NationStates Jolt Archive

About 97% aren't, to be exact...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran#Demographics
So I guess a better example for me to use would have been:

Calling Iranians "Arabs" would be like calling all Americans "Asians," because about 3% of the USA population is of Asian ethnicity.

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?
See above (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11192052&postcount=241). Right after that post, too... perhaps my attempts at being reasonable about the whole thing brings out the worst of my verbose tendencies. ;)

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?

For the same reason that it is inappropriate for you to call somebody "Johnny" after he has asked you to please call him "Jonathan." It's true that "Johnny" is a perfectly reasonable nickname to use, and there's nothing inherently insulting about that name, but it's very rude of you to persist in using a name for somebody after they have informed you that they don't like it.

As a lover of language, I beg you to not refer to myself as a USian. I realize that Americans are largely responsible for the slaughter of the English language, but to add that ending on that contraction, thus flying in the face of a widely respected and accepted term *shudders*.

Besides, I don't know if any of you realize this but NO. ONE. IN. THE. WORLD. CARES. WHAT. WE. SAY. ON. NATION. STATES. That is right. You may call us USians until your faces turn blue and it does not mean that you have reclaimed the term "Americans" for the continent. Because everywhere else in the world, I am still an American.

contraction
Acronym. ;)

See above (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11192052&postcount=241). Right after that post, too... perhaps my attempts at being reasonable about the whole thing brings out the worst of my verbose tendencies. ;)

There are those who mistake kindness for weakness. Perhaps your reasonable discourse was seen as kindness by these.

Thank you. Haha, that is what I get for stating that I love language.

I find it funny this debate is still going on and even more funny that those from the US get so worked up about being called USian. I mean is it really as bad as say genocide in Sudan?

I find it funny this debate is still going on and even more funny that those from the US get so worked up about being called USian. I mean is it really as bad as say genocide in Sudan?

Multitasking. Try it.

I find it funny this debate is still going on and even more funny that those from the US get so worked up about being called USian. I mean is it really as bad as say genocide in Sudan?
You could make the same argument about those who so strongly cling to using the term "USian." It's like insisting on calling me "Jar" when my name is "Bottle"...don't you have better things to do, besides wasting your time insisting on your right to be annoying?

You could make the same argument about those who so strongly cling to using the term "USian." It's like insisting on calling me "Jar" when my name is "Bottle"...don't you have better things to do, besides wasting your time insisting on your right to be annoying?
I dont know anymore. Reading this thread makes my head hurt.

I thought I'd worked it all out rather nicely here on this very thread, last night. In order to avoid harming anyone's delicate constitutions, Anything pertaining to the United States of America (see? I typed it out in full for once - bask in it, Daistaillia - it'll only happen this once) should heretofore be replaced with the far snappier, completely impossible-to-construe-as-being-insulting, "_". As in, '_s live to the south of Canada, _ is at war with Iraq'.

I say 'completely impossible to construe as being insulting', as there's actually nothing to construe as being insulting. And it's even easier to type than 'USian'.

Yay for me, I win teh thread already.

Yay for me, I win teh thread already.

Proof that clearer heads prevail?

Proof that clearer heads prevail?
Well it's proof that good humour always wins out over whiney breast-beating, anyway...

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).
With all due respect, that is not the case. There is no consensus on Continent and what to call them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent

I have learned that there is one continent named America. So those who say that's it's obvious about America being two continents: North and South America, I've got news for them: It's not obvious.

Just a note: Iran's leading language is Persian, and most Iranians refer to themselves as Persian or Iranean, not Arab.

You could make the same argument about those who so strongly cling to using the term "USian." It's like insisting on calling me "Jar" when my name is "Bottle"...don't you have better things to do, besides wasting your time insisting on your right to be annoying?

Jar is correct in that the USian promoters are wasting their time arguing that it is their right to use the term. Just freaking use it or don't people. Is there really a need for all these threads asking if it is OK or not? If someone wants to be annoyed or offended over something so ridiculous, let them and move on. lets get back to arguing about religion, abortion and gay marriage - you know, the things we really love to be condescending to each other over.


Well it's proof that good humour always wins out over whiney breast-beating, anyway...

_ thanks you for your support.

Well it's proof that good humour always wins out over whiney breast-beating, anyway...

Ice cream wins "teh" thread now?

Jar is correct in that the USian promoters are wasting their time arguing that it is their right to use the term. Just freaking use it or don't people. Is there really a need for all these threads asking if it is OK or not? If someone wants to be annoyed or offended over something so ridiculous, let them and move on. lets get back to arguing about religion, abortion and gay marriage - you know, the things we really love to be condescending to each other over.
.
Wait was that a voice of sanity in this little discussion, I think it might be.

Wait was that a voice of sanity in this little discussion, I think it might be.


Sorry, I forgot where I was.

I wouldn't brag about that. :rolleyes:


I have learned that there is one continent named America. So those who say that's it's obvious about America being two continents: North and South America, I've got news for them: It's not obvious.

As a lover of language, I beg you to not refer to myself as a USian. I realize that Americans are largely responsible for the slaughter of the English language, but to add that ending on that contraction, thus flying in the face of a widely respected and accepted term *shudders*.

Besides, I don't know if any of you realize this but NO. ONE. IN. THE. WORLD. CARES. WHAT. WE. SAY. ON. NATION. STATES. That is right. You may call us USians until your faces turn blue and it does not mean that you have reclaimed the term "Americans" for the continent. Because everywhere else in the world, I am still an American.
That's an almost totally polarized view to my own. I think if you love language then you have to accept that it is constantly changing. And some of the newest additions to the English language are coming from online communities. So it's curiosity to see whether this term can become more accepted that is putting me on the pro-USian side of the argument. Because unlike many changes to the language there is solid logic behind it. It is logical for there to be separate words to describe people from the USA and the Americas. And USian is a logical derivation of USA to provide a handy alternative to 'American'.

Offensive - No.

Stupid - Yes.

That's an almost totally polarized view to my own. I think if you love language then you have to accept that it is constantly changing. And some of the newest additions to the English language are coming from online communities. So it's curiosity to see whether this term can become more accepted that is putting me on the pro-USian side of the argument. Because unlike many changes to the language there is solid logic behind it. It is logical for there to be separate words to describe people from the USA and the Americas. And USian is a logical derivation of USA to provide a handy alternative to 'American'.


yeah I love playing with language - so in terms of labelign people from where they come from...I call my fellow Nevada dwellers "Nevadalites", - our Arizona, Utah, and California (my home state) neighbors "Ariziders", "Utah-hoians", and "Califuckers" simply because I can. I call Fass a Svedo cuz he is a Svedonic as he comes from Sweden.

I am heartened to see that those who find USian to be an offensive term are in the minority.

I am heartened to see that those who find USian to be an offensive term are in the minority.
I hope you temper your bonhomie with the realization that those few who are offended are brayingly loud and - yes, I'll say it - oppressive in their self-proclaimed victimhood.

I'm sure the founding fathers of _ would be thoroughly confused by the passions of many _s posting here in the 21st century. Almost as confused as they'd be if they saw me having to employ underscores to avoid the wrath of their fellow _s.

I hope you temper your bonhomie with the realization that those few who are offended are brayingly loud and - yes, I'll say it - oppressive in their self-proclaimed victimhood.

I'm sure the founding fathers of _ would be thoroughly confused by the passions of many _s posting here in the 21st century. Almost as confused as they'd be if they saw me having to employ underscores to avoid the wrath of their fellow _s.

I for one am impressed by your use of "_" in order to make the term "American" less ambiguous. Few would contemplate such a simple and elegant solution. What a gift you have.

I for one am impressed by your use of "_" in order to make the term "American" less ambiguous. Few would contemplate such a simple and elegant solution. What a gift you have.
Why, thank you. Are you yourself _?

I see less as victimhood than as simple lack of manners. I have to admit I like your Doonsburyesque solution quite funny. I doff my hat to you sir (sir?)


I hope you temper your bonhomie with the realization that those few who are offended are brayingly loud and - yes, I'll say it - oppressive in their self-proclaimed victimhood.

I'm sure the founding fathers of _ would be thoroughly confused by the passions of many _s posting here in the 21st century. Almost as confused as they'd be if they saw me having to employ underscores to avoid the wrath of their fellow _s.

I wouldn't brag about that. :rolleyes:
Why, because how you were taught is automatically right? Most Latin Americans (who by far outnumber people living in the US) are taught that the Americas are a continent, and that for ease of discussion, North and South may be applied, but do not denote separate continents.

Why, thank you. Are you yourself _?No Im not a United State. I dont even have my own zip code yet.

It's not my fault they were taught incorrectly also. They may have had Canadian or Euian teachers. :p


Why, because how you were taught is automatically right? Most Latin Americans (who by far outnumber people living in the US) are taught that the Americas are a continent, and that for ease of discussion, North and South may be applied, but do not denote separate continents.

So, who's winning Dunce Spamfest VI or whichever iteration this is?

General and its undying shame, its great cold war between the Pissantists and the Crybabyists

Who will win the race to be more loathsome?

No Im not a United State. I dont even have my own zip code yet.
Ahh yes, quite right. My question would be better phrased, 'are you yourself _n?'

Thank you for helping me to maintain a degree of consistency in my new 21st-century lexicon.

So, who's winning Dunce Spamfest VI or whichever iteration this is?

General and its undying shame, its great cold war between the Pissantists and the Crybabyists

Who will win the race to be more loathsome?


Dobbsworld claimed victory in the thread earlier. Do keep up.

So, who's winning Dunce Spamfest VI or whichever iteration this is?

