For a few weeks, we have been buying regular small boxes of oranges
from the local coop, described as 'grade 1 easy peelers' - Spanish
mandarin.

Having a sweet tooth, I found them quiet juicy and sweet though not
entirely consistent even from the same box. The last box contents was
different, not so sweet, not so juicy and very pithy, not nice at all
so they were binned. The obvious difference was that they had a lump
where the stalk goes, bulging rather like nipple. Might that suggest
they had been picked too soon, or simply a different variety?

Chris Hogg presented the following explanation :
Different variety. They're commonly known as 'Navel Oranges', because
of the likeness of the bulge to a human navel. Navel oranges are
seedless. https://fruitguys.com/almanac/2012/0...s-vs-valencias

Ta!

On 16/02/18 14:03, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
For a few weeks, we have been buying regular small boxes of oranges
from the local coop, described as 'grade 1 easy peelers' - Spanish
mandarin.

Having a sweet tooth, I found them quiet juicy and sweet though not
entirely consistent even from the same box. The last box contents was
different, not so sweet, not so juicy and very pithy, not nice at all
so they were binned. The obvious difference was that they had a lump
where the stalk goes, bulging rather like nipple. Might that suggest
they had been picked too soon, or simply a different variety?

I think you are confusing oranges and mandarins/clementines.

I think what you are referring to is a "clemenule" - see fruit at upper
right in picture he
http://goodfruitguide.co.uk/product/clemenules/

There are so many varieties these days available in shops simply sold
under a big label which says "Clementines" (eg "Nadorcott") that if in a
net bag you need to look closely at the label on the bag to see what you
are actually buying!

--

Jeff

Jeff Layman was thinking very hard :
I think you are confusing oranges and mandarins/clementines.

More than possible, I have never studied the subject.


I think what you are referring to is a "clemenule" - see fruit at upper right
in picture he
http://goodfruitguide.co.uk/product/clemenules/

Like that, but with a very pronounced bulge where the stalk went, which
was why I wondered if they might have been picked to early - they
hadn't filled out properly.

I bought another box/ pack today, these are nicely rounded and lack the
bulge - just like the contents of the previous boxes. Yet to try them,
but it looks promising. I am trying increase my fruit intake.

Harry Bloomfield Wrote in message:
Jeff Layman was thinking very hard :
I think you are confusing oranges and mandarins/clementines.

More than possible, I have never studied the subject.


I think what you are referring to is a "clemenule" - see fruit at upper right
in picture he
http://goodfruitguide.co.uk/product/clemenules/

Like that, but with a very pronounced bulge where the stalk went, which
was why I wondered if they might have been picked to early - they
hadn't filled out properly.

I bought another box/ pack today, these are nicely rounded and lack the
bulge - just like the contents of the previous boxes. Yet to try them,
but it looks promising. I am trying increase my fruit intake.


Oranges are not the only fruit....

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 14:03:10 GMT, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

For a few weeks, we have been buying regular small boxes of oranges
from the local coop, described as 'grade 1 easy peelers' - Spanish
mandarin.

Having a sweet tooth, I found them quiet juicy and sweet though not
entirely consistent even from the same box. The last box contents was
different, not so sweet, not so juicy and very pithy, not nice at all
so they were binned. The obvious difference was that they had a lump
where the stalk goes, bulging rather like nipple. Might that suggest
they had been picked too soon, or simply a different variety?

Different variety. They're commonly known as 'Navel Oranges', because
of the likeness of the bulge to a human navel. Navel oranges are
seedless. https://fruitguys.com/almanac/2012/0...s-vs-valencias

Doubt they are navels as navels are a quality orange.

In message , jim
writes
Oranges are not the only fruit....

But the inability to transport and display bananas correctly seems to
have spread from M & S, who have always been hopeless, to other local
supermarkets.

I don't like the large brown patches. It was never like this in the days
of clipper ships.
--
Bill

On 16/02/2018 17:27, FMurtz wrote:

Doubt they are navels as navels are a quality orange.

