The british isles and Ireland.

looksee

The British won't stop the Argentinians from referring to the islands off their coast as the Malvinas, they won't get the majority of people in Ireland to refer to Derry as 'Londonderry' and judging by this poll's results and the attitude of our government, they're not going to get the majority of Irish people to regard the islands of Ireland and Britain as the 'British Isles'.

You would be totally amazed at how much most "British" really don't care what the Argentinians call the islands off their coast, or what the locals want to call Derry (where??) or whether the Irish want to have a different name for "these islands". IONA's kind of cute though, except that a lot of post would end up on a little Scottish island:D

Terry

i've no problem with the island that contains the countires of england, scotland and wales and the surrounding islands (hebrides etc) being referred to as the british isles.
i just don't want this island and its surrouding smaller islands referred to as the same.

LordSutch

Maybe the people of New Zealand & Tasmania should object to being labled as part of "Australasia" because it might give the impression to foreigners that they are part of Australia!

Australasia includes the Australian landmass (including Tasmania), New Zealand, and Melanesia: New Guinea and neighbouring islands north and east of Australia in the Pacific Ocean. The designation is sometimes applied to all the lands and islands of the Pacific Ocean lying between the equator and latitude 47° south.

(The term "Australasia" is also a geographical term, as is the "British Isles").

The people of New Zealand are no more Australian than the people of the Republic of Ireland are British ...............................

Point being: This thread should be about GEOGRAPHY (Not Politics)!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

JaysusMacfeck wrote:

Deal with it. Deal with it. Deal with it. Uhuh.

You can't blame Irish people for not wanting to use the term 'British Isles'. I dont' know many Irish people who would use it in coversation or writing. A lot prefer "Ireland and the UK" or "Ireland and Britain".

Why isn't MTV isn't called "MTV British Isles". Or why isn't Yahoo! called "Yahoo! British isles". It's because it has political connotations.

In all fairness, that's the whiney wanky "We''ll call it what ever the hell you want us to call it, just don't damage our saleas PLEASE" approach

gurramok

WhiteWashMan wrote:

and to redspider who thinks this poll is reflective as a whole, then you forgot that half of the people that voted on it cant even tie their own shoelaces yet alone be old enough to be able to hold an informed opinion.

Proof?..Links?
Hope you were not referring to me when unable to tie my shoelaces

WhiteWashMan wrote:

seriously. too many people with too much time on their hands. but at least their shoulders are the same height, what with the chip on both their shoulders...

Nope, people with chips on their shoulders are the ones who prefer to be known as British from the British Isles rather from that place called Ireland while even they have Irish passports.

Regarding majority, i all my 31 years and neither have family/friends have never heard an Irish person nor anyone in the Irish legal\political\media system to refer to this country as part of the British Isles.
Maybe its because they know we are not part of the British Isles in the first place?

Please point out where in Irish law and the irish constitution where it say we are part of the British Isles if you may?

Big Ears

ArthurF wrote:

Maybe the people of New Zealand & Tasmania should object to being labled as part of "Australasia" because it might give the impression to foreigners that they are part of Australia!

Australasia includes the Australian landmass (including Tasmania), New Zealand, and Melanesia: New Guinea and neighbouring islands north and east of Australia in the Pacific Ocean. The designation is sometimes applied to all the lands and islands of the Pacific Ocean lying between the equator and latitude 47° south.

(The term "Australasia" is also a geographical term, as is the "British Isles").

The people of New Zealand are no more Australian than the people of the Republic of Ireland are British ...............................

Point being: This thread should be about GEOGRAPHY (Not Politics)!

It's Oceania nowdays not Australasia .

Terry

Big Ears wrote:

It's Oceania nowdays not Australasia .

see. they changed the name. not that hard really.
It's like Burma. you might know it Myanmar, but to me it will always be Burma.

secret_squirrel

julep wrote:

of course, i'll get the usual 'oh, national identity doesn't matter', 'we're all european', and so forth.
not me. I'm Irish and damn proud to be. i love this country and always will. i don't see anything wrong with loving your birthplace.

Whats an obscure geographical term got to do with your national identity?

How does it stop you loving your birthplace?

Are you really that insecure?

A geographical name doesnt affect any part of your identity unless you let it.

gurramok wrote:

Please point out where in Irish law and the irish constitution where it say we are part of the British Isles if you may?

Again whats Political and Legal document got to do with a Geographical term?

