst moments of the war for the United States, Brigadier General William Hull surrendered the fort at Detroit without firing a shot. He had recently failed in his foray into Canada and found himself surrounded by British regulars and militia under Major General Isaac Brock and Indians under Tecumseh. The British would retain control of the fort for thirteen months, abandoning it after their defeat in the Battle of Lake Erie in September 1813.

August 24, 1824

British occupation of Washington, D.C.
Having routed the Americans at Bladensburg, British Major General Robert Ross occupied the nation's capital, Washington, D.C. for two days. During this time, the public buildings, including the Capitol and White House were burned, before the British retreated to their ships on the Patuxent, leaving in the early hours of August 26.

Kind of funny how the USA declared war on Britain, invaded Canada, and ended by driving the British out of America. We didn't win!

^-^ Is that what they really teach you? That Britain lost their empire (in the 1950s) because of the American War of Independence! Hahahahaha. :rolleyes:
Lost empire? I dont think so, its more misplaced for the time being.

I'm not offended by it, but those who call Americans USians should have no problem with me calling them UKians, Federal Republicans, Republicans, United Mexicans, People's Republicans, Commonwealth of Independent Statesians, EUians or anything else.

In my opinion, it's incorrect to call someone USian because that is the name of the political structure, not the nation. The nation is America and its political structure is comprised of a union of states, or the United States. It sounds idiotic to call a resident of Germany a Federal Republican and it sounds equally as stupid to call Americans USians.

Except that "United States," unlike most of the examples you provided, is pretty universally recognized as a reference to the United States of America.

^-^ Is that what they really teach you? That Britain lost their empire (in the 1950s) because of the American War of Independence! Hahahahaha. :rolleyes:

Duh you dumbass I know when you lost your Stupid Empire, We started its downfall, just like we started the downfall to all of europes empires, becuase we showed you up, and showed that rebels could beat the Imperialst. Dont believe me? ask Ho Chi Minh, If you cannot draw the connection, you dont understand my superior american brain.

Offensive? No, just stupid. This is the kind of debate college sophomores have after they have tired of asking whether or not god can create a boulder too heavy for god to pick up or exploring the possibility that we are all just living in a really tiny universe in the hands of some cosmic giant.

Take another hit off the bong and move on to something else.

Sure thing. Take a coaster, draw a point near the center, and a point on the outer edge. Then slowly turn it. The points stay the same relative to each other, but they are traveling different speeds. So how fast is the coaster actually turning?

Lost empire? I dont think so, its more misplaced for the time being.

Oh yeah, the british army, theres somthing to fear, your L-85's fall apart...its worse than the m16 and that sucks enough.

Duh you dumbass I know when you lost your Stupid Empire, We started its downfall, just like we started the downfall to all of europes empires, becuase we showed you up, and showed that rebels could beat the Imperialst. Dont believe me? ask Ho Chi Minh, If you cannot draw the connection, you dont understand my superior american brain.
Your not being serious are you? For the love of god tell me your kidding

Its so funny to see how cocky and arrogant you british peices of shit are, I mean for christs sakes you were even beaten by the Irish....

not to mention the french too.....:eek:

I don't find it offensive at all, however I am not a citizen of the United States of America. However, given that at least one US citizen has noted their offence, it is obvious that the phrase is offensive. Hence, regardless of whether you, I or others think it not so, as long as there is a group, even if a minority, who find it offensive, then it is offensive.

I'm not offended. Just annoyed. It's too minor a thing to be offended about.

Your not being serious are you? For the love of god tell me your kidding


Like I said, Superior American Brain.

Lost empire? I dont think so, its more misplaced for the time being.
Check the Forest Maze. Head North, then West, then South, then West again. That's where I last saw the empire.

Duh you dumbass I know when you lost your Stupid Empire, We started its downfall, just like we started the downfall to all of europes empires, becuase we showed you up, and showed that rebels could beat the Imperialst. Dont believe me? ask Ho Chi Minh, If you cannot draw the connection, you dont understand my superior american brain.

I believe the Bore War started the collapse of the Empire. Your secesion was a blow, but nowhere near fatal. The E,pire expanded for another hundred or so years before the first signs of trouble set in. Such an American-Centric view is unworthy and historically inaccurate.

Oh yeah, the british army, theres somthing to fear, your L-85's fall apart...its worse than the m16 and that sucks enough.
Actually the British assault is better than its US counterpart in nearly every way. More reliable, faster fire rate, more accurate and I believe the only thing the M-16 beats it at is range. I will take the British rifle any day of week.

Duh you dumbass I know when you lost your Stupid Empire, We started its downfall, just like we started the downfall to all of europes empires, becuase we showed you up, and showed that rebels could beat the Imperialst. Dont believe me? ask Ho Chi Minh, If you cannot draw the connection, you dont understand my superior american brain.

As much as I hate to admit it, the American Revolution did inspire some if not all of the following revolutions. Oddly enough, the French Revolution, which led, somewhat indirectly, to Napoleon's rise and the creation of an Empire, springs to mind. Consider, though.

Ghandi used completely different tactics than the Americans. India still gained independence.

I don't think Canada actually really had to fight for their's one way or another. Could be wrong though.

Not really sure about Australia.

Actually the British assault is better than its US counterpart in nearly every way. More reliable, faster fire rate, more accurate and I believe the only thing the M-16 beats it at is range. I will take the British rifle any day of week.

ok........Imperial Lies?

Like I said, Superior American Brain.
lmao, yeah your kidding. You have to be

Its so funny to see how cocky and arrogant you british peices of shit are, I mean for christs sakes you were even beaten by the Irish....

not to mention the french too.....:eek:

Newsflash, genius. The British beat Napoleon. Twice.

And you try hanging on to Ireland when they don't want to be hung onto.

Oh yeah, the british army, theres somthing to fear, your L-85's fall apart...its worse than the m16 and that sucks enough.

As opposed to the M16A1 which still has problems? Or that the British Army possesses a huge amount of Peacekeeping skills moreso than your army, or that it contains the worlds foremost Counter-Terrorism organisation?

The British Army is a well-trained and now well-equipped military. Look elsewhere for your criticism.

Newsflash, genius. The British beat Napoleon. Twice.

And you try hanging on to Ireland when they don't want to be hung onto.
I tried that once with a drunk Irish girl. I feel the pain of the British.

Except that "United States," unlike most of the examples you provided, is pretty universally recognized as a reference to the United States of America.

True, but that's only because the US is so well known and influential and also because there are few other nations with our political appellation.

Even so, it is very rare to refer to the inhabitants of the Americas simply as "Americans" because there are two continents, North and South and the region between them called Central America; generally, people will specify the region rather than refer to just "Americans" which would be a very large overgeneralization of the continents.

I don't find it offensive at all, however I am not a citizen of the United States of America. However, given that at least one US citizen has noted their offence, it is obvious that the phrase is offensive. Hence, regardless of whether you, I or others think it not so, as long as there is a group, even if a minority, who find it offensive, then it is offensive.

So we can never use any term at all to describe anyone. There will always be someone who finds it offensive. If a minority find something offensive, but the majority don't then it is not offensice, that minority are being hypersensitive and aer imagining offense where there isn't any. For a term to be offensive, it has to be used with the intent of causing offense. If it is not, it really doesn't matter what the opinion of a mollycoddled few is.

This is the problem of Political Correctness. It leads to silence.

Newsflash, genius. The British beat Napoleon. Twice.

And you try hanging on to Ireland when they don't want to be hung onto.

wow you dont know your own history

100 YEARS WAR

you limey.

wow you dont know your own history

100 YEARS WAR

you limey.

You lose at history. And life.

As opposed to the M16A1 which still has problems? Or that the British Army possesses a huge amount of Peacekeeping skills moreso than your army, or that it contains the worlds foremost Counter-Terrorism organisation?

The British Army is a well-trained and now well-equipped military. Look elsewhere for your criticism.


Hey, I'd pit any Brit force up against any American and see who wins,


*cough* yorktown

Even so, it is very rare to refer to the inhabitants of the Americas simply as "Americans" because there are two continents, North and South and the region between them called Central America; generally, people will specify the region rather than refer to just "Americans" which would be a very large overgeneralization of the continents.

And it's very rare to refer to, say, "Eurasians," either, but if a country in Eurasia decided to call its citizens "Eurasians" that would be justifiably regarded as absurd.

You lose at history. And life.
No I win, becuase I am an American, and thats what Americans do, is win.

Actually the British assault is better than its US counterpart in nearly every way. More reliable, faster fire rate, more accurate and I believe the only thing the M-16 beats it at is range. I will take the British rifle any day of week.
Aye. The L85 and L85A1 were shoddily built, but the A2 has been shown to e more reliable in tests than the M16, and the L85A2 also has a longer barrel, giving it better accuracy and marginally better power and range, whilst still being shorter than the M16. Also, the SUSAT is the best assault rifle sight ever. Disadvantages = weight and no left-hand shooting. So meh.

No I win, becuase I am an American, and thats what Americans do, is win.
This is not the place to be discussing your misplaced nationalism. Go start your own thread.

So we can never use any term at all to describe anyone. There will always be someone who finds it offensive. If a minority find something offensive, but the majority don't then it is not offensice, that minority are being hypersensitive and aer imagining offense where there isn't any. For a term to be offensive, it has to be used with the intent of causing offense. If it is not, it really doesn't matter what the opinion of a mollycoddled few is.

This is the problem of Political Correctness. It leads to silence.

I'm not arguing that you can't use it. The poll asks if it is offensive: the answer is clearly yes, because 1 person finds it so. (What I mean is this poll is flawed. As soon as one person responds with an option signifying offense, the debate ends because the evidence exists) If the poll asks should it not be used, that would be another argument. So please don't shoot me down for something I didn't say - I may in fact agree with your sentiments. Please read comments carefully before casting aspersions.

This is not the place to be discussing your misplaced nationalism. Go start your own thread.

Your mad cuz you lost your empire, like i said before.

Hey, I'd pit any Brit force up against any American and see who wins,


*cough* yorktown

Do you have any actual points? Because to be quite frank, this is going to be rather boring otherwise? You're using as an example a two-hundred year old battle in which a well-trained but inflexible infantry force was led on a frontal assault by an inbred General against dug-in infantry with a pathetic naval attachment and idiotic tactics. Hardly the best of examples old boy.

Hey, I'd pit any Brit force up against any American and see who wins,


*cough* yorktown
I'll take that bet. 100 on the Brits

wow you dont know your own history

100 YEARS WAR

you limey.

Quick question. How long did the hundred years war last?

Your mad cuz you lost your empire, like i said before.

You, good sir, are the reason the rest of us Americans have to apologize for our nation.