Depends on country of origin and method of picking, transport and
storage. Some regions are not suited for fruit growing although that
doesn't stop the production of such as it seems the only important
criteria is the look of the fruit rather than taste.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 16/02/18 17:10, jim wrote:
Harry Bloomfield Wrote in message:
Jeff Layman was thinking very hard :
I think you are confusing oranges and mandarins/clementines.

More than possible, I have never studied the subject.


I think what you are referring to is a "clemenule" - see fruit at upper right
in picture he
http://goodfruitguide.co.uk/product/clemenules/

Like that, but with a very pronounced bulge where the stalk went, which
was why I wondered if they might have been picked to early - they
hadn't filled out properly.

I bought another box/ pack today, these are nicely rounded and lack the
bulge - just like the contents of the previous boxes. Yet to try them,
but it looks promising. I am trying increase my fruit intake.


Oranges are not the only fruit....

Just to add to this OT thread, most "hard(ish)" fruit such as apples,
pears, bananas, and sometimes stone fruits are sold in polythene bags,
but citrus fruit is packed in nets. What is the reason for this?

(All types can be found in plastic or card punnets or trays, sealed with
a film of some sort, but then so is meat and fish.)

--

Jeff

On 16/02/2018 18:11, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 16/02/18 17:10, jim wrote:
Harry Bloomfield Wrote in message:
Jeff Layman was thinking very hard :
I think you are confusing oranges and mandarins/clementines.

More than possible, I have never studied the subject.


I think what you are referring to is a "clemenule" - see fruit at
upper right
in picture he
http://goodfruitguide.co.uk/product/clemenules/

Like that, but with a very pronounced bulge where the stalk went, which
was why I wondered if they might have been picked to early - they
hadn't filled out properly.

I bought another box/ pack today, these are nicely rounded and lack the
bulge - just like the contents of the previous boxes. Yet to try them,
but it looks promising. I am trying increase my fruit intake.


Oranges are not the only fruit....

Just to add to this OT thread, most "hard(ish)" fruit such as apples,
pears, bananas, and sometimes stone fruits are sold in polythene bags,
but citrus fruit is packed in nets. What is the reason for this?

(All types can be found in plastic or card punnets or trays, sealed with
a film of some sort, but then so is meat and fish.)

Red nets make oranges look far sweeter than they really are.
--
Dave W

On Friday, 16 February 2018 19:37:07 UTC, Dave W wrote:
On 16/02/2018 18:11, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 16/02/18 17:10, jim wrote:
Harry Bloomfield Wrote in message:
Jeff Layman was thinking very hard :

I think you are confusing oranges and mandarins/clementines.

More than possible, I have never studied the subject.


I think what you are referring to is a "clemenule" - see fruit at
upper right
in picture he
http://goodfruitguide.co.uk/product/clemenules/

Like that, but with a very pronounced bulge where the stalk went, which
was why I wondered if they might have been picked to early - they
hadn't filled out properly.

I bought another box/ pack today, these are nicely rounded and lack the
bulge - just like the contents of the previous boxes. Yet to try them,
but it looks promising. I am trying increase my fruit intake.


Oranges are not the only fruit....

Just to add to this OT thread, most "hard(ish)" fruit such as apples,
pears, bananas, and sometimes stone fruits are sold in polythene bags,
but citrus fruit is packed in nets. What is the reason for this?

(All types can be found in plastic or card punnets or trays, sealed with
a film of some sort, but then so is meat and fish.)

Red nets make oranges look far sweeter than they really are.

and reduce the tendency to moulder, to which citrus are quite prone


NT

Bill wrote:

In message , jim
writes
Oranges are not the only fruit....

But the inability to transport and display bananas correctly seems to
have spread from M & S, who have always been hopeless, to other local
supermarkets.

I don't like the large brown patches. It was never like this in the days
of clipper ships.

I suspect it is more due to careless handling and bruising than to other
factors in transport.


--

Roger Hayter

On 16/02/2018 20:21, wrote:

and reduce the tendency to moulder, to which citrus are quite prone


I always smell citrus in supermarkets and any hint of mustiness the
fruit is left on the shelves.

Stalks on grape bunches shouldn't look withered and dead. If they do the
grape is well past its best.

