There is no second meaning though. Niggling is not a play on the N word. It never has been. It has a very clear and definitive meaning that was appropriate for what the journalist was trying to convey.
There is no second meaning though. Niggling is not a play on the N word. It never has been. It has a very clear and definitive meaning that was appropriate for what the journalist was trying to convey.To me using the phrase niggling is no different to me saying "chink in the armour" about an East Asian person. The phrase by itself is not racist nor does it have racist origin but when you think of the context of which it was used it is inappropriate, rude, racist. This phrase would never have been used by the likes of the Telegraph / Times despite being right leaning papers like the Mail as they would know that their readers would understand the hidden meaning of the words. The daily mail readers are either too stupid to see the hidden meaning or knew the meaning and just didn't care as they believe the diatribe the Mail give them about meghan.
If you believe no one in the DM press room who read the article before going to press knew about the second meaning (journalists who have studied at oxbridge and attended elite public schools studying the english language and the eytomology of words from Latin, french etc), you are either naive, disingenuous or both.
There are so many things the press could say about meghan without the passive aggressive references about her heritage. By doing this, it negates any genuine critiques they have made about her.
Do you mean like his half-sister has done?Hahahaha.
Thomas has already had a couple of pages revealing text messages in the Mail today. I'm sure Gammon News will have him or the sister on sometime soon. Let's not pretend he hasn't got a voice
That's fairly obvious - the relationships become problematic once they have served their purpose - easier to ditch than mend.you have to wonder why she ditches all of her family, friends and spouse's family. Are they the problem or is she?
Pray do tell, what was the ‘journalist’ (this is the DM, let’s be real here) trying to convey that the words bother, irk, or worry couldn’t express?There is no second meaning though. Niggling is not a play on the N word. It never has been. It has a very clear and definitive meaning that was appropriate for what the journalist was trying to convey.
Love thisPray do tell, what was the ‘journalist’ (this is the DM, let’s be real here) trying to convey that the words bother, irk, or worry couldn’t express?
It not inherently a play on anything, no. It needs to be looked at as a potential dogwhistle though, to be honest.There is no second meaning though. Niggling is not a play on the N word. It never has been. It has a very clear and definitive meaning that was appropriate for what the journalist was trying to convey.
Those words are similar but not the same. And the phrase used was 'niggling worry'. I'm not being obtuse, I'm aware of political/racist dog whistles. I just disagree on this point. Let's move on as it's getting dull.Pray do tell, what was the ‘journalist’ (this is the DM, let’s be real here) trying to convey that the words bother, irk, or worry couldn’t express?
What do you think they did mean then? Why would they have a niggling worry about it?Those words are similar but not the same. And the phrase used was 'niggling worry'. I'm not being obtuse, I'm aware of political/racist dog whistles. I just disagree on this point. Let's move on as it's getting dull.
I don't really know what else I can say that I haven't said in previous posts. People feel differently to me, that's fine. It's allowed. Like I said, let's move past it.What do you think they did mean then? Why would they have a niggling worry about it?
Personally I’m only asking as I’ve not seen anybody (including you) say what they think the paper actually did mean if they don’t think it was deliberately chosen in a dog whistle scenario. All I’ve seen is a small number of people saying it’s not meant in a racist way ie what it isn’t, not what it is. I’ve seen the headline and genuinely can see no other reason to use that phrase so would be really happy to be enlightened before moving on.I don't really know what else I can say that I haven't said in previous posts. People feel differently to me, that's fine. It's allowed. Like I said, let's move past it.
The piece was about whether the engagement photos weren't all a bit too 'Hollywood'. The author had a 'niggling worry' about them. Not a major worry, not a rage, not a fury, not an irritation, not a dread, not a hate but a slight concern that she couldn't quite bat away. Niggling.Personally I’m only asking as I’ve not seen anybody (including you) say what they think the paper actually did mean if they don’t think it was deliberately chosen in a dog whistle scenario. All I’ve seen is a small number of people saying it’s not meant in a racist way ie what it isn’t, not what it is. I’ve seen the headline and genuinely can see no other reason to use that phrase so would be really happy to be enlightened before moving on.
Why would you have a niggling worry about the engagement photos though? They are someone else's engagement photos. How were they ' Hollywood'? Quite apart from whether it was racist or not, when it comes to the Royal Family, half the country suddenly decides actors ( especially female ones) are akin to prostitutes! Its bizarre.The piece was about whether the engagement photos weren't all a bit too 'Hollywood'. The author had a 'niggling worry' about them. Not a major worry, not a rage, not a fury, not an irritation, not a dread, not a hate but a slight concern that she couldn't quite bat away. Niggling.
they're public figures aren't they? It's not like we're talking about some randoms plucked off Pinterest. I thought the pictures were a bit schmaltzy too.Why would you have a niggling worry about the engagement photos though? They are someone else's engagement photos. How were they ' Hollywood'? Quite apart from whether it was racist or not, when it comes to the Royal Family, half the country suddenly decides actors ( especially female ones) are akin to prostitutes! Its bizarre.
He’s a prince and she’s an actress, of course they’re schmaltzy, would be more weird if they weren’t.they're public figures aren't they? It's not like we're talking about some randoms plucked off Pinterest. I thought the pictures were a bit schmaltzy too.
If they knew then what they know now …Here is Charles' first Christmas card as King. I like it. Camilla looking very lovingly at him.
King Charles and Camilla's Christmas card shows pair at Highland Games
They pick an image from September's Highland Games for first festive card since Charles became King.www.bbc.co.uk
It’s a lovely photograph of them.Here is Charles' first Christmas card as King. I like it. Camilla looking very lovingly at him.
King Charles and Camilla's Christmas card shows pair at Highland Games
They pick an image from September's Highland Games for first festive card since Charles became King.www.bbc.co.uk
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?