Go read a book, get some brains, and get the hell out of this thread.

Your mad cuz you lost your empire, like i said before.

Look mate, start your own thread. You're derailing this one.

Do you have any actual points? Because to be quite frank, this is going to be rather boring otherwise? You're using as an example a two-hundred year old battle in which a well-trained but inflexible infantry force was led on a frontal assault by an inbred General against dug-in infantry with a pathetic naval attachment and idiotic tactics. Hardly the best of examples old boy.


Idiotic tactics? ok, lets wear blaze red and march out into and open field, and then expect the americans to do the same and call them cowards for not when they blow us away using rifles......:rolleyes:

Look mate, start your own thread. You're derailing this one.

Then my tactic is working.:)

Because you say so, and your word is above all else?

I've got news for you: I find it offensive, because it is. Most of the posters who use it, no matter how often they deny it, are doing so to piss us off.
Ohh, get over yourself. I can think of many terms to describe people from the USA, that could be offensive. The aforementioned is not one of them.

And it's very rare to refer to, say, "Eurasians," either, but if a country in Eurasia decided to call its citizens "Eurasians" that would be justifiably regarded as absurd.

Well, if the country were named Eurasia that would happen. However, the US was originally referred to as Columbia and was then named the United States of America in the Declaration of Independence; the US was still commonly called Columbia until the end of the 19th century.

Perhaps the independence of the homophonic Colombia in the mid 19th century led to the popularity of American as the name for the US.

Quick question. How long did the hundred years war last?

It actually lasted for more than one hundred years, but everything I have read calls it that, I dont know the exact ammount of years, true it did take 100 years for the french to beat England, but they still got beat by the french.

Ohh, get over yourself. I can think of many terms to describe people from the USA, that could be offensive. The aforementioned is not one of them.

Who are you to say what is offensive to me?

Idiotic tactics? ok, lets wear blaze red and march out into and open field, and then expect the americans to do the same and call them cowards for not when they blow us away using rifles......:rolleyes:

The British used idiotic tactics. Do you even read the posts when you respond? The US forces had the advantage of Jackson aiding in their command, and a well-dug in entrenched position that General Packenham decided to asault using a frontal bayonet-charge.

So, idiotic tactics...

You, good sir, are the reason the rest of us Americans have to apologize for our nation.

Go read a book, get some brains, and get the hell out of this thread.

So would you mind the king of England walking all over you?

The British used idiotic tactics. Do you even read the posts when you respond? The US forces had the advantage of Jackson aiding in their command, and a well-dug in entrenched position that General Packenham decided to asault using a frontal bayonet-charge.

So, idiotic tactics...

Please don't mind him.

It actually lasted for more than one hundred years, but everything I have read calls it that, I dont know the exact ammount of years, true it did take 100 years for the french to beat England, but they still got beat by the french.

I shall simply respond with - Blenheim, and Marlborough.

So yeah I'm not offended by the term USian, its just stupid, I'm just saying that a Brit invented it cuz he was mad cuz england sux and america rules.

To Aeson, the point of the first poll was that it all of NSG, by making more than 2 options you make it impossible for the mods to do anything.

Offensive? Not really. I think its ridiculous and pointless, but I’d not call it offensive.

Here's the thing: if, hypothetically, they are doing it to piss you off, just...don't get pissed off.

And it's very rare to refer to, say, "Eurasians," either, but if a country in Eurasia decided to call its citizens "Eurasians" that would be justifiably regarded as absurd.

Language is irrational and oft-times silly. You know why? Because people are irrational and oft-times silly.

It makes no sense to try and make something as fundamently human as language make sense. If you do you will get all kinds of people posting examples such as "why do we drive on a parkways and park in driveways," and the like.

It's not logical. You have to deal with that.

I'd be offended if someone thought I was an American, so yes.

So yeah I'm not offended by the term USian, its just stupid, I'm just saying that a Brit invented it cuz he was mad cuz england sux and america rules.
then why did you vote that you were offended by it in the poll?

then why did you vote that you were offended by it in the poll?

Because he's an idiot. Duh.

To Aeson, the point of the first poll was that it all of NSG, by making more than 2 options you make it impossible for the mods to do anything.
The mods aren't bound by our polls or even by what we think they should do. Even if the poll where unanimous they wouldn't enforce it. I think that the only possible way any mod would take any action against the word is if it was used to spam, in which case it wouldn't be against the word specificly but against spam.

The mods aren't elected or bound by any desire of ours, so a poll means nothing to them.

Well, if the country were named Eurasia that would happen. However, the US was originally referred to as Columbia and was then named the United States of America in the Declaration of Independence; the US was still commonly called Columbia until the end of the 19th century.

Perhaps the independence of the homophonic Colombia in the mid 19th century led to the popularity of American as the name for the US.

It isn't really homophonic, but I suppose it's close enough to cause confusion. Especially for English speakers.

Maybe we should just rename the country; that would solve the problem.

I'm offended by people who are offended by nonsensical things.

Language is irrational and oft-times silly. You know why? Because people are irrational and oft-times silly.

It makes no sense to try and make something as fundamently human as language make sense. If you do you will get all kinds of people posting examples such as "why do we drive on a parkways and park in driveways," and the like.

It's not logical. You have to deal with that.

I'm aware of that. That's one of the reasons I think the usage of "USian" shouldn't be objected to on logical grounds.

then why did you vote that you were offended by it in the poll?

Becuase I knew that that # would be in the minority.

It isn't really homophonic, but I suppose it's close enough to cause confusion. Especially for English speakers.

Maybe we should just rename the country; that would solve the problem.

I say the United States of Columbia. And we make those other columbians get another name. Yeah.

Becuase I knew that that # would be in the minority.

Yeah, by the same logic I should vote for the Constitution Party every election.

Becuase I knew that that # would be in the minority.
Yeah. I vote for Nader, too.

It isn't really homophonic, but I suppose it's close enough to cause confusion. Especially for English speakers.

It was mainly English speakers who called the US "Colombia", so they did sound homophonic. I think most of the people who call the US "America" are also English speakers.

Maybe we should just rename the country; that would solve the problem.

That might cause even more complications than it would solve. Plus, it would be hard to convince people to start calling the US by another name; it's easier just to say you are from the US instead of America and avoid the issue entirely.

Yeah. I vote for Nader, too.

hehe

Becuase I knew that that # would be in the minority.
You do realize that doesnt exactly follow logic right?

It was mainly English speakers who called the US "Colombia", so they did sound homophonic. I think most of the people who call the US "America" are also English speakers.

That's probably true.

That might cause even more complications than it would solve. Plus, it would be hard to convince people to start calling the US by another name; it's easier just to say you are from the US instead of America and avoid the issue entirely.

I know, I wasn't being serious.

As I said on either this thread or the other one, I just use "US" or "United States" whenever possible.

That's probably true.

Most likely.

I know, I wasn't being serious.

I figured you wern't, but I'm sure someone would think so...the last thing we need is it turning in to a debate over renaming the US.

As I said on either this thread or the other one, I just use "US" or "United States" whenever possible.

So do I; it's clearer and faster to say and write. It clears up pretty much all confusion.

No I win, becuase I am an American, and thats what Americans do, is win.
You made it into my signature.

Offencive, no of course not, but I would much rather be called American. The term USian or USAian just doesn't sit well with me for some reason.

The mods aren't bound by our polls or even by what we think they should do. Even if the poll where unanimous they wouldn't enforce it. I think that the only possible way any mod would take any action against the word is if it was used to spam, in which case it wouldn't be against the word specificly but against spam.

The mods aren't elected or bound by any desire of ours, so a poll means nothing to them.

Unless we find a nice one, because the term USian could really bog threads down in future, and its begining to now.

Unless we find a nice one, because the term USian could really bog threads down in future, and its begining to now.
A mis-spelling can bog down a thread. A typo. Anything, really.

In the thread that started the whole thing it was a convinient red-herring because the thread didn't have a prayer-it was based on something that was falsly attributed and rather than deal with all that egg on his face he chased that rabbit.

To certain degrees, and within guidelines, mods can intervine in the case of threadjacking, which is what you are talking about. But that exists unto itself. No volunteer mod on a forum that's just a saddlebag to a game meant to promote a book is going to go through a large volumne of specific buzzwords and their proper use to prevent threadjacks.

The power is in your hands to stay on topic.

The power is in your hands to stay on topic.

That sounds oh so dramatic

ALRIGHT IM BUSTING OUT MY POST FROM THE LAST THREAD ON THIS STUPID NAME THATS TOTALLY RETARDED!!!

People who live in the United states are called Americans. But why no one else in a America you ask? Because they dont have the word AMERICA in their name. Its the United States of AMERICA! and its the only country with america in its name. Therese no Canadian Republic of America. No Mexican Centrist Democracy of America. No Venezuelan Socialist States of America. Theres Canada, Mexico, and Venezuala, and they call themselves Canadians, Mexicans, and Venezualans. so you know what, were americans.

And yes USians, is totally retarded. Who started it? people who want to piss us off cause we say were proud to be an American. "well no ure actually an Usian." Screw you no im not. Im an American. Its the same reason people came up with the Term Bushavic. because people support bush and we must piss them off. I mean there was no reason to come up with this other than that. Knock it off people.

ah silence.

It's not I find it offensive, I just don't like the term. As has been said before, the United States is our TITLE, and America is our nation name. Other Examples:

Estados Unidos Mexicanos (United Mexican States)

The United States of Venezuela (from 1864 to April 15, 1953)

For a further list, go here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_%28disambiguation%29).

Therefore, if you call us USians, then those other countries are all USians too.

I'm sorry our countries founding fathers couldn't come up with a better name than "America", but to be fully honest, we were the first independent country after Europeans conquered the whole continent, so if anything, we had first dibs. That's why Haiti got stuck with such a shitty name :p

I dont find the term offensive, I personally just think its stupid and pointless as you can generaly determine if somebody is talking about a person from the United States or a person from one of the Americas from context.
EX:
"I am an American that lives in New York."
^
This obviously does not refer to somebody from, say, Ecuador.

And even in sentences that could be easily confused, its not that hard to modify them to make it clear where you or the person/people you are refering to would be from.
EX:
"As an American, I feel that Peru's stance on zombie rights is overzealous."
Could easily be changed to:
"As a Peruvian (or South American or Peruano, or whatever.), I feel that Peru's stance on zombie rights is overzealous."

But some people obviously feel differently. I dont see myself using the term 'USian' any sooner than I start talking about people from the British Isles as 'UKians' or people from South Korea as 'ROKians'.

That sounds oh so dramatic
If you think of Captain Planet as dramatic...which is what I was parodying...