Supermarkets light their fresh produce areas in such a way to disguise
the early signs of rotting. I often re-check my purchases of fruit in
other areas on the supermarket where the lighting may be different.

Other tricks include packing some vegetables in plastic bags but where
vegetable has been cut the bag is opaque so that you cannot tell if the
cut surface has turned dark brown indicating old stock or long transport
times.


--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

Or well past their date. Oranges are funny things, as some are just no
edible and only really useful in things like preserves etc. I'm told you can
tell by the leaves of the tree, but assuming these are all the edible types,
its hard to really say, but my guess is that they have been perhaps either
picked too soon or too late or left hanging around too long.

Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
news
For a few weeks, we have been buying regular small boxes of oranges from
the local coop, described as 'grade 1 easy peelers' - Spanish mandarin.

Having a sweet tooth, I found them quiet juicy and sweet though not
entirely consistent even from the same box. The last box contents was
different, not so sweet, not so juicy and very pithy, not nice at all so
they were binned. The obvious difference was that they had a lump where
the stalk goes, bulging rather like nipple. Might that suggest they had
been picked too soon, or simply a different variety?

On 17/02/2018 09:28, Brian Gaff wrote:
Or well past their date. Oranges are funny things, as some are just no
edible and only really useful in things like preserves etc. I'm told you can
tell by the leaves of the tree, but assuming these are all the edible types,
its hard to really say, but my guess is that they have been perhaps either
picked too soon or too late or left hanging around too long.


Do the buyers for the supermarkets actually taste or perform any quality
control before the fruit gets put on the shelves?

I've just thrown away a packet of pears that seem to have turned to some
form of concrete rather than ripening!


--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 17/02/2018 09:42, alan_m wrote:
I've just thrown away a packet of pears that seem to have turned to some
form of concrete rather than ripening!

They start of like concrete. Then for about half a day, they're lovely.
Then they disintegrate.

Andy

After serious thinking jim wrote :
Oranges are not the only fruit....

but, I like 'em and one of the dogs likes 'em.

On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 18:08:16 +0000, alan_m wrote:

On 16/02/2018 17:27, FMurtz wrote:

Doubt they are navels as navels are a quality orange.

Depends on country of origin and method of picking, transport and
storage. Some regions are not suited for fruit growing although that
doesn't stop the production of such as it seems the only important
criteria is the look of the fruit rather than taste.

"French Golden Delicious" being a case in point. :-)

--
Johnny B Good

Chris Hogg Wrote in message:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 17:50:22 +0000, Vir Campestris
wrote:

On 17/02/2018 09:42, alan_m wrote:
I've just thrown away a packet of pears that seem to have turned to some
form of concrete rather than ripening!

They start of like concrete. Then for about half a day, they're lovely.
Then they disintegrate.


In our family, the saying is that you have to sit up all night to
catch a Williams pear ripe.


Did you have to translate that from the familial patois ?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 18:43:32 +0000, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

After serious thinking jim wrote :
Oranges are not the only fruit....

but, I like 'em and one of the dogs likes 'em.

Not to worry, Jim. At least one of us got the literary reference
straight away. :-)

--
Johnny B Good

"alan_m" wrote in message
...

I've just thrown away a packet of pears that seem to have turned to some form of
concrete rather than ripening!

The only fruit I ever buy from supermarkets is/are bananas.
Then its necessary to shop around to find branches which stock
large bananas, as most seem to prioritise small or medium
"lunchbox size" fruit.

Pears are always difficult as they have to be picked and transported
unripe/hard as they bruise so easily once they start to ripen.

One of the advantages of living where I do, is that there are plenty
of ethnic greengrocers, many of whom have displays/piles of pears
outside the shop; 90% of which are similarly hard. Its sometimes necessary
to visit 5 or 6 of these shops to find the one or two pears in each
pile which will ripen fully within the next week. They go straight
in the fridge door and are taken out one or two at a time to
warm up over the next 24 hours.
Which with experience doesn't take that much longer than visiting the
supermarket when you know where to go. Same with oranges.
But then not everybody lives in a city with the pavements
cluttered with ethnic shops I suppose.

