>Hi Tamar,
>
>>Using "black" or "white" or "tall" or "short" to describe someone so others can find them or visualize them isn't insulting. But combining those descriptive words with pejorative words, in my view, makes the pejorative stronger and more offensive, especially if the pejorative word is part of a stereotype about the group identified by the descriptive word. So, for example (trying to choose one that's less inflammatory than some others), describing someone as a "blonde airhead" is offensive to blondes generally, while describing someone as an "airhead" is about only the individual so described.
>
>Personally, I don't see how a statement like "blond airhead" is offensive to all blonds. It still describes one individual. It would be different when you say "All blondes are airheads".
>
>IMO, there is a great difference between insulting and discrimination. Discrimination is about generalisations that are insulting. Here I miss te generalisation.

The generalization is implied. If you say "She's blonde and an airhead," it's clear you're describing two different characteristics, but "She's a blonde airhead" carries an implication that there's a relationship between the two.

I don't know any stereotypes about Dutch people, so I can't come up with a realistic analogy here, but suppose for a moment that the Dutch were said to be prone to fighting. Saying "Boy, Walter sure is belligerent" is clearly just about you, but if I said "Walter's just a belligerent Dutchman," it takes on an additional connotation, playing on the expectation that the listener knows that all Dutchman are belligerent.

Tamar