General and its undying shame, its great cold war between the Pissantists and the Crybabyists

Who will win the race to be more loathsome?

Tsk-tsk. If you'd bothered reading, you'd see we've come up with a constructive solution for all concerned. Then again, it is far easier to crebe than to create, is it not so, NG?

Ahh yes, quite right. My question would be better phrased, 'are you yourself _n?'

Im a Californicator

Thank you for helping me to maintain a degree of consistency in my new 21st-century lexicon.

I cant tell one Japanese car from another you'll have to point out your new lexicon

Tsk-tsk. If you'd bothered reading, you'd see we've come up with a constructive solution for all concerned. Then again, it is far easier to crebe than to create, is it not so, NG?


I will believe in your "constructive solution for all concerned" when there havent been any posts or topics whining about this subject for a month.

I wish I could "create" this thread a Peer of the Spam Forum.

I will believe in your "constructive solution for all concerned" when there havent been any posts or topics whining about this subject for a month.

I wish I could "create" this thread a Peer of the Spam Forum.

Are you now on the crybaby or the pissant end of your scale for posters in this thread?

Are you now on the crybaby or the pissant end of your scale for posters in this thread?

A plague on both houses.

Are you now on the crybaby or the pissant end of your scale for posters in this thread?
Not bad, not bad...

Not bad, not bad...
*chuckles*

Lives up to the name, eh wot?

I wouldn't brag about that. :rolleyes:

Oh! DO shut up. :rolleyes:

Your education is not inherently better than my education and claiming so (in three separate threads) is ridiculous. Unless you have something constructive to say to me, I would wish you would shut up.

It's not my fault they were taught incorrectly also. They may have had Canadian or Euian teachers.
And if we look at the sheer number of people who were taught one continent Vs. two continent, it would seem your teacher taught you incorrectly. So shut you gob and try to respect the views of other as you want us to do.

While I didn't find the term USians Offensive in and of it'self... unless when it's mispronounced... :p

What I do find offensive is the forced labeling that others on this forum are doing. Who has the right to choose which label to use? The person doing the labeling or the person being labeled.

in the first poll thread put up, I voted that I didn't really care. However, in posts after that, I've seen people asked to be referred to as Americans and instead of complying, others started to argue why citizens of the USA have to accept the term USians, note, HAVE to, not should. that's when it started getting offensive to me.

it's not the term that offends me, it the fact that when asked to use American, people did not comply with those wishes. That is when term stopped being an alternative and started to be offensive to me. when it's forced.

I will accept the term USian only if ALL of these conditions are met.

1) Each Government of North, Central and South America submits to the USA an official statement to ask that AMERICANS be used to indicate all people of both physical Continents and the area known as Central America.

2) Each Government of North, Central and South America change their name to include the word America in it.

3) Each Government of North, Central and South America pulls together to form a similar Body equivalent to the Europen Union.

4) Each Citizen of Each Government of North, Central and South America starts referring themselves as Americans in their media and everyday transaction.

or if this even happens.

The US Government issues a proclaimation stating that we are now "USians" and should not refer to ourselves as "AMERICAN".

Until each of these conditions are met and thus shown that every nation on the physical continent of North, South and the area known as Central America wants to be called American (Just American, not North/South/Central American but AMERICAN.) I will be an American and not a "USian".

I have a question, don't you think the term "USain" would not apply to everyone living in the American country? Not every part of America is a state. The country owns many small islands in the Pacific and D.C. is a distric, not a state. You can't cal every American a USain. Then again, you could cal people from D.C. Columbian, but that would piss off the people from The Republic of Columbia. So, to be fair, people from D.C. should be called DCers and people from The Republic of Columbia should be called RCers.

But, that's just stupid. Most countries has two or three words before its main name. There's a reason Dominicans are called Dominicans and not Dominican Republicans.

Whetherxhttp://i.cnn.net/cnn/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/20/sotu.speech/vert.bush.flag.ap.jpgx...or...xhttp://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j315/crashcow/NSG/US_.jpgxit's all the same.

Honestly.xxxxxxx

I don't find it offensive, but I find it disrespectful to use it to describe people who do.

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.
Is it offensive? Not to me, personally. That said, I still don't like it. I prefer being called American. I, in fact, try to make it my business to call those from other countries what they call themselves in their own countries. Emphasis on try: I definitely don't always succeed.

Is it offensive? Not to me, personally. That said, I still don't like it. I prefer being called American. I, in fact, try to make it my business to call those from other countries what they call themselves in their own countries. Emphasis on try: I definitely don't always succeed.
and when you are corrected, you do endevor to follow their preferences, right?

and when you are corrected, you do endevor to follow their preferences, right?
Indeed.

in the first poll thread put up, I voted that I didn't really care. However, in posts after that, I've seen people asked to be referred to as Americans and instead of complying, others started to argue why citizens of the USA have to accept the term USians, note, HAVE to, not should. that's when it started getting offensive to me.
I made this point several pages ago; it changed at least one person's mind. It's about civility, no more and no less. I made the analogy of how it's rude to call someone "Eddie" when he has said to please call him "Edward." Of course, that's not good enough for some who wish to right a perceived wrong, while the customary politeness is exactly the same. If someone from Mexico would prefer to be called a mexicano than a Mexican, that's their right. If someone from southern Britain would prefer to be called English instead of British, that's also their right. If someone prefers to be called Hong Kong-ese instead of Chinese (like a transfer student I knew) that's also their right.

As for the one/two continents thing that was brought up previously, in English-speaking countries the two American continent system is taught. I understand it's different in Latin America; that's why I particularly specified English. After all, the various Spanish-speaking countries have their own (Spanish) words for "someone who hails from or a subject relating to the United States of America" and as far as I know we're not going around busting people's chops for calling us estadosunidoses (apologies if I misspelled it; my Spanish is rusty).

After all, the various Spanish-speaking countries have their own (Spanish) words for "someone who hails from or a subject relating to the United States of America" and as far as I know we're not going around busting people's chops for calling us estadosunidoses (apologies if I misspelled it; my Spanish is rusty).

And Portuguese speaking as well. Which is the problem that I have being a Portuguese - English translator. I have repeatedly asked for suggestions on how to translate 'estadounidense' (the Portuguese variant of the Spanish) when it is used to contrast with Americanos - the peoples/cultures etc. of the Americas. Can you suggest a solution to this problem if any term other than American is offensive.

There is no established convention in the existing literature, and nothing has actually been written that I can find about this problem from the translator's perspective.

It seems like shortening estadounidense to "dense" would be appropriate as a way to avoid stepping on the sensitive toes of the people offended by 'usian' pissantism.

Spanish is language #2 in the US by a large margin anyways, so there is good, clear precedent for this.

It seems like shortening estadounidense to "dense" would be appropriate as a way to avoid stepping on the sensitive toes of the people offended by 'usian' pissantism.

Spanish is language #2 in the US by a large margin anyways, so there is good, clear precedent for this.
or how about if someone asks or reqests to be called American, the other just complies.

or how about if someone asks or reqests to be called American, the other just complies.

This is an epic pig-shit wrestle between pissantism and crybabyism.

This is like asking a communist to "comply" with your request to privatize everything, it is against the core principles of his ideology.

There is only one America, and it is governed by the United States.
America and Americans are also part of North America and are North Americans.
North America != America

There is also South America, filled with South Americans, and Central America, filled with Central Americans.
South America != America
Central America != America

Finally, there is Latin America, up to its ears in Latin Americans. Interestingly Latin America intersects with South America.
Latin America != America(though some parts of America could probably be considered part of Latin America ;) ).

Then, North and South America taken together is referred to as The Americas.
The Americas != America

Perhaps we should refer to denizens of North and South America, taken together, as The Americasans.

Or we could just generalize the dumbass USonian idea: UKians, EUians, PRCians, ROCians,...etc.

or how about if someone asks or reqests to be called American, the other just complies.
That would be too easy, plus it would require that the dementoids who insist on calling us some derogatory name they made up, to actually be nice for a change. Forcing them to comply with good manners would probably make their heads implode from all the cognitive dissonance.

This is an epic pig-shit wrestle between pissantism and crybabyism.

This is like asking a communist to "comply" with your request to privatize everything, it is against the core principles of his ideology.

There is an ideology based on this USonian crap? Good god, that's pathetic!

And Portuguese speaking as well. Which is the problem that I have being a Portuguese - English translator. I have repeatedly asked for suggestions on how to translate 'estadounidense' (the Portuguese variant of the Spanish) when it is used to contrast with Americanos - the peoples/cultures etc. of the Americas. Can you suggest a solution to this problem if any term other than American is offensive.

There is no established convention in the existing literature, and nothing has actually been written that I can find about this problem from the translator's perspective.

You translate it as American. That's what people call citizens of the U.S. in the English language and that is how you should translate it as. The purpose of a translator is to translate correctly, not to change the language he is translating to. Imagine the person you are translating the word for using it in the future. No one would understand what he would be saying.

There is an ideology based on this USonian crap? Good god, that's pathetic!


There are competeing ideologies at play here.

One the left, the ideologues of pissantism will do whatever they must to heckle and annoy, no matter how much they have to degrade themselves or drag themselves through the mud.

On the right, the crybabyist ideologues are resolved never to stop whining about this, never to stop complaining, never to stop dumpster diving their form-letter response, never to stop acting offended, no matter how much they besmirch their nation's character.

There are competeing ideologies at play here.

One the left, the ideologues of pissantism will do whatever they must to heckle and annoy, no matter how much they have to degrade themselves or drag themselves through the mud.