Actually, I get a chuckle out of the fact that we "Americans" actually hail from the United States of Henry.

As most students know, the Americas were named after an Italian mapmaker named Amerigo Vespucci. Amerigo is an Italian form of the medieval Latin Emericus, which in German is Heinrich, and in English, Henry.

We are the "Henrys," damnit, and you better remember it.

I much prefer the term Yankee, much to the dismay of my southern countrymen.

I much prefer the term Yankee, much to the dismay of my southern countrymen.
Please, south-EASTERN.
Im just about as far South as you can go without being in Mexico, and I dont appreciate being thrown in with the hics :P
OR:
We ain't got no durn ally-bamians sons'a'bitches 'ere goddamn commie wassat.
;)

I'll make a confession. I'm not sure how Usians is pronounced. Is it like Asians with U instead of capital A? Or like Ucyiance?
As for the adjective, United Stater/USer sounds better. Or simply free&brave :D

Who are you to say what is offensive to me?
"Originally Posted by Potarius
Because you say so, and your word is above all else?

I've got news for you: I find it offensive, because it is. Most of the posters who use it, no matter how often they deny it, are doing so to piss us off."

I'm a person who can obviously make a distinction between what is offensive and what is inconsequential. I also do not make sweeping accusations, as you, Potarius seem only too willing to do as proven in your quote above.
There is no conspiracy to piss you/us off.
:rolleyes:

Sure thing. Take a coaster, draw a point near the center, and a point on the outer edge. Then slowly turn it. The points stay the same relative to each other, but they are traveling different speeds. So how fast is the coaster actually turning?

You would describe it in terms of angular velocity ;) . It would be an angle per second depending on how fast you turned it :p .

I use the term USian, because it works for me, not to piss anyone off.
Liar.

I don't find it offensive at all, however I am not a citizen of the United States of America. However, given that at least one US citizen has noted their offence, it is obvious that the phrase is offensive. Hence, regardless of whether you, I or others think it not so, as long as there is a group, even if a minority, who find it offensive, then it is offensive.
Thank you. A voice of reason on NS General! Amazing! :)

What I find most funny about this BS is that the people that are most against it are the PC is rubbish-types.
haha! your right. silly people.

Thank you. A voice of reason on NS General! Amazing! :)
Really? Because using that logic I can claim I find the use of the word Atheist to describe me offensive and simply me stating it is reason enough for no one to be able to use it. Thats a slippery slope

I'd be offended if someone thought I was an American, so yes.
That's kewl. I would be offended if someone mistook you for an American too. :)

I much prefer the term Yankee, much to the dismay of my southern countrymen.
[ Is appropriately dismayed. ] :)

I'm not offended by the term "USian," but its really just laziness. I mean it's only 3 more letters. How hard is it to type out "American?"

Let's take this step by step.

One-word countries are easy:

Person from France = French
Person from Japan = Japanese
Person from Australia = Australian

With complicated names, you must go to the next best thing:

Person from the United Soviet Socialist Republics = Soviet, or Russian
Person from the United Kingom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland = British, or English

So... Person from the United States of America = American

Nothing else in the name fits.

United-ite? No.
States-ian? No!
American? Yes.

And none of this "Usian" nonsense. It implies that one is from "Usia", which doesn't exist. It would be like calling a Soviet person a "Ussrianite".

And as for the residents of other North and South American Countries?

Person from Venezuela = Venezuelan
Person from Brazil = Brazilian
Person from Canada = Canadian
Person from North America = North American
Person from South America = South American
Person from the Americas = Westerner

Simple.

On a scale of things to be offended by for me this ranks just below someone wearing plad pants to a formal party.

It is incorrectly constructed, Americans find it offensive and I find it idiotic and a mouthful - and not of the good type. An it harm none, do what ye will. So yeah, I'll just go on calling you Americans.

I still don't understand what in this term exactly offends USians? I honestly don't. It's not like US of A=America, which means that person can be American without being a Citizen of USA. Because of this I find USian to work just well in describing those Americans who from United States.

Are people ashamed of being said to be from United States? Do they feel that they're more from the continent of America than from the nation of US? I just don't get it.

Okay, so from here on in I'll try being mindful of the more faint-hearted among you - anyone who I notice objecting to my use of the term 'USian', I'll either refer to as "_s" or just put them on ignore.

Fair enough?

Okay, so from here on in I'll try being mindful of the more faint-hearted among you - anyone who I notice objecting to my use of the term 'USian', I'll either refer to as "_s" or just put them on ignore.

Fair enough?

It seems to me that "_s" would be a good solution. Then there would be a real problem about how to pronounce it. (USians is at least obviously You-ess-eeans)

It seems to me that "_s" would be a good solution. Then there would be a real problem about how to pronounce it. (USians is at least obviously You-ess-eeans)
Pronunciation? Easy. "Blank-ians". You can't get any less offensive than that, as no-one's being called anything whatsoever.

It seems to me that "_s" would be a good solution. Then there would be a real problem about how to pronounce it. (USians is at least obviously You-ess-eeans)
Or you could just call people from the United States of America Americans.
Brilliant idea isn't it?
To use the word that has been used worldwide for over 200 years to refer to a NATIONALITY.
Everyone knows what you are talking about, it's a real word, it is easily pronouncable it's what the people you are referring to would like to be addressed as, and it would stop threads like these from ever being created.

Other nationalities in the AMERICAS(so someone living in the two continents could be refered to as Americasian) have their own nationalities and most of them would prefer not to be called an American anyway.

Don't we have anything better to debate about?

Jesh...

Or you could just call people from the United States of America Americans.
Brilliant idea isn't it?
To use the word that has been used worldwide for over 200 years to refer to a NATIONALITY.
Everyone knows what you are talking about, it's a real word, it is easily pronouncable it's what the people you are referring to would like to be addressed as, and it would stop threads like these from ever being created.

Other nationalities in the AMERICAS(so someone living in the two continents could be refered to as Americasian) have their own nationalities and most of them would prefer not to be called an American anyway.

I could, but as I am an American, and I don't live in the US, I can choose not to.

I could, but as I am an American, and I don't live in the US, I can choose not to.
:confused: Weren't you British?

To all my _n friends on NSG:

I salute your resolve to not suffer needless denigration through the use of hurtful acronyms and short-forms. People of _, you are a testament to dogged perseverance in the face of the sort of faceless oppression you often read about in books about faceless oppressors of doggedly perseverant types who always win in the end by getting their own way. And for that, Dobbsworld salutes all _ and every blessed _n here tonight.

*smiles*

:confused: Weren't you British?

How do you define your nationality? I was born and raised in the UK - so in one way I am UKian, but I live, work and have my family in Brazil - so I am American as well.

How do you define your nationality? I was born and raised in the UK - so in one way I am UKian, but I live, work and have my family in Brazil - so I am American as well.
Dual nationality, it would seem. UKian by the way? :p I know subject of the UK is a mouthful, but still.

How do you define your nationality? I was born and raised in the UK - so in one way I am UKian, but I live, work and have my family in Brazil - so I am American as well.
I know its off topic but was it hard to settle in to a new country and find work?

How do you define your nationality? I was born and raised in the UK - so in one way I am UKian, but I live, work and have my family in Brazil - so I am American as well.
I define it by the nationality in my passport. Which is Dutch.

I know its off topic but was it hard to settle in to a new country and find work?

For me, no. But I had married a Brazilian before moving to Brazil, and I come from a family that in the last two generations has spread over seven continents - it is in the blood it seems to get as far away as possible from the rest of the family. :D

There are cultural shocks and confusions to be overcome, and a language barrier to knock down. (Even if it is officially the same language US - UK for example) You have to be humble - it is you that will be wrong in nearly every case of confusion, and if you are not prepared to 'fess up and say sorry, then it will be very hard.

As to finding work - it depends on where you go and what your talents and skills are. As I am, amongst other things, a teacher - it was easy to obtain work teaching English to start with. (I hope to go back to teaching philosophy soon.)

There are two ways to refer to someone from the United States in our own language.

You either refer to someone as "American" or by their state's name: EX, "Californian" "Virginian" "New Yorker" Etc.

So if you are really so worried about offending people from Canada, Mexico, Nicaragua, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador, Panama, etc. that you can't "in good conscience" use the term "American" to refer to people from the United States and you want to speak to someone from the United States in our language, then you should refer to us by state name.


What you call people from the United States in your own language is your own business people, but don't come rolling up into our country and start trying to change our language because you all get pissy about what we call ourselves.



I don't find the term itself offensive because the definition is just fine. What I find offensive is the context under which it is used, and based on how people use it here on the forum it seems as though people think it their duty to take people from the US down a notch. Maybe people like Barbarian are idiots and need to be brought down a notch or two, but there are idiots in every country, so don't pretend for a moment that guys like him are license to start throwing around new terms. I also find that while the term is not used as a pejorative it does seem like the intent behind the word is to demean persons native to the United States.

NT

[snip]
What you call people from the United States in your own language is your own business people, but don't come rolling up into our country and start trying to change our language because you all get pissy about what we call ourselves.
[snip]

I also find that while the term is not used as a pejorative it does seem like the intent behind the word is to demean persons native to the United States.

NT

Thank you. As my mother tongue is English, then in my own language I will call you a USian. :D

I don't get the last bit of your post that I have quotesd. If you do not think that it is used as a pejorative term, and I agree with you, it is not, then why do you think the intent is to demean persons native to the US? You are contradicting yourself.

In my case, the intent is to recognise that there is a culture that is attributable to the USA, and as such the people from there have a common identity to some degree. It is this commonality that I label USian, as it certainly is not common to other inhabitants of the new world. No demeaning involved. I keep repeating this, but if I want to demean someone, I can certainly find better ways of doing it - Bushite springs to mind.

For me, no. But I had married a Brazilian before moving to Brazil, and I come from a family that in the last two generations has spread over seven continents - it is in the blood it seems to get as far away as possible from the rest of the family. :D

There are cultural shocks and confusions to be overcome, and a language barrier to knock down. (Even if it is officially the same language US - UK for example) You have to be humble - it is you that will be wrong in nearly every case of confusion, and if you are not prepared to 'fess up and say sorry, then it will be very hard.

As to finding work - it depends on where you go and what your talents and skills are. As I am, amongst other things, a teacher - it was easy to obtain work teaching English to start with. (I hope to go back to teaching philosophy soon.)


thanks for the insight, your points are noted. Im really considering doing what you have done, which is to teach english abroad, I think it would be good for me.

I'm amazed at how long this thread has gone on (yet here I am helping to keep it going). I'm not entirely convinced that this silliness isn't just someone's attempt to see how riled up they can get people.