The number of people who cant or wont understand the difference between a Geographical name and Legal and Political names amazes me.

Dave!

I think julep is afraid of the British invading again. It's okay. It won't happen again. Rest easy.

Terry

some might say they never left.
not me. i couldn't give a shit about the sitch-e-a-shun.
i just don't like that this island is classed as one of the british isles.
i find it insulting.

where's the damn PC brigade when you need them?

LordSutch

Judging by this thread, several contributors should ask for an Atlas or World Globe for their Christmas present!

Failing that, they should embark on Geography night courses.

Terry

judging by that post, you should take a look at the question posed.

LordSutch

julep wrote:

judging by that post, you should take a look at the question posed.

The question posed is: do you recognise the term 'british isles' in reference to Ireland?

Yes I do!

Mr.Nice Guy

secret_squirrel wrote:

Whats an obscure geographical term got to do with your national identity?

The point that a lot of people such as yourself seem to have missed is that the term 'British Isles' does not reflect our (Irish) national identity but only the British national identity.

I didn't think it was a difficult concept to grasp.

It has nothing to do with being insecure, it's an aspiration for equality and dignity.

Dave!

It's being picky, that's all. The term is rarely used in every day conversation, have ye no more important matters to worry about? Or is this it, we've achieved independance, we're a Republic, our economy is booming -- and the only thing left to do to remove modern Ireland from our painful past is... rename some obscure geographical term?

Why don't ye try and get the majority of the population to be fluent in our 1st language instead?

LordSutch

The term British Isles is not meant to reflect anybodys identity!

It is purely a geographical term, refering to those islands located off the North West coast of Europe ...........................

"Think Geography" not Politics or identity

looksee

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

It has nothing to do with being insecure, it's an aspiration for equality and dignity.

Surely if you feel you are only aspiring to equality and dignity (equality with whom?) you are insecure?

Mr.Nice Guy

looksee wrote:

Surely if you feel you are only aspiring to equality and dignity (equality with whom?) you are insecure?

Equality with whom? Why the British of course. The term is the 'British Isles' which makes no mention of the Irish island - Ireland.

I am quite secure as it relates to my nationality. My desire for parity of esteem stems not from insecurity but rather a belief that we warrant equality with our nearest neighbours.

For those who say it's about geography and not politics, fine let me ask you this - seeing as one island is called Ireland and one island is called Britain, what sense does it make from a geographical standpoint to refer to the two collectively as the 'British Isles'?

From a geographical standpoint, wouldn't it make more sense to call the two collectively the 'British and Irish isles' or some other similar term?

I'd like people to give me their thoughts on that without resorting to snide comments or allegations.

Dave!

Perhaps the Malay archipelago should be renamed also, to the Indonesian, Filipino, Singaporean, Bruneian, Malaysian, and Papua New Guinean archipelago, lest some sensitive Asians feel inferior to the Malaysians...

Flex

DaveMcG wrote:

Perhaps the Malay archipelago should be renamed also, to the Indonesian, Filipino, Singaporean, Bruneian, Malaysian, and Papua New Guinean archipelago, lest some sensitive Asians feel inferior to the Malaysians...

Perhaps we could just designate our island and offshore territories the 'Irish Isles' if the idea of using the term 'British and Irish Isles' is too long and too hard for people to remember?

I would like the name changed because Im proud of my nationality and citizenship; not insecure. These islands are home to 2 states and 2 nationalities/peoples; the Irish and the British. The name of the Lions rugby team was changed from the 'British Lions' to the 'British and Irish Lions' despite the name 'British Lions' being based on the geographical name for the islands the team came from, so the whole '...its only a geographic term, so it doesnt matter...' argument seemed to fail there.

Mr.Nice Guy

DaveMcG wrote:

Perhaps the Malay archipelago should be renamed also, to the Indonesian, Filipino, Singaporean, Bruneian, Malaysian, and Papua New Guinean archipelago, lest some sensitive Asians feel inferior to the Malaysians...

Round and round we go.

pclancy

We could be dead in the morning and theres a lot more important things to give a **** about.

