The Word Snigger

[Rellik San]

I can understand why someone would think it's racist(since it's not a common spelling in large parts of the world), but once you talk over it, they should understand.

What was the context, though? Did you use it in a sentence, or did you just type 'snigger', which would easily be confused for misspelled '******'?

Because someone assumed I was trying to get the "N" word past them, so after hastily defending it, giving links to dictionary and even the host of the stream tell his mods not to be such jack asses and that it's fine and a real word, I wasn't banned for it.

Wait, isn't that totally reasonable then? They made a mistake, were corrected, and you were not banned.

I disagree in Britain and across most of Europe that learns English as a second language, Snigger is the culturally prevalent term.

As for the context, I partly quoted a sentence from someone that could be construed as smutty and followed it up with *snigger*.

And whilst yes, the results were favourable this time, it's the very fact that I would get accused of even attempting such a thing that I took exception with, especially for what a large part of the world IS the defacto terminology. The very fact I had to defend myself hastily, is also quite upsetting, if the mod would have simply said "I'm unfamiliar with that what does it mean?" I'd have been fine with it, and we'd have both learned something about the cultural impact of certain words.

 

[Lieju]

I can understand why someone would think it's racist(since it's not a common spelling in large parts of the world), but once you talk over it, they should understand.

What was the context, though? Did you use it in a sentence, or did you just type 'snigger', which would easily be confused for misspelled '******'?

Because someone assumed I was trying to get the "N" word past them, so after hastily defending it, giving links to dictionary and even the host of the stream tell his mods not to be such jack asses and that it's fine and a real word, I wasn't banned for it.

Wait, isn't that totally reasonable then? They made a mistake, were corrected, and you were not banned.

I disagree in Britain and across most of Europe that learns English as a second language, Snigger is the culturally prevalent term.

As for the context, I partly quoted a sentence from someone that could be construed as smutty and followed it up with *snigger*.

And whilst yes, the results were favourable this time, it's the very fact that I would get accused of even attempting such a thing that I took exception with, especially for what a large part of the world IS the defacto terminology. The very fact I had to defend myself hastily, is also quite upsetting, if the mod would have simply said "I'm unfamiliar with that what does it mean?" I'd have been fine with it, and we'd have both learned something about the cultural impact of certain words.

I'm Finnish, and always learned it as 'snicker', you know, like the candy bar.

 

[Lilani]

So what are your thoughts on the word snigger and other similar words, accidental offence caused by seemingly innocuous words and the general feel of some people that certain words be edited out of cultural vernacular because of possible accidental offence caused by people unfamiliar with the word?

In the US anyway, the more common word to be used there is "snicker," or to simply pronounce the word "snigger" as "snicker." And I have a feeling that is the precise reason--to avoid being misheard and saying a very rude word.

As for how I feel about the editing of words to avoid such mix-ups, I feel like language is is simply a means to an end. It's a way to facilitate the communication of ideas. So, if some word is severely hindering that communication, then the only logical thing to do is change it. This is also why I have no problem with things like the Oxford adding words like twerking to their dictionary--regardless of how crass the word is, it's a part of our language, and communicates something no other singular word so precisely defines.

 

[Thaluikhain]

You know what's ironic? The same people probably wouldn't bat an eye at somebody saying they got "gypped", even though that IS a reference to exactly what you think it is.

Though, apparently that is the most hated ethnic group in the UK, so not surprising.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

This is quite interesting as only a few days ago it suddenly hit me that, as i was about to use the word 'snigger' online (to imply that i tried to hold back a laugh for shame of finding the subject matter darkly hilairious), someone somewhere may believe i have racist intentions. So i refrained due to feeling a little emotionally sensitive at the time. According to Rellik San's recent friction, perhaps it was best.
It bothers me cos there really isnt a replacement for snigger...not for that particular context anyhow. Damn my inherent white guilt complex.

Americans and your word mutations! Still im learning differences even now!

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

Nope it's here in the Oxford English Dictionary, aka The Classy Dictionary.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/snigger

No racist etymology behind it as far as I can tell, it's just the culturally prevalent version of "snicker" where I'm from, (north west, UK).

You know, having looked on the English Synonyms link

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english-thesaurus/snigger

it occurred to me that all those are specific types of laugh and much like the guy in the post above my 1st, I would actually imagine a difference between a "snicker" and a "snigger". Both are a sort of suppressed laugh but I would think of snicker as more open mouthed and breathy, the sound being made in the mouth (like Muttley) but a snigger as closed mouth with the sound being made by the sinuses, more of a snort.