For me the entire issue boils down to good manners. The people of Ukraine don't like it when their country is referred to as The Ukraine (as it was when it was part of the Soviet Union), so I do the polite thing and abide by those wishes.

If Americans wished to be called Americans and not USians then to do otherwise is boorish and arrogant.

Swedish guy: "So Bob... what's your nationality?"
American guy: "Usian!"
Swedish guy: "Usian? What's that?"
American guy: "Oh... I'm from the United States!"
Swedish guy: "So... you're American then..."
American guy: "Yes... yes I am..."

If Americans wished to be called Americans and not USians then to do otherwise is boorish and arrogant.

What about the other people whoi live in the americas and want to reclaim the adjective as referring to the continent, not to the US. The US of A could not decide on a name for itself as a country, and now they claim that due to this indecision the adjective american applies to them and them alone. It does apply to them, but only in the same way that European applies to Ukrainians. If the EU decided to claim the adjective European for only those nations that are part of the EU, wouldn't you object?

As such, some other term is needed to function as an adjective relating to the US, and what is more natural than to take US, a noun which they do not object to, and build an adjective from it according to normal English language rules - USian. No insult, no demeaning intent, just an adjective.

Thank you. As my mother tongue is English, then in my own language I will call you a USian. :D

I don't get the last bit of your post that I have quotesd. If you do not think that it is used as a pejorative term, and I agree with you, it is not, then why do you think the intent is to demean persons native to the US? You are contradicting yourself.

In my case, the intent is to recognise that there is a culture that is attributable to the USA, and as such the people from there have a common identity to some degree. It is this commonality that I label USian, as it certainly is not common to other inhabitants of the new world. No demeaning involved. I keep repeating this, but if I want to demean someone, I can certainly find better ways of doing it - Bushite springs to mind.

If your "Mother tongue" is British English, then by all means in the company of other Brits call people from the United States "Usians" all you want.

As a citizen of the United States I acknowledge that I have no right to demand other people refer to people in the same way I do when speaking my language in theirs. For instance, I won't go to Germany and demand that instead of saying "Ich spreche Deutsch" people say "Ich spreche German."


But the same thing works in reverse. People do not just get to come here and tell us how to speak our own language.


British English and American English despite their similarities have become two entirely separate languages. Try taking someone from London speaking in a cockney dialect and placing them in the US, and no one who hasn't been exposed to the dialect will understand this person.



And the term itself is not an insult. That much I recognize, but when people are using it around here it is often used in a manner whereby it appears that the speaker (in this case the typer) is using it because they believe that in doing so they are "Righting the wrong that is US egotism."


You want to take someone down a peg do it in your own country. When your country is perfect, then you can come over to ours and start bitching us out about our problems. But until then you let us worry about our own problems and we will let you worry about yours. (And no this is not a lead in to some assinine discussion about foreign policy. On this thread whose problems become another country's problems when, where, and how is not relevant)>

NT

But the same thing works in reverse. People do not just get to come here and tell us how to speak our own language.

Where is this "here" that you are referring to?

Where is this "here" that you are referring to?
I was wondering the same thing... :rolleyes:

Where is this "here" that you are referring to?
Jeeze! Even you couldn't be that dense!

Jeeze! Even you couldn't be that dense!
:confused:

What about the other people who live in the americas and want to reclaim the adjective as referring to the continent, not to the US.

Have you ever met such a person? I haven't. This is made up message board masturbation. However, if people from Brasil, Canada, Mexico, Jamaica, or any of the other countries of the Americas wished to be called Americans, then I say fine. I will honor their wish.

Good manners, remember?

:confused:
I concur.

Rofl. Seperate languages, that really cracks me up. :p

Rofl. Seperate languages, that really cracks me up. :p
Yeah that made me laugh too. British English and American English are at best idiomatically different. Nowhere near separate languages though.

Yeah that made me laugh too. British English and American English are at best idiomatically different. Nowhere near separate languages though.
What? I dont understand you. SPEAK ENGLISH! this is America damn it!;)

What? I dont understand you. SPEAK ENGLISH! this is America damn it!;)
You mean American, don't you? :)

Jeeze! Even you couldn't be that dense!

Mind your manners old goat. Flamming is still your prediliction I see.

Mind your manners old goat. Flamming is still your prediliction I see.
*Cough* Predilection *Cough*

Flaming too.

You mean American, don't you? :)
lol, yeah thats what I meant, American. USA, USA :p

snip

Ok, I really like you. In your last couple of posts you said excatly what I was feeling, but had the patience to type it all out.

I would also like to add, that the word "USain" really just sounds wrong and is rather ugly sounding. Acronyms and abbreviations really should not have suffixes added to them. There is a reason people say "I'm going scuba diving," and not "I'm going scubaing."

Well good night _, good night world. And good night to both _s and USians alike.

Dobbsworld salutes you!

Its not what you say, its how u say it. I prefer American, but I don't mind USian. As for South and Central Americans, I direct you to the song Political Science by Randy Newman:

No one likes us / I don't know why / We may not be perfect / But heaven knows we try
But all around, even our old friends put us down / Lets drop the big one and see what happens.....
Asia's crowded, Europe's too old / Africa is far too hot and Canada's too cold
South America stole our name Lets drop the big one, there'll be no one left to blame us.....

If you all want to get really technical then linguists do indeed classify "American English" and "British English" as separate "Dialects," but my point still stands.


I will not go down to Louisiana and demand that people speaking a southern dialect of American English to refer to things the same way I do. The same should hold true for people from other countries, even Great Britain.


And I have to agree with Ogiek here: People who are living in Central American countries, Mexico, Canada, South American countries don't seem to be demanding the right to call themselves Americans. If they want to be called Americans to, then by all means, I have no vested interest in an exclusive namesake so long as everyone recognizes what this entails. I'm not getting pissy about the fact that Great Britain has the word "Great" in it. I'm not going to go around complaining that this is British egocentrism and a bunch of other BS. It's just the name of the bloody country.


By "here" I mean the United States. You want to refer to people from the United States as USians in your own country, then by all means. But when you go to another country and speak their language, then you do so according to how they refer to themselves.


Now the internet certainly does change things because the notion of national boundaries becomes almost moot, but when in mixed company it would be appreciated if one referred to another person's nationality according to how they wished to be addressed.


So if it really bothers someone to refer to me as an "American," then they can call me "Californian." I do live in a "State" after all.

NT

Offensive? No.

Annoying and retarded as fuck? Yes.

There are two ways to refer to someone from the United States in our own language.

You either refer to someone as "American" or by their state's name: EX, "Californian" "Virginian" "New Yorker" Etc.

So if you are really so worried about offending people from Canada, Mexico, Nicaragua, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador, Panama, etc. that you can't "in good conscience" use the term "American" to refer to people from the United States and you want to speak to someone from the United States in our language, then you should refer to us by state name.


What you call people from the United States in your own language is your own business people, but don't come rolling up into our country and start trying to change our language because you all get pissy about what we call ourselves.



I don't find the term itself offensive because the definition is just fine. What I find offensive is the context under which it is used, and based on how people use it here on the forum it seems as though people think it their duty to take people from the US down a notch. Maybe people like Barbarian are idiots and need to be brought down a notch or two, but there are idiots in every country, so don't pretend for a moment that guys like him are license to start throwing around new terms. I also find that while the term is not used as a pejorative it does seem like the intent behind the word is to demean persons native to the United States.

NT

Hey hey hey, i can in good concious call americans americans with out offending peolple and canada and so forth...you know why....cause look. You say people in United States. Wait wahts the whole name? you know. United States of America? maybe isnt that what the A in USA stands for? come on people, where does this shit comefrom, people are too lazy to type out American and so they put USian, Geez how lazy can you be. Its plain in simple, people in USA are americans. People in Canada Are Canadians. Simple and Done. THREAD OVER!

If you all want to get really technical then linguists do indeed classify "American English" and "British English" as separate "Dialects," but my point still stands.


I will not go down to Louisiana and demand that people speaking a southern dialect of American English to refer to things the same way I do. The same should hold true for people from other countries, even Great Britain.
Such is the nature of dialects.

I'm not getting pissy about the fact that Great Britain has the word "Great" in it. I'm not going to go around complaining that this is British egocentrism and a bunch of other BS. It's just the name of the bloody country.
Just to clarify, it is more to do with the adjective "Greater" than implying Britain is the centre of the world.

US citizen. Yes.

Have you ever met such a person? I haven't. This is made up message board masturbation. However, if people from Brasil, Canada, Mexico, Jamaica, or any of the other countries of the Americas wished to be called Americans, then I say fine. I will honor their wish.

Good manners, remember?

I am just such a person.

However the issue goes a little deeper than that. I was translating an academic article recently concerning the Brazilian invasion of Okut (Something you may or may not know about). This left me with the problem of trying to refer to the culture and behaviour of Orkuteers from the USA without having spacve to use long winded descriptions (Portuguese is long winded enough without having to translate estadounidense into "the citizens of the USA that are" every time.) Now English does not have a word for 'estadounidense' according to you, but it does have - USian, being one such word.

Appalacian, Colonican, Columbard, Columbian, Frede, Fredonian, Nacirema, Pindosian (or just Pindos), Stateside(r), Uesican, Uessian, Unisan, Unisian, United States (as an attributive noun), United States American, United Stater, United Stateser, United Statesian, United Statesman, United Statian, USAian, U.S. American, Usan, USAn, Usanian, Usian (pronounced "YOU-zhuhn"), U-S-ian, Usonian (pronounced "you-SOH-nee-un"), and Washingtonian.

References to these words have been around since the early days of the republic, but they are virtually unused and American remains by far the most common term.

(Emphasis added)

Now I could have picked any one of these terms, but I tried to use the one that would be the most immediately recognizable and meaningful.

It would have made no sense to translate estadounidense as American when the cultural behaviour was being contrasted to that of Americans (The people of the Americas.) Then I find people, like Eutrusca, on this board arguing that it is insulting. I ask why - they don't answer (and still have not done so - o master of ad hominem). If you find it insulting, please tell me why. What is wrong with the term, or are you ashamed to be associated with the US?

Man are we still on this?


I would like to request that people of the world: refer to me aS Fruity McTuity.

Look we are the only country in the world who calls themselves Americans. Why you ask? because we base nationalities on 3 standards. Continent, Country, And province, however, the ethniticity by continent, seems to have died in the Western hemisfphere, in the east its my by continent, and in the west were simply either the name of our country, or "westerner.

So lets break it down.

Continents:

Australia, = Australian
Asia, =Asian
Africa, =African
Europe, =European
North America, =Westerner
and South America. = westerner

Thats how its worked for hundred of years,

now Country, alright im not going and naming all 2275 or however many there are cause i dont know them all, so ill just do the majors.

