Is "Anlke-Biters' pejorative?

[Barca]

I have never heard the term in reference to dogs of any sort. I have always found it to be an affectionate way to refer to kids and if anyone finds it offensive I'd recommend bottling yourself up at home because the world has become too difficult for you.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Maybe never heard and maybe thought you were trying to hit on her in front of her kids...Not a single fucking thing offensive about ankle biters though.

Litmus test for offensive: If a term was used regularly on "Full House", it is not offensive.

.

Oh, I don't think I fucked up. From what I hear, its not a big deal, so if she didn't like it it's not my problem. I certainly don't intend to kowtow to anyone's super-sensitivities. Marriage hardened me up about that! Big time.

I don't give that kind of "I have one up on you' a foothold.

Like you guys said, she probably never heard it before (frankly, I don't recall that expression either) and took offense to a tongue-in-cheek comment, but honestly, I wouldn't even use Rug Rats or Yard Apes or any other similar expressions when describing someone else's kids, unless there was a certain level of comfort or familiarity.

Barnacle, did you have any interest in this lady, or were you just trying to be friendly to a just a familiar face at the gym? I think she might have taken offence because maybe she liked YOU and it didn't sound like a compliment.

 

[GPIDEAL]

SHowcum you asked us for validation and reassurance then, if it';s no big deal? Isn't she the one you needed to ask? Better you should have apologized to her for any inadvertent offence or accidental uncomfortableness you caused. At least that had a chance of going somewhere productive. Unlike this Forum. But congrats on a marriage that works for you, even if it's built on thickening up your rhino-hide armour rather than perfecting sensitivity to your chosen life partner.

Common courtesy has nothing to do with deals big or small. It's about not causing needless discomfort or inconvenience. Another word is 'consideration'; try a little next time, before some other original and clever witticism blows up in your face.

Since you asked

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[MattRoxx]

You talk to people at the gym?!

I should try that some time.

 

[red]

It's a pejorative unless it's your own kids. Extremely offensive? No. But toss in you don't know her well and maybe that's it.

 

[barnacler]

So howcum you asked us for validation and reassurance then,
Since you asked

I didn't ask.

My exact question was "WTF is wrong with ankle-biters?

Nothing about validation, reassurance. Pretty simple, just asking what there is about it that could possible offend. To me it was the same thing as "Munchkins" or "Whipper-Snappers".

 

[GPIDEAL]

I didn't ask.

My exact question was "WTF is wrong with ankle-biters?

Nothing about validation, reassurance. Pretty simple, just asking what there is about it that could possible offend. To me it was the same thing as "Munchkins" or "Whipper-Snappers".

It wasn't a royal fuck up when I said you fucked up. I'm sure you didn't mean to offend her but people have different backgrounds and culture, and expressions or descriptions like you describe might be taken the wrong way.

Personally, the only kind of description I'd use other than children or kids is "little ones". Those other tongue-in-cheek descriptions require some familiarity with the person you're talking with. Now IF they were giving her a hard time when you said that, she might have been more accepting of the term.

Now you're going to have to buy her flowers and her kids gifts if you want any chance with her, lol.

 

[GPIDEAL]

It's a pejorative unless it's your own kids. Extremely offensive? No. But toss in you don't know her well and maybe that's it.

Couldn't have said it simpler. Thanks.

 

[barnacler]

Actually, this brings me to the word "offensive".

Seems to me it used to mean "I feel that you are personally insulting me", whereas now it is a highfalutin way or really saying " I either disagree with or dislike what you just said". Can't tell you the number of conversations I have had with people who, when you disagree with them, say that they find my views "offensive'.

 

[oldjones]

I didn't ask.

My exact question was "WTF is wrong with ankle-biters?

Nothing about validation, reassurance. Pretty simple, just asking what there is about it that could possible offend. To me it was the same thing as "Munchkins" or "Whipper-Snappers".

Since you asked: Ankle-biters describes either cannibals with a foot-fetish or children so badly behaved and brought up that they can't control their physical aggressions. Apart from love-bites — which are only acceptable from strangers after explicit consent — biting other humans on the ankle or elsewhere is a dishonourable form of assault, and to call someone — anyone — a biter is an insulting accusation. Insulting a child has always been seen as an attack on their guardian or parent. You'll have to dig far to find any such negative aspects to cute little singing cartoon people, or people who snap long-obsolete carriage-driving implements (although that one does have bad connotations if you bother to look it up).

My apologies for imagining you knew all that sort of stuff and just wanted confirmation that the term was an acceptable form of ordinary good-humour among strangers. The woman made it clear it was not, and why you ask and explain to us, what you should have to her, illustrates one of the abiding mysteries of humans not getting along. Because they speak before they consider how their words might land, then seek to justify the offence they gave rather than fix it.

It doesn't matter what the term means to you, but what it meant to her.

 

[SkyRider]

illustrates one of the abiding mysteries of humans not getting along because they speak before they consider how their words might land.

In the current environment, think thrice before saying anything. People have been fired for saying silly stupid things. Oh, if asked say you are a strong supporter of gay marriage (if you want to continue to be gainfully employed).

 

[GPIDEAL]

Since you asked: Ankle-biters describes either cannibals with a foot-fetish or children so badly behaved and brought up that they can't control their physical aggressions. Apart from love-bites — which are only acceptable from strangers after explicit consent — biting other humans on the ankle or elsewhere is a dishonourable form of assault, and to call someone — anyone — a biter is an insulting accusation. Insulting a child has always been seen as an attack on their guardian or parent. You'll have to dig far to find any such negative aspects to cute little singing cartoon people, or people who snap long-obsolete carriage-driving implements (although that one does have bad connotations if you bother to look it up).

My apologies for imagining you knew all that sort of stuff and just wanted confirmation that the term was an acceptable form of ordinary good-humour among strangers. The woman made it clear it was not, and why you ask and explain to us, what you should have to her, illustrates one of the abiding mysteries of humans not getting along. Because they speak before they consider how their words might land, then seek to justify the offence they gave rather than fix it.

It doesn't matter what the term means to you, but what it meant to her.

Old Jones may sometimes sound old-fashioned but he hits the nail on the head here a few times.

 

[bazokajoe]

Ankle biters,yard apes,crumb snatchers,pick pockets,a pain in the ass,it's all the same.
As you can tell I am not a fan of kids.

 

[oldjones]

In the current environment, think thrice before saying anything. People have been fired for saying silly stupid things. Oh, if asked say you are a strong supporter of gay marriage (if you want to continue to be gainfully employed).

The only marriage you have any business sharing your opinion of is your own. And that you share only if it makes a positive contribution to the general conversation and atmosphere.

Much like commenting on children. Including your own.