On the right, the crybabyist ideologues are resolved never to stop whining about this, never to stop complaining, never to stop dumpster diving their form-letter response, never to stop acting offended, no matter how much they besmirch their nation's perceived character.
How colourful. But look here - not a spot of mud on me. Just a bagful of cookies for my wonderful _n friends.

*opens bag*

Have some!

*eats one*

Youf ee, itvh hahb to mae onefelf unnsthtood wiffa moufull oh cookies. Mmm. Good.

There is only one America, and it is governed by the United States.
America and Americans are also part of North America and are North Americans.
North America != America

There is also South America, filled with South Americans, and Central America, filled with Central Americans.
South America != America
Central America != America

Finally, there is Latin America, up to its ears in Latin Americans. Interestingly Latin America intersects with South America.
Latin America != America(though some parts of America could probably be considered part of Latin America ;) ).

Then, North and South America taken together is referred to as The Americas.
The Americas != America

Perhaps we should refer to denizens of North and South America, taken together, as The Americasans.

Or we could just generalize the dumbass USonian idea: UKians, EUians, PRCians, ROCians,...etc.
No.

If you had ever paid attention in your elementary school Geography class, you'd have learned that there's a whole continent called America. North America, Central America and South America are sub-continents. All of these sub-continents are populated by Americans.

Following your line of thought, people from Arizona would NOT be US citizens, but Arizonian citizens. California wouldn't have US inhabitants but Californian ones.

In truth, they're both US and (insert state adjective here) citizens. For the same reason, for instance, people living in South American are South Americans, Americans and (insert country adjective here).

How colourful. But look here - not a spot of mud on me. Just a bagful of cookies for my wonderful _n friends.

*opens bag*

Have some!

*eats one*

Youf ee, itvh hahb to mae onefelf unnsthtood wiffa moufull oh cookies. Mmm. Good.


You may sit CHian-like on the sidelines, but all that is required for pissantism or crybabyism to prevail is that good men do nothing.

No.

If you had ever paid attention in your elementary school Geography class, you'd have learned that there's a whole continent called America. North America, Central America and South America are sub-continents. All of these sub-continents are populated by Americans.

No. If YOU ever went to your elementary school Geography class, you would have learned that there are 7 continents. North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Antarctica, Africa and Australia.

http://worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/contnent.htm

http://www.bearsystems.com/world/world.html

No.


Following your line of thought, people from Arizona would NOT be US citizens, but Arizonian citizens.


if i followed my countrymen's example I would start whining that you would even dare to possibly say "arizonian" instead of "arizonan," and to imply that we are in the War of Southern Treason's states-rights confederacy.

That aside, the comparison doesnt work because we fought a real war where a lot of people were killed to determine that people in arizona arent "Arizona citizens" but "US citizens" and that the issue isnt up for idlers on the internet to 'debate.'

No. If YOU ever went to your elementary school Geography class, you would have learned that there are 7 continents. North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Antarctica, Africa and Australia.

http://worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/contnent.htm

http://www.bearsystems.com/world/world.html
We were taught there were really only six, but that _s liked saying there were seven - something political, an old thing about building the Panama Canal, if I recall correctly. But apart from digging a trench at its' thinnest, North and South _ is merely an arbitrary political division.


(Oh, and is Gepetto keeping well?)

This is an epic pig-shit wrestle between pissantism and crybabyism.

This is like asking a communist to "comply" with your request to privatize everything, it is against the core principles of his ideology.
exscuse me, but if a black man does not want to be called a negro, who has the right?

you for calling him a Negro or him asking you not to call him a Negro.

your insistance on using a term or label that some people don't want used is just as wrong as using a derogatory term or Racist slur.

if you truly think that this is Pissantism vs Crybabyism, then you would have no problem with just saying ok, since it truely doesn't matter to you what term to use.

however, your stance shows that you are a Crybabyists. "Whaaa! why can't I call you whatever the F*&k I wanna call you! Whaaa!"

We were taught there were really only six, but that _s liked saying there were seven - something political, an old thing about building the Panama Canal, if I recall correctly. But apart from digging a trench at its' thinnest, North and South _ is merely an arbitrary political division.

By your rationale, then there should be only four continents then. Africa is connected to Asia with only a "trench at its thinnest", and Eurpoe and Asia share a HUGE land border.


And aparently there are as many continent models as their are mapmakers, yet Americans are not the only users of the 7 continent model, it being used in most of "Western Europe, China, and most native English-speaking countries":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continents

Your wooden puppet analogy is illogical, inappropriate, and beneath me DW. Hence, I shall take the higher road and ignore your infantile remarks.

... people living in South American are South Americans, Americans and (insert country adjective here).
Baldfaced allegations doth not factual data make.

exscuse me, but if a black man does not want to be called a negro, who has the right?

you for calling him a Negro or him asking you not to call him a Negro.

your insistance on using a term or label that some people don't want used is just as wrong as using a derogatory term or Racist slur.

if you truly think that this is Pissantism vs Crybabyism, then you would have no problem with just saying ok, since it truely doesn't matter to you what term to use.

however, your stance shows that you are a Crybabyists. "Whaaa! why can't I call you whatever the F*&k I wanna call you! Whaaa!"

I dont call anyone anything stupid like "usian" -- that's for the pissantist ideologues.

Its pretty outrageous to pretend that people being called "usian" on an internet forum by people out to annoy you is like using racist slurs against historically opressed minorities.

..."never to stop whining about this, never to stop complaining, never to stop dumpster diving their form-letter response, never to stop acting offended, no matter how much they besmirch their nation's character."

There is an ideology based on this USonian crap? Good god, that's pathetic!
Yup! It's called "Hatefulism," and is common in those who insist on being called what they want to be called, while refusing the same courtesy to others.

I dont call anyone anything stupid like "usian" -- that's for the pissantist ideologues.

Its pretty outrageous to pretend that people being called "usian" on an internet forum by people out to annoy you is like using racist slurs against historically opressed minorities.

..."never to stop whining about this, never to stop complaining, never to stop dumpster diving their form-letter response, never to stop acting offended, no matter how much they besmirch their nation's character."whether or not the Intent of "USian" is to Insult or not is not the point. if someone does not want that label of "USian" but instead wants to be called an "American". then who gives anyone else the right to slap another label on them. especially if it's an unasked for label.

By your rationale, then there should be only four continents then. Africa is connected to Asia with only a "trench at its thinnest", and Eurpoe and Asia share a HUGE land border.


And aparently there are as many continent models as their are mapmakers, yet Americans are not the only users of the 7 continent model, it being used in most of "Western Europe, China, and most native English-speaking countries":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continents


Which certainly wasn't lost on our elementary school teacher, who went on to say that Europe, Asia and Africa really should be considered one continuous land mass as well, and that there were even greater, longstanding politics behind those particular old, enduring divisions.

Your point is blunt, AllCoolNamesAreTaken, as I offered no 'rationale' for you to rail against. I was merely recalling an anecdote from my youth. Though I wouldn't expect you to try differentiating between the two.

(quote:AllCoolNamesAreTaken) Your wooden puppet analogy is illogical, inappropriate, and beneath me DW. Hence, I shall take the higher road and ignore your infantile remarks.

Whatever you say, Eut old man. Right back atcha.

exscuse me, but if a black man does not want to be called a negro, who has the right?

you for calling him a Negro or him asking you not to call him a Negro.

your insistance on using a term or label that some people don't want used is just as wrong as using a derogatory term or Racist slur.

I've really got to question how you could equate "Usian" with a racist slur like "negro" or "******". The racial slurs have centuries of slavery, mistreatment, and dehumanizing cultures behind them, while Usian is just something a few posters here have thought up. When you call someone by a racial slur, you're implying that they somehow are naturally inferior and deserve to be treated as less than human. I've never seen or heard Usian used in such a context (unless I've missed a flamewar or two). What did I miss?

...and tho I've guetthin obody wantha cookie then? Everybody still too cranky?

*waves bag, crumbs falling onto shirt*

We were taught there were really only six, but that _s liked saying there were seven - something political, an old thing about building the Panama Canal, if I recall correctly. But apart from digging a trench at its' thinnest, North and South _ is merely an arbitrary political division.


(Oh, and is Gepetto keeping well?)
exscuse me, but there is no Geographical division between Europe, Aisa and Africa. Africa actually extends beyond the Suez Canal. so what is the geographical separator for Africa and Asia?

There was no option for " its stupid " ...so I did not vote.

I've really got to question how you could equate "Usian" with a racist slur like "negro" or "******". The racial slurs have centuries of slavery, mistreatment, and dehumanizing cultures behind them, while Usian is just something a few posters here have thought up. When you call someone by a racial slur, you're implying that they somehow are naturally inferior and deserve to be treated as less than human. I've never seen or heard Usian used in such a context (unless I've missed a flamewar or two). What did I miss?
it's a label. like White, Black, Caucasian and anything else. what makes it a slur is if it's also used to label someone who does not want that label put on them.

whether or not the Intent of "USian" is to Insult or not is not the point. if someone does not want that label of "USian" but instead wants to be called an "American". then who gives anyone else the right to slap another label on them. especially if it's an unasked for label.


Most of the americans on the forum dont seem to mind at all, because they arent Cybabyist ideologues.

The best answer to "if someone does not want that label of "USian" but instead wants to be called an "American". then who gives anyone else the right to slap another label on them. "

Is "grow up and get a thicker skin"

I've really got to question how you could equate "Usian" with a racist slur like "negro" or "******". The racial slurs have centuries of slavery, mistreatment, and dehumanizing cultures behind them, while Usian is just something a few posters here have thought up. When you call someone by a racial slur, you're implying that they somehow are naturally inferior and deserve to be treated as less than human. I've never seen or heard Usian used in such a context (unless I've missed a flamewar or two). What did I miss?

