Home > Life in General > Man of Middle Eastern Appearance

Man of Middle Eastern Appearance

December 30th, 2005

In the right light, I certainly am, as has been noticed both by commentators here, and In Real Life. As far as actual ethnicity goes, I’m a mixed bag, but mostly Celt. Quiggin is a Manx name, and my ancestry on my mother’s side is mostly Scots.

None of that signifies anything much except the arbitrariness of distinctions over which a lot of blood has been, and is still being, shed.

Categories: Life in General Tags:
  1. Terje
    December 30th, 2005 at 12:13 | #1

    It’s the beard.

  2. December 30th, 2005 at 12:20 | #2

    In the right light, I certainly am…

    You’ve got to be joking.

  3. Terje
    December 30th, 2005 at 12:22 | #3

    Actually I think you look like a Victorian Era conservative.

    The Scottish influence is not that surprising. During the recent discussion on this site I looked at your picture and tried to guess at your heritage. Scottish was the first thing that came to mind. Then I thought about Groundskeeper Willie from the Simpsons. Then I rolled around laughing.

    http://www.ubervic.com/batonrougetigers/images/ripped%20willie.jpg

  4. December 30th, 2005 at 17:45 | #4

    Pr Q looks to me like the classic black Irishman. Not the sort one would like to meet on a dark street or a storm-tossed sea.

  5. December 30th, 2005 at 17:48 | #5

    The crucial point is whether JQ gives the first impression of a terrorist or a Rabbi (the two are not mutually exclusive, e.g. the late Rabbi Meir Kahane).

    As regards Celticness, an important question is how much Viking got in there. I know someone who always thought she was basically Welsh but has discovered that she has some Norse in there.

    As for myself, I find that when I tell people that I am half Scottish and half Irish, they usually say “that explains a lot”, though for some reason they never clarify that remark. One unkind person did once say “so you drink a great deal at other people’s expense?”.

  6. Ian Gould
    December 30th, 2005 at 18:28 | #6

    I also fit the description of a “man of middle eastern appearance”.

    I thought of this the other week running for the bus in the Queen Street Bus Station while carrying a large box.

    There’s nothing like the thought of several bullets in the head to slow one down.

  7. December 30th, 2005 at 22:42 | #7

    Oh yes there is – the fact of several bullets in the head. I’m sure I heard it before, but somewhere Terry Pratchett uses the line “put a warning shot through his head”.

  8. eric bloodaxe
    December 31st, 2005 at 09:19 | #8

    There are a lot of Vikings in the Isle of Man, and when you say scottish, do you mean Lowland (Germanic), or Highland ( Irish with a bit of Norse)?

  9. jquiggin
    December 31st, 2005 at 10:05 | #9

    Highland Scots, with some more Norse coming in from other ancestors.

  10. Iain
    December 31st, 2005 at 10:54 | #10

    And I always thought that Quiggan was an Anarresti-sounding name.

  11. jquiggin
    December 31st, 2005 at 12:37 | #11

    It certainly has a Cetian ring to it.

  12. December 31st, 2005 at 13:50 | #12

    My eleven year old has whipped up a piccie of a former relative of yours, as it is far too hot to be outside. See site and have a Happy New Year!

  13. December 31st, 2005 at 15:47 | #13

    ps …’humour’ and we enjoy your site largely.

  14. December 31st, 2005 at 22:25 | #14

    To be honese, John, you look like one of those Euro converts rather than the dinkum article.

    Except that your beard hasn’t been shaped quite right either. Try cutting the end off to get a more rectangular shape.

  15. January 1st, 2006 at 18:39 | #15

    None of that signifies anything much except the arbitrariness of distinctions over which a lot of blood has been, and is still being, shed.

    The problem with Pr Q’s little sally is that the notion of “man of middle eastern appearance” is almost an oxymoron. It is nearly always “men of middle eastern appearance”.

    And thats where the problem starts, one that solitary swarthier, harier types, such as Pr Q, rarely face. Because the proneness of some people to tribal behaviour is not an arbitrary distinction.

    A cultural policy that encourages ethical individuals, rather than ethnic groups, is indicated.

  16. Iain
    January 1st, 2006 at 19:43 | #16

    Sorry John, obviously I meant to put the second ‘i’ in.

    My suspicions of your ethnicity remain the same however :)

  17. SJ
    January 1st, 2006 at 20:00 | #17

    Strocchi Says:

    The problem with Pr Q’s little sally is that the notion of “man of middle eastern appearance� is almost an oxymoron. It is nearly always “men of middle eastern appearance�.

    Yeah, yeah, we get it. It’s not about individuals, it’s about gangs.

    And thats where the problem starts, one that solitary swarthier, harier types, such as Pr Q, rarely face. Because the proneness of some people to tribal behaviour is not an arbitrary distinction.

    Yeah, yeah, we get this too. Only darkies form gangs.

    Really, Jack, such naked racism belongs to a different era.