Canada=Canadian
Russia= Russian
China= Chinese
Japan= Japanese
Venezuala= venezualan
Brazil= Brazilian
Portugal= Portugese
Spain= Spanish
France= French
Italy= Italian
Britain= British
Mexico= Mexican
Columbia = Columbian

See the trend,

so
United States of AMERICA = American


now province, well theres,

California=Californian
Texas= Texan
Florida= Floridian,

(note: only use US states cause i dont know other countries provinces or divisions)

However these are used by people in one part of country talking about people in other part of country, not internationaly.

so lets not change things. People in the United States of America have been called Americans, since before USA was a country. the british Parliament were the first to call us Americans. And the name stuck. We were the American army. The American Navy.

By "here" I mean the United States. You want to refer to people from the United States as USians in your own country, then by all means. But when you go to another country and speak their language, then you do so according to how they refer to themselves.
NT

This forum is not in the United States of America. So here, on the forum, I can refer to you as I wish I suppose then.

This forum is not in the United States of America. So here, on the forum, I can refer to you as I wish I suppose then.
wait, you mean there are people OUTSIDE the US? :eek:

wait, you mean there are people OUTSIDE the US? :eek:
Are those...things...even people? :eek:

wait, you mean there are people OUTSIDE the US? :eek:

No, of course not. How silly of me. So we don't have to worry about American, let us just use the word 'people' :rolleyes:

Are those...things...even people? :eek:
Im not sure. Im scared:eek: hold me

I am just such a person.

However the issue goes a little deeper than that. I was translating an academic article recently concerning the Brazilian invasion of Okut (Something you may or may not know about). This left me with the problem of trying to refer to the culture and behaviour of Orkuteers from the USA without having spacve to use long winded descriptions (Portuguese is long winded enough without having to translate estadounidense into "the citizens of the USA that are" every time.) Now English does not have a word for 'estadounidense' according to you, but it does have - USian, being one such word.



(Emphasis added)

Now I could have picked any one of these terms, but I tried to use the one that would be the most immediately recognizable and meaningful.

It would have made no sense to translate estadounidense as American when the cultural behaviour was being contrasted to that of Americans (The people of the Americas.) Then I find people, like Eutrusca, on this board arguing that it is insulting. I ask why - they don't answer (and still have not done so - o master of ad hominem). If you find it insulting, please tell me why. What is wrong with the term, or are you ashamed to be associated with the US?


Alright ill try to explain. Right now the America is the Scape Goat of the World. Everything, and i mean Everything from The war in Iraq(lets not get started) to global warming, is currently are fault. So any debauchery of the American way of life, is seen as an attack upon us. Were really sensative right now. We have been called Americans since before the Country was independant. Now all of a sudden with all the turmoil going on, were called Usians, Seems like an attack. Whether it is or isnt. I find it offensive, cause I was raised as an American, Not as a Usian. Its almost as if your Saying im less than an American. So please, How hard is it to call us Americans. Someday, when the worlds at peace again, and America isnt hated. Go ahead try to introduce it. But right now isnt the best time. And just to tell you, people have started to try to use it as a Derogatory term.

Africa, =African
Europe, =European
North America, =Westerner
and South America. = westerner

Actually, most people I know use Westerner to refer to someone from Europe or North America. Although South America is in the Western Hemisphere, I do not think of South Americans when someone says Westerner. Besides, whats wrong with just using South American?


now province, well theres,

California=Californian
Texas= Texan
Florida= Floridian,

(note: only use US states cause i dont know other countries provinces or divisions)

However these are used by people in one part of country talking about people in other part of country, not internationaly.

Since we are the United States, why are you calling states provinces???

No, of course not. How silly of me. So we don't have to worry about American, let us just use the word 'people' :rolleyes:
What about those outside it? The Greeks used the word barbarians. You need your own term.

IIf you find it insulting, please tell me why. What is wrong with the term, or are you ashamed to be associated with the US?

You miss the point, I think. USian isn't insulting. It's stupid. It's sophomoric. It's laughable. Nobody uses it and if you tried to use it you would end up spending more time explaining what it means than if you just said American, which is what everyone calls us (us being Americans).

As I have said repeatedly, it doesn't make logical sense. We know that. We could spend a lifetime cataloguing things in human language in general and the English language in particular that don't make sense.

We're named after a guy whose name translates as Henry for god's sake (the United States of Henry?).

Let me ask you, if you met a guy named Richard, who went by Dick, would you argue with him that it makes no sense to translate Richard as Dick? No. You would call him what he asked you to call him.

We're Americans. You can ignore that. But, to do so is silly and rude.

Im not sure. Im scared:eek: hold me
I am one of those things. :p

What about those outside it? The Greeks used the word barbarians. You need your own term.
Freedom haters?

Freedom haters?
Yes! Terrorists even!

Yes! Terrorists even!
I'll settle for "those mean kids".

Alright ill try to explain. Right now the America is the Scape Goat of the World. Everything, and i mean Everything from The war in Iraq(lets not get started) to global warming, is currently are fault. So any debauchery of the American way of life, is seen as an attack upon us. Were really sensative right now. We have been called Americans since before the Country was independant. Now all of a sudden with all the turmoil going on, were called Usians, Seems like an attack. Whether it is or isnt. I find it offensive, cause I was raised as an American, Not as a Usian. Its almost as if your Saying im less than an American. So please, How hard is it to call us Americans. Someday, when the worlds at peace again, and America isnt hated. Go ahead try to introduce it. But right now isnt the best time. And just to tell you, people have started to try to use it as a Derogatory term.

OK. I can see your point, but how about my problem of needing a term to refer to US citizens and US cultural artifacts in comparison to the other citizens and artefacts of the Americas (American, in other words). I am stuck here. Can you suggest a suitable term to translate estadounidense? (and it can not be american as the term estadounidense is being used rather than americano to avoid just this problem.)

I'll settle for "those mean kids".
lol how very fitting. Still, 'tis an honour to be branded a Freedom Hater™ or Terrorist™ by a genuine American™.

lol how very fitting. Still, 'tis an honour to be branded a Freedom Hater™ or Terrorist™ by a genuine American.
I've been called both on numerous occasions by genuine _s. I'm probably one of the most honoured members of the forum in that respect...

OK. I can see your point, but how about my problem of needing a term to refer to US citizens and US cultural artifacts in comparison to the other citizens and artefacts of the Americas (American, in other words). I am stuck here. Can you suggest a suitable term to translate estadounidense? (and it can not be american as the term estadounidense is being used rather than americano to avoid just this problem.)

Avoid what problem? American in Portuguese is Americano, is it not? Do Brazilians call themselves Americanos? Or do they more commonly use the terms Brasileiro or Américano do Sul

What is wrong with América, Estados Unidos, Estados Unidos da América, or E.U.A.?

I'm not sure I see the problem.

How do you define your nationality? I was born and raised in the UK - so in one way I am UKian, but I live, work and have my family in Brazil - so I am American as well.
No your either British or Brazilian, your choice, but since neither country is called the United States of America, you are not American. And if you were talking about what continent you live in, you are either South American or European.

Avoid what problem? American in Portuguese is Americano, is it not? Do Brazilians call themselves Americanos?

What is wrong with América, Estados Unidos, Estados Unidos da América, or E.U.A.?

You really can't read can you.

I have explained the problem. I need a term to translate 'estadounidense' - a portuguese word that is fairly easy to understand. However this word can not be 'american' as in the text I am translating 'estadounidense' is contrasted to 'americano' - with the former refering to the USA and the latter referring to the america as a whole - all of it, not jus the USA part.

And no, American (as in of the USA) is not americano in good educated Portuguese it is estadounidense. What is wrong with the terms you gave - they are nouns. I need an adjective.

What about the other people whoi live in the americas and want to reclaim the adjective as referring to the continent, not to the US.
Last time I checked, there was no such continent called "America". There is North America and South America. People who wish to "reclaim the adjective" can use North American and South American, respectfully. Or Central American, or Latin American, or anything else. Just plain "American", however, describes the USA alone.

The US of A could not decide on a name for itself as a country, and now they claim that due to this indecision the adjective american applies to them and them alone. It does apply to them, but only in the same way that European applies to Ukrainians. If the EU decided to claim the adjective European for only those nations that are part of the EU, wouldn't you object?
You're missing the point. The United States of America resides in the continent of North America. But, contrary to claims that we are usurping the continent's descriptors, we call ourselves "Americans", not "North Americans". This is a unique situation that can't be explained by analogy, since the USA is the only nation which incorporates *part* of the name of its continent into its title. But the point is: In the term "USA", "America" is the only word that can be turned into an adjective, so that's what we use.

As such, some other term is needed to function as an adjective relating to the US, and what is more natural than to take US, a noun which they do not object to, and build an adjective from it according to normal English language rules - USian. No insult, no demeaning intent, just an adjective.Wrong. Acronyms cannot be given suffixes in this way.

No your either British or Brazilian, your choice, but since neither country is called the United States of America, you are not American. And if you were talking about what continent you live in, you are either South American or European.

Sorry you are wrong. I partake of a culture, that culture is described as American, in that it covers the entire new world. Like it or not, I am an American. But I am not claiming to have anything more than a passing association - through this Americanness with the USA. So in saying I am an American I am not saying I am an American. Great huh. Now do you see why a different adjective for estadounidense is needed. (I guess not - but meh)

Wrong. Acronyms cannot be given suffixes in this way.

Of course acronyms can be given suffixes. They can be converted into verbs, they can be conjugated. You can do anything with an acronym that you would do with any other noun.

The rest of your post is irrelevant which you would know if you could have been bothered to read why I need a term for estadounidense.

One thing I am noticing here. Not you specifically, but all those that are objecting, is that they get all very indignant, but only one person so far has given any reason for this indignation. What the hell does it matter to you if I use the term USian for what you call American?

Ah, I understand now. Allow me to retort (feel free to get someone to translate into Portuguese):

Go fuck yourself, you arrogant ****.

By which you manage to prove my point. :p

If you had read my posts you would know that English is my mother tongue. No translation is needed.

Sorry you are wrong. I partake of a culture, that culture is described as American, in that it covers the entire new world. Like it or not, I am an American. But I am not claiming to have anything more than a passing association - through this Americanness with the USA. So in saying I am an American I am not saying I am an American. Great huh. Now do you see why a different adjective for estadounidense is needed. (I guess not - but meh)
Do you normally claim yourself as such?
*Be honest now*

Do you normally claim yourself as such?
*Be honest now*

No, nor have I said that I do. But I am in a situation where I need to make the distinction between American (transcontinental) and American. Not just once, but repreatedly.