Every anti US blog on the planet apparantly.

The term did not originate here.

I suggest looking up USian on google and reading the works of those who use the term USian

Whatever you say, Eut old man. Right back atcha.
:fluffle:

exscuse me, but there is no Geographical division between Europe, Aisa and Africa. Africa actually extends beyond the Suez Canal. so what is the geographical separator for Africa and Asia?
I'll refer you to post #322, and just who are you supposed to be, anyway? Ann Coulter? Back off your flame buttons and take the damn cookie of friendship, dammnit.

Shit-on-a-stick, this isn't about the thread at all, is it? You just want to freak out for the sake of freaking out.

Whatever. Have a cookie. Enjoy.

Now sod off.

Most of the americans on the forum dont seem to mind at all, because they arent Cybabyist ideologues.

The best answer to "if someone does not want that label of "USian" but instead wants to be called an "American". then who gives anyone else the right to slap another label on them. "

Is "grow up and get a thicker skin"actually, if you look at the poll, it's do you find the Term USian offensive. not do you want to be called USian or American.

big difference.

and again, if Edward does not want to be called Eddie, then who has the right to call Edward, "Eddie" You can use USian if you wish, but should someone ask to use American, instead, who are you or anyone else to say otherwise?

It's a fairly stupid thing that Europeans made up to make fun of us Yanks across the pond.

I prefer to be called American.

actually, if you look at the poll, it's do you find the Term USian offensive. not do you want to be called USian or American.

big difference.

and again, if Edward does not want to be called Eddie, then who has the right to call Edward, "Eddie" You can use USian if you wish, but should someone ask to use American, instead, who are you or anyone else to say otherwise?

Those dastardly bullies! calling poor edward eddie! Wahhh, poor little edward, poor little crying edward. Think of the american children getting their precious freedom taken away by the internet bullies!

To reiterate for the nth time, I dont subscribe to the pissantist ideology of typing "usian."

You just want to freak out for the sake of freaking out.



.


And the Crybabyist ideology is brought to light!

danke beaucoup, you aspiring CHian you

Most of the americans on the forum dont seem to mind at all, because they arent Cybabyist ideologues.

The best answer to "if someone does not want that label of "USian" but instead wants to be called an "American". then who gives anyone else the right to slap another label on them. "

Is "grow up and get a thicker skin"
So let me see if I've got this right:

By your "reasoning" I can call you a "Newbian," or "n00b" for short, and if you get irritated, I can tell you go "grow up and get a thicker skin," yes?

How about if I call African Americans "Nubians?" Or Chinese Americans "Chinks?" It must be ok, since I really don't "mean" anything by it, and they have no right to complain because it's what I want to call them, yes?

Why are we having this argument?

USian is a stupid name, not just because it sounds retarded, but it is not what we call ourselves. I don't see the argument beyond that.

So let me see if I've got this right:

By your "reasoning" I can call you a "Newbian," or "n00b" for short, and if you get irritated, I can tell you go "grow up and get a thicker skin," yes?

How about if I call African Americans "Nubians?" Or Chinese Americans "Chinks?" It must be ok, since I really don't "mean" anything by it, and they have no right to complain because it's what I want to call them, yes?


Since we arent talking about an ethnic or racial slur with anything like the pedigree or genuine import of "chink" that bit doesnt rate a response.

You are welcome to call me Newbian or "n00b" or anything else you can come up with. Because i'm a grown-up with a thick skin and not a crybaby, I wont raise a fuss. I shall lead by example.

I'll refer you to post #322, and just who are you supposed to be, anyway? Ann Coulter? Back off your flame buttons and take the damn cookie of friendship, dammnit.

Shit-on-a-stick, this isn't about the thread at all, is it? You just want to freak out for the sake of freaking out.

Whatever. Have a cookie. Enjoy.

Now sod off.
sorry, it was a serious question, and I didn't see #322 untill now.

and no, it's not "freak out for the sake of freaking out" but making a point. there is no continent called America. there is one called North America and One called South America. with a group of countries inbetween called Central America for the exact same reason you pointed out in post 322

btw Dobbsworld. this argument isn't to you but others who claim that America is a name of a continent and thus should not be used for a Nation.

Noob.

Why are we having this argument?

USian is a stupid name, not just because it sounds retarded, but it is not what we call ourselves. I don't see the argument beyond that.
the reason is that there are those who insist on useing USian... to the point of ignoring or lambasting anyone who asks to be called "American"

To reiterate for the nth time, I dont subscribe to the pissantist ideology of typing "usian."
I wonder if that fact will get picked up on, finally. See - this isn't really about being pissed off about some stupid nickname. What this is about, in actuality, is that certain people here really dislike certain others here. And it all boils down to a pissing contest - in this case, 'who can piss closer to the flame without getting burnt'. Knowingly, or much more likely, unknowingly, people file up on one side or another for reasons they really truly don't know why. But the intent, however obfuscated, compartmentalized, discounted, or even disavowed - remains.

I offer cookies and glad tidings. Let's call it a day already. This is getting older than some posters' memories.

Why are we having this argument?
We're having this agrument ... again ... because some of the dipshit dementoids on here think they have the right to use a derogatory term towards Americans without suffering any consequences, or even being called on it. They see themselves as somehow above all that.

Every anti US blog on the planet apparantly.

The term did not originate here.

I suggest looking up USian on google and reading the works of those who use the term USian

Well, after five pages of Google results on Usian, I still don't see how Usian=******. The terms Liberal and Conservative have been used as bigger insults than Usian, from what I saw.

What's making this an issue isn't the people using it when they make fun of the US or try some pathetic satirical list like "Five Step to Being a Good Usian", it's the people who are giving these bloggers more attention than they deserve. You shouldn't be trying to argue with that Usian is a blanket insult based these people anymore than you should try to argue calling someone a Liberal is flaming because Ann Coulter uses it as an insult. Try dealing with the usage of Usian outside of NS if that's what you object to, but I haven't seen anything here that deserves the status of flaming.

Since we arent talking about an ethnic or racial slur with anything like the pedigree or genuine import of "chink" that bit doesnt rate a response.

You are welcome to call me Newbian or "n00b" or anything else you can come up with. Because i'm a grown-up with a thick skin and not a crybaby, I wont raise a fuss. I shall lead by example.
Heh! Better turn around once in awhile to check if anyone is following.

We're having this agrument ... again ... because some of the dipshit dementoids on here think they have the right to use a derogatory term towards Americans without suffering any consequences, or even being called on it. They see themselves as somehow above all that.
Well I don't see how it's offensive or derogatory, but it's just pointless.

the reason is that there are those who insist on useing USian... to the point of ignoring or lambasting anyone who asks to be called "American"


And there are those who, being morally equivalent, can't just ignore it.

We're having this agrument ... again ... because some of the dipshit dementoids on here think they have the right to use a derogatory term towards Americans without suffering any consequences, or even being called on it. They see themselves as somehow above all that.
Like I said, getting really. old. man.

Like I said, getting really. old. man.
Yes, I am. And the older I get, the less tolerant I am of ideologues and other dubmasses. :D

Yes, I am. And the older I get, the less tolerant I am of ideologues and other dubmasses. :D
And apparently less clever as well, for I was not referring to you, dear old chap, but to the thread. Still feeling cranky, are we?

And apparently less clever as well, for I was not referring to you, dear old chap, but to the thread. Still feeling cranky, are we?
Fuck yeah! It's my constitutional right to be cranky as hell! :D

And there are those who, being morally equivalent, can't just ignore it.
so it comes back down to who has the right to dictate which label to use on a person.

the person using that label on another.
or the one whom the label is being used on.

you never answered that question.

And there are those who, being morally equivalent, can't just ignore it.

And those who dont have a dog in the fight but stir because...well we dont know why, they just stir.

I wonder if that fact will get picked up on, finally. See - this isn't really about being pissed off about some stupid nickname. What this is about, in actuality, is that certain people here really dislike certain others here. And it all boils down to a pissing contest - in this case, 'who can piss closer to the flame without getting burnt'. Knowingly, or much more likely, unknowingly, people file up on one side or another for reasons they really truly don't know why. But the intent, however obfuscated, compartmentalized, discounted, or even disavowed - remains.

I offer cookies and glad tidings. Let's call it a day already. This is getting older than some posters' memories.


More diplomatic than my "epic pig-shit wrestle," but thats the CHian in you, surely.

This is indeed more fundamental than "usian," it is the perfect storm of childish provocateurs vs people who love to complain. Pissantists v. Crybabyists.

And those who dont have a dog in the fight but stir because...well we dont know why, they just stir.


"...that good men do nothing"

Fuck yeah! It's my constitutional right to be cranky as hell! :D
Fuck. Yeah. Great.

There's cookies a few posts back. Enjoy.

Like I said, getting really. old. man.
guess someone thinks that this subject... like wine... gets better with age. :D

:rolleyes: then again, isn't the rehashing of old topics a staple of NS General... :D

Homosexual Rights, Religion, Politics...

so it comes back down to who has the right to dictate which label to use on a person.

the person using that label on another.
or the one whom the label is being used on.

you never answered that question.


A person has no legitimate business throwing a fit because someone on the internet called him a "usian," it isnt a slur with any historical or significant import.

The problem isnt one of "who has the right to label whom" but of "who lacks the character or maturity to simply ignore dimwitted internet provocateurs"

There's nothing in the constitution which gives you a right 'not to be offended,' and a whole lot giving the others the right to free speech.