Despite experts claiming they need to be at room temperature to ripen,
at room temperature they'll ripen too quick and the final three of four will
go mushy. Unlike other fruit, pears will also go mushy from the inside
out. Outside fine, inside brown. Storing them in the fridge door doesn't seem
to hinder ripening just slows it down. 69 to 79p per pound ATM
round here

To expect any fruit or veg to be properly ripe from a supermarket is probably
expecting a bit much. Years ago when regular customers bought daily from proper
fruit and veg shops - as with the ethnics to certain extent today the shopkeepers
could buy just what they needed from wholesalers they could trust to sell within
one or two days. Like opening restaurants overstocking on fresh produce
without the benefit of frozen storage is a quick road to bankruptcy.

The supermarkerts threw all that out of the window. Because of the long
supply chains to compete on price while keeping waste to acceptable
levels they have to prioritise shelf life. While customers will carry on
buying rock hard unripe and tasteless fruit and vet, as soon as they
find anything rotten they will be demanding their money back and
pictures of their mouldy fruit and veg will be splashed all over the
red-tops. Ideally just pulled from the mouth of their two year old tot.

michael adams

....

On 18/02/2018 10:14, michael adams wrote:
One of the advantages of living where I do, is that there are plenty
of ethnic greengrocers,

Ah, the old east-end barrowboys. Funny, I thought most of those shops
were run by Asians these days. Who aren't ethnic over here.

Andy

"Vir Campestris" wrote in message
news
On 18/02/2018 10:14, michael adams wrote:

One of the advantages of living where I do, is that there are plenty
of ethnic greengrocers,

Ah, the old east-end barrowboys.

Around where I Iived in the 50's and 60's, at the topof my road there were
two independent greengrocers on either side of the road within 50yards
of each other. And another maybe 100 yards away further on up the road.
In the high street there was a Gerrards who were a big chain greegrocers
along with Myers ISTR. Who together had as many branches as say Sainsbury
or Dewhurst the butcher .

The idea that we all stood around waiting until the chirpy cockneys showed
up having wheeled their fruit laden barrows all the way from the East End
is the sort of thing you might expect to see in a film made by Americans
starring Dick Van Dyke.

Funny, I thought most of those shops were run by Asians these days.

Polish Asians, eh ? Who'd have thought.

Who aren't ethnic over here.

Ethnicity concerns people's cultural identity both objective and subjective
as compared with the cultural mores of the majority population, and has
nothing to do with geography as such, at all.

Congratulations Andy on posting two short sentences comprising one of the best
examples of ill-considered incomprehensible gibberish its been my pleasure to
read in quite a while.


michael adams

....
Andy

On 19/02/2018 10:02, michael adams wrote:
Ethnicity concerns people's cultural identity both objective and subjective
as compared with the cultural mores of the majority population, and has
nothing to do with geography as such, at all.

That's kind of the point. The term "ethnic" has come to be used where
other terms are now politically incorrect. But where the use of ethnic
is incorrect.

Congratulations Andy on posting two short sentences comprising one of the best
examples of ill-considered incomprehensible gibberish its been my pleasure to
read in quite a while.

The pleasure is entirely mine, sir.

Andy

Vir Campestris wrote:

On 19/02/2018 10:02, michael adams wrote:
Ethnicity concerns people's cultural identity both objective and subjective
as compared with the cultural mores of the majority population, and has
nothing to do with geography as such, at all.

That's kind of the point. The term "ethnic" has come to be used where
other terms are now politically incorrect. But where the use of ethnic
is incorrect.
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic". The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics
and they form an ethnic group like any other. If people must use the
term, they should at least say "minoriity ethnic" rather than just
"ethnic". Otherwise it doesn't make sense.




Congratulations Andy on posting two short sentences comprising one of
the best examples of ill-considered incomprehensible gibberish its been
my pleasure to read in quite a while.

The pleasure is entirely mine, sir.

Andy


--

Roger Hayter

(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
Vir Campestris wrote:

On 19/02/2018 10:02, michael adams wrote:
Ethnicity concerns people's cultural identity both objective and subjective
as compared with the cultural mores of the majority population, and has
nothing to do with geography as such, at all.