This is also not the first time that this problem has arisen. It may be that because my work involves translation of sociological and anthropological articles that I encounter this problem and others never do. Nevertheless the problem is there. I have no desire to insult the potential readers, but I cannot use the term American without the articles losing all vestiges of meaning.

What the fuck is insulting about it? Nothing.

What on earth is the point in these stupid threads? It's not as if there is an issue to discuss here.

One thing I am noticing here. Not you specifically, but all those that are objecting, is that they get all very indignant, but only one person so far has given any reason for this indignation. What the hell does it matter to you if I use the term USian for what you call American?
Well, there can be two reasons. The first is that historically we have been refered to as Americans. "What is this American, this new man?" -Hector St. Jean de Crèvecoeur in the 1770's for example. Even other languages have tended to pick up American to refer to the people of the United States. In Japan, I am an アメリカ人 (Amerikajin or America person) and it's only in very formal situations that the full title of the country is used. Most Japanese just say America.

So we have been called Americans for a very long time, it is how we refer to ourselves and how others have refered to us for longer than there has been an 'us' to refer to. To find someone suddenly stating that we've been wrong all these years and everyone should refer to us as something else (especially something that is a mouthful and doesn't look pronouceable) strikes us as rather rude if not down right arrogant.

The second reason is the assumption (and from your posts I think that it is partialy correct) that you're doing it just to annoy the hell out of Americans to whom their country means a great deal to.

As for me, I don't particuarly care WHAT you call me. I find USian to be idiotic, but I am not in the business of trying to keep people from being idiots.

Just don't call me late for dinner. :D

No, nor have I said that I do. But I am in a situation where I need to make the distinction between American (transcontinental) and American. Not just once, but repreatedly.

This is also not the first time that this problem has arisen. It may be that because my work involves translation of sociological and anthropological articles that I encounter this problem and others never do. Nevertheless the problem is there. I have no desire to insult the potential readers, but I cannot use the term American without the articles losing all vestiges of meaning.
Have you attempted to chck out the lit for the convention?

You made it into my signature.

Is that some kind of threat!?:eek: :sniper:

Sorry you are wrong. I partake of a culture, that culture is described as American, in that it covers the entire new world. Like it or not, I am an American. But I am not claiming to have anything more than a passing association - through this Americanness with the USA. So in saying I am an American I am not saying I am an American. Great huh. Now do you see why a different adjective for estadounidense is needed. (I guess not - but meh)
Not quite
Culture is independant from nationality(defined as the status of belonging to a particular nation by birth or naturalization). We are discussing nationality, therefore your nationality is either British(birth) or Brazilian(naturalization). It is really quite simple concept. There is no such thing as a passing association with a nationality. An Austrian would never refer to himself as German because they share a similar culture. Someone from Japan would never refer to himself as Chinese despite their cultural and proximal relationship.

erg triple post

erg triple post

Just for the hell of it, the OED defines American as:

A. adj.

1. a. Belonging to the continent of America. Also, of or pertaining to its inhabitants.

b. American language (usu. with the), (i) a language of American Indians; (ii) American English (see sense 3). Also American tongue.

2. a. Belonging to the British colonies in North America (obs.). b. Belonging to the United States.

c. U.S. spec. (See quot. a1861.)

3. a. Special Combs. American bar [BAR n.1 28], the name given (outside the U.S.) to a bar serving refreshments in allegedly American style; American blight = APPLE-aphis; American cheese, cheese of the Cheddar type, made in the U.S.; American cloth, (a) = AMERICANI; (b) also American oilcloth, see CLOTH n. 9c; American dream, the ideal of a democratic and prosperous society which is the traditional aim of the American people; a catch-phrase used to symbolize American social or material values in general; American English, the form of English used by the inhabitants of the U.S.; American football, a team game orig. based on Rugby football and played between two sides each with eleven players on the field; now the prevalent form of football in N. America; American leather (see LEATHER n. 1); American organ, see ORGAN n.1 3c; American plan, ‘the system of charging an inclusive price for room and board in a hotel’ (see D.A.E.), contrasted with European plan; American sheeting = AMERICANI; American Sign Language, a sign language consisting of a system of manual gestures, developed for the use of the deaf in the U.S.; cf. ASL s.v. A III, AMESLAN; American supper, tea, a social function for raising funds to which the guests contribute by bringing or buying food and drink; American tournament Sport, a tournament in which each competitor plays each of the others in turn; opp. KNOCK-OUT a. 1, n. 6.

b. In the names of various trees and plants native to North America, as American arbor vitæ, Thuja occidentalis; American ash, Fraxinus americana; American aspen (tree), Populus tremuloides; American Beauty (rose), a variety of cultivated rose; American beech (tree), Fagus grandifolia; American elm (tree), = WHITE ELM; American plane (tree), the buttonwood or Virginian Plane (see PLANE n.1 1).

B. n.

1. An American Indian.

2. A native of America of European descent; esp. a citizen of the United States. Now simply, a native or inhabitant of North or South America (often with qualifying word, as Latin American, North American); a citizen of the United States.

3. A ship belonging to America.

4. pl. Short for American stocks or shares.

5. American English; the form of English spoken in the United States.

Hence (in sense A. 2 or B. 2) Americana (-en, -n) n. pl. [see ANA suffix]; Americanese (-iz) = AMERICAN B. 5 (see above); Americaness, an American woman; Americanitis (-ats) [see -ITIS], some characteristically American penchant (esp. fig., over-weening or blatant national conceit in American achievements, etc.) or (loosely) related in some way to what is American (e.g. morbid fear of American competition or rivalry); Americanly adv., in an American manner; Americanness, the quality of being American, of having or revealing American characteristics.

But it cannot reconize either Usian or Usaian.

So the Brits think we're Americans. ;)

"Belonging to the continent of America"? The OED needs to brush up on its geography.

Anyway, it boils down very simply.

-- If you want to refer to a continent or a region, use North, South, Latin, or Central American.
-- For both continents, use Westerner.
-- For various individual countries, use their respective adjectives (Brazilian, Chilean, etc.)
-- And, for the USA, use the only adjective possible, the one that makes the most sense and is the most common: American.

Anybody who wants to buck centuries of convention for no justifiable reason is obviously just trying to take a jab at what they perceive to be the "arrogant Americans".

This is a unique situation that can't be explained by analogy, since the USA is the only nation which incorporates *part* of the name of its continent into its title.

South Africa comes close, though. I'm wondering if Angolans, Zimbabweans, Namibian, and Mozambicans are all exercised about the South Africans glomming onto the designation "South African" for themselves. I suspect not. I read that South Africa was ready at one point to call itself Azania anyway.

Come to think of it, I kind of like Usanian more than USian, because it rolls off the tongue a lot better (not to mention that nobody seems to agree on exactly how to pronounce USian) and because it also has the A for America in it.

It was also my understanding that some countries, e.g. the United Mexican States, as well as the former United States of Colombia, United States of Venezuela, and Republic of the United States of Brazil, would get in a snit about the US monopolizing the term "United States". So this whole argument is just chasing its tail.

BTW, "Westerner" is what we in Canada call someone from BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan (e.g. me), or Manitoba. In the US it's someone from one of the western states. And to someone from Asia, someone from the Middle East in particular, a Westerner is someone from one of those infidel western democracies of (esp. Western) Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the US.

We're named after a guy whose name translates as Henry for god's sake (the United States of Henry?)

Well, not Henry, but Emery or Emory, which is even nerdier.

Henricus (L) --> Enrico (It)
.................. --> Heinrich (Ger)
.................. --> Henry (Eng)

Emericus (L) --> Amerigo (It)
.................. --> Emerich or Emmerich (Ger)
.................. --> Emery or Emory (Eng)

Let me put it this way...

...if a nation's citizens (or, to be fair, simply the vast majority of a nation's citizens) had been refering to themselves a certain way for more than two centuries, I would NOT start calling them something else and start telling those people that they are wrong and they should start using this new term that I have started using.

That goes for every nation from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe.

It's not offensive, or derogatory...just rude.

Although I think this all bullshit and shouldn't matter at all if one wishes to use it; it could be resolved by putting two simple letters in front of American and make it USAmerican.

Let me put it this way...

...if a nation's citizens (or, to be fair, simply the vast majority of a nation's citizens) had been refering to themselves a certain way for more than two centuries, I would NOT start calling them something else and start telling those people that they are wrong and they should start using this new term that I have started using.

That goes for every nation from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe.

It's not offensive, or derogatory...just rude.
The problem being that we have done just that to a number of people ourselves.

The problem being that we have done just that to a number of people ourselves.

Which is a reason for us to keep doing it because...?

Of course acronyms can be given suffixes. They can be converted into verbs, they can be conjugated. You can do anything with an acronym that you would do with any other noun.

The problem is "U.S." is not an acronym, it is an abbreviation. Abbreviations cannot be conjugated because they are nouns and yhey cannot be converted into verbs.

One thing I am noticing here. Not you specifically, but all those that are objecting, is that they get all very indignant, but only one person so far has given any reason for this indignation. What the hell does it matter to you if I use the term USian for what you call American?

USain sounds stupid. The word degrades a nationality into IM speak, something a twelve year old would use along with LOL, ROTFL and OMG.

Which is a reason for us to keep doing it because...?
Just pointing out that English speakers tend to assign names and ignore native self-naming (Japan and Japanese instead of Nippon and Nihonjin for example), so using that as a reason why they can't call us Usian is probably not going to work.

Just pointing out that English speakers tend to assign names and ignore native self-naming (Japan and Japanese instead of Nippon and Nihonjin for example), so using that as a reason why they can't call us Usian is probably not going to work.

Perhaps, but I don't see anyone telling residents of Japan that their use of Nihonjin is wrong and they should start using the term Japanese like "the rest of us"

Perhaps, but I don't see anyone telling residents of Japan that their use of Nihonjin is wrong and they should start using the term Japanese like "the rest of us"
You haven't seen some of the tourists here then.

Isnt there a spam forum on jolt for this garbage?

You haven't seen some of the tourists here then.

No...no I haven't. I would like to visit Japan someday, though I doubt I'll have the money to do so anytime soon.

I assure you, I won't be bugging them about how they use their own language. ;)

Bad enough that a person would do that on an online forum...much less do so in a person's own country.

Let's capture such people when we find them...and send them to a much better tourist destination for such behavior.

http://www.wildland.com/trips/antarctica/images/penguins_and_ice_b.jpg

:D

In my opinion, it's incorrect to call someone USian because that is the name of the political structure, not the nation. The nation is America and its political structure is comprised of a union of states, or the United States. It sounds idiotic to call a resident of Germany a Federal Republican and it sounds equally as stupid to call Americans USians.