Fuck. Yeah. Great.

There's cookies a few posts back. Enjoy.
LOL! Nahh. Cookies aren't in my diet anymore. I've been working out every day the last two weeks and am so sore I probably couldnt lift one without groaning. But thanks anyway. :)

There's cookies a few posts back. Enjoy.You know... I think of this subject like "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" no matter how many time's you see it... it's not the picture you watch... but the audience.

popcorn?
http://members.cox.net/tljgator/popc.gif
Edit: Damn... my smilie vault got moved to spam... and that affected all my Smilies collected. :(

A person has no legitimate business throwing a fit because someone on the internet called him a "usian," it isnt a slur with any historical or significant import.

The problem isnt one of "who has the right to label whom" but of "who lacks the character or maturity to simply ignore dimwitted internet provocateurs"

There's nothing in the constitution which gives you a right 'not to be offended,' and a whole lot giving the others the right to free speech.
still haven't answered the question.

who has the right to dictate which label to use on a person.

the person using that label on another.
or the one whom the label is being used on.

by your answer, there is no racial slur. but only those who who lacks the character or maturity to simply ignore dimwitted provocateurs.

good thing the law doesn't see it that way.

"...that good men do nothing"

As long as we are quoting Edmund Burke



I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards to avenge even a look that threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone.
Edmund Burke

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.


apparantly, your superior american brain cannot understand the grammar of English.

I am not offended by tht term. I thikn it's kinda weird to refer to a country by its chosen title, but I won't say I've never referred to a country as 'the people's republic'(in context of course), so I take no offense to it. What I do take offense to is people who give Americans our reputation of being asses. Personally, however, I think any nationalism is somewhat stupid. People are not American, or British, or Spanish, their actions are somewhat individual, albeit influenced by culture, unfortunately.

still haven't answered the question.

who has the right to dictate which label to use on a person.

the person using that label on another.
or the one whom the label is being used on.

by your answer, there is no racial slur. but only those who who lacks the character or maturity to simply ignore dimwitted provocateurs.

good thing the law doesn't see it that way.

I dont believe that a right exists to "dictate which label to use on a person" - no one has that right. We have other rights here, like free speech.

By my answer (the one I wrote and posted, using the words "historical and significant import" did you read it? also "slur against a historically opressed minority," did you read it?) a slur has to have a historical and significant import against a historically victimized group.


People on an internet forum calling you "usian" - a term which is not historically perjorative and carries no innate negative connotation - something they call you only because they are provocateurs and enjoy the response simply doesnt compare.

When those european bullies have trampled your people underfoot and in the cotton fields and railroad tracks and mines for a generation, under the slur of "usian," you can make these arguments honestly and earnestly.

Not before.

I dont believe that a right exists to "dictate which label to use on a person" - no one has that right. We have other rights here, like free speech.

By my answer (the one I wrote and posted, using the words "historical and significant import" did you read it? also "slur against a historically opressed minority," did you read it?) a slur has to have a historical and significant import against a historically victimized group.


People on an internet forum calling you "usian" - a term which is not historically perjorative and carries no innate negative connotation - something they call you only because they are provocateurs and enjoy the response simply doesnt compare.

When those european bullies have trampled your people underfoot and in the cotton fields and railroad tracks and mines for a generation, under the slur of "usian," you can make these arguments honestly and earnestly.

Not before.so only Historical slurs cannot be used by your opinion. so Faggot, which historically meant "a patch of moss" does not have any negative connotation in today's world. Gee, what determines "Historical and Significant Import" and who makes that determination.

Slurs, my friend is anything used and perceived to be used, as a negative. "Fundies", a relatively new term can be considered a slur when used or percieved to be used in the negative. it doesn't have to be old, or of "Historical or Significant import." it just has to be used or perceived to be used in a negative way.

To use any term on someone who does not wish to have that term used on them is a slur. to insist on using that term on someone who doesn't want that term to be used is infantie on the part of the user.

think that's wrong? go ahead and tell Sexist/Racial jokes in mixed company at your workplace (you are an adult right?) you'll learn very quickly to respect the comfort and feelings for others.

untill you learn otherwise, do not consider yourself "Grown up."

When those european bullies have trampled your people underfoot and in the cotton fields and railroad tracks and mines for a generation, under the slur of "usian," you can make these arguments honestly and earnestly.

Not before.
ROFLMFAO!!!!

[ Invites New Grenada to go perform an impossible act upon his own body. ] :D

so only Historical slurs cannot be used by your opinion. so Faggot, which historically meant "a patch of moss" does not have any negative connotation in today's world. Gee, what determines "Historical and Significant Import" and who makes that determination.

Slurs, my friend is anything used and perceived to be used, as a negative. "Fundies", a relatively new term can be considered a slur when used or percieved to be used in the negative. it doesn't have to be old, or of "Historical or Significant import." it just has to be used or perceived to be used in a negative way.

To use any term on someone who does not wish to have that term used on them is a slur. to insist on using that term on someone who doesn't want that term to be used is infantie on the part of the user.

think that's wrong? go ahead and tell Sexist/Racial jokes in mixed company at your workplace (you are an adult right?) you'll learn very quickly to respect the comfort and feelings for others.

untill you learn otherwise, do not consider yourself "Grown up."

Having the advantage of an education in linguistics, its easier to tell that words like "******" and "spic" and "chink" are different from words like "usian."

The long crime by the US against 'niggers' is what gives that word its historical and significant import.

Whatever the etymology of 'spic,' there is a great deal of very real suffering connected with the word and the racists who use it. It, like ******, is directed at a race (or ethnicity). Thats why these words are "racial slurs."

The thing that makes a racial slur unacceptable is that it is racist, and racism is unacceptable.

Calling a brit a "limey" or an american a "yank" is generally significantly less serious a thing than calling a black person a ******. These words arent racist - they are insults based on nationality. Compared to things like war and terrorism, harmless words pale to insignificance.

"Chink" compares to "murkan" beause the words are based on the way chinese and americans stereotypically talk. Even in this instance however, "chink" is an attack on a race (I cant think of any racists with the discipline to discern chinese "chinks" from other asians) while "murkan" isnt. Racism, again, is unacceptable.


Usian, a recently made up "word" used on the internet - where one can honestly have no reasonable expectation of respectful or civilized behavior - does not insult a race and does not imply anything perjorative about americans.

Usian is less of a "slur" than "poopiehead," which has a strong negative connotation. It isnt anything but a way for provocateurs on the internet to try to get under thin-skinned people's skin. The more it works toward that end, the more popular it will become.

ROFLMFAO!!!!

[ Invites New Grenada to go perform an impossible act upon his own body. ] :D
Oh dear, I appear to have been impaled on Eutrusca's rapier-sharp wit.


No, wait a moment - it was just a blunted thumbtack.

Go figure.

Having the advantage of an education in linguistics, its easier to tell that words like "******" and "spic" and "chink" are different from words like "usian."

The long crime by the US against 'niggers' is what gives that word its historical and significant import.

Whatever the etymology of 'spic,' there is a great deal of very real suffering connected with the word and the racists who use it. It, like ******, is directed at a race (or ethnicity). Thats why these words are "racial slurs."

The thing that makes a racial slur unacceptable is that it is racist, and racism is unacceptable.

Calling a brit a "limey" or an american a "yank" is generally significantly less serious a thing than calling a black person a ******. These words arent racist - they are insults based on nationality. Compared to things like war and terrorism, harmless words pale to insignificance.

"Chink" compares to "murkan" beause the words are based on the way chinese and americans stereotypically talk. Even in this instance however, "chink" is an attack on a race (I cant think of any racists with the discipline to discern chinese "chinks" from other asians) while "murkan" isnt. Racism, again, is unacceptable.


Usian, a recently made up "word" used on the internet - where one can honestly have no reasonable expectation of respectful or civilized behavior - does not insult a race and does not imply anything perjorative about americans.

Usian is less of a "slur" than "poopiehead," which has a strong negative connotation. It isnt anything but a way for provocateurs on the internet to try to get under thin-skinned people's skin. The more it works toward that end, the more popular it will become.you didn't read what I wrote did you for you didn't counter anything I said.

Calling a Brit a "Limey", Especially if said Brit has expressed his preference in not being called such, is still just as wrong as calling a black man a "******" or a Chinese person a "Chink"

it's an unwanted label. one that was used without 1) their desire to have it used on them. 2) their permission to use it on them.

Slurs, my friend is anything used and perceived to be used, as a negative.


il n'est pas vrai, cherie

a slur is

"1 a : an insulting or disparaging remark or innuendo "

(m-w.com)

usian is not insulting or disparaging it is in fact a literal translation from the standard spanish estadounidense.

usian doesnt even have a diminutive morpheme like "eddie."

you didn't read what I wrote did you for you didn't counter anything I said.

Calling a Brit a "Limey", Especially if said Brit has expressed his preference in not being called such, is still just as wrong as calling a black man a "******" or a Chinese person a "Chink"

it's an unwanted label. one that was used without 1) their desire to have it used on them. 2) their permission to use it on them.


and "unwanted label" is not the same as a racist slur. apples to oranges.

[snipped]
howabout you Dobbsworld. would you use a term/label on someone who has asked you not to use said term/label?

I'm talking about any form of label... from Liberal/Conservative to Nazi.

you didn't read what I wrote did you for you didn't counter anything I said.

Calling a Brit a "Limey", Especially if said Brit has expressed his preference in not being called such, is still just as wrong as calling a black man a "******" or a Chinese person a "Chink"

it's an unwanted label. one that was used without 1) their desire to have it used on them. 2) their permission to use it on them.


