Bannies v subis

Post new topic   Reply to topic

Page 5 of 15 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10 ... 15  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by tac on Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:57 am

subis are funny

tac


Number of posts: 18719
Reputation: 4
Registration date: 2007-08-31
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by Ash on Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:58 am

Laughing

Ash


Number of posts: 1988
Reputation: -4
Registration date: 2007-09-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by tac on Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:59 am

sherlock

tac


Number of posts: 18719
Reputation: 4
Registration date: 2007-08-31
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by horace on Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:11 am

personally i prefer using banindia, stanlanders, bangles and 'land of the CBER'..

most oz or seas posters here have the bangles as their 2nd favourite team

most SEAs enjoy the use the use of nicknames - must be our Indigenous, convict, irish, chinese, jewish, italian, greek, turkish, slavonic, vietnamese, east african, sub-continental,chilean and multicultural heritage

horace


Number of posts: 12053
Age: 100
Reputation: 8
Registration date: 2007-09-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by DJ_Smerk on Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:30 am

*Reads list*
*Sees Horrie missed out a certain nationality*
My reaction....

Spoiler:
suicide

_________________
holy-sheep

DJ_Smerk


Number of posts: 13268
Age: 22
Reputation: 6
Registration date: 2007-09-08
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by horace on Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:28 am

smerkles - where did the convicts come from?

horace


Number of posts: 12053
Age: 100
Reputation: 8
Registration date: 2007-09-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by skully on Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:48 am

Have Ange and Ash got the rags on?

skully


Number of posts: 36623
Age: 98
Reputation: 10
Registration date: 2007-08-31
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by tac on Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:38 am

Why, skull? You up for a bit of "red ink"?

tac


Number of posts: 18719
Reputation: 4
Registration date: 2007-08-31
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by skully on Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:48 am

Eek!! You sound like a bikie I played cricket with. He'd earned his "red wings". Shocked

skully


Number of posts: 36623
Age: 98
Reputation: 10
Registration date: 2007-08-31
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by eowyn on Thu Mar 18, 2010 8:58 am

It's pointless trying to have a sensible discussion with you on this subject isn't it, skully? As far as you are concerned you are right and anyone else's view counts for nothing.

Please do carry on making yourself look like a moron at your leisure. I give up.

eowyn


Number of posts: 9163
Reputation: 13
Registration date: 2007-09-04
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by skully on Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:00 am

Phurt, lighten up Ange. You've become crabby in your old age. Most unlike you to resort to attempted insults. shrug

I have my view, you have yours. That's forumming.

Since when did reasoning with an FBer ever work?

If it did, Farky wouldn't be such an idiot.

skully


Number of posts: 36623
Age: 98
Reputation: 10
Registration date: 2007-08-31
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by Merlin on Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:16 am

I seem to recall in my rowdy confrontational C4 days, that my continued use of the word "Cons" when referring to the Aussies on here invoked some serious reactionary and prickled abuse - especially from the likes of the bender and zimmerkins amongst others.

It's the goose and gander situation IMO ... in other words .... what's good for ...!

BanIndia is a jocular euphemism only because of the BCCI ... whereas Pak, Lankan and the Bangle are "Johnners" type abbreviations which are spoken or printed with no malice aforethought.

No point getting het up about these things FFS ... it's banter, pure and simple ...(except in taipan's case, of course !)

Merlin


Number of posts: 11429
Reputation: 3
Registration date: 2007-09-05
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by Zat on Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:49 am

eowyn wrote:People from the Subcontinent have, on the most part, said quite politely that they don't liike the term. Why continue to offend people in that way? Telling them to accept it because you say it's not offensive?


Some sooks have said they don't like it, some have said they don't give a shit.

Plenty of pommy forumers continue to use the term 'convict' to refer to Aussies, and I find that term offensive. Do I carry on like a pork chop about it? No, because I'm not a prize farquing sook. Funnily enough, these poms are the same ones who seem to object to the other shortened sobriquet.

Plenty of the abovementioned should just get rooted. They know who they are.

_________________
W 4 1lb 6 2 1lb | 4 2 2lb 2 2 4 | 1 6 6 4 6
Who cares if it was only t20, it was still a hell of a hitting spree.

Zat


Number of posts: 22080
Age: 100
Reputation: 28
Registration date: 2007-09-04
Country:

View user profile http://www.amishrakefight.org/gfy

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by embee on Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:00 am

My ancestors came from Ireland , Denmark , Germany and England to settle in Australia way back in the 19th century. The English ancestor happened to be from Norfolk and was sent out here for poaching (it was probably shooting the gamekeeper more than the poaching ) . The rest of them came chasing gold or following their fathers who were chasing gold.

So I really cant be farqued if anyone wants to call me a convict because thats part of my heritage (well 1/32th of it anyway) ...

Id rather be called a convict than "English" ...though its equal parts of each


PS ..I use the term subi a lot less than I used to because someone politely asked me not to...

embee


Number of posts: 11124
Reputation: 9
Registration date: 2007-09-03
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Bannies v subis

Post by skully on Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:06 am

Merlin wrote:I seem to recall in my rowdy confrontational C4 days, that my continued use of the word "Cons" when referring to the Aussies on here invoked some serious reactionary and prickled abuse - especially from the likes of the bender and zimmerkins amongst others.

It's the goose and gander situation IMO ... in other words .... what's good for ...!

BanIndia is a jocular euphemism only because of the BCCI ... whereas Pak, Lankan and the Bangle are "Johnners" type abbreviations which are spoken or printed with no malice aforethought.

No point getting het up about these things FFS ... it's banter, pure and simple ...(except in taipan's case, of course !)

Some Aussies reacted adversely to "Cons"?? PMSL. They must have been weak qunts.

I find it a term of endearment when lobbed at me from an English comrade. Cool

skully


Number of posts: 36623
Age: 98
Reputation: 10
Registration date: 2007-08-31
Country:

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 15 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10 ... 15  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


Permissions of this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum