|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
|
|
“Every critic, every detractor will have to bow down to President Trump...It’s everyone who’s ever doubted Donald, whoever disagreed, whoever challenged him. It is the ultimate revenge to become the most powerful man in the universe.”
- Omarosa Manigault, Trump campaign official
|
On September 23 2016 07:13 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:10 oBlade wrote:On September 23 2016 07:05 Plansix wrote:On September 23 2016 07:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 06:58 KwarK wrote:On September 23 2016 06:55 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 06:51 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:50 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 06:49 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:48 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
I'm not using "politically correct" as an argument. I'm using it as a label. And the labeling really has nothing to do with my arguments anyway -- all of which makes your appeal to logic amusing. Certain posters (yourself included) certainly haven't shown any hesitation in relentlessly misrepresenting my point, so don't let logic get in your way. So there's nothing wrong logically with our position? Oh no, there very clearly is something logically wrong, which is why I mentioned your "relentless misrepresentation" of my point. So can you please demonstrate it, as I asked you, instead of just labeling it pc? I already have, as have others. All of my statements were racially neutral, yet they have been repeatedly impugned (and I have personally been impugned) as being racist. And the only way to get to "what xDaunt said is racist" is to add content to my statements that aren't there. That is what we call a misrepresentation. If you want people to stop calling you a racist maybe ease up on the racist rhetoric. Just an idea. It's the same as when GGTemplar is burning crosses on the lawns of a black family and cries out "no, actually I burn crosses on the lawns of white and black people all the time, you can't infer anything from this". If you're upset about people thinking you're a racist perhaps stop using the word vermin to describe black people. Of course we all already think you're a racist but maybe when you're meeting new people you could try and hide it. I'm not upset at all that various posters call me racist. It lets me know that I've won. He has reached is final form. It took Trump, but he got there. Full blown, doesn't need to hide it any more, racist upper middle class dude. 2016 people. The year we will never forget. Have you ever wondered to yourself what percent of society is racist, and what percent of people you have disagreements with in this thread (about anything) are racist, and compared those estimates? 100% of society suffer from racist bias. Not enough of society understand that fact and gets super offended when someone tells them they are being racist. Do you know what you say when someone says you are being racist? "I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be. I don't want to offend anyone, can you explain to me why that is racist?" Fucking EZ PZ.
I can't accommodate people who appoint themselves indisputable racism police. But if 100% of society (meaning none of society) is racist, I'll start composing my own educate-yourself-memos for you.
On September 23 2016 07:13 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:12 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:50 KwarK wrote:On September 23 2016 06:46 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:38 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:37 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:36 ticklishmusic wrote:
Maybe we should have an experiment. GGTemplar can call a white guy on the street a monkey for "doing something dumb". Then he call a black person that and we can compare the results. Oh I don't go around calling people on the street monkey that is just retarded. On September 23 2016 06:37 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:36 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:30 Slaughter wrote:
The problem is that terms like monkey is rarely applied to white people, even when they are doing bad things. So what about me? I've thought of more white people as 'fucking monkeys' thank blacks. You might be surprised to learn that the way people speak around the world isn't generally based on what you think. Nope not surprised at all. As I've said, I've come to learn I am very different than most people. So if you aren't surprised, why did you say "What about me?" as if it was surprising that the english language didn't stop to consider all of your particularities? So that you can come to the rational conclusion that I am one of the rare exceptions who applies it to anyone acting like a monkey. That's what the word literally is. Monkey. When someone is stupid you can call them stupid. The only difference is this word has historical baggage associated with racism. This entire argument started because the two were conflated. I can't speak absolutely for other people in this thread, but I wouldn't be surprised if the people who called them 'vermin' or 'thugs' did so because of their actions not because of their skin color. The criticism came that they were being targeted because of their skin color which I doubt was the case. Maybe I'm wrong, but I know from my perspective at least that it certainly wasn't the case. How are you still not getting it that you shouldn't be calling black people monkeys, even if you think it's not coming from a racist place? Do you think it's okay to call black people niggers as a derogatory term if you're not doing it because you're racist, just because you're looking down on those specific black people? I mean we both know what's actually going on here but I'll play the game and pretend you really have no idea why what you did was wrong and that it needs to be explained to you. I disagree with the notion that 'monkey' and 'nigger' are comparable insults. You're just wrong here. The only wrong thing I did was decide to entertain the pseudointellectuals that call this thread home and waste my time with the following argument -'Why is calling these violent criminals who are acting like animals vermin/thugs racist? It's just factually true' -'No it's racist you're only calling them that because they're black' -'No I'm calling them that because of how they're acting. I call white people monkey all the time. It has nothing to do with race' -'No it's racist you're only calling them that because they're black. You are a racist for calling these black people monkey'. -'You don't understand I'm not calling black people monkeys, I'm calling these violent criminals monkeys because they're acting like animals' -'You're a fucking deplorable racist stop calling black people monkeys' wow I am the idiot here Please explain why nigger is racist and monkey is not with reference to the historical contexts of each. Thanks.