This comparison is also false on its face.

Calling a brit a UKian or an african (not a country...) a "DRian" (democratic republic of the congo?) would be the same as calling an american a "USian."

I hope you can see how the equivalent "DRian" doesnt carry the import of "******" or "kike."

il n'est pas vrai, cherie

a slur is

"1 a : an insulting or disparaging remark or innuendo "

(m-w.com)

usian is not insulting or disparaging it is in fact a literal translation from the standard spanish estadounidense.

usian doesnt even have a diminutive morpheme like "eddie."it's usage and perception that determines Insulting or Disparaging remark. by calling someone a label that they don't want to be called is using that label in an Insulting and Disparaging way. thus a slur.

howabout you Dobbsworld. would you use a term/label on someone who has asked you not to use said term/label?

I'm talking about any form of label... from Liberal/Conservative to Nazi.


You seem to have confused rude and offensive.

It is certainly rude to insist on being a pissant and "use a term/label on someone who asked you not to use said term/label"

The term in question though isnt an offensive one, it has no perjorative connotation and is not disparaging or insulting.

It is like calling "edward" "jonathan," it might be annoying and a little rude, but "jonathan" is not disparaging or insulting.

This comparison is also false on its face.

Calling a brit a UKian or an african (not a country...) a "DRian" (democratic republic of the congo?) would be the same as calling an american a "USian."

I hope you can see how the equivalent "DRian" doesnt carry the import of "******" or "kike."
and I never referred to anyone as a UKian or a DRian. I've endevored to correct myself when I label someone and they take execption to it. When I called someone an American and they pointed out to me that they were not an American but a Canadian, I did NOT insist that they were American because they were on the American Continent, but apologized and called them Canadian.

it's usage and perception that determines Insulting or Disparaging remark. by calling someone a label that they don't want to be called is using that label in an Insulting and Disparaging way. thus a slur.


What is insulting or disparaging about "usian" ?

What part of being a US citizen does it disparage? What is its insulting connotation?

"annoying" does not equal "insulting"

You seem to have confused rude and offensive.

It is certainly rude to insist on being a pissant and "use a term/label on someone who asked you not to use said term/label"

The term in question though isnt an offensive one, it has no perjorative connotation and is not disparaging or insulting.

It is like calling "edward" "jonathan," it might be annoying and a little rude, but "jonathan" is not disparaging or insulting.isn't that was American/USian/Canadian/Liberal/Neo-Con/ Fundie are? Labels.

a Label doesn't have to be insulting. It can be used in an insulting manner, but of and by itself, It's not insulting.

What is insulting or disparaging about "usian" ?

What part of being a US citizen does it disparage? What is its insulting connotation?

"annoying" does not equal "insulting"
you are insisting it's usage on those that don't want it used on them.

that's what makes it insulting and rude.

and I never referred to anyone as a UKian or a DRian. I've endevored to correct myself when I label someone and they take execption to it. When I called someone an American and they pointed out to me that they were not an American but a Canadian, I did NOT insist that they were American because they were on the American Continent, but apologized and called them Canadian.


That's called politness, and it is admirable. But being impolite is not the same as being insulting and disparaging, unless insulting and disparaging words are used.

The point of my post was that comparing "usian" to "******" or "kike" doesnt work, because "usian" is not the equivalent of either of those, it is the equivalent of "DRian" or "UKian."

you are insisting it's usage on those that don't want it used on them.

that's what makes it insulting and rude.


you might be insulted that someone is rude to you, in which case your problem (like my problem) is with the rude people, not with their annoyance-du-jour.

That's called politness, and it is admirable. But being impolite is not the same as being insulting and disparaging, unless insulting and disparaging words are used.I can be rude, without using Insulting and Disparaging words and still insult people and offend them.

The point of my post was that comparing "usian" to "******" or "kike" doesnt work, because "usian" is not the equivalent of either of those, it is the equivalent of "DRian" or "UKian."Using any label on someone that does not want said label to be used is still an insult to them. whether or not YOU, as the user of those labels, don't see anything wrong with using such labels, is not the point and has never been the point.

you might be insulted that someone is rude to you, in which case your problem (like my problem) is with the rude people, not with their annoyance-du-jour.however, if they ask, or tell you that they take exeption to your usage of said label. who are you to then argue that there is nothing wrong with said label and how you use it?

I can be rude, without using Insulting and Disparaging words and still insult people and offend them.


Exactly intent can make all the difference in meaning

So why are you arguing over a non loaded word when it is not being used with offensive meaning.

however, if they ask, or tell you that they take exeption to your usage of said label. who are you to then argue that there is nothing wrong with said label and how you use it?


Clearly (by comparison to real slurs and real insults, by the results of the forum poll, &c) 'usian' is not on its face an offensive word.

If you take exception to being called JN -which clearly isnt offensive on its face-, dont respond to people who call you JN, ignore it, act like a grown-up. That's called acting mature. The alternative - to moan and whine and throw a fit - is called acting like a crybaby.

If you think its rude to call me NG -which clearly isnt offensive on its face- (say, because I hypothetically object to it), don't call me NG, act like a grown-up. That's called acting mature. The alternative - to keep doing it - is called acting like a pissant.

The same choice is presented to both sides in this disgrace of a debate and both sides consistantly make the wrong choice. This is what makes them morally equivalent.

Exactly intent can make all the difference in meaning

So why are you arguing over a non loaded word when it is not being used with offensive meaning.
simple. some people have expressed umbrage at the word being used. instead of apologizing or even using the preferred label in replying to them, they get an argument on why they HAVE to accept that label.

Thus it becomes an unwanted label used on people who don't want it. with such usage, it becomes Offensive and used in an insulting manner (to them).

simple. some people have expressed umbrage at the word being used. instead of apologizing or even using the preferred label in replying to them, they get an argument on why they HAVE to accept that label.



And then they grin ear-to-ear that they've caught another shmuck in their trap.

And the shmucks are just lining up!

simple. some people have expressed umbrage at the word being used. instead of apologizing or even using the preferred label in replying to them, they get an argument on why they HAVE to accept that label.

Thus it becomes an unwanted label used on people who don't want it. with such usage, it becomes Offensive and used in an insulting manner (to them).
So? I mean no one has the right to not be offended

I really cant find fault with someone using a short to the point term to accurately describe the nationality a person is from.

But even if I did find fault with it I would probably just ignore it as long as it was not used in a pointedly and purposefully impolite manner.

I guess I dislike people bitching about this as much as I dislike PC and for much of the same reasons.

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.

I'm offended by it.

But only because it is such a corny term.

If you can't understand why it's corny, than you're corny.

And the shmucks are just lining up!
Go schmucks!

Clearly (by comparison to real slurs and real insults, by the results of the forum poll, &c) 'usian' is not offean offensive word.As long as there are those who are taking it as an offensive word, you cannot say that it's not an insult for it is (to them.)

If you take exception to being called JN -which clearly isnt offensive on its face-, dont respond to people who call you JN, ignore it, act like a grown-up. That's called acting mature. The alternative - to moan and whine and throw a fit is called acting like a crybaby.now if you call me JN and I ask that you use either Ju or Junii, and you refuse to do so, you are not acting Mature but acting like a child who can't get their way. reguardless on your intent behind useing JN.

If you think its rude to call me NG -which clearly isnt offensive on its face- (say, because I hypothetically object to it), don't call me NG, act like a grown-up. That's called acting mature. The alternative - to keep doing it - is called acting like a pissant.and I won't. but if I call you NewG. and you ask me not to call you NewG but "New Granada" or "NG" I will comply because to do otherwise would be insulting to you and your preferences.

The same choice is presented to both sides in this disgrace of a debate and both sides consistantly make the wrong choice. This is what makes them morally equivalent.but when those who are made uncomfortable by such labeling ask to have such labeling stop. why not stop?

Unless the person using that label is now going to be rude and thus uses the word in an "insulting or disparaging" manner.

And then they grin ear-to-ear that they've caught another shmuck in their trap.

And the shmucks are just lining up!
and thus you admit then that the word/label USian is used in a insulting or disparaging manner... thus it becomes a Slur.

thus it becomes a Slur.


A corny slur.

A slur that slurs the very person who uses it, and makes them a super-herb.

So? I mean no one has the right to not be offended

I really cant find fault with someone using a short to the point term to accurately describe the nationality a person is from.

But even if I did find fault with it I would probably just ignore it as long as it was not used in a pointedly and purposefully impolite manner.

I guess I dislike people bitching about this as much as I dislike PC and for much of the same reasons.no one has the right to be Offended but everyone has a right to be comfortable with their surroundings. that is why there are harrasement laws.

if you offend me, I will let you know. what you do with that knowledge is up to you. I've offended some on this board and I've apologised when they let me know that umbrage was taken. that's the civil and polite thing to do.

some people take umbrage when texts are posted in other colors. they ask the person to stop. whether or not they do so is up to them.

Others Nitpick When Each Word Of A Post Is Captialized. While Not Offensive To Me, Others Find It Offensive, And Have Asked Such Person To Stop. Whether Or Not They Do So Is Up To Them. They Have No Protected Right To Continue To Do That Which Others Find Offensive.

No one has the right NOT to be offended, but also No one has the RIGHT to be purposely Offensive. especially on this, a private, Site.

and thus you admit then that the word/label USian is used in a insulting or disparaging manner... thus it becomes a Slur.
By some ... but a lot of words can become "slurs" with a change in intent

Instead of trying to get rid of words we should be just trying to promote civilness

A corny slur.