That's kind of the point. The term "ethnic" has come to be used where
other terms are now politically incorrect. But where the use of ethnic
is incorrect.
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic". The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics
and they form an ethnic group like any other. If people must use the
term, they should at least say "minoriity ethnic" rather than just
"ethnic". Otherwise it doesn't make sense.


I understood it perfectly.

Perhaps usage has changed without you realising?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 20/02/18 09:04, jim wrote:
(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
Vir Campestris wrote:

On 19/02/2018 10:02, michael adams wrote:
Ethnicity concerns people's cultural identity both objective and subjective
as compared with the cultural mores of the majority population, and has
nothing to do with geography as such, at all.

That's kind of the point. The term "ethnic" has come to be used where
other terms are now politically incorrect. But where the use of ethnic
is incorrect.
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic". The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics
and they form an ethnic group like any other. If people must use the
term, they should at least say "minoriity ethnic" rather than just
"ethnic". Otherwise it doesn't make sense.


I understood it perfectly.

Perhaps usage has changed without you realising?

No, its just that you inhabit a bubble who all use words wrongly, spell
badly, and never studied English Grammar and who think they are in the
right.


--
How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.

Adolf Hitler

jim k wrote:

(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
Vir Campestris wrote:

On 19/02/2018 10:02, michael adams wrote:
Ethnicity concerns people's cultural identity both objective and
subjective as compared with the cultural mores of the majority
population, and has nothing to do with geography as such, at all.

That's kind of the point. The term "ethnic" has come to be used where
other terms are now politically incorrect. But where the use of ethnic
is incorrect.
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic". The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics
and they form an ethnic group like any other. If people must use the
term, they should at least say "minoriity ethnic" rather than just
"ethnic". Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

I understood it perfectly.

Perhaps usage has changed without you realising?

Just a rearguard action against ignorance, I agree.

--

Roger Hayter

"Vir Campestris" wrote in message
news
On 19/02/2018 10:02, michael adams wrote:
Ethnicity concerns people's cultural identity both objective and subjective
as compared with the cultural mores of the majority population, and has
nothing to do with geography as such, at all.

That's kind of the point. The term "ethnic" has come to be used where other terms are
now politically incorrect.

No Andy its simply more convenient. Around where I live as far as I can tell without
actually quizzing people and asking to see their passports there are shops serving
Muslim Indians, Muslim Afghans, Gujrat Hindus, Punjabi Sikhs, West Indians, Japanese
who I presume follow Shinto, Catholic Poles and other maybe other East Europeans plus
the odd sprinkling of Chinese. I only know the latter because having a local Japanese
enclave I automatically assumed that a person was Japanese when in fact they weren't.

I find it a lot simpler to use the term Ethnic Andy, as opposed to your epithet of
choice
for such shops, which is "Asian" I believe.

This is simply because if I list them all as I have above, doubtless another smartarse
will
crawl out of the woodworrk and point out that the Irish or some other group are also an
ethnic minority who doubtless must also live in the area, so why haven't I listed them
as well ?.

Ethic shops serve the type of people who are aren't prepared to buy the sort of rubbish
sold by the supermarkets, which apparently satisfy the neeeds of the majority of the
population.

Or in the case of short sighted yokels, whose patronage of big supermarkets
has meant the closure of village stores people have no real choice in the matter.

So you'll just have suck it up I'm afraid.

Or as Terry Thomas might have said to Ian Carmichael in School for Scoundrels

"Hard pears old chap. Hard pears"


michael adams

....

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic".

Ethnic groups are defined in terms of *specific* religious
and cultural charactersitics. Basically if they don't share that
religion or culture then they're not part of that group.

The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics

Which are exactly ?


michael adams

....

michael adams wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic".

Ethnic groups are defined in terms of *specific* religious
and cultural charactersitics. Basically if they don't share that
religion or culture then they're not part of that group.

The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics

Which are exactly ?


Aslk the Brexiteers. These characteristics are what they want to
preserve. Not that I'm against preserving them, but I think they are
quite robust enough to survive immigration, and alter with time as such
things do. I could just mention sausage and mash, lager, football as
some very superificial preferences.




--

Roger Hayter

On 20/02/18 17:09, Roger Hayter wrote:
Aslk the Brexiteers. These characteristics are what they want to
preserve.

