|
i wouldnt consider nappy to be a racial term, esp not in this day and age.
so slave owneres refered to their slaves as nappy b/c of their hair, why should that make the word taboo?
Slavery was over a hundred years ago, but white people are still living the high life on the backs of slaves, and black people are still enduring the effects of being bred for generations to fear reading, to fear education, to be totally subordinate and isolated and to think of themselves as animals. If you think that black people today are in overwhelmingly worse circumstances than white people are just because they are stupid or lazy or something, you have no idea what you're talking about and should go back to school. Aside from the lasting social, educational and economic effects of slavery, complicit racism is still being perpetrated en masse in every corner of the united states. It's still many times harder to get a job with the name Yolanda than it is with the name Beth, and black people are still expected to act certain ways and do certain things, and still have to deal with things white people never even have to think about. If you don't understand this, you obviously either have no substantial relationships with black people or your black friends are scared to talk to you about this. If you think that slavery ending over 100 years ago means that racism is irrelevant, you are incredibly ignorant.
man, dont be stupid. That is totally ridiculous, black people are expected to act like everyone else who has come to the United States, get off your high horse.
no one alive today is at fault for what happened to the slaves so no one should have to put up with this crap they dish out, i feel sorry for those who lived through slavery, not those who blindy insist they are still enslaved, moping around waiting for reperation, GET A JOB.
+ before this controversy i had no idea the word nappy was associated in any way with the black populace. If people would just LET IT GO and not continue to associate things in this manner then these problems would not exist
|
On April 11 2007 12:08 bine wrote:
If you think that calling them nappy-headed wasn't a reference to their ethnicity you're just unfamiliar with the word's common usage, the context in which he said it, and the racial makeup of the basketball team.
Again, MY point isn't whether or not Imus MEANT to apply a racial undertone to it or not. Whether he did or didn't, we don't know but we have to assume he did because of his apology. That's not really being questioned, as far as I can see.
The point I'm making is that in general, such terms SHOULD NOT have any racial undertones. To assume that it would is to display bias, and that is derived from perception. People tend to perceive things the way they've been led to or the way they want to, and that's how we get situations like these in the first place.
There is racism in this world, but a lot of it is created by the hyper-sensitive defense mechanisms people use, which interestingly enough are SUPPOSED to lower racism but instead simply make it worse.
|
There is racism in this world, but a lot of it is created by the hyper-senesitive defense mechanisms people use, which interestingly enough are SUPPOSED to lower racism but instead simply make it worse.
word
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
uh people trying to say "nappy headed ho" is NOT a racial reference need to shut the hell up. Its common use / social understanding is a complete and utter reference to African Americans. Especially given the obvious fact they were discussing a game between two predominantly african american basketball teams. The term is racial because it is a generalization of African Americans that their hair is "nappy" which is possibly one of the worst ways to portray their typical ethnic hair type.
I think this is a fine thread on whether or not he should be taken serious / how society should react but the argument that the term "could be used for others" or "isnt that bad" needs to stop. Given use, context and common social use/understanding the term is clear cut with the American people, debating the semantics of it here is extra topical and needs to stop, its a waste of time.
PS: Arguing that people need to "perceive it differently" because it doesnt specifically spell out a single race or something is EQUALLY retarded. Fucking serious? That kind of logic is circular and can be applied to anything... which means it has absolutely 0 solvency or validity. The fact isnt whether or not people should perceive it differently (you are naming the victims as the ones to "keep their chin up and ignore it" btw) it is that THAT is how the term is used and that THAT is the emotion or message it is intended to establish. Your logic btw is exactly the kind that is used by bigot men in rape cases, "She should not have worn such provocative clothes." That is significantly more severe sure, but the logic is "They should not have done X to bring X upon themselves." Garbage.
|
That's interesting.
I guess from now on when my black friends are describing certain white girls as having nappy hair, and that they're hos, I should just call them idiots for being so blind as to see that they aren't black.
It CAN be used in different ways. What DOES need to stop is people being so narrow-minded in this world and to assume that their perception is the only right one.
|
On April 11 2007 12:10 [angst]chraej wrote:i wouldnt consider nappy to be a racial term, esp not in this day and age. so slave owneres refered to their slaves as nappy b/c of their hair, why should that make the word taboo? Show nested quote +Slavery was over a hundred years ago, but white people are still living the high life on the backs of slaves, and black people are still enduring the effects of being bred for generations to fear reading, to fear education, to be totally subordinate and isolated and to think of themselves as animals. If you think that black people today are in overwhelmingly worse circumstances than white people are just because they are stupid or lazy or something, you have no idea what you're talking about and should go back to school. Aside from the lasting social, educational and economic effects of slavery, complicit racism is still being perpetrated en masse in every corner of the united states. It's still many times harder to get a job with the name Yolanda than it is with the name Beth, and black people are still expected to act certain ways and do certain things, and still have to deal with things white people never even have to think about. If you don't understand this, you obviously either have no substantial relationships with black people or your black friends are scared to talk to you about this. If you think that slavery ending over 100 years ago means that racism is irrelevant, you are incredibly ignorant. man, dont be stupid. That is totally ridiculous, black people are expected to act like everyone else who has come to the United States, get off your high horse. no one alive today is at fault for what happened to the slaves so no one should have to put up with this crap they dish out, i feel sorry for those who lived through slavery, not those who blindy insist they are still enslaved, moping around waiting for reperation, GET A JOB.
Learn how to read, as in books. No one with any credibility has ever substantiated your position in any publication or in any speech or in any classroom. Think of it this way, as you're obviously dense: I cut off your legs. I leave you lying on the ground bleeding. Eventually, you use all of your limited resources to repair your wound and keep yourself alive. Then you come to me and ask why I cut off your legs, and say that it wasn't fair and that you should be compensated. And then I say "get a job." Obviously, I'm totally right, because that whole leg thing happened, like, totally a week ago!!!
Believe me, I recognize that your impulse to continue living off of other people's suffering and maintain relative wealth by getting jobs over more qualified black people is really virtuous, but something about it just doesn't feel right. I guess I'm naive, and don't understand how gritty your life is. On blindness: you betray your foolishness and lack of education when you say things like you are.
|
i agree, what is the point in carrying on the racial use of the word?
it was a word before the time of slavery and was unfortunately used in an offensive way,
just because i now know that doesnt mean im giong to avoid the word, that is idiocy.
|
On April 11 2007 12:19 [angst]chraej wrote:
i agree, what is the point in carrying on the racial use of the word?
it was a word before the time of slavery and was unfortunately used in an offensive way,
just because i now know that doesnt mean im giong to avoid the word, that is idiocy.
god damnit you're so stupid 
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On April 11 