A slur that slurs the very person who uses it, and makes them a super-herb.
one Herb I won't be cooking with. :D

Exactly intent can make all the difference in meaning

So why are you arguing over a non loaded word when it is not being used with offensive meaning.

Because it IS a loaded word. Having been invented by anti-Americans and the PC police as an insult.

I see the term 'USian', I hear something like this:
"how dare you call yourself Americans, you arrogant yanks, there are other countries in those continents! We shall call you something else to protect all the other REAL Non-U.S. Citizen Americans from your Jew backed global imperialist policies! Nevermind that no one ever complained about it until we decided it was un-PC of you"

Now, YOU may not mean all that, but that's what I hear when you type it. Just like if a child who knew no better called an African man a '******' because he heard the word somewhere. The child didn't know it was bad, but that doesn't stop the African man from getting offended.

And I am not Eut's puppet DW- we disagree on everything EXCEPT being proud Americans

.

No one has the right NOT to be offended, but also No one has the RIGHT to be purposely Offensive. especially on this, a private, Site.

Are you advocating the banning of the word usian?

By some ... but a lot of words can become "slurs" with a change in intent

Instead of trying to get rid of words we should be just trying to promote civilness
and that's my point.

As I said, I have no problem with "USian". My problem is only when it's used when others don't want it used and have said so.

The Civil thing to do is to respect the wishes of others when possible. I'm not saying don't use the word, but perhaps not use it when responding to those to take umbrage at such words.

no one has the right to be Offended but everyone has a right to be comfortable with their surroundings. that is why there are harrasement laws.

if you offend me, I will let you know. what you do with that knowledge is up to you. I've offended some on this board and I've apologised when they let me know that umbrage was taken. that's the civil and polite thing to do.

some people take umbrage when texts are posted in other colors. they ask the person to stop. whether or not they do so is up to them.

Others Nitpick When Each Word Of A Post Is Captialized. While Not Offensive To Me, Others Find It Offensive, And Have Asked Such Person To Stop. Whether Or Not They Do So Is Up To Them. They Have No Protected Right To Continue To Do That Which Others Find Offensive.

No one has the right NOT to be offended, but also No one has the RIGHT to be purposely Offensive. especially on this, a private, Site.You are correct that this site is private therefore can set its own rules as to what is acceptable speech… and as far as I have heard they have, and that the term usean is an acceptable term.

one Herb I won't be cooking with. :D

Are you familar with the word herb? :)

It's like my favorite thing to call someone.

It's not used as often anymore, having reached its' height of popularity in the late 90s.

I'm not even sure if our international friends here know of it.

and that's my point.

As I said, I have no problem with "USian". My problem is only when it's used when others don't want it used and have said so.

The Civil thing to do is to respect the wishes of others when possible. I'm not saying don't use the word, but perhaps not use it when responding to those to take umbrage at such words.
But at some point civilness means reasonableness I do not find it a reasonable request to stop using an accurate term in proper non-disparaging manor. Same reason I do not find it particularly reasonable to have everyone change the term used for the handicapped every few years.

I am a citizen of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NOT part of Asia.

Because it IS a loaded word. Having been invented by anti-Americans and the PC police as an insult.




You ARE the PC police.

and thus you admit then that the word/label USian is used in a insulting or disparaging manner... thus it becomes a Slur.


It doesnt have an insulting or disparaging connotation even if you don't prefer to "be called that."

I assume you are a PC-policeman of the hardest core, since it is your basic argument that 'using a term against the wishes of the person addressed with the term' is 'a slur.'

What if I want to be called Your Supreme Masterful Glorious Holy Highness from now on?

I am a citizen of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NOT part of Asia.
How does that have anything to do with anything?

You are correct that this site is private therefore can set its own rules as to what is acceptable speech… and as far as I have heard they have, and that the term usean is an acceptable term.
actually, it hasn't been forbidden. Not the same thing.

I am a citizen of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NOT part of Asia.
Heres a ball. go play

You ARE the PC police.

Noo...the people who invented the slur "USian" are the PC police. You are the ones who think it is wrong for us 'arrogant yanks' to steal a term you think others have a claim to. I am an American, have always been an American, and no amount of anti-American PC propoganda like 'that term is inaccurate, you could offend Mexicans who want to use that name- you have to be a USian instead' will ever make me be anything but an American.

Noo...the people who invented the slur "USian" are the PC police. You are the ones who think it is wrong for us 'arrogant yanks' to steal a term you think others have a claim to. I am an American, have always been an American, and no amount of anti-American PC propoganda like 'that term is inaccurate, you could offend Mexicans who want to use that name- you have to be a USian instead' will ever make me be anything but an American.


And you think it isnt PC to call you anything but what you want to be called, just like anyone else who whines about PC.

Noo...the people who invented the slur "USian" are the PC police. You are the ones who think it is wrong for us 'arrogant yanks' to steal a term you think others have a claim to. I am an American, have always been an American, and no amount of anti-American PC propoganda like 'that term is inaccurate, you could offend Mexicans who want to use that name- you have to be a USian instead' will ever make me be anything but an American.
Don’t know throughout this thread it is the anti-usian people preaching not using this specific word because it may offend some …

So, yesterday, someone called me a NZian. OMGF!!! I WAS SO OFFENDED!! DFGKJ#$MDG!!@!$LMDG//..

actually, it hasn't been forbidden. Not the same thing.
They have not strictly forbidden the use of the word popsicle either … what’s your point as long as it has not been forbidden it is acceptable like any other word they have not forbidden.

Don’t know throughout this thread it is the anti-usian people preaching not using this specific word because it may offend some …


Yup, these mean evil un-pc europeans keep hurting and insulting the poor helpless american babies by calling them "united statesians."

Yup, these mean evil un-pc europeans keep hurting and insulting the poor helpless american babies by calling them "united statesians."
Dont be insulting some of us Usians (in fact apparently so far a majority of this board) are of the opinion that it does not really matter

Dont rune civil conversation by being trolish

Schmucks ftw!


*edit: Actually, I spent most of the night with a Bond flick. I just thought I'd check in and see if anyone'd smartened up yet. I bet you'd all be willing to resolve this if I had a voice like Adam West.

"Come on now, everybody... let's hold hands."

But at some point civilness means reasonableness I do not find it a reasonable request to stop using an accurate term in proper non-disparaging manor. Same reason I do not find it particularly reasonable to have everyone change the term used for the handicapped every few years.
you do realize that at one point in time, ****** was a term not connotated with negativity, but an indicator of skin color (black.) However because of it's usage, it became a Derogatory term.

People have asked then started threads demanding to stop using "USians". Instead of trying to work something out, you know, being reasonable, it became a shouting match over who had the right to call whom what. This poll thread being yet another of such tools.

The Reasonable and Civil thing to do was what was originally decided upon. Those that wish to, will be referred to as "Americans", and those that don't care, or wish otherwise, "USians."

actually, it hasn't been forbidden. Not the same thing.

It doesn't even matter.

When you get all worked up and vocal about it, it gives the word power.

Look at the people to who use it.

Corny, international socialists, that worship at the altar of Fass and and say gay things like "You go girl".

The worst part about it is, that this is as clever as they get.

It's lubrication for there mutual congratulatory circle jerk.

Yup, these mean evil un-pc europeans keep hurting and insulting the poor helpless american babies by calling them "united statesians."

No, it's "those Europeans have the gall to call us arrogant? They demand the right to take away our name and rename us some jackass term, and get all pissy and refuse to call us by our proper name when we call them on it. They are bowing down to the PC gods in the name of some imaginary guy in Mexico who supposedly wants to be called an American."

Dont be insulting some of us Usians (in fact apparently so far a majority of this board) are of the opinion that it does not really matter

Dont rune civil conversation by being trolish


This is the clear result of the crybabyist ideologues dragging our country's character through the mud and besmirching its reputation with their pointless whining.

Sort of like how the minority of militant muslims besmirches the reputation of the rest, and the minority of loudmouthed christian maniacs drags the faith through the mud, this noisy minority does nothing but harm its own interests.

They have not strictly forbidden the use of the word popsicle either … what’s your point as long as it has not been forbidden it is acceptable like any other word they have not forbidden.true, but acceptable and Not Forbidden are two different things.

they (the owner and mods) don't rule on what is acceptable, but rule on what isn't acceptabe on this site. the difference is slight, but there is a difference.

Wow, the posts are flyin'. Even puppets are getting left behind in the dust. It's a -

Terminology Twister!

It doesn't even matter.

When you get all worked up and vocal about it, it gives the word power.

Look at the people to who use it.

Corny, international socialists, that worship at the altar of Fass and and say gay things like "You go girl".

The worst part about it is, that this is as clever as they get.

It's lubrication for there mutual congratulatory circle jerk.yes, but allowing a percieved wrong to continue will also indicate acceptance of such actions as being acceptable.

No, it's "those Europeans have the gall to call us arrogant? They demand the right to take away our name and rename us some jackass term, and get all pissy and refuse to call us by our proper name when we call them on it. They are bowing down to the PC gods in the name of some imaginary guy in Mexico who supposedly wants to be called an American."


those americans have the gall to call the europeans arrogant? they demand the right to forbid them to call them "united statesians" and get all pissy and demand they get their way. they are bowing to the PC gods in the name of people being able to force other people to use specific, approved terminology

blah blah blah blah blah

Wow, the posts are flyin'. Even puppets are getting left behind in the dust. It's a -

Terminology Twister!
*dial spins*

Right Foot.....