Nigger/coon/spook are slurs. Thug/vermin/monkey are words. We know there's no eyelid batting if someone were to call a white person, acting like a monkey, a monkey.
If you call someone a slur as an insult, nigger/coon/spook, the force of it is that the person is black. Now, thug/vermin/monkey may have more connotations. If GGT was calling people at the supermarket that, we might be suspicious. But if someone throws rocks off an overpass at cars, and they're vermin, but in the case we find out they happen to be black, that means you can't use that word anymore because the very use also hurts Morgan Freeman? Because of the historical status of people who also resemble the person throwing rocks at cars, that's relevant? Two groups in this thread find that thought either incredibly divisive or necessarily inclusive.
What's dehumanizing, as a bundle of smart people figured out through history, is committing a crime against your fellow man.
|
I mean I don't think people should be that surprised after we had the whole "should we feel white guilt" conversation a while back. If you don't accept that how you got to where you are today as a white person is from racism then you really have no frame of reference to recognize racism in anyway.
This is why its so hard for me to be a republican. I'm really trying here.
|
On September 23 2016 07:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:08 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:57 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:48 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:46 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:38 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:37 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:36 ticklishmusic wrote:
Maybe we should have an experiment. GGTemplar can call a white guy on the street a monkey for "doing something dumb". Then he call a black person that and we can compare the results. Oh I don't go around calling people on the street monkey that is just retarded. On September 23 2016 06:37 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:36 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
[quote]
So what about me? I've thought of more white people as 'fucking monkeys' thank blacks. You might be surprised to learn that the way people speak around the world isn't generally based on what you think. Nope not surprised at all. As I've said, I've come to learn I am very different than most people. So if you aren't surprised, why did you say "What about me?" as if it was surprising that the english language didn't stop to consider all of your particularities? So that you can come to the rational conclusion that I am one of the rare exceptions who applies it to anyone acting like a monkey. That's what the word literally is. Monkey. When someone is stupid you can call them stupid. The only difference is this word has historical baggage associated with racism. This entire argument started because the two were conflated. I can't speak absolutely for other people in this thread, but I wouldn't be surprised if the people who called them 'vermin' or 'thugs' did so because of their actions not because of their skin color. The criticism came that they were being targeted because of their skin color which I doubt was the case. Maybe I'm wrong, but I know from my perspective at least that it certainly wasn't the case. Your original argument was that we overreacted by calling you a racist when you used racist terms to describe black people. Now you're saying, we should have considered that you're a special snowflake who uses racist terms differently than the other people who are racists. In what you're saying now, there is no overreaction on our part. It is perfectly logical of us to assume that you're using terms in the same way that the rest of americans do. I'm clearly not explaining myself correctly here and you are clearly living in a different reality of what the 'argument' was about. My comments about being a special snowflake are trying to bring some humor into a situation I consider absurdly stupid. My original argument was that people calling the criminals in that video 'thugs' or 'vermin' was not racially motivated but behaviorally motivated because they were acting like 'monkeys' so it wasn't wrong to call them 'monkeys'. This was largely met with the counter-argument of being called a racist. I think you're being the opposite of logical when you are strictly being told "they are vermin/thugs/monkeys because they are behaving like criminals, not because they are black", but then ignore that and say "No you're only doing it because they're black you racist" over and over. You pretend I misunderstand you, and your explanation clearly shows that I didn't. Your original argument was that we overreacted by calling you a racist when you used racist terms ( monkeys) to describe black people. Now you're saying, we should have considered that you're a special snowflake who uses racist terms differently ( "they are vermin/thugs/monkeys because they are behaving like criminals, not because they are black") than the other people who are racists. You could call them niggers and then say that you do it because they behave like criminals, not because they are black. You could even believe that it is very true. Wouldn't change how you would be perceived, or how you should expect to be perceived. Oh you didn't overreacted by calling me a racist. You were just wrong. I said this the first time. I said I was calling them names because the names fit how they were behaving. I said it had nothing to do with their skin color. You are others wanted to have an argument about why I was doing it, which was just about as far from logical as you can get. That's literally what happened. You can't read. My comments about being a special snowflake had nothing to do with the argument, so yes you misunderstood me and willingly continue to ignore what I say and misunderstand me still. Why is it so difficult for you to read? I'm telling you the snowflake tangent had nothing to do with the argument and that's all you can focus on. Vermin is not a racist term. Thug is not a racist term. Criminal is not a racist term. Monkey is not a racist term. Everything is a racist term if the people in power use the term to degrade the disenfranchised. Mick is not inherently a slur, but I wouldn't call a large Irish dude it.