 

[Steve the Pocket]

You know what's ironic? The same people probably wouldn't bat an eye at somebody saying they got "gypped", even though that IS a reference to exactly what you think it is.

Though, apparently that is the most hated ethnic group in the UK, so not surprising.

I meant "the same people" who do cringe when they hear the word "snigger" (Americans, mainly), not the ones who don't.

On a related note: I once encountered someone on the Internet who went by the handle "kaykaykit". Turns out they were Canadian. I could never decide whether to tell them or not.

 

[Grimh]

Never heard of it said that way before but I don't really think you should have to censor yourself.
It's just a word that closely resembles another word but is in no way related to it in any other way so.
My mind didn't even go there, it did in fact go nowhwere as I completely blanked on any possible meaning it could have.

I will say however that while I think you should be free to write the word like that because really c'mon, you're just gonna have to deal with the possibility of people misunderstanding you and that they won't even do you the courtesy of looking it up (which is easier than ever) to verify that you're not using a racist slur. It sucks but that's just the way it is.

On a somewhat related note, here in Sweden there was a controversy a few years back regarding the name of two ice creams/popsicles. One was called Nogger, I think you can guess what people's problem with that was, the other was called 88.
Guess why people were offended by that.

 

[Megalodon]

Because someone assumed I was trying to get the "N" word past them,

Huh, oddly enough the confusion between "snigger" and the N-word was the basis for a joke on Have I Got News For You (British topical comedy/satire show) the other week.

Quoted you two to highlight something I genuinely don't get, whenever a story like this comes up. Assuming everyone/ the majority involved in the conversation is vaguely adult, why say 'N-word', '"N" word' or your euphemism of choice? Just say ******. Anyone with any knowledge of the English language can immediately tell you're not using the word as a racial insult, so there's no danger of causing offence. Anyone who takes offence to you using such language in the obvious context can only be a professional victim looking to create controversy. All that avoiding the word does is perpetuate the forbidden nature of words like ****** and **** (the other word I most often see substituted to 'the C word' or 'c**t', just like ******). All this attitude gets us is ridiculous incidents like this:

Word only have the power we give them, it seems to me American (and therefore Western) culture, has given ****** far more power than it's due.

Please don't take this as a direct criticism and/or attack on the posts I quoted, I intend it as an illustration of a behaviour I simply don't understand.

On topic: OP is dead right, censoring snigger is ridiculous. I didn't actually know people substituted snicker for it before this thread. Snicker has always been the chocolate bar to me.

 

[Eamar]

Quoted you two to highlight something I genuinely don't get, whenever a story like this comes up. Assuming everyone/ the majority involved in the conversation is vaguely adult, why say 'N-word', '"N" word' or your euphemism of choice? Just say ******. Anyone with any knowledge of the English language can immediately tell you're not using the word as a racial insult, so there's no danger of causing offence. Anyone who takes offence to you using such language in the obvious context can only be a professional victim looking to create controversy. All that avoiding the word does is perpetuate the forbidden nature of words like ****** and **** (the other word I most often see substituted to 'the C word' or 'c**t', just like ******). All this attitude gets us is ridiculous incidents like this:

Word only have the power we give them, it seems to me American (and therefore Western) culture, has given ****** far more power than it's due.

Please don't take this as a direct criticism and/or attack on the posts I quoted, I intend it as an illustration of a behaviour I simply don't understand.

I've already answered this question once in this thread, but I'll do it again and expand on the answer: I sometimes do this for certain words because I just don't like using them. They're horrible, ugly words that just feel wrong passing my lips (or fingertips). If for whatever reason it's really necessary I'll use them, but in this sort of conversation it's perfectly obvious what I mean, so I don't see the problem.

 

[wulf3n]

If for whatever reason it's really necessary I'll use them, but in this sort of conversation it's perfectly obvious what I mean, so I don't see the problem.

You don't see a problem with a legitimate and worthwhile conversation being stifled because the person was terrified of using a word?

 

[DANEgerous]

Hey, OP. Maybe you should eat one of these. I think you must get a little British when you're hungry. XD

Thanks there pal, I feel like a Hot Blooded American now, COLOR! HONOR! SNICKER!