Green!

true, but acceptable and Not Forbidden are two different things.

they (the owner and mods) don't rule on what is acceptable, but rule on what isn't acceptabe on this site. the difference is slight, but there is a difference.
Agreed and if it made a difference I would be sorry at the slight language mistake, but in this case it makes no practical differences to the points I was making.

true, but acceptable and Not Forbidden are two different things.

they (the owner and mods) don't rule on what is acceptable, but rule on what isn't acceptabe on this site. the difference is slight, but there is a difference.


is there a parallel difference in law?

"everything not forbidden by law is legal"

wold you say that this statement is wrong, and that there is some difference between "legal" and "not forbidden by law"

Is "acceptable" different from "not unacceptable" ?

those americans have the gall to call the europeans arrogant? they demand the right to forbid them to call them "united statesians" and get all pissy and demand they get their way. they are bowing to the PC gods in the name of people being able to force other people to use specific, approved terminology

blah blah blah blah blah
I have to agree with you here

Agreed and if it made a difference I would be sorry at the slight language mistake, but in this case it makes no practical differences to the points I was making.the saying "The Squeaky wheel get's the oil" may be true, but what some people don't realize is that The Squeaky Wheel also get's removed.

The original settlement (to my understanding) was that USians would be used in conjunction with American. American being used for those who don't want USians. however, instead of seeing that civility. I see people vehemently aruging that USians be accepted by everyone NOW. not what I perceived as the 'agreement'.

We need to suppress the term American because its offensive to other countries. In fact, the new term USian should be enforced by the government because people saying "American" is NOT a right. The Constitution DOES NOT allow people to be hateful to other people.

Where my school teachers and the ACLU both agree is that the government MUST CERTAINLY should not enforce any prayer. That would affect my ability to have sex, and that's a human right. As I learned in my civil liberties class, the Constitution mandates that what I do with my own body to be my own choice.

yes, but allowing a percieved wrong to continue will also indicate acceptance of such actions as being acceptable.

Nope.

At some point it becomes played out.

Well IMO it already is.

It's a cumbersome term, that needs to be rexplained almost everytime it is used.

It smacks of arrogance, and, I know, I keep saying this, but it's mad corny.

the saying "The Squeaky wheel get's the oil" may be true, but what some people don't realize is that The Squeaky Wheel also get's removed.

The original settlement (to my understanding) was that USians would be used in conjunction with American. American being used for those who don't want USians. however, instead of seeing that civility. I see people vehemently aruging that USians be accepted by everyone NOW. not what I perceived as the 'agreement'.


If the europeans want europe to be called "Majestic Grand Europe - Lord Among All Continents, Home of the Greatest of all Nations" I assume you will be the first to start doing so?

After all, calling them something other than what they demand you call them is, in your words, a slur.

Nope.

At some point it becomes played out.

Well IMO it already is.

It's a cumbersome term, that needs to be rexplained almost everytime it is used.

It smacks of arrogance, and, I know, I keep saying this, but it's mad corny.and unfortnately, more of these types of threads will keep popping up. but if eveyone doesn't mind that...

If the europeans want europe to be called "Majestic Grand Europe - Lord Among All Continents, Home of the Greatest of all Nations" I assume you will be the first to start doing so?

After all, calling them something other than what they demand you call them is, in your words, a slur.
if they let me know that. sure.

saying it with a straight face might be difficult at first, but I will endevor to comply.

Now if I want to be called an "American" will you comply?

the saying "The Squeaky wheel get's the oil" may be true, but what some people don't realize is that The Squeaky Wheel also get's removed.

The original settlement (to my understanding) was that USians would be used in conjunction with American. American being used for those who don't want USians. however, instead of seeing that civility. I see people vehemently aruging that USians be accepted by everyone NOW. not what I perceived as the 'agreement'.
I have not seen this drive for forced acceptance, personally I have seen way more bitching about it being “offensive” then I have people trying to force everyone to like the term

I have not seen this drive for forced acceptance, personally I have seen way more bitching about it being “offensive” then I have people trying to force everyone to like the term
go read those threads and look at the responses for those bitching about it being Offensive.

few civil remarks but most with the tone of "get over it and accept it USian."

Now if I want to be called an "American" will you comply?
I have a problem with the word 'comply'. 'Comply' implies Authority, and there I must draw a line.

go read those threads and look at the responses for those bitching about it being Offensive.

few civil remarks but most with the tone of "get over it and accept it USian."


To be honest, i havent noticed more than a handful "pro-usian" posts by actual posters since i started in this thread. Nothing along the lines of "accept it usian."

It has been nothing but convoluted, unreasonable nonsense whining about how terrible of an insult and a slur it is to be called a "united statesian."

If you ask me, the usian mob is just sitting back hucking it up, basking in the glow of their victory.

Their only aim, after all, is to provoke a response - its why they are called provocateurs

Their only aim, after all, is to provoke a response - its why they are called provocateurs
A la Anne Coulter. ;)

and unfortnately, more of these types of threads will keep popping up. but if eveyone doesn't mind that...

What are you going to do?

Some people are herbs.

I feel for the children, they're going to grow up, graduate college, go for a job interview and blow it because they'll use the word usian.

The interviewer will just stand there and give them this blank stare.

Then they'll go home, watch the Daily Show and clap along like a good little monkey.

I can hear them now;

"you go girl"

I have a problem with the word 'comply'. 'Comply' implies Authority, and there I must draw a line.
fair enough.. If I ask to be referred to as an American. will you do so?

I have a problem with the word 'comply'. 'Comply' implies Authority, and there I must draw a line.
http://evaluezonehosting.com/images/two-line-coupler-diagram.gif

See? I even drew a second line. And uh... a couple of sockets, too.

So there.

*raises glass*

Cheers, NG!

To be honest, i havent noticed more than a handful "pro-usian" posts by actual posters since i started in this thread. Nothing along the lines of "accept it usian."

It has been nothing but convoluted, unreasonable nonsense whining about how terrible of an insult and a slur it is to be called a "united statesian."

If you ask me, the usian mob is just sitting back hucking it up, basking in the glow of their victory.

Their only aim, after all, is to provoke a response - its why they are called provocateurs
that's this thread. there are others you know that have such arguments in them. and not just ones solely meant for this...

subject.

so if the USian mob is hucking it up, then let's stick it to em. let's agree to use American and ignore anything else.

I have a problem with the word 'comply'. 'Comply' implies Authority, and there I must draw a line. http://evaluezonehosting.com/images/two-line-coupler-diagram.gif

See? I even drew a second line. And uh... a couple of sockets, too.

So there.

*raises glass*

Cheers, NG!:confused: :eek: ;) :p

http://evaluezonehosting.com/images/two-line-coupler-diagram.gif

See? I even drew a second line. And uh... a couple of sockets, too.

So there.

*raises glass*

Cheers, NG!


Precise people, those CHians, complicated watches and things... beyond me.

that's this thread. there are others you know that have such arguments in them. and not just ones solely meant for this...

subject.

so if the USian mob is hucking it up, then let's stick it to em. let's agree to use American and ignore anything else.


How about you do what any decent, mature, civilized person would do and sigh, roll your eyes, and move on.

How about you do what any decent, mature, civilized person would do and sigh, roll your eyes, and move on.
I have. you don't see me replying in those other threads. ;)

again, back to my question that you didn't answer tho.

I have. you don't see me replying in those other threads. ;)

again, back to my question that you didn't answer tho.


I decided not to reply to anything that implies I use or have ever used in earnest a word like 'usian.'

I decided not to reply to anything that implies I use or have ever used in earnest a word like 'usian.'
good. then there is nothing to further discuss here.

Ahhh. Now, doesn't that feel better?

*cues sitar music in background*

having a couple drinks tonight are ya Dobbs? You Canadite lush.

Ahhh. Now, doesn't that feel better?

*cues sitar music in background*
not really...

who's turn to spin the dial for that Twister game?

I'm getting a cramp here.... ;)

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.

For Pete's sake, my little sister has better grammar than you, and you chew out on an English guy, with flawless grammar mind you, and have the arrogance to say you have a superior American brain? Either you truly are a rebel and an anarchist, or simply have an inferior American brain (not to say that Americans are unintelligent, as I a number of good American friends).

A word of advice to anyone in any nation who will listen... Don't be proud and cocky of the past, because you had nothing to do with it.

having a couple drinks tonight are ya Dobbs? You Canadite lush.
Oh noes! I'm been found out by a canny _ liberal! Aieee!

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.)

Let's be radical and try US citizen?
Or USA citizen?

I'm getting a cramp here.... ;)
Twister (http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B00005N5PQ.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg) always makes me think of Lux Interior (http://www.researchpubs.com/images/ism_lux.jpg), which in turn makes me think of the Cramps (http://www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/images/cramps.gif).

Let's be radical and try US citizen?
Or USA citizen?

I would if it were referring only to people, but it isn't. It is referring to attitudes and cultural structures etc. The estadounidense way of life. I have opted to use US, but if USian is offensive, then surely this is as well.

I would if it were referring only to people, but it isn't. It is referring to attitudes and cultural structures etc. The estadounidense way of life. I have opted to use US, but if USian is offensive, then surely this is as well.
How about American.

And if it deals with something that also may encompases Mexico and Canada, then use North American (since there is a South America and Central America that have cultures and ideologies that differ from North American Countries.)

Oh noes! I'm been found out by a canny _ liberal! Aieee!


that was a hint for you to offer me some :p

that was a hint for you to offer me some :p
Ah well no doubt it's due to your canny _n ways you saw through my disguise all along. Now - tall or small?

Or is it the pipeweed you're after, you naughty _n, you?

Well, I prefer American. In honesty, you can call me what you will. Just don't call me late for dinner!