Irish were called vermin aswell.
The problem is that the poorest of the poorest are going to be dehumanized by the priviledged. If you complain they are doing so because of racism, you are not attacking the root of the problem, just the surface or justification, which sure is despicable.
|
United States42596 Posts
On September 23 2016 07:28 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:10 Plansix wrote:On September 23 2016 07:08 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:57 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:48 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:46 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:38 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:37 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:36 ticklishmusic wrote:
Maybe we should have an experiment. GGTemplar can call a white guy on the street a monkey for "doing something dumb". Then he call a black person that and we can compare the results. Oh I don't go around calling people on the street monkey that is just retarded. On September 23 2016 06:37 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
You might be surprised to learn that the way people speak around the world isn't generally based on what you think. Nope not surprised at all. As I've said, I've come to learn I am very different than most people. So if you aren't surprised, why did you say "What about me?" as if it was surprising that the english language didn't stop to consider all of your particularities? So that you can come to the rational conclusion that I am one of the rare exceptions who applies it to anyone acting like a monkey. That's what the word literally is. Monkey. When someone is stupid you can call them stupid. The only difference is this word has historical baggage associated with racism. This entire argument started because the two were conflated. I can't speak absolutely for other people in this thread, but I wouldn't be surprised if the people who called them 'vermin' or 'thugs' did so because of their actions not because of their skin color. The criticism came that they were being targeted because of their skin color which I doubt was the case. Maybe I'm wrong, but I know from my perspective at least that it certainly wasn't the case. Your original argument was that we overreacted by calling you a racist when you used racist terms to describe black people. Now you're saying, we should have considered that you're a special snowflake who uses racist terms differently than the other people who are racists. In what you're saying now, there is no overreaction on our part. It is perfectly logical of us to assume that you're using terms in the same way that the rest of americans do. I'm clearly not explaining myself correctly here and you are clearly living in a different reality of what the 'argument' was about. My comments about being a special snowflake are trying to bring some humor into a situation I consider absurdly stupid. My original argument was that people calling the criminals in that video 'thugs' or 'vermin' was not racially motivated but behaviorally motivated because they were acting like 'monkeys' so it wasn't wrong to call them 'monkeys'. This was largely met with the counter-argument of being called a racist. I think you're being the opposite of logical when you are strictly being told "they are vermin/thugs/monkeys because they are behaving like criminals, not because they are black", but then ignore that and say "No you're only doing it because they're black you racist" over and over. You pretend I misunderstand you, and your explanation clearly shows that I didn't. Your original argument was that we overreacted by calling you a racist when you used racist terms ( monkeys) to describe black people. Now you're saying, we should have considered that you're a special snowflake who uses racist terms differently ( "they are vermin/thugs/monkeys because they are behaving like criminals, not because they are black") than the other people who are racists. You could call them niggers and then say that you do it because they behave like criminals, not because they are black. You could even believe that it is very true. Wouldn't change how you would be perceived, or how you should expect to be perceived. Oh you didn't overreacted by calling me a racist. You were just wrong. I said this the first time. I said I was calling them names because the names fit how they were behaving. I said it had nothing to do with their skin color. You are others wanted to have an argument about why I was doing it, which was just about as far from logical as you can get. That's literally what happened. You can't read. My comments about being a special snowflake had nothing to do with the argument, so yes you misunderstood me and willingly continue to ignore what I say and misunderstand me still. Why is it so difficult for you to read? I'm telling you the snowflake tangent had nothing to do with the argument and that's all you can focus on. Vermin is not a racist term. Thug is not a racist term. Criminal is not a racist term. Monkey is not a racist term. Everything is a racist term if the people in power use the term to degrade the disenfranchised. Mick is not inherently a slur, but I wouldn't call a large Irish dude it. Irish were called vermin aswell. The problem is that the poorest of the poorest are going to be dehumanized by the priviledged. If you complain they are doing so because of racism, you are not attacking the root of the problem, just the surface or justification.