Say the remoaners. Not the brexiteers.

Therbey demonstrating their innate bigotry and racism.

Brexitwers are more concerned with escaping fronm the power of what
seems more and more to be a corrupt quasi communist mafia, than a
benevolent unelected government.




--
"Women actually are capable of being far more than the feminists will
let them."

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic".

Ethnic groups are defined in terms of *specific* religious
and cultural charactersitics. Basically if they don't share that
religion or culture then they're not part of that group.

The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics

Which are exactly ?


Aslk the Brexiteers.

Er no. It was you yourself who claimed the majority population
had as much claim to be regarded as an ethnic grouping
as do the groupings I cited.

Its a characteristic of many right wing groups that they trade on
the threat felt by the majority population which is comparatively
fluid in its values, from the rigid adherence of ethnic groups to
specific values which transcend class and other factors, even
nationality. Which is often an accident of birth chosen for
purely economic rather than cultural reasons.

These characteristics are what they want to
preserve.

Such as ?

Not that I'm against preserving them, but I think they are
quite robust enough to survive immigration, and alter with time as such
things do. I could just mention sausage and mash, lager, football as
some very superificial preferences.

But not all of the majority population like either lager or football;
by which I take it you mean soccer. Some prefer bitter and rugger
for a start. As to sausages, although quite possibly a majority
are still carnivours that still leaves the veggies out in the cold.

One factor which appears most commonly in ethnic groupings is
adherence to a common religion. What with the havoc Dawkins
and his ilk have wrought, to say nothing of all the various
schisms down the years from the traditional Catholic Religion,
Protestantism, Methodism, Calvinism Presbytariansim etc shared
religious belief clearly isn't something found in the
majority population either.


michael adams

....

The Natural Philosopher Wrote in message:
On 20/02/18 09:04, jim wrote:
(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
Vir Campestris wrote:

On 19/02/2018 10:02, michael adams wrote:
Ethnicity concerns people's cultural identity both objective and subjective
as compared with the cultural mores of the majority population, and has
nothing to do with geography as such, at all.

That's kind of the point. The term "ethnic" has come to be used where
other terms are now politically incorrect. But where the use of ethnic
is incorrect.
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic". The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics
and they form an ethnic group like any other. If people must use the
term, they should at least say "minoriity ethnic" rather than just
"ethnic". Otherwise it doesn't make sense.


I understood it perfectly.

Perhaps usage has changed without you realising?

No, its just that you inhabit a bubble who all use words wrongly, spell
badly, and never studied English Grammar and who think they are in the
right.



Shed oi preseumee yout goth your speech two twxt sal****er
working peoperlt now ****nip?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

jim k Wrote in message:
The Natural Philosopher Wrote in message:
On 20/02/18 09:04, jim wrote:
(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
Vir Campestris wrote:

On 19/02/2018 10:02, michael adams wrote:
Ethnicity concerns people's cultural identity both objective and subjective
as compared with the cultural mores of the majority population, and has
nothing to do with geography as such, at all.

That's kind of the point. The term "ethnic" has come to be used where
other terms are now politically incorrect. But where the use of ethnic
is incorrect.
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic". The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics
and they form an ethnic group like any other. If people must use the
term, they should at least say "minoriity ethnic" rather than just
"ethnic". Otherwise it doesn't make sense.


I understood it perfectly.

Perhaps usage has changed without you realising?

No, its just that you inhabit a bubble who all use words wrongly, spell
badly, and never studied English Grammar and who think they are in the
right.



Shed oi preseumee y
out goth your speech two twxt sal****er
working peoperlt now ****nip?


PS your ****e punctuation places you in precisely the same
"bubble" you attempted to pigeon hole me in...
;-)
--
Jim K




----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

michael adams wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic".

Ethnic groups are defined in terms of *specific* religious
and cultural charactersitics. Basically if they don't share that
religion or culture then they're not part of that group.

The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics

Which are exactly ?


Aslk the Brexiteers.

Er no. It was you yourself who claimed the majority population
had as much claim to be regarded as an ethnic grouping
as do the groupings I cited.