We're all part of the USE anyway (United States of Europe)

Terry

DaveMcG wrote:

Perhaps the Malay archipelago should be renamed also, to the Indonesian, Filipino, Singaporean, Bruneian, Malaysian, and Papua New Guinean archipelago, lest some sensitive Asians feel inferior to the Malaysians...

i don't live there and don't care about it.
I live in Ireland. I am Irish and care that my country is part of what is known as the british isles.
I'm sorry if i offend anyone, but i personally do not like being linked in any way to britain.
you can call it a chip on my shoulder or whatever you want, but my great grandfatehers were not shot in the head because they wanted to be known as 'british'.
you can be proud to be Irish without being a 'ra head. it's not that hard. all you have to do is confirm that you do not support them.
it's time to let go of the 'ra guilt. we didn't do it. the bombs were planted by some jackasses who thought they were doing the right thing. we know they were not. it's ok to be Irish. honestly.
the "no dogs, no blacks, no Irish" signs are long gone.
you can now embrace yor nationality without shame.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

julep wrote:

i don't live there and don't care about it.
I live in Ireland. I am Irish and care that my country is part of what is known as the british isles.
I'm sorry if i offend anyone, but i personally do not like being linked in any way to britain.
you can call it a chip on my shoulder or whatever you want, but my great grandfatehers were not shot in the head because they wanted to be known as 'british'.
you can be proud to be Irish without being a 'ra head. it's not that hard. all you have to do is confirm that you do not support them.
it's time to let go of the 'ra guilt. we didn't do it. the bombs were planted by some jackasses who thought they were doing the right thing. we know they were not. it's ok to be Irish. honestly.
the "no dogs, no blacks, no Irish" signs are long gone.
you can now embrace yor nationality without shame.

I fell no 'shame' in being Irish. I don't particularly feel pride, either, but that's a diffreent issue. Similiarly, there is no 'shame' in NOT being anti-British. Personally, I couldn't care less wheether people think if me as Irish, Britisih, Swedish (it did happen once) or whatever.

What I am, though, is an individual. If my great-grandfathers got shot in the head to proove a point, that's their choice, not mine. I should not and do not feel compelled to agree with them and in this case don't. I see the term "British Isles" as a geographical term coviering two nations and named oafter the larger one. There are instances of it all voer the world, which have been poitned out. Calling it the Irish isles, British and Irish isles, Irish and British Isles or is really just affirming your own feelings of inferiority. Or, as someone said, "aspiring to equality".

Flex

Ikky Poo2 wrote:

I fell no 'shame' in being Irish. I don't particularly feel pride, either, but that's a diffreent issue. Similiarly, there is no 'shame' in NOT being anti-British. Personally, I couldn't care less wheether people think if me as Irish, Britisih, Swedish (it did happen once) or whatever.

What do you mean by anti-British? If someone incorrectly called an Irish person 'British' and that person corrected them and said they dont like that lable, would that be anti-British?

Calling it the Irish isles, British and Irish isles, Irish and British Isles or is really just affirming your own feelings of inferiority. Or, as someone said, "aspiring to equality".

Im proud of my nationality, in no way am I insecure or believe it to make me inferior to anyone. If I believed I was inferior for being Irish I wouldnt want the name changed to include the word 'Irish'. Instead Id just keep my mouth shut and not want it to be changed because if it was changed it might highlight the fact Im Irish and dont like/want to be labled British.

AFAIK, the people who have posted wanting it changed dont have an inferiority complex about being Irish as their primary motivator, quite the opposite.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Flex wrote:

What do you mean by anti-British? If someone incorrectly called an Irish person 'British' and that person corrected them and said they dont like that lable, would that be anti-British?



.

The poster I was replying to said he didn;t like being likned to Britain in ANY way.

JaysusMacfeck

Flex wrote:

If someone incorrectly called an Irish person 'British' and that person corrected them and said they dont like that lable, would that be anti-British?

Unfortunately that seems to be the view of a lot of posters here. If you object to being called 'British', you are instantly labelled a Britain hater.

It's quite sad and perhaps a result of some Irish people identifying with British culture more so than Irish culture.

I've noted some posters fail to distinguish the cultures between these two nations. I have lived in the United Kingdom for two years, both in England and Scotland. I can tell you that the cultures are notably different. The most obvious difference is in the attitudes and conduct of 'the people'. While us Irish enjoy some of Britain’s television productions and magazines, the character of the Irish is distinctively different to that of the British.

We can of course identify with the Scottish more so than the English. I worked in England and I found the average English 'Joe Soap' to be entirely the opposite of the average Irish ‘John Soap’.

Irish people underestimate the intimacy of: the Irish people. We are a small population compared to England. Most of the Irish can instantly identify with each other, the nuances and intricacies that it takes to be Irish are instantly identifiable.