Are you high right now? The Irish experienced a shitton of racism for hundreds of years. They're like the most discriminated against white folk out there historically. You're trying to use them as an exception but they're not, they're a fucking case study of victims of racism. Anglican England abused the fuck out of the Irish until we stopped feeding them and they left to try their luck in Protestant America who targeted them heavily with the KKK etc.
|
|
|
On September 23 2016 07:31 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:28 Godwrath wrote:On September 23 2016 07:10 Plansix wrote:On September 23 2016 07:08 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:57 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:48 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:46 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:38 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:37 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
[quote]
Oh I don't go around calling people on the street monkey that is just retarded.
[quote]
Nope not surprised at all. As I've said, I've come to learn I am very different than most people. So if you aren't surprised, why did you say "What about me?" as if it was surprising that the english language didn't stop to consider all of your particularities? So that you can come to the rational conclusion that I am one of the rare exceptions who applies it to anyone acting like a monkey. That's what the word literally is. Monkey. When someone is stupid you can call them stupid. The only difference is this word has historical baggage associated with racism. This entire argument started because the two were conflated. I can't speak absolutely for other people in this thread, but I wouldn't be surprised if the people who called them 'vermin' or 'thugs' did so because of their actions not because of their skin color. The criticism came that they were being targeted because of their skin color which I doubt was the case. Maybe I'm wrong, but I know from my perspective at least that it certainly wasn't the case. Your original argument was that we overreacted by calling you a racist when you used racist terms to describe black people. Now you're saying, we should have considered that you're a special snowflake who uses racist terms differently than the other people who are racists. In what you're saying now, there is no overreaction on our part. It is perfectly logical of us to assume that you're using terms in the same way that the rest of americans do. I'm clearly not explaining myself correctly here and you are clearly living in a different reality of what the 'argument' was about. My comments about being a special snowflake are trying to bring some humor into a situation I consider absurdly stupid. My original argument was that people calling the criminals in that video 'thugs' or 'vermin' was not racially motivated but behaviorally motivated because they were acting like 'monkeys' so it wasn't wrong to call them 'monkeys'. This was largely met with the counter-argument of being called a racist. I think you're being the opposite of logical when you are strictly being told "they are vermin/thugs/monkeys because they are behaving like criminals, not because they are black", but then ignore that and say "No you're only doing it because they're black you racist" over and over. You pretend I misunderstand you, and your explanation clearly shows that I didn't. Your original argument was that we overreacted by calling you a racist when you used racist terms ( monkeys) to describe black people. Now you're saying, we should have considered that you're a special snowflake who uses racist terms differently ( "they are vermin/thugs/monkeys because they are behaving like criminals, not because they are black") than the other people who are racists. You could call them niggers and then say that you do it because they behave like criminals, not because they are black. You could even believe that it is very true. Wouldn't change how you would be perceived, or how you should expect to be perceived. Oh you didn't overreacted by calling me a racist. You were just wrong. I said this the first time. I said I was calling them names because the names fit how they were behaving. I said it had nothing to do with their skin color. You are others wanted to have an argument about why I was doing it, which was just about as far from logical as you can get. That's literally what happened. You can't read. My comments about being a special snowflake had nothing to do with the argument, so yes you misunderstood me and willingly continue to ignore what I say and misunderstand me still. Why is it so difficult for you to read? I'm telling you the snowflake tangent had nothing to do with the argument and that's all you can focus on. Vermin is not a racist term. Thug is not a racist term. Criminal is not a racist term. Monkey is not a racist term. Everything is a racist term if the people in power use the term to degrade the disenfranchised. Mick is not inherently a slur, but I wouldn't call a large Irish dude it. Irish were called vermin aswell. The problem is that the poorest of the poorest are going to be dehumanized by the priviledged. If you complain they are doing so because of racism, you are not attacking the root of the problem, just the surface or justification. Are you high right now? The Irish experienced a shitton of racism for hundreds of years. They're like the most discriminated against white folk out there historically.
Did i say the oppossite somewhere ? Do you realize that when i say justification, i mean the use of the priviledge's perception of race superiority as an excuse to piss on the poorest and exploited, right ?
|
On September 23 2016 07:21 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:18 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 07:14 Barrin wrote:On September 23 2016 07:08 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Monkey is not a racist term. Let me get this straight. You've never heard this term used in a racist context? If not, are you sure you live in the US? Do you get out much?If so, I think you might want to take a look in the mirror when you say "intellectually dishonest". Oh I have. ... So you do see how someone might think you're racist when you use it to describe black people, seeing as how that's how it's been used pretty much every time they've seen it in that context in the past? Just trying to clarify communication.