Its a characteristic of many right wing groups that they trade on
the threat felt by the majority population which is comparatively
fluid in its values, from the rigid adherence of ethnic groups to
specific values which transcend class and other factors, even
nationality. Which is often an accident of birth chosen for
purely economic rather than cultural reasons.

This "rigid adherence" is a figment of your imagination. Of course
there are subgroups who could be so described. But just compare Ugandan
asians with Sikhs and with rural Pakistani immigrants. And compare
first second and third generation members of the latter group. This
monolith "ethnic timebomb" is a an artefact of Islamophobia and racism.
In fact, it is remarkably like the common description of Jews in this
country that was popular in some circles in the 1930s.




These characteristics are what they want to
preserve.

Such as ?

Not that I'm against preserving them, but I think they are
quite robust enough to survive immigration, and alter with time as such
things do. I could just mention sausage and mash, lager, football as
some very superificial preferences.

But not all of the majority population like either lager or football;
by which I take it you mean soccer. Some prefer bitter and rugger
for a start. As to sausages, although quite possibly a majority
are still carnivours that still leaves the veggies out in the cold.

One factor which appears most commonly in ethnic groupings is
adherence to a common religion. What with the havoc Dawkins
and his ilk have wrought, to say nothing of all the various
schisms down the years from the traditional Catholic Religion,
Protestantism, Methodism, Calvinism Presbytariansim etc shared
religious belief clearly isn't something found in the
majority population either.

And minority ethnic groups are going exactly the same way, some faster
than others, but all at their own pace.


--

Roger Hayter

On 20/02/18 22:01, Roger Hayter wrote:
michael adams wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic".

Ethnic groups are defined in terms of *specific* religious
and cultural charactersitics. Basically if they don't share that
religion or culture then they're not part of that group.

The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics

Which are exactly ?


Aslk the Brexiteers.

Er no. It was you yourself who claimed the majority population
had as much claim to be regarded as an ethnic grouping
as do the groupings I cited.

Its a characteristic of many right wing groups that they trade on
the threat felt by the majority population which is comparatively
fluid in its values, from the rigid adherence of ethnic groups to
specific values which transcend class and other factors, even
nationality. Which is often an accident of birth chosen for
purely economic rather than cultural reasons.

This "rigid adherence" is a figment of your imagination. Of course
there are subgroups who could be so described. But just compare Ugandan
asians with Sikhs and with rural Pakistani immigrants. And compare
first second and third generation members of the latter group. This
monolith "ethnic timebomb" is a an artefact of Islamophobia and racism.
In fact, it is remarkably like the common description of Jews in this
country that was popular in some circles in the 1930s.




These characteristics are what they want to
preserve.

Such as ?

Not that I'm against preserving them, but I think they are
quite robust enough to survive immigration, and alter with time as such
things do. I could just mention sausage and mash, lager, football as
some very superificial preferences.

But not all of the majority population like either lager or football;
by which I take it you mean soccer. Some prefer bitter and rugger
for a start. As to sausages, although quite possibly a majority
are still carnivours that still leaves the veggies out in the cold.

One factor which appears most commonly in ethnic groupings is
adherence to a common religion. What with the havoc Dawkins
and his ilk have wrought, to say nothing of all the various
schisms down the years from the traditional Catholic Religion,
Protestantism, Methodism, Calvinism Presbytariansim etc shared
religious belief clearly isn't something found in the
majority population either.

And minority ethnic groups are going exactly the same way, some faster
than others, but all at their own pace.


I think your post above demonstaretes that it is in fact not.

Why are people more scared of Muslims than the aforenetioned other
newcomers?

How many current religious wars have been started by the others?

I am sure you would have aqccused me of Naziphobia 80 years ago...

--
"If you dont read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic".

Ethnic groups are defined in terms of *specific* religious
and cultural charactersitics. Basically if they don't share that
religion or culture then they're not part of that group.

The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics

Which are exactly ?


Aslk the Brexiteers.

Er no. It was you yourself who claimed the majority population
had as much claim to be regarded as an ethnic grouping
as do the groupings I cited.