EOA_Mushy

Massive army required, murder every one, black/white/chatholic/prodistant/lepricaun/elf.... sorry got carried away... up north then go over to england and do the same!

Then they can be known as the Irish Isles

My point you ask, apart from the Briliant idea outlined above... is that, yes they are the british isles, but dont forget why.

1huge1

julep wrote:

do you see Ireland as part of the british isles, or are you as digusted as me by the term?
dicksuss.

i'd consider northern ireland to be part of the british isles but not the republic

secret_squirrel

Look its fairly obvious that there's only 2types of people posting on this thread.

One lot believe an obscure Geographical term has no bearing on their identity or culture.

The others believe that the same term somehow impinges on their 'Irish identity' to be part of the Geographic entity known as the British Isles.

You dont hear Scots or Welsh bemoaning the fact that their countries are part of the British Isles, infact you dont even hear anyone at all from this group of islands say 'Im from the British Isles'. Why because unlike 60% of the people in the poll, they are secure in their national identity.

Honestly there are so many other more important things wrong with this country, why not try getting uptight about them first? Then if it still bothers you work on getting the British Isles renamed the

'Irish, English, Welsh, Scottish, Manx and affiliated smaller islands' Isles.

There -do you see how ridiculous that is??

In a way I can understand the RA head-type threads better than this one - atleast they are worrying about a real issue.

LordSutch

1huge1 wrote:

i'd consider northern ireland to be part of the british isles but not the republic

Northern Ireland is part of the same land mass as the Republic, so why would the North be part of the British Isles (geographically speaking) but not the Republic?

Please explain.

Flex

secret_squirrel wrote:

You dont hear Scots or Welsh bemoaning the fact that their countries are part of the British Isles

Perhaps because they are from Britain and are British citizens?

Why because unlike 60% of the people in the poll, they are secure in their national identity.

Wow, thats confusing. Im one of the people that voted in that 60% and, yet, Im secure in my national identity :eek: Or perhaps you were just making some condescending remark? I am secure in my Irishness and proud of it, hence the reason I dont like the current term. If I was insecure or felt inferior because of it I wouldnt want the name changed to include the word 'Irish' and draw attention to my Irishness.

What about changing the name of the Lions aswel? As I pointed out earlier, it was only called the British Lions because of the name of the islands the team came from, but now theyre called the British and Irish Lions out of respect and courtesy.

Honestly there are so many other more important things wrong with this country, why not try getting uptight about them first? Then if it still bothers you work on getting the British Isles renamed the

'Irish, English, Welsh, Scottish, Manx and affiliated smaller islands' Isles.

There -do you see how ridiculous that is??

Yes. 'British and Irish Isles' works better. Or perhaps simply 'Irish Isles' for our island and offshore terroritories. As I said above, the Lions are now called the 'British and Irish Lions' and people dont get headaches trying to remember such a massive, long and tongue twisting name as that, so the 'British and Irish Isles' would work just as well Im sure.


Furthermore, if its only a geographic term that lacks any real significance or importance, then why are people so reluctant to change it?

alleepally

ziggy67 wrote:

It is just a geographical thing, just like the Irish Sea.

I've seen the Irish Sea written in English newspapers and media as : "the so-called Irish Sea", so it must be important to lots of people what title is put on geographic areas.

Therefore we should all refer to it as the "So called British Isles"

End of discussion now, do some homework.

LordSutch

Citizenship & National identity has nothing to do with this thread . . .

The "British Isles" is a Geographical term ~ ones National identiy or Citizenship is completly irrelevant to this thread, but if on the other hand, one compares the flora & fauna between North Wales & the East coast of Ireland, or the Giants Causeway to the Scottish Highlands then you might begin to see the light?

You see, the British Isles were formed long before man existed, & although the term might imply that we are all "British" it actually refers (geographically) to the largest island which is "Britain" and all the smaller islands surrounding this, the largest island in Europe!

The people that settled here/ Celts/ Picts/ Romans/ Normans/ Vikings/ Norse/ Brits/ need not get upset, as this term has nothing to do with Human politics or culture, it is purely a Geographical term.

alleepally

ArthurF wrote:

it actually refers to the lager island Britain and all smaller islands surrounding the largest island in Europe!

(Peoples/ Races NOT included).