I understand. This entire debate sparked over posters commenting that the black people in the video were acting like animals/vermin/thugs. I understand why some people might think that sounds racist. It's not exactly something I fault them for or consider irrational.
What I consider irrational is not considering or accepting the possibility that it wasn't racially motivated. Even arguing that it had to be racially motivated because the words were being used against black people. I considered this irrational. I mocked how they were being picky-and-choosy with the insults they cared about 'going too far' as dehumanizing.
I focused on the obviously charitable position that any rational person ought to consider. These violent criminals were being called animals/vermin/thugs because they were acting like animals/vermin/thugs, not because they were black, which is what multiple posters seemed to be incapable of grasping.
That is when I decided to say fuck it and called them monkeys, and specifically stated I am calling them monkeys because they were acting like monkeys and it had nothing to do with their race or skin color. As you can tell, this confused some of the PC posters in this thread who irrationally rejected the idea that such an insult could be used (against a black person) without being racially motivated. I consider this highly irrational.
GH actually picked up on the point I was making extremely early on in the debate, and noted that it's possible for it to not be racist if 'monkey' was being used as a sort of synonym for 'stupid'. The thing is, everyone using these phrases made explicit multiple times that they were insulting these people because of their behavior, not because of their skin color. I even noted how I've probably called more white people 'fucking monkeys' to myself when i considered them to be behaving like animals.
I would think the discussion would have immediately turned to the historical context discussion that we are at now if the posters were more intelligent, but rather it turned into several posters arguing that "no you're only doing it because they're fucking black you racist".
So you're telling me why I'm calling someone stupid is because they are black after I've literally told you I am calling them stupid because they behaved stupid. That is how I saw the past 10 pages going down.
|
|
|
On September 23 2016 07:27 oBlade wrote:
Nigger/coon/spook are slurs. Thug/vermin/monkey are words. We know there's no eyelid batting if someone were to call a white person, acting like a monkey, a monkey.
You're trying to make a distinction that makes no sense. If you call an american man a "cunt", there's no eyelid batting either. Doesn't mean "cunt" is a "word" and not a "slur".
|
On September 23 2016 06:16 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 06:11 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:07 Plansix wrote:On September 23 2016 06:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 05:50 KwarK wrote:
Templar, if you're being a racist asshole and I call you a racist asshole you can't then go "I'm offended by that and I demand you not call me it". Teamliquid is not your safe space. Grow the fuck up. If you want to double down on being racist and calling black people monkeys then get used to people calling you out on it. I'm sure xDaunt can recommend you a few websites where that kind of rhetoric will be more mainstream if you need to go find a hugbox where nobody ever disagrees with you. I'm not dehumanizing black people I'm calling criminals acting like animals criminals acting like animals If you call me a racist asshole I don't give a shit because you're wrong. I'm not a racist any more than any rational thinking, educated human being If you get mad when I call someone a monkey because they happen to be black then you're the fucking racist. Why is it so hard to come to terms with the fact that my judgment is not racially motivated. The video of these people showed them acting like monkeys. It doesn't matter what color their skin are to me, what matters is how they acted.
What matters to you is their skin color.
You are the racist, not me. Welcome to the real world, where you can't call black people monkeys and not be called a racist. There's nothing logical or rational about dictating if you call someone a 'monkey' then it's immediately racist, but only under the caveat that they are black. It's an entirely emotional, and ironically racist in itself, conclusion When a racist person calls a black man a monkey, he's refering to the idea that black people aren't really human, they're not really of the same species. He's also projecting the image that black people kind of look like monkeys to him cause, you know, black people are black, and monkeys are black (very sophisticated as you can see). There is a vast history on associating black people and monkeys in racist circles. Meanwhile, when you call a white person a monkey, you're not refering to any particular history of racism. Which is why it's not generally viewed as racist. So yeah, you're right, a double standard exists. It's there to address the fact that the two standards are different.
![[image loading]](https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/13/89/34/138934af6844c29c4d5311ea14ed975b.jpg)
+ Show Spoiler +
Let's talk about colorism amongst monkeys.
|
United States42596 Posts
On September 23 2016 07:32 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
GH actually picked up on the point I was making extremely early on in the debate, and noted that it's possible for it to not be racist if 'monkey' was being used as a sort of synonym for 'stupid'.
On September 23 2016 06:16 GreenHorizons wrote:
I suppose if the person wanted to operate from the position that they were a ignorant moron, there may be nothing racist about it.