Its a characteristic of many right wing groups that they trade on
the threat felt by the majority population which is comparatively
fluid in its values, from the rigid adherence of ethnic groups to
specific values which transcend class and other factors, even
nationality. Which is often an accident of birth chosen for
purely economic rather than cultural reasons.

This "rigid adherence" is a figment of your imagination. Of course
there are subgroups who could be so described. But just compare Ugandan
asians with Sikhs and with rural Pakistani immigrants.

Ugandan Asians were mainly hindus I believe, who together with
sikhs are strict lacto-vegetarians. Pakistani immigrants whether
rural or not are muslim who follow halal laws which allow them
to eat anything other than pork or pork products.

To get back on topic for a moment, shops catering for hindus
and sikhs are conspicuous by the fact that they don't sell any
meat or meat products. For strict vegetarians looking to buy
catering/industrial size bags of lentils, chick peas, peanuts,
rice etc. at reasonable prices - as opposed to supermarkets selling
similar commodities in smaller quantities to a niche
middle class market at grossly inflated prices, such
oulets are a boon. Similarly to anyone looking to simply
buy fruit and vegetables - most of which are offered at
prices their typical customers can afford and are willing
to pay. And most of which is actually sold to be eaten rather
than sat looking nice on a bowl on the table.
Which for reasons I explained earlier supermarket fruit is
best suited for until its thrown away; except for customers
with lots of patience who are willing to do their research.

Now I don't actually think all these shops are catering for
"subgroups" as you describe them. Not around where I live at
least. Maybe things are different in Midsomer Hayter, dunno.

And compare
first second and third generation members of the latter group.

So they abandon all their religious practices do they ?

This
monolith "ethnic timebomb" is a an artefact of Islamophobia and racism.
In fact, it is remarkably like the common description of Jews in this
country that was popular in some circles in the 1930s.

Indeed.

But I only made an observation. If there's any incipient racism or anything
else in evidence here Roger it's in your automatic assumptionb that these
ethnic "subgroups" will gradually "see sense" and adopt our superior
indigenous values, however they're described.

Except of course you've failed so far to describe any. Football, beer
and sausages have so far fallen by the wayside and as far as I can
see you've yet to field any subs


And minority ethnic groups are going exactly the same way, some faster
than others, but all at their own pace.

See above.

Talking of "timebombs" Roger as you chose to raise the subject, lets
consider "family values". It appears that many of these minority groups
are still wedded to the idea of the nuclear family. The oldsters
live with their grown up children and impart their wisdom, etc
etc. As was the case among the majority population in this country
until a generation or two ago. Now we shuffle them off into old
folks homes instead. Except that it turns out that a lot of these
homes are run by fraudsters and incompetents. So who's going to sort
out this particular mess then Roger, who's going to pay for it all?

So much for our more advanced "family" values, whereby people over a
certain age rather than being cherished, as is the case with a lot of
these "subgroups", Asians etc, are forgotten about as quickly as possible.
Apart from the odd weekend visit at least.

Just so long as it doesn't clash with the football.



michael adams

....

"michael adams" wrote in message
news
consider "family values". It appears that many of these minority groups
are still wedded to the idea of the nuclear family.

For "nuclear family", read "extended family"


michael adams

....

On Tuesday, 20 February 2018 17:09:49 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
michael adams wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
And there is no concept of minority or exceptional in the adjective
"ethnic".

Ethnic groups are defined in terms of *specific* religious
and cultural charactersitics. Basically if they don't share that
religion or culture then they're not part of that group.

The majority population has its own ethnic characteristics

Which are exactly ?


Aslk the Brexiteers. These characteristics are what they want to
preserve. Not that I'm against preserving them, but I think they are
quite robust enough to survive immigration, and alter with time as such
things do. I could just mention sausage and mash, lager, football as
some very superificial preferences.

But lager came from Germany NOT the UK it took over from real ale or beer because it was cheaper to produce and the lack of flavour could be masked by serving it very cold. As for football I think we had that too before joining the EU. Apparently there's rare footage of England beating German around 1966, but how could it if football didn't exist before the EU.
As for sausage and mash or bangers and mash did that exist before the EU I think it did.







--

Roger Hayter