NO, The nation isn't America, 'cause America is a Geographical name for a whole continent. It appeared when USA where the only independent State in America. In spanish you are "estadounidenses"--->something like USians, but it sounds better :D This is the kind of thing makes the rest of America and the world to think US is a proud and selfish country (please, read proud as a negative item)

what is it that makes any word offensive?

meaning?
tone?
person saying it?

is niger offensive?

now what if i was to say it in a way that was rewarding towards so called nigars?

or does it make things better that i myself could be black?

what is it that makes any word offensive? meaning? tone? person saying it?
Context in general. Like tone or person saying it, or in what manner it's used to refer to Americans. I think some people are offended by USian because it's used by people to criticise Americans unfairly. The argument goes "You're so arrogant, claiming the name American while there's a whole continent full of Americans you know". I think to make an honest argument you'd have to consider the therm "U.S. American", not USian. It's a very PC debate though. The term 'American' is lexically fixed for most languages.

is niger offensive?
"******" is more offensive than USian, almost beyond comparison. USian at least doesn't have racist connotations.

now what if i was to say it in a way that was rewarding towards so called nigars?
Even if you're praising a black guy for being the best, most friendly, and cuddliest ****** you've ever met, I'd congratulate him on having your spleen. ;)

or does it make things better that i myself could be black?
Apparently for some it does. But it's still rude. Maybe black people use the term '******' to mock its original racist usage. A term can still be racist if it's about your own race though.

http://www.wildland.com/trips/antarctica/images/penguins_and_ice_b.jpg

:D
But... the penguins! Think of the poor penguins trapped there with weird people who keep telling them they have to call themselves something else!

Not again!!!

I say we call citzents of US - Bponaans

Not again!!!

I say we call citzents of US - Bponaans

This would actually bother me less than USians, just because it sounds cooler. :D

This forum is not in the United States of America. So here, on the forum, I can refer to you as I wish I suppose then.

Look people you can call people from America whatever you want. You could call me Mary Queen of Scots for all I care, but I don't respond to "Mary Queen of Scots" or "USian." If I started referring to people from Great Britain as: "Lesser British" because I was "offended by the presumption of greatness," then I would probably take some flak for the insult. So I don't do it. I consider it a matter of politeness not to try and take people down a notch due to perceived arrogance.


I can't stop you from calling people from the US whatever you choose, but understand that most of us don't particularly care for the term. Live and die by your choices.


And its been made abundantly clear now how the term while not pejorative, is used in such a way as to try and be offensive. The very presumption of arrogance and selfishness on the part of citizens of the United States because they like to be called Americans is exactly what I'm talkin about.



Long story short if you want civil and rational discourse then refer to me as either American or Californian. Or if both of those bother you that much then by all means choose to add two letters to the front and make it "USAmerican." But if people start refering to me as the ungrammatical and awkward sounding "USian" term, then I am going to be put off to say the least.

NT

With complicated names, you must go to the next best thing:

Person from the United Soviet Socialist Republics = Soviet, or Russian
Person from the United Kingom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland = British, or English What about Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish? Please don't be so offensive to the other peoples in the UK

.
Please, before you lecture others on correct usage, be careful you don't fall into the same error yourself.

this bit straight from the dictionary for the term "United States of America"*

Formal: America
Noun: Americans
Adjective: American

Citizens of the US.

On this forum at least, I have already agreed to refrain from using the term USian. But I will never, ever call you American.

Citizens of the US.

On this forum at least, I have already agreed to refrain from using the term USian. But I will never, ever call you American.

Can you suggest what adjective I should use for behaviour, artefacts etc. that originate from the US. I am tempted to use US itself as an adjective, do you think they will object to this?

Can you suggest what adjective I should use for behaviour, artefacts etc. that originate from the US. I am tempted to use US itself as an adjective, do you think they will object to this?
Well there needs to be a happy medium. People, (only those from the US it seems) are taking great offense at the term USian. Nonetheless, 'US' is an accepted abbreviation.

Since you and I (and many others) have VALID and thought out reasons for not wanting to use 'American' to refer to a single nationality, then I think that the accepted abbreviation should do.

US Constitution...you hear it all the time.

US citizen.

US landmark.

I don't see how it could possibly be construed as offensive....which of course means that someone will take umbrage.

While I agree that the term American is awkward because of its elitist perception, the term USian sounds inane

it really does.

it does not offend me,

only a fool is offended when offence was not meant ( and a greater fool is offended when offence is meant)

but I do think we should probably find a way to label us conveniently without resorting to meshing two non-compatible forms of english grammar :)

Well there needs to be a happy medium. People, (only those from the US it seems) are taking great offense at the term USian. Nonetheless, 'US' is an accepted abbreviation.



Some people from the US.....not all of us. I requested the people of the world to refer to me as a Fruity McTuity.

Some people from the US.....not all of us. I requested the people of the world to refer to me as a Fruity McTuity.
And I'm still damn well sticking up for my right to be identified as a Quizblorgian From Dimension 12B.

Well that's just fine girls...but it doesn't help us refer to the citizens of the US as a whole...

By the way, I just can't believe how many threads we've had on this...and did you see the thread in Moderation with everyone's comments deleted? Hilarious. Mountain, meet this molehill.

And I'm still damn well sticking up for my right to be identified as a Quizblorgian From Dimension 12B.

We should picket the forum or something. Show them we mean business.

Do the words self important pompous arrogant ass mean anything …beside the words best used to describe Dobbsworld?

Does the word 'paranoia' mean anything to you? Other than being a term to describe the political climate of the 1950s?

Considering the mods have told people to cool down over the term, this last post is probably not in your best interests.

And personal attacks are never good.

The L-85 is ok but in close combat (ie butstroke and bayonette) it is VERY flimsy. The M-16 is more robust but not as much as an AK.


Actually the British assault is better than its US counterpart in nearly every way. More reliable, faster fire rate, more accurate and I believe the only thing the M-16 beats it at is range. I will take the British rifle any day of week.

Dude A1's haven't been used since 84 I carried a A2 when I was in the Corp an I got out in 1987. The A2 is VASTLY superior to the A1.

As opposed to the M16A1 which still has problems? Or that the British Army possesses a huge amount of Peacekeeping skills moreso than your army, or that it contains the worlds foremost Counter-Terrorism organisation?

The British Army is a well-trained and now well-equipped military. Look elsewhere for your criticism.

Dude A1's haven't been used since 84 I carried a A2 when I was in the Corp an I got out in 1987. The A2 is VASTLY superior to the A1.


What the heck are you talking about?

Diverts attention away from the previous flame though, doesn't it?

The L-85 is ok but in close combat (ie butstroke and bayonette) it is VERY flimsy. The M-16 is more robust but not as much as an AK.
If you're resorting to using your modern assault rifle as a club then something has gone very wrong indeed. However the SA80 does benefit in some ways in this role because not only is it slightly heavier, but the weight is more concentrated towards the butt. And as for bayonet use, does the US military even use bayonets in combat anymore? The British army used them in Iraq on the other hand.

:rolleyes:

Ah, full on hijackage.

:rolleyes:

Ah, full on hijackage.
Oops sorry. I replied before the hijacking comment had been made.
Edit: To be fair though, it's another USian thread so it 's not far off a spam thread anyway.

You miss the point... polite people will you the term you prefer. Impolite people will try to piss you hence USian. So I propose the term UEian( say YOO -IAN) to be used for all Eurotrash who are too impolite to use the term American, however polite people should be treated politly and be called what they prefer.





Let's take this step by step.

One-word countries are easy:

Person from France = French
Person from Japan = Japanese
Person from Australia = Australian

With complicated names, you must go to the next best thing:

Person from the United Soviet Socialist Republics = Soviet, or Russian
Person from the United Kingom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland = British, or English

So... Person from the United States of America = American

Nothing else in the name fits.

United-ite? No.
States-ian? No!
American? Yes.

And none of this "Usian" nonsense. It implies that one is from "Usia", which doesn't exist. It would be like calling a Soviet person a "Ussrianite".

And as for the residents of other North and South American Countries?

Person from Venezuela = Venezuelan
Person from Brazil = Brazilian
Person from Canada = Canadian
Person from North America = North American
Person from South America = South American
Person from the Americas = Westerner

Simple.

GOLD FRIGGIN' STAR! EXACTLY CORRECT PERFECT !!!!!I'm amazed at how long this thread has gone on (yet here I am helping to keep it going). I'm not entirely convinced that this silliness isn't just someone's attempt to see how riled up they can get people.

For me the entire issue boils down to good manners. The people of Ukraine don't like it when their country is referred to as The Ukraine (as it was when it was part of the Soviet Union), so I do the polite thing and abide by those wishes.

If Americans wished to be called Americans and not USians then to do otherwise is boorish and arrogant.

My position remains the same--of all of the minor, pointless details to quibble over, why this one? Sure, I don't take offense to it, but if someone ever called me a USian on the street, I'd look at him like he was an idiot, and have an extremely low opinion of him due to his bowing to this pointless and moronic form of political correctness.

The M-16

What the heck are you talking about?

The USMC trains with them intensly the Army ...not so much. As to what you said about using the rifle as a club...nobody plans to get that close but if you have to, better to have a robust weapon.

If you're resorting to using your modern assault rifle as a club then something has gone very wrong indeed. However the SA80 does benefit in some ways in this role because not only is it slightly heavier, but the weight is more concentrated towards the butt. And as for bayonet use, does the US military even use bayonets in combat anymore? The British army used them in Iraq on the other hand.

Well seems like most of us are reasonable and realize that it is not a slur just an accurate shortened name that describes who you are talking about

Personally, I prefer US American. USian sounds a bit awkward... But I also think that US's monopolizing of the term "American" is nothing more than arrogant and elitist.

My arrogant and elitist two (Euro) cents, anyway.

You miss the point... polite people will you the term you prefer. Impolite people will try to piss you hence USian. So I propose the term UEian( say YOO -IAN) to be used for all Eurotrash who are too impolite to use the term American, however polite people should be treated politly and be called what they prefer.

Well, see, there are several countries in Europe... Kind of like in America. Over here, we tend to use nationalities, like English, French and Polish... The difference is similar to Canadian, Mexican or US American, not to forget Venezuela, Cuba, Brazil, etc, etc.

Here's a line that I found interesting.

"The US of A could not decide on a name for itself as a country, and now they claim that due to this indecision the adjective american applies to them and them alone."