And there was me thinking Ireland was the true lager island being the alcoholic nation we are and all that :-)

pvt. joker

call me a pathetic american, but i never knew the term British Isles included ireland

Gurgle

pvt. joker wrote:

call me a pathetic american, but i never knew the term British Isles included ireland

The term British Isles is very rarely used except when an Irish athlete wins an olympic gold medal / world championship etc.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Gurgle wrote:

The term British Isles is very rarely used except when an Irish athlete wins an olympic gold medal / world championship etc.

Now THERE'S your chip on the shoulder....!

Flex

Ikky Poo2 wrote:

Now THERE'S your chip on the shoulder....!

Are you joking?

darkman2

I just have one thing to say:


The ppl who refer to the Republic as part of the 'British Isles' have already lost the argument because 60% of this vote DO NOT recognise this term in relation to the Rep of Ireland, thats the reality. So dont lose sleep over it. What the majority say goes.

DEmeant0r

I've only read two pages of this long thread but my thoughts:

tbh who the **** cares what it's called? We're still all part of the human race in the planet Earth. Life is too short to be irked by such a small geographical technicality.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

darkman2 wrote:

I just have one thing to say:


The ppl who refer to the Republic as part of the 'British Isles' have already lost the argument because 60% of this vote DO NOT recognise this term in relation to the Rep of Ireland, thats the reality. So dont lose sleep over it. What the majority say goes.

It does? Then why do we never win the Eurovision sicne the almighter voters pick the sing...?

Republic just means you get to choose which government screws you over, but that's going off topic

Kwekubo

darkman2 wrote:

I just have one thing to say:


The ppl who refer to the Republic as part of the 'British Isles' have already lost the argument because 60% of this vote DO NOT recognise this term in relation to the Rep of Ireland, thats the reality. So dont lose sleep over it. What the majority say goes.

Neatly ignoring that more than a quarter of respondents have no problem with this long-standing, non-political, geographical term. 'Cause that's all that it is in the heel of the hunt.

Personally, I vote for Cybertron.

A Dub in Glasgo

secret_squirrel wrote:

Look its fairly obvious that there's only 2types of people posting on this thread.

One lot believe an obscure Geographical term has no bearing on their identity or culture.

The others believe that the same term somehow impinges on their 'Irish identity' to be part of the Geographic entity known as the British Isles.

What about the people who would prefer if the RoI was part of Britain (or the UK to be specific)?

You dont hear Scots or Welsh bemoaning the fact that their countries are part of the British Isles, infact you dont even hear anyone at all from this group of islands say 'Im from the British Isles'. Why because unlike 60% of the people in the poll, they are secure in their national identity.

What is their national identity?

Honestly there are so many other more important things wrong with this country, why not try getting uptight about them first? Then if it still bothers you work on getting the British Isles renamed the

'Irish, English, Welsh, Scottish, Manx and affiliated smaller islands' Isles.

There -do you see how ridiculous that is??

In a way I can understand the RA head-type threads better than this one - atleast they are worrying about a real issue.

It obviously concerns you as you have posted in the thread

A Dub in Glasgo

Kwekubo wrote:

Neatly ignoring that more than a quarter of respondents have no problem with this long-standing, non-political, geographical term.

How do you know that those 1/4 are voting in a non-political way?

darkman2

Kwekubo wrote:

Neatly ignoring that more than a quarter of respondents have no problem with this long-standing, non-political, geographical term. 'Cause that's all that it is in the heel of the hunt.

Personally, I vote for Cybertron.

WOW a whopping 25%. Nope if the majority dont recognise it, then thats it. End of story. There is no issue here.

Snowbie

darkman2 wrote:

I just have one thing to say:


The ppl who refer to the Republic as part of the 'British Isles' have already lost the argument because 60% of this vote DO NOT recognise this term in relation to the Rep of Ireland, thats the reality. So dont lose sleep over it. What the majority say goes.

And i`ll second that.

pvt. joker

Gurgle wrote:

The term British Isles is very rarely used except when an Irish athlete wins an olympic gold medal / world championship etc.

rofl, that would piss me off

Mahou

My experience is living here in spain a lot think im british even though im as Dub and Irish as they come, Half them think london is a country so its ignorence on thier part.50% know about Ireland and when you tell them youre from Ireland the reaction makes me very proud.We have a great name abroad and as an ambassador for us It'll continue

robinph

Mahou wrote:

Half them think london is a country so its ignorence on thier part.

So changing the name of a bunch of islands that the still won't care about is unlikely to make a whole lot of difference in their perception of the world. Other than they might then think that Ireland is the capital of the country of London maybe.