2006-09-01 03:32:44 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Other - Arts & Humanities
I'm not saying it shouldn't keep its original name, but I am intereseted in the responses?
2006-09-01 03:40:28 · update #1
Sorry that should have been 'interested!'
2006-09-01 03:41:25 · update #2
Keep it as it was.
I don't think "opressed minority of African decent hereby referred to in a derogatory manner" rolls of the tongue...
the dog was a BLACK lab...must WAR history now be re-written to be all cutesy & P.C?
hmmm, maybe they should call it "whassup-me"
2006-09-01 03:50:02 · answer #1 · answered by creviazuk 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that it should still be called N***r as it actually was.
I fully understand that some people may claim that it is racist, but it is a question of CONTEXT - It was just the name of the dog, there were no racist intent or sub agenda.
I know that in other films (Blazing Saddles) the same word was used directly at a black person as an insult, this was dubbed over - which I fully understand and support.
(I think that the term N****r used in its original context just meant black person. It was only later that the meaning changed to an insult)
2006-09-01 12:13:08 · answer #2 · answered by David 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is historically correct to call the dog n i g g e r so that is accurate and should be used. Do not allow the politically correct to change history-they have already insisted that photographs of Isambard Kingdom Brunel smoking a cigar should have the cigar air brushed out or digitally removed from school books.
2006-09-01 14:24:30 · answer #3 · answered by Torchwood 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
N IGGER... it was the dogs name it always was and always will be.. why should they rename it? what are we on some politcally correct surge here.. ok how about chalky and make it a white labrador instead would that help? or we could make it a brown dog and call it mocha or cappucino ... am I being silly now? and I had to edit it so it appears as two words as nanny yahoo, doesn't lke the n word either.. what is this world coming too?
2006-09-01 10:34:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hi. Guy Gibsons' dog should still be called '******' since it is historically correct,although nowadays politically incorrect. I mean, if a term for gays nowadays was a 'Horatio', then in a film biography of Nelsons' life,what do we address him as- Arthur Nelson? Brad Nelson? The worlds' gone mad.......
Love and peace,
2006-09-01 10:41:44 · answer #5 · answered by misterviv 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the original name - it is a historical fact that the dog was called
N igger
If we let the PC people get their own way, they will make it a movie about a squadron of culturally mixed men and women, dropping supplies on oppressed minorities. ('The Jam Bussers' :-)
2006-09-01 10:35:55 · answer #6 · answered by Vinni and beer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No more reason to change its name than to change Gibson's 1st name to the more politically correct 'Person'
2006-09-01 11:15:52 · answer #7 · answered by andigee2006 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Make it white with a bandana and a limp and call it Wigger???
Give it a shovel and call it Digger???
Make it a great dane and call it Bigger???
Paint a number on it's side and call it Figure???
Stick a dildo on it's head and call it Frigger???
Make it orange with black stripes and call it Tigger???
Just a few suggestions.
2006-09-01 10:44:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
dave
ive like dave for a dogs name and not enough people use it
2006-09-01 10:42:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
****** , as in the original
2006-09-01 10:35:13 · answer #10 · answered by richard1.eves@btinternet.com 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