"American" in this context in the English language, has its first known literary mention in 1765 (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=American&searchmode=none), before the United States ever became a country. The argument that "The United Staters now demand to be called Americans in a slight to everyone else in the Americas" is a blatant straw-man. Arguments that we are monopolizing it, as if it were something new, are equally silly in historical context. Just because the concept of "European" as a national identity is new doesn't mean that "American" is as well. People across the world have been using the word "America" for quite literally centuries now, and when the context demands a nation being referred to you can bet they're probably not talking about Haiti.

And yes, I do find it aggrivating (if not offensive) because it's a deliberately externally-applied handle that tries to right a wrong that for all intents and purposes does not exist. Additionally, because it does actually offend some people, some others use it to annoy them. Which means we get involved, again, and again, and again.

Seriously, it all comes down to keeping other people's feelings in mind when this is done. Let's say you are a European and have an African friend who gets offended when you call him and his "black" even though to you it may be a simple descriptor that shows how he's mildly different from you, and you would take no offense at the descriptor "white." Continuing to use the word "black" around him shows disregard for his feelings. Now, I know the usual counterargument: anyone insulted by "USian" is probably foolish and so I shouldn't respect his feelings. Again, I ask, what is your intent: to make life easier on yourself with some sort of AOL speak ("rduce5 kybrd w3rr!") or get on someone else's nerves? Which is more important, your "convenience," some feeling of "fairness" to all the peoples who already have different names for their countries, or to tick people off? If it's the first, then "British" should always be shortened to "UKians," French should be shortened to "5RFians," et al. If it's the second, that's already an immediate double standard because Bolivians, Brazilians, Cubans, et al are not "Americans" first and foremost in their own minds and you would therefore be denying Americans of the only effective self-referential national noun/adjective family they have.

The confusion between nation-America and continent-America is what lead to the terms "North America," "South America," "Central America," collectively "The Americas," so on and so forth. The problem isn't broke, so there's no need to fix it. If other people can be adamant and correct in that Britain is not England and vice versa, we can also do just as well with the Americas not being America.

If these crybabies carry on like this, it seems the US will have to adopt this as its new national anthem:

Too many teardrops
For one heart to be crying
Too many teardrops
For one heart to carry on

You're gonna cry ninety-six tears
You're gonna cry ninety-six tears
You're gonna cry, cry, cry, cry now
You're gonna cry, cry, cry, cry
Ninety-six tears

Come on and lemme hear you cry, now
Ninety-six tears, woo
I wanna hear you cry
Night and day, yeah, all night long

Uh, ninety-six tears, cry cry cry
Come on, baby
Let me hear you cry now, all night long
Uh, ninety-six tears, yeah, come on now
Uh, ninety-six tears

<snip>


Eloquently put, and I do agree. Personally I just tend to get a bit aggravated over the the whole "God save America, the devil take the rest" attitude... And taking pot-shots at the naming of US citizens is petty, I know, but it gives me some peace of mind.

Thus spoke a member of the Fighting Keyboarders...

And the rest of the world gets aggrivated at the "Rule Britannia" types. *shrug* Everyone's got their jerkoffs and it's the sign of a wise man to not let a few bad examples become the universal rule in one's mind.

[edit: New Granada's attitude is pretty much the reason I said what I said. Nevermind the street goes both ways]

Besides, whatever happened to "Yankee" as an alternative? It may be recognizably derogatory at times, but at least it isn't randomly made up.

I still don't understand what in this term exactly offends USians? I honestly don't. It's not like US of A=America, which means that person can be American without being a Citizen of USA. Because of this I find USian to work just well in describing those Americans who from United States.

Are people ashamed of being said to be from United States? Do they feel that they're more from the continent of America than from the nation of US? I just don't get it.

Could someone answer to this question? It's pretty much the one I have been wondering, too. I hear many people say how USian feels offensive to them, but, well, why? "many people use it when they try to insult" is not an answer. If that's all it takes, no word in the who wide world could be used.

And the rest of the world gets aggrivated at the "Rule Britannia" types. *shrug* Everyone's got their jerkoffs and it's the sign of a wise man to not let a few bad examples become the universal rule in one's mind.

[edit: New Granada's attitude is pretty much the reason I said what I said. Nevermind the street goes both ways]

Besides, whatever happened to "Yankee" as an alternative? It may be recognizably derogatory at times, but at least it isn't randomly made up.


The problem here is that "usian" is so childish, low-brow, and petty that it degrades the person who says it more than the person who is addressed by it.

This should be enough to end the 'debate,' but some people are such petty and thin-skinned whiners that they take genuine offense to the 'term' and muck up the forum with their whining spam.

The "usian" pissantocracy is pretty contemptible, but the problem is that it's difficult to tell whether the crybaby camp is even more contemptible.

I'm not offended by it, but those who call Americans USians should have no problem with me calling them UKians, Federal Republicans, Republicans, United Mexicans, People's Republicans, Commonwealth of Independent Statesians, EUians or anything else.

In my opinion, it's incorrect to call someone USian because that is the name of the political structure, not the nation. The nation is America and its political structure is comprised of a union of states, or the United States. It sounds idiotic to call a resident of Germany a Federal Republican and it sounds equally as stupid to call Americans USians.

Exactly. America is the nation, the United States part is the politcial structure. Therefore, we're Americans, not "USians". Even though there are two continents called America, they are better known as North America and South America, and people from those continents are referred to as "North Americans" and "South Americans", not lumped together as "Americans," who are people from the United States (and anything pertaining to both North and South America is Western). Just because this does not apply to Europe, Asia, Africa, or Australia, does not mean that Americans are both North Americans and South Americans, but that they are from the USA.

But if the posters from the UK insist upon calling us USians, then we have the full right to call them UKians.:D

That's just it. In the English language, America does equal the United States of America. The continental landmass of North and South America are "the Americas" (emphasis mine). It's the annoyance of any person towards others essentially demanding the usage of an epithet describing themselves that they didn't themselves actually agree on. For example, "black" in English is an external epithet applied to someone with dark skin; some dark-skinned people accept it and others don't. It's only polite when in the company of those who would take offense that it is not used and instead whatever epithet they prefer used in its stead.

It would be the annoyance of someone from Great Britain being called a "UKer" when "British" already exists to describe them. It starts as simple annoyance as people use "UKer;" then others find that "UKer" annoys the British and so they resort to using it, in part or in whole, for the express reason of annoying others. This is impolite, and this is what generates the offense.

Take the word "negro," a loan-word in English from Spanish to describe dark-skinned people. Many people who would not be offended by "black" would be offended by "negro," which bereft of context is simply a synonym. It does, however, approximate "******" and therefore it offends; the people who use "negro" in common English-speaking cultures are either separated from the issue and do not have to deal with offense and therefore ignorant of the connotations or, in situations where it has been deemed impolite because others find it offensive or impolitic, the person is actively trying to deride and insult. This is how the epithet treadmill ran from "******" to "negro" to "colored person" to "black" and so forth; all of these are offensive to certain people under certain circumstances. However, disbarring "******" as a cringe word, "negro," "black," "colored person," and "person of color" are all synonyms, just as the argument goes that "USian" is a synonym of the current and historical usage of "American" as a nationality.

The historical relevance of "American" as a national identity I mentioned about five posts upwards and for the sake of brevity will not be repeated.

"USian" was originally simply annoying because we already have a name. If someone introduces himself as "Edward" one doesn't immediately call him "Ed" or "Eddie," especially when it clearly aggrivates him, right? "Timothy" or "Tim" doesn't immediately become "Timmy" even if no insult is meant by the swap. The first instance of "I don't like to be called that" is a simple social mistake, no more or less. Continuing to call someone who has a nominative identity by something that conflicts with that, be it personal or national, tends to insult. From insult breeds offense.

To New Granada: I take exception more to your statements than I do to "USian." To me, "USian" is simply annoying and, in a way similar to how you dismiss it as "low-brow," bad English. Because I find it annoying, and because others do find it offensive as per the insult previously intended by some of its adopters, I am trying to reasonably defend why as a term it probably should not be used. This will not of course stop some people, but from those who are trying to play nice hopefully it will change some minds.

Yes, the term if used to annoy is quite petty. But petty annoyances multiplied hundredfolds are what tends to break people, it grinds them down. It should also be that "I don't like to be called that" is enough to end the debate. Unfortunately, it hasn't been and like everything else this forum finds to snark about it's split into the two camps of the offenders and the offendees, who resort to counter-offense and only serve to polarize things further.

You see, this is why every successful society has had rules of etiquette, propriety, and politeness. It is how they function efficiently.

A couple of questions:

Is it appropriate to say "citizen of the United States" or "United States citizen"? Would anyone ever ask "Which United States?", or would everyone understand that it meant the United States of America?

Is it appropriate to say "the US"? Would anyone mistake that for another country that has "United States" in its long name?

If so, why is USian or USer or whatever inappropriate? If it is acceptable to use the above terms to refer to the country, why is it a problem to use an extension of those terms to refer to its citizens?

When I look at official maps, I see the name "United States" way more often than "United States of America", and I cannot recall ever seeing simply "America".

Also, we Americans prefer "American." It is polite to call someone by what they prefer.

But as I said before, if you Europeans insist upon calling us "USians", then don't start crying when we call you "UKians" or "EUians," when you prefer to be called British, Irish, European, etc, etc, etc.

Also, we Americans prefer "American." It is polite to call someone by what they prefer.

But as I said before, if you Europeans insist upon calling us "USians", then don't start crying when we call you "UKians" or "EUians," when you prefer to be called British, Irish, European, etc, etc, etc.

We should all take that to heart. In the future, we should stop referring to the people of Deutschland as "Germans", or the people of Iran as "Arabs".

Good points Scolopendra, thanks for explaining. I'll continue to use Yankee/Gringo/American instead of USian then.

We should all take that to heart. In the future, we should stop referring to the people of Deutschland as "Germans", or the people of Iran as "Arabs".
Given that there are non-Arabs who live in Iran, it's pretty obviously stupid to call all Iranians "Arab."

Given that there are non-Arabs who live in Iran, it's pretty obviously stupid to call all Iranians "Arab."
That was my point. Most Iranians are not Arab, although you wouldn't necessarily know it from the news etc.

Thank you for making it obvious. :P

Given that there are non-Arabs who live in Iran, it's pretty obviously stupid to call all Iranians "Arab."
And because there are people from America (s) that aren't from USA, ...

And because there are people from America (s) that aren't from USA, ...
You don't have to be from the USA to be an American (or a USian, if you like).

I think a better comparison would be to say that calling all Iranians "Arabs" is like calling all Americans "white." There are plenty of non-white people who absolutely are Americans, regardless of where they originally come from, just as there are plenty of non-Arab individuals who are Iranian.

Most Iranians are not Arab.

About 97% aren't, to be exact...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran#Demographics