I'm not sure that post says what you think it says.
|
On September 23 2016 07:32 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:21 Barrin wrote:On September 23 2016 07:18 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 07:14 Barrin wrote:On September 23 2016 07:08 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Monkey is not a racist term. Let me get this straight. You've never heard this term used in a racist context? If not, are you sure you live in the US? Do you get out much?If so, I think you might want to take a look in the mirror when you say "intellectually dishonest". Oh I have. ... So you do see how someone might think you're racist when you use it to describe black people, seeing as how that's how it's been used pretty much every time they've seen it in that context in the past? Just trying to clarify communication. What I consider irrational is not considering or accepting the possibility that it wasn't racially motivated.
This sentence, translated from GGTeMpLaR into english, means "I consider it irrational that people are not accepting my way of speaking english over the way of speaking english of everyone else".
|
On September 23 2016 07:36 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:32 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
GH actually picked up on the point I was making extremely early on in the debate, and noted that it's possible for it to not be racist if 'monkey' was being used as a sort of synonym for 'stupid'. Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 06:16 GreenHorizons wrote:
I suppose if the person wanted to operate from the position that they were a ignorant moron, there may be nothing racist about it. I'm not sure that post says what you think it says.
I didn't want to tell him. GH's burn was so cold and then GG didn't even get it. I couldn't bring myself to do it.
|
United States42596 Posts
On September 23 2016 07:27 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:13 Plansix wrote:On September 23 2016 07:10 oBlade wrote:On September 23 2016 07:05 Plansix wrote:On September 23 2016 07:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 06:58 KwarK wrote:On September 23 2016 06:55 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 06:51 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:50 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 06:49 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
So there's nothing wrong logically with our position? Oh no, there very clearly is something logically wrong, which is why I mentioned your "relentless misrepresentation" of my point. So can you please demonstrate it, as I asked you, instead of just labeling it pc? I already have, as have others. All of my statements were racially neutral, yet they have been repeatedly impugned (and I have personally been impugned) as being racist. And the only way to get to "what xDaunt said is racist" is to add content to my statements that aren't there. That is what we call a misrepresentation. If you want people to stop calling you a racist maybe ease up on the racist rhetoric. Just an idea. It's the same as when GGTemplar is burning crosses on the lawns of a black family and cries out "no, actually I burn crosses on the lawns of white and black people all the time, you can't infer anything from this". If you're upset about people thinking you're a racist perhaps stop using the word vermin to describe black people. Of course we all already think you're a racist but maybe when you're meeting new people you could try and hide it. I'm not upset at all that various posters call me racist. It lets me know that I've won. He has reached is final form. It took Trump, but he got there. Full blown, doesn't need to hide it any more, racist upper middle class dude. 2016 people. The year we will never forget. Have you ever wondered to yourself what percent of society is racist, and what percent of people you have disagreements with in this thread (about anything) are racist, and compared those estimates? 100% of society suffer from racist bias. Not enough of society understand that fact and gets super offended when someone tells them they are being racist. Do you know what you say when someone says you are being racist? "I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be. I don't want to offend anyone, can you explain to me why that is racist?" Fucking EZ PZ. I can't accommodate people who appoint themselves indisputable racism police. But if 100% of society (meaning none of society) is racist, I'll start composing my own educate-yourself-memos for you. Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:13 KwarK wrote:On September 23 2016 07:12 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:50 KwarK wrote:On September 23 2016 06:46 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:38 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:37 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:36 ticklishmusic wrote:
Maybe we should have an experiment. GGTemplar can call a white guy on the street a monkey for "doing something dumb". Then he call a black person that and we can compare the results. Oh I don't go around calling people on the street monkey that is just retarded. On September 23 2016 06:37 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:36 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 06:30 Slaughter wrote:
The problem is that terms like monkey is rarely applied to white people, even when they are doing bad things. So what about me? I've thought of more white people as 'fucking monkeys' thank blacks. You might be surprised to learn that the way people speak around the world isn't generally based on what you think. Nope not surprised at all. As I've said, I've come to learn I am very different than most people. So if you aren't surprised, why did you say "What about me?" as if it was surprising that the english language didn't stop to consider all of your particularities? So that you can come to the rational conclusion that I am one of the rare exceptions who applies it to anyone acting like a monkey. That's what the word literally is. Monkey. When someone is stupid you can call them stupid. The only difference is this word has historical baggage associated with racism. This entire argument started because the two were conflated. I can't speak absolutely for other people in this thread, but I wouldn't be surprised if the