I was criticized the other day for using this word. It never occurred to me that it was offensive, but Wikipedia says it "may" be derogatory. Given Vancouver's hockey team, I tend to think it's benign, but I wouldn't want to get William Shatner angry. Please help me oot.
Asked
Active
Viewed 3.2k times
17
-
11Just because a professional sports team uses a name doesn't make it inoffensive. See: Washington Redskins. – Sam Apr 29 '11 at 05:04
-
Related: What does 'mothercanuckers' mean? – RegDwigнt Apr 29 '11 at 10:34
-
@Sam However there is a difference because Canuck describes those on the team, while Redskin describes a minority not particularly represented on the team. See Alain's answer. – BBischof Apr 30 '11 at 03:46
-
1@BB, that was kind of my point. Just because the players may not be offended by it, doesn't mean that someone, somewhere isn't. – Sam Apr 30 '11 at 04:22
-
Here in Minnesota the term is used in a jocular sense -- not exactly derogatory but used for friendly "ribbing". (Though I really haven't heard it much in a number of years.) – Hot Licks Oct 23 '16 at 18:27
-
As usual, it depends on how it's used. When Pat Buchanan referred to Canada as Canuckistan (because of his grossly misguided understanding of what he thinks socialism is or he thinks that Canada is socialist (!)---a view shared by many Americans by the way), it was obviously offensive. But it is rarely used in Canada, except in Vancouver, and except to mimic Americans. – David Handelman Oct 23 '16 at 19:51
9 Answers
12
The reason why Canuck could be perceived as offensive is because it is a slang term for a nationality.
But as you know there are many sports in which Canadian teams have elected to call themselves the "Canucks". The most famous is the Vancouver Hockey team but the rugby national team is also called the Canucks.
Since sport is very much an activity based on group pride, Canuck is probably not an insult.
It's all a matter of circumstances, context and tone. I don't mind being addressed at as Froggy as long as it's not used in an offensive way or in a formal occasion.
Alain Pannetier Φ
- 17,926
-
-
1@muntoo, please see here. The excerpt that says "The French custom of eating frog legs is the source of the English use of the derogatory nickname "frogs" for French people". See also this. – Alain Pannetier Φ Jun 26 '12 at 05:49
-
I've never heard of a Canadian taking offense at Canuck, but I would never call you Froggy. – JAM Oct 03 '12 at 13:18
6
Like any other "possibly derogatory" expression - it's up to the person you meet if he/she finds it offensive. It doesn't come down to grammar and use as much, but more to the feelings and background of the receiver.
You will come across words that people find offensive, and then you know not to use that word again in the same situation. No rules since there are feelings involved - and there are no rules on feelings.
masarah
- 2,732
-
2But there are certain words that are widely accepted as offensive and there is always a reason for that, if not a rule. – z7sg Ѫ Apr 29 '11 at 11:18
5
I'm Canadian, and I don't think of the word Canuck as offensive and don't know of anyone who does think so. I haven't surveyed the population, however.
It is perfectly possible to offend someone by calling them a Canuck or Canadian (or any nationality, in fact) if you simultaneously equate that nationality with something offensive. In that sense you'd be insulting the entire nation generally, and the person in question specifically, for being a member of that nation. But I don't think that's intrinsic to the word Canuck.
Mr. Shiny and New 安宇
- 26,528
2
Sometimes it matters if the user of the word is a member of the group described. I would think "Canuck" used by one Canadian of another might be perceived as less offensive than the same word used by a non-Canadian. I know that, since I am Caucasian, I am pretty much forbidden "the n-word" when speaking of certain non-Caucasians, whereas those same non-Caucasians make freer use of the word when speaking among themselves.
PSU
- 1,826
1
I've never heard of Canuck being offensive. We have the Vancouver Canucks, the Crazy Canucks (ski jumping) and comic book hero Captain Canuck. I'm proud to be a Canuck.
Kaye
- 11
1
In my 43 years being Canadian, I have never, ever been offended by the use of the term Canuck, never met anyone who was offended by the term Canuck, never met anyone who felt it could be used as a derogatory term...it is synonymous with Canadian.
It has no known derogatory connotations in Canada or elsewhere, unlike specific words that have always been almost exclusively pejorative. Unlike even the term Yankee, Canuck is, and as near as anyone can determine, simply a nickname for Canadians.
Using the term in a pejorative fashion does not make it a derogatory term, any more than if they'd used the term Canadian. Anyone who decides they are offended by the use of the term Canuck is desperately reaching for something, anything to be offended by, and you are best advised to put some distance between yourself and that perpetually self-victimizing human.
Andrew M
- 29
1
A little more information at: Johnny Canuck
Johnny Canuck, a personification of Canada and a member of the same family of figures as John Bull (Great Britain), Uncle Sam (US), and Marianne (France). Since the 1860s, editorial cartoonists have depicted Johnny Canuck as a wholesome, if simpleminded, young man wearing the garb of a habitant, farmer, logger, rancher or soldier. He is often drawn resisting the blandishments or bullying of John Bull or Uncle Sam.
Offence might still be taken by a Canadian of modern outlook at the idea of "wholesome, if simpleminded" but its value as an insult has probably been lost to time.
Icy
- 1,728
- 12
- 12
0
If one Canadian calls another a "Canuck" that is alright but it is not alright if an American or someone else calls us that because it is used as an insult most of the time. If you are American and call someone a Canuck in Toronto or Montreal, you'd better be a brave person!