Wait... you put put a U in honor? So that is where I got it from mu English prof took of points until I told him it was a direct quote. I always thought it was better as honour.

 

[Eamar]

If for whatever reason it's really necessary I'll use them, but in this sort of conversation it's perfectly obvious what I mean, so I don't see the problem.

You don't see a problem with a legitimate and worthwhile conversation being stifled because the person was terrified of using a word?

Wait, what? How on earth am I stifling anything? I'm not against discussion and I don't criticise those who do use the full word in such discussions, I just choose not to use it myself so long as I can still be understood. Again: what's the problem?

 

[wulf3n]

Wait, what? How on earth am I stifling anything? I'm not against discussion and I don't criticise those who do use the full word in such discussions

Why is it I can't say anything on the Internet without someone taking it as an accusation?

I didn't say you are currently or are wanting to stifle discussion. Just that being terrified of a word has no positive aspect.

I just choose not to use it myself so long as I can still be understood. Again: what's the problem?

Well I wasn't necessarily talking about you not wanting to use a word, but rather everyone in general, with the example being the video linked by Megalodon.

The problem is that it hinders discussions, being so timid about a word, like the interviewer was. It would have been obvious to everyone if he said ****** that he wasn't using it to insult anyone, and yet he still couldn't bring himself to say it.

It's not the word that people should be afraid of but the meaning behind it.

 

[shootthebandit]

Wait, what? How on earth am I stifling anything? I'm not against discussion and I don't criticise those who do use the full word in such discussions

Why is it I can't say anything on the Internet without someone taking it as an accusation?

I didn't say you are currently or are wanting to stifle discussion. Just that being terrified of a word has no positive aspect.

I just choose not to use it myself so long as I can still be understood. Again: what's the problem?

Well I wasn't necessarily talking about you not wanting to use a word, but rather everyone in general, with the example being the video linked by Megalodon.

The problem is that it hinders discussions, being so timid about a word, like the interviewer was. It would have been obvious to everyone if he said ****** that he wasn't using it to insult anyone, and yet he still couldn't bring himself to say it.

It's not the word that people should be afraid of but the meaning behind it.

While I agree with you I dont think people should be forced into saying something they feel uncomfortable with. Whilst I understand Samuel L Jacksons reasoning I think he was very rude forcing him into an uncomfortable situation

While filming django leonardo dicaprio had to stop filming because his lines where too intense. Granted the context in the movie is more than simply using a word as a direct quote or to explain its meaning but I can still see why people wouldnt be comfortable and they shouldnt be forced into saying anything

 

[gargantual]

If for whatever reason it's really necessary I'll use them, but in this sort of conversation it's perfectly obvious what I mean, so I don't see the problem.

You don't see a problem with a legitimate and worthwhile conversation being stifled because the person was terrified of using a word?

Wait, what? How on earth am I stifling anything? I'm not against discussion and I don't criticise those who do use the full word in such discussions, I just choose not to use it myself so long as I can still be understood. Again: what's the problem?

Well there you go. See how when you say 'I' it brings about more understanding? No one would question your personal boundaries of dignified self reflection and speech.

But making objective claims about the nature of words in contextual discussion that are outside our own can be a whole different ballgame. So to me context is still everything. I can't go in like Joe Pesci in Goodfellas on somebody. Granted that was a 'test' but still some people have genuine triggers that are easy to misunderstand. Its better to understand that "okay this person isn't seeing their communication through the same lens as I am", but at least we've established that theres no harm intended. Without that clarification. Theres no preset line established


There are thresholds of reprimanding based on the environment, role model position, and context. Some people won't even be forum mods when they do the job well, because they decide they need that ability to speak a certain way around people they know. So it gets too widespread to make a universal judgement regarding offense. People have varying degrees of what they consider dignified, and how much room they want to make for folk speech. If you hold everyone up with puritan levels of speech and decorum across all forums in society, then obeyers only follow by the letter, not in spirit, and many other non-offensive terms become offensive in context. Censorship is far more of a bomb on language and social discourse than the effect that popular humor, porn and slacker comedy films have had on the sexual-connotations of language, because when the latter happens, people just end up laughing, the person backs up re-establish the context and keeps explaining...mostly.

But with flat out word-fear, unfortunately humanity will DEFINITELY find other more hurtful ways to get their 'offense' and 'othering' business on.