people who called them 'vermin' or 'thugs' did so because of their actions not because of their skin color. The criticism came that they were being targeted because of their skin color which I doubt was the case. Maybe I'm wrong, but I know from my perspective at least that it certainly wasn't the case. How are you still not getting it that you shouldn't be calling black people monkeys, even if you think it's not coming from a racist place? Do you think it's okay to call black people niggers as a derogatory term if you're not doing it because you're racist, just because you're looking down on those specific black people? I mean we both know what's actually going on here but I'll play the game and pretend you really have no idea why what you did was wrong and that it needs to be explained to you. I disagree with the notion that 'monkey' and 'nigger' are comparable insults. You're just wrong here. The only wrong thing I did was decide to entertain the pseudointellectuals that call this thread home and waste my time with the following argument -'Why is calling these violent criminals who are acting like animals vermin/thugs racist? It's just factually true' -'No it's racist you're only calling them that because they're black' -'No I'm calling them that because of how they're acting. I call white people monkey all the time. It has nothing to do with race' -'No it's racist you're only calling them that because they're black. You are a racist for calling these black people monkey'. -'You don't understand I'm not calling black people monkeys, I'm calling these violent criminals monkeys because they're acting like animals' -'You're a fucking deplorable racist stop calling black people monkeys' wow I am the idiot here Please explain why nigger is racist and monkey is not with reference to the historical contexts of each. Thanks. Nigger/coon/spook are slurs. Thug/vermin/monkey are words. We know there's no eyelid batting if someone were to call a white person, acting like a monkey, a monkey. If you call someone a slur as an insult, nigger/coon/spook, the force of it is that the person is black. Now, thug/vermin/monkey may have more connotations. If GGT was calling people at the supermarket that, we might be suspicious. But if someone throws rocks off an overpass at cars, and they're vermin, but in the case we find out they happen to be black, that means you can't use that word anymore because the very use also hurts Morgan Freeman? Because of the historical status of people who also resemble the person throwing rocks at cars, that's relevant? Two groups in this thread find that thought either incredibly divisive or necessarily inclusive. What's dehumanizing, as a bundle of smart people figured out through history, is committing a crime against your fellow man.
Monkey is a slur against blacks. Because of the way that people said that they literally were subhuman monkeys while justifying enslaving them, discriminating against them, conducting unethical medical research on them and all the other shit that went down. Oh, and the way that people use it as a slur against blacks all the time.
|
On September 23 2016 07:34 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:32 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 07:21 Barrin wrote:On September 23 2016 07:18 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 23 2016 07:14 Barrin wrote:On September 23 2016 07:08 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Monkey is not a racist term. Let me get this straight. You've never heard this term used in a racist context? If not, are you sure you live in the US? Do you get out much?If so, I think you might want to take a look in the mirror when you say "intellectually dishonest". Oh I have. ... So you do see how someone might think you're racist when you use it to describe black people, seeing as how that's how it's been used pretty much every time they've seen it in that context in the past? Just trying to clarify communication. I understand. This entire debate sparked over posters commenting that the black people in the video were acting like animals/vermin/thugs. I understand why some people might think that sounds racist. It's not exactly something I fault them for or consider irrational. What I consider irrational is not considering or accepting the possibility that it wasn't racially motivated. Even arguing that it had to be racially motivated because the words were being used against black people. I considered this irrational. I mocked how they were being picky-and-choosy with the insults they cared about 'going too far' as dehumanizing. I focused on the obviously charitable position that any rational person ought to consider. These violent criminals were being called animals/vermin/thugs because they were acting like animals/vermin/thugs, not because they were black, which is what multiple posters seemed to be incapable of grasping. That is when I decided to say fuck it and called them monkeys, and specifically stated I am calling them monkeys because they were acting like monkeys and it had nothing to do with their race or skin color. As you can tell, this confused some of the PC posters in this thread who irrationally rejected the idea that such an insult could be used (against a black person) without being racially motivated. I consider this highly irrational. GH actually picked up on the point I was making extremely early on in the debate, and noted that it's possible for it to not be racist if 'monkey' was being used as a sort of synonym for 'stupid'. The thing is, everyone using these phrases made explicit multiple times that they were insulting these people because of their behavior, not because of their skin color. I even noted how I've probably called more white people 'fucking monkeys' to myself when i considered them to be behaving like animals. I would think the discussion would have immediately turned to the historical context discussion that we are at now if the posters were more intelligent, but rather it turned into several posters arguing that "no you're only doing it because they're fucking black you racist". So you're telling me why I'm calling someone stupid is because they are black after I've literally told you I am calling them stupid because they behaved stupid. That is how I saw the past 10 pages going down. I'm just saying that maybe you can avoid such confusion by using different terminology.