    Would you mind taking your white supremacist cr*p somewhere else?

  18. January 1st, 2006 at 21:44 | #18

    SJ Says: January 1st, 2006 at 8:00 pm

    Yeah, yeah, we get it. It’s not about individuals, it’s about gangs.

    Correct. Combine multiculturalisms pre-modern ethnic tribalism with various post-modern yoof sub-cultures and you get gangstas, mafiosi and jihadists. This is what is meant by unassimilated men being “caught between two cultures”.

    Yeah, yeah, we get this too. Only darkies form gangs.

    No. Indians are darker than Arabians, they dont go in for much gangsterism in Australia. And Asians are definitely of a different race to Caucasians, but they seem pre-occupied with making money or converting to Presbyterianism.

    Young Arabian males do tend to form into gangs, particularly when encouraged and empowered to do so by multiculturalists and poltically correct, touchy-feely culturally sensitive policing. This fact is know by all honest policemen but ignored by cultural elites. They prefer to have domestic anarchy and sectarianism rather than confess they were wrong on their precious pet political theory.

    The Cronulla disturbances were initiated by Arabic ethnic gangstas marauding a suburb, culminating in the molesting of females and the bashing of life guards. What followed was “actual and existing” multiculturalism in practice, as a small group of Anglo ethnic gangstas (white supremacists skin heads) whipped up race hatred on the back of local vigilantes.

    But I would not expect SJ to tumble to the irony. His type are too dense to notice how their ideas are mocked by manifested reality.

    Really, Jack, such naked racism belongs to a different era. Would you mind taking your white supremacist cr*p somewhere else?

    No. This problem is more cultural, rather than racial. Arabians are members of the Caucasian racial lineage and Abrahamic religious tradition. The Clash of Arabic Islamic-Anglo Christian Civilizations, such as it is, is a family squabble.

    FTR, I support ethical individualism for all races. Ethnic collectivism leads to the evils indicated above, that have been licensed by fools and knaves like SJ.

    Perhaps SJ would consider taking his foul-mouthed ignorance and vicous political ideology someplace else.

  19. SJ
    January 1st, 2006 at 21:59 | #19

    Strocchi Says:

    Perhaps SJ would consider taking his foul-mouthed ignorance and vicous political ideology someplace else.

    Yeah, yeah, we all understand this bit, too. Bigots don’t like being called bigots.

  20. January 1st, 2006 at 22:54 | #20

    Jack really does talk a lot of nonsense, doesn’t he?

  21. January 1st, 2006 at 23:10 | #21

    SJ Says: January 1st, 2006 at 9:59 pm

    Yeah, yeah, we all understand this bit, too. Bigots don’t like being called bigots.

    Actually true bigots usually revel in publicising their bigotry. I simply like to use satire to correct error and satire to ridicule impostors.

    It is hypocrites who do not like having the distance between reality and their rhetoric revealed. This is why I like to needle multiculturalists on the corrupt underpinnings and perverse consequences of their policy, and watch them squirm.

    I imagine the subtlety of these distinction might escape knuckle-dragging low-brow yobs like SJ.

    John Hardy Says: January 1st, 2006 at 10:54 pm

    Jack really does talk a lot of nonsense, doesn’t he?

    I seem to have stumbled into someone elses moronic inferno. You fellas might try using some facts and logic to make your case, instead of relying on free-floating malice and moral vanity preening to put down opposition. It might get you someplace beyond the school-yard level of intellectual retardation.

  22. January 1st, 2006 at 23:55 | #22

    Jack Strocchi Says: January 1st, 2006 at 11:10 pm

    I simply like to use satire to correct error

    should read

    I simply like to use science to correct error

    Emphasis added.

  23. January 2nd, 2006 at 04:39 | #23

    #1~ ARE YOU A ………………………………………………………………>
    “WALKING~TALKING~WARM~BLOODED~HUMAN~BEING”?
    #2~ YOU “QUITE~OBVIOUSLY~HAVE~CIVIL~RIGHTS”……………..>
    A- YOUR FACIAL HAIR STYLE – STYLE OF HAIR CUT – THE RIGHT
    TO WEAR IRON IN YOUR FACE – CHOICE OF RELIGEON – THE
    CHOICE OF BEIN FAT OR SKINNY – CHOICE OF DRESSING NICE
    OR DOUBLE UGLY – DRIVING BRAIN DEAD – CELL PH SUGICALLY
    IMPLANTED ON YER EAR – DOING ALL THE “MACHO-MAN” STUFF
    IE. JOGING – BICYCLING – LOOKING & ACTING COOL – BEING
    RUDE & OFFENSIVE TO OTHERS – ETC. ETC.
    #3~ *B U T* ….. YOU DONT HAVE THE CHOICE OF “SMOKING OR NOT
    SMOKING”….. IT HAS TO BE A LIVING HELL ….. BEIN “SO~DAMNED~
    PERFECT~IN~EVERY~WAY”.

