I’m a bit puzzled by this TBH.
Not that I’m against the avoidance of racist language - but who on earth knows that “Hottentot” is a derogatory term for a specific nomadic race of Africans?
Certainly not young children today who will have never heard it - so it will either go completely over their heads or they will ask.
At which point “a not nice word for some African people which we don’t use any more” should suffice for anyone under the age of 12 (and many above it).
Exactly.
The idea that “[while a film with such a rating] should not unsettle a child aged around eight or older … but parents are advised to consider whether the content may upset younger, or more sensitive, children” seems blatant nonsense for the reasons you give. The result is that parents might lose the opportunity to provide the sort of context and comment you suggest.
Quite, it sounds and is, a Victorian name for Southern Africa’s original human inhabitants.
Incidentally over half a century ago when I was doing ‘A’ level Geography, they were one of the world’s five races. Although ‘race’ associated terms are perhaps more abundant than ever, that ‘scientific’ concept of race disappeared with paleo-anthropology and DNA analysis, so it too is best avoided!
Hottentot was superseded by ‘Boesman’/‘Bushman’ but with the end of Apartheid, these too became derogatory, but today’s acceptable version/s can be a minefield because there’s about two dozen different tribes, each with its own ‘click’ language. In SA ‘San’ and Khoi-San are often used but ‘san’ is now known to be also problematic. Apparently these peoples didn’t really have a name for themselves and whatever they’re called may upset someone. also some of the current names of tribes are unpronounceable to most people as they consist largely of clicks.
In addition to the above I doubt that Mary Poppins is screened that often in the Namib desert, and probably even less so with subtitles in a Khoi language.
In Antwerp when I lived there people used to demonstrate the general amazingness of Dutch as a language with the word “Hottentottententententoonstelling*” obviously if you speak German or other fusional languages (let alone agglutinative ones like Turkish or Korean) it’s less amazing 
*It means an exhibition (tentoonstelling) of Hottentot tents (tenten).
I was taught not to use the word Fart as it was considered rude and coarse.
Instead I was told to say Trump.
Now that that is even worse.
I would still use the phrase ‘old totty’ when referring to an ‘old biddy’ as in old woman. Is that no longer acceptable, because this old fart is married to one😄
The worlds gone mad.
Wow - that word’s a BIG challenge - and to think I have my wife in stitches simply when I try to pronounce Afrikaans’ words, particularly the names of old SA Huguenot wineries like Vergelegen or Buitenverwachting.
Lightweights all, try saying
Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch
I can, but only slowly, and if I have it written before me.
For Goodness sakes, don’t people have anything better to do than go over films and pick on them. Get over it you ar***oles! Sorry but this gets my blood boiling and how many of you can remember this in the actual film?
Written by the same professional offendrones that got upset that minorities weren’t represented in the film “Miss Peregrine’s Home
for Peculiar Children”.
A film mainly set in Wales in 1943.
No, I didn’t remember it and, in fact had to search to find out what it was. Even then only in this thread. 
I certainly remember the film, though not the dialogue in question.
Also, had it not been in the article I would have had to check what Hottentot actually meant.
I think that, in general, anti-PC comments (I suppose I should say anti-woke these days) are misplaced. It is important, for example that we refer to people affected by trisomy-21 as “people with trisomy-21” or just maybe “people with Down syndrome” (though I’m not keen on the latter), and absolutely not, under any circumstances “Mongols”.
Language matters - it matters that we start with “people”, it matters that we avoid the label that Down applied because he didn’t just think that people with trisomy-21 looked like members of the Mongolian race he thought people of the Mongolian race shared the trait of low intellect.
Down was a racist. Yes he was a product of his time but thinking that certain human groups are inherently less able than others is racist, there’s no other label,
I agree, but diversity matters and we’ve (mostly, see controversy over Hugh Grant playing an Oompa Lumpa - or the whole characterisation of Oompa Lumpa’s in the Willy Wonka stories) moved on from white actors in blackface.
In this case, however, the move seems to have no benefit at all.
‘Oy vey!’
The French have the Acadamie Francaise, whereas the ‘English’ have Acadamie Mondiale who ‘slope’ in their ‘dark’ recesses from ‘land to sea’ through the ‘nitty gritty’ of our ‘pure’ language. Taking the ‘cross of Jesus’ on their backs in a never-ending ‘crusade’ to repent.
In my daily work have to deal with:
Asian hornets
German wasps
German cockroaches
Oriental cockroaches
(sorry I said ‘cock’ twice then)!
Norwegian rats
Bald moles
PCPC Politically correct Pest Control!
French letters from the mayor.
God give me strength.
I’m sorry 
You could just say offensive.
I’m with noted historian Barbara Tuchman on this.
“Nothing is more unfair than to judge the men of the past by the ideas of the present”.
Brilliant.
I could find only this about Down John Langdon Down - Wikipedia, which doesn’t at all suggest he was a racist or thought “certain human groups are inherently less able than others”. Do you have a reliable source to link?
Yes … and no.
In Down’s case he, at least, advocated for better treatment for mentally impaired individuals than was normal at the time and his views on “Mongolism” were definitely limited by the medical understanding of the time (as genetics hadn’t been invented yet).
But Tiedemann had already questioned the assumption that Africans had smaller brains and were, therefore, less intellectually capable and there was recognition that all humans are equally able righht back into the 16th and 17th centuries.
So we’re not judging solely by the standards of today when we accuse Down of racism, but by the standards of his time (OK, views held by more enlightened individuals, not the majority, but definitely contemporaneous).
Did Tiedemann have any peer reviewed and accredited scientific research to back up his views?
Down’s paper is at https://www.romolocapuano.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Langdon-Down-1866.pdf
Interestingly I think you could have a point - it’s been one of those “data bank” things but now that I re-read the original (which I last did many, many years ago) he says:
Which I always took to mean he thought “typical Mongols” were also intellectually inferior - perhaps, as you say, not after all.
They weren’t big on that sort of thing in the 19th century 
Quite. This is the sort of idiocy that really makes me say FFS 