They just use passive-aggressive insults and duplicitous, excluding behavior, and you'll never feel like you can dilute the poison in some conversations and move things to a level of open understanding or be a part of certain group, only thing is you don't have a word to build a case upon.

 

[wulf3n]

While I agree with you I dont think people should be forced into saying something they feel uncomfortable with. Whilst I understand Samuel L Jacksons reasoning I think he was very rude forcing him into an uncomfortable situation

While filming django leonardo dicaprio had to stop filming because his lines where too intense. Granted the context in the movie is more than simply using a word as a direct quote or to explain its meaning but I can still see why people wouldnt be comfortable and they shouldnt be forced into saying anything

Sure people shouldn't be forced into doing something their uncomfortable doing, but the whole idea of the people finding the word uncomfortable to say is basically my point.

It's not the word people should be uncomfortable with, but the meaning. Being afraid of the word is meaningless.

 

[Edith The Hutt]

To be fair though this is true of all words, not just ones that could potentially cause offence, I can't count the number of times I was working in a bar and had to explain what "decant" meant:

"Would you like me to decant it for you?"
"....What does that mean?"
"It means to pour it into..."
"OH! Why didn't you just say that?"
"Because there's a word for it and that word is 'decant'."

That kind of exchange happened more than I'd care to admit.

Decant doesn't mean pour, it means a separation of substances by removal of a liquid layer. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decantation] So when you pour the fat off gravy, you're decanting it, you're also decanting wine by removing it from the sediment which usually accompanies bottled wine; this is a different process from a simple transfer of the wine from bottle to receptacle (ideally a decanter, but you can get away with a glass if you're careful). With wine you're hoping to catch the sediment at the shoulder of the bottle (or base of the decanter) when you pour it, thus separating the wine (the liquid layer you want to drink) from the sediment (the solid layer you really don't)

Sorry, I'm a pedant and a wine lover, I couldn't let that ambiguity stand.

 

[shootthebandit]

While I agree with you I dont think people should be forced into saying something they feel uncomfortable with. Whilst I understand Samuel L Jacksons reasoning I think he was very rude forcing him into an uncomfortable situation

While filming django leonardo dicaprio had to stop filming because his lines where too intense. Granted the context in the movie is more than simply using a word as a direct quote or to explain its meaning but I can still see why people wouldnt be comfortable and they shouldnt be forced into saying anything

Sure people shouldn't be forced into doing something their uncomfortable doing, but the whole idea of the people finding the word uncomfortable to say is basically my point.

It's not the word people should be uncomfortable with, but the meaning. Being afraid of the word is meaningless.

I think I covered this in a previous comment and I agree entirely. The word itself is simply 6 letters written down. These 6 letters without any meaning are just 6 random letters. Its when you add context it becomes offensive

The word ****** actually comes from "negro" (spanish for black) and "niger" (latin for black). The actual literal meaning of the word is not offensive either. However when you have 200+ years of slavery and a further 100(ish) years of segregation with people being simply called "******" then yes it is offensive

I can appreciate when this is used in context or not however the horrible context of this word is engrained in the minds of people and I can see why they feel uncomfortable saying it even if there is no context or weight behind it

I could go on to argue that the word "boy" is offensive (in a certain context). Im pretty sure we all know that "boy" is a perfectly innocent word however black people where often referred to as "boy" which in this context makes it a racial slur. Are we afraid to use the word "boy"? No because context is vital to the meaning of words

 

[Eamar]

If for whatever reason it's really necessary I'll use them, but in this sort of conversation it's perfectly obvious what I mean, so I don't see the problem.

You don't see a problem with a legitimate and worthwhile conversation being stifled because the person was terrified of using a word?

Wait, what? How on earth am I stifling anything? I'm not against discussion and I don't criticise those who do use the full word in such discussions, I just choose not to use it myself so long as I can still be understood. Again: what's the problem?

Well there you go. See how when you say 'I' it brings about more understanding?

I thought it was pretty obvious I was only referring to my own personal usage (in response to being asked about my personal usage, none less). Said "I" plenty of times in the original post, talked about my opinions on the words and how using them made me feel and the efforts I go to in order to ensure that I am understood. Sorry for labouring the point there, but I really fail to see how I could have been any more clear.

[small]Also, I don't know if you meant it that way at all since tone is a ***** to convey on forums, but the quoted turns of phrase came across as really smug and patronising. Not an accusation, just an observation from the receiving end.[/small]