    #4~ THE “UN-HOLIER~THAN~THOU” – SELF APPOINTED “DO-RIGHTS” ARE
    THE ONLY ONES WITH “R I G H T S” TODAY ???? *ASK~EM*
    *ANNNNNNND~DONT~YOU~FORGET~IT*

  24. dsquared
    January 2nd, 2006 at 07:10 | #24

    For what it’s worth, the cutting edge of research in Celtic Studies appears to be that most of us with Celtic names aren’t Celts; we’re descended from the Pictish and Britonic races that were conquered by the Celts before they left in the general direction of Galicia in Spain. We speak Celtic languages for much the same reasons why Indians speak English.

  25. Will De Vere
    January 2nd, 2006 at 13:42 | #25

    I have a number of minor personal superstitions, such as that darkhaired people are ‘luckier’ and more ‘intelligent’ (definition?). As a half-Irish, part-Welsh (this is becoming ridiculous), part-Cornish, part-Jewish brunette-blond, I’ve always believed that blondes are dumber.

    Such superstitions are so silly, but they have an influence.

    We should never vote for redheads, because they’re bonkers. Look at Pauline Hanson.

  26. Will De Vere
    January 2nd, 2006 at 14:14 | #26

    Dsquared says: ‘We speak Celtic languages for much the same reasons why Indians speak English. ‘

    Was it GB Shaw who claim that ‘a language is a dialect with an army’?

    Generalisations about ethnicity are so bloody compelling we shouldn’t trust them. Someone always gets hurt.

  27. SJ
    January 2nd, 2006 at 22:39 | #27

    Strocchi Says:

    I imagine the subtlety of these distinction might escape knuckle-dragging low-brow yobs like SJ.

    And here I was all worried that Jack would call me an elitist, chardonnay-swilling, latte-sipping, baby-boomer humanist.

    Phew. Dodged a bullet there.

  28. January 2nd, 2006 at 22:51 | #28

    Will De Vere Says: January 2nd, 2006 at 2:14 pm

    Generalisations about ethnicity are so bloody compelling we shouldn’t trust them.

    Including that one?

  29. January 2nd, 2006 at 22:55 | #29

    SJ Says: January 2nd, 2006 at 10:39 pm

    an elitist, chardonnay-swilling, latte-sipping, baby-boomer humanist.

    Actually that is quite a good description of the present commenter, when he is off-duty. It certainly represents his world-historical ideal for citizenship of a universal state.

  30. SJ
    January 2nd, 2006 at 23:07 | #30

    Actually that is quite a good description of the present commenter, when he is off-duty. It certainly represents his world-historical ideal for citizenship of a universal state.

    So what are you telling us here, Jack? That you speak of yourself in the third person, and that you’re completely nutso?

    Or that you have some sacred mission, which only causes you to appear like a nut-case when on-duty?

  31. orang
    January 3rd, 2006 at 05:40 | #31

    JQ – you’re hilarious. Hmm dark hair and beard, looks Middle Eastern. It’s not just the colouring me boyo.
    As for me, alone drinking an Ouzo I could be a Wog, with me mate, I could be one of two Middle Eastern males.

  32. January 3rd, 2006 at 20:54 | #32

    SJ Says: January 2nd, 2006 at 11:07 pm

    Or that you have some sacred mission, which only causes you to appear like a nut-case when on-duty?

    I am, like most educated persons, am pretty Wet in my personal opinions and preferences. But I do not make the mistake of elevating my occasional self-indulgences into a political ideology. The Wets do, which is why I enjoy taking the piss out of them. Especially when they fall into that insufferable habit of ostentatiously preening themselves on their supposed moral superiority.

    It is all the more fun when the gap between their scientific ignorance and ethical arrogance yawns so alarmingly. SJ is a text book case of this particular dis-ease.

    So what are you telling us here, Jack? That you speak of yourself in the third person, and that you’re completely nutso?

    The third person omniscient has a distinguished pedigree in literature, even in autobiographical literature. But occasionally I lapse into the first person. Like just then.

    In blogging comments I usually refer to everyone, self and others, in the third person. It maintains my pose of Olympian detachment from the fray and prevents the dispute from getting too personal.

    But if SJ really wants me to get first-personal then I will. You are a light-weight twit who contributes nothing to the discussion except gratuitous bile. Trying to convey scientific findings to you is like explaining chess to a dog. Absolutely nothing gets through to the receiver and the sender just feels foolish for having tried.

    There, feel better now Fido?

  33. Terje
    January 3rd, 2006 at 21:17 | #33

    Taking the piss out of people and getting personal may give the old simian instincts a good work out but it’s kind of painfully distracting for all us innocent bistanders. Can’t you lot find some other form of self indulgence that does not pollute the blogosphere.

  34. Terje
    January 3rd, 2006 at 21:20 | #34

    On further review I think JQ could achieve a public good and just kill this discussion. Its going nowhere fast.

Comments are closed.