I'd prefer we didn't have this socially taboo list of names you aren't allowed to call this group or that group. How about we as a society focus on progressing past these things that hold us back from culturally moving past this and focus on more productive things? Take away the power from these words and they lose meaning.
It's literally Lord Voldemort vs 'he-who-must-not-be-named' but instead of one word we've got fucking dozens we're trying to censor.
Some of them I understand, others like 'vermin' or 'thug' or 'monkey' make no fucking sense.
It comes down to the idea that just because things are a certain way doesn't mean they have to stay that way. Whatever though.
I will not call black people, or white people, or asian people, or anyone a monkey in this thread again (even if they're acting literally like violent animals).
What other words should we censure as insults? Vermin? Thugs? Deplorables? Cucks? SJWS's? Alt-right? Hillbillys? Shills? Trumpets?
Where do you want to draw the line. It's just ridiculous to me but whatever
|
On September 23 2016 07:34 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:27 oBlade wrote:
Nigger/coon/spook are slurs. Thug/vermin/monkey are words. We know there's no eyelid batting if someone were to call a white person, acting like a monkey, a monkey. You're trying to make a distinction that makes no sense. If you call an american man a "cunt", there's no eyelid batting either. Doesn't mean "cunt" is a "word" and not a "slur".
There is almost as much shock in polite society if you called xDaunt a cunt as if you called him a nigger (speaking academically, thanks for being a sport xDaunt) despite that he's not in the target group of either of those slurs.
But vermin/thug/monkey are words with meanings beyond "that person is garbage due to an uncontrollable identity from birth." I'm sure there's a group of people among whom a common understanding that words have no power who wouldn't care about calling xDaunt a cunt, but I expect those same people wouldn't be flabbergasted at calling him a nigger instead.
|
On September 23 2016 07:27 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:13 Plansix wrote:On September 23 2016 07:10 oBlade wrote:On September 23 2016 07:05 Plansix wrote:On September 23 2016 07:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 06:58 KwarK wrote:On September 23 2016 06:55 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 06:51 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 06:50 xDaunt wrote:On September 23 2016 06:49 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
So there's nothing wrong logically with our position? Oh no, there very clearly is something logically wrong, which is why I mentioned your "relentless misrepresentation" of my point. So can you please demonstrate it, as I asked you, instead of just labeling it pc? I already have, as have others. All of my statements were racially neutral, yet they have been repeatedly impugned (and I have personally been impugned) as being racist. And the only way to get to "what xDaunt said is racist" is to add content to my statements that aren't there. That is what we call a misrepresentation. If you want people to stop calling you a racist maybe ease up on the racist rhetoric. Just an idea. It's the same as when GGTemplar is burning crosses on the lawns of a black family and cries out "no, actually I burn crosses on the lawns of white and black people all the time, you can't infer anything from this". If you're upset about people thinking you're a racist perhaps stop using the word vermin to describe black people. Of course we all already think you're a racist but maybe when you're meeting new people you could try and hide it. I'm not upset at all that various posters call me racist. It lets me know that I've won. He has reached is final form. It took Trump, but he got there. Full blown, doesn't need to hide it any more, racist upper middle class dude. 2016 people. The year we will never forget. Have you ever wondered to yourself what percent of society is racist, and what percent of people you have disagreements with in this thread (about anything) are racist, and compared those estimates? 100% of society suffer from racist bias. Not enough of society understand that fact and gets super offended when someone tells them they are being racist. Do you know what you say when someone says you are being racist? "I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be. I don't want to offend anyone, can you explain to me why that is racist?" Fucking EZ PZ. I can't accommodate people who appoint themselves indisputable racism police. But if 100% of society (meaning none of society) is racist, I'll start composing my own educate-yourself-memos for you.
I never really expected you to. You have made it pretty clear that you don't give a shit if black people think something is racist, you will decide if it is for them.
|
On September 23 2016 07:41 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 07:34 Nebuchad wrote:On September 23 2016 07:27 oBlade wrote:
Nigger/coon/spook are slurs. Thug/vermin/monkey are words. We know there's no eyelid batting if someone were to call a white person, acting like a monkey, a monkey. You're trying to make a distinction that makes no sense. If you call an american man a "cunt", there's no eyelid batting either. Doesn't mean "cunt" is a "word" and not a "slur". There is almost as much shock in polite society if you called xDaunt a cunt as if you called him a nigger (speaking academically, thanks for being a sport xDaunt) despite that he's not in the target group of either of those slurs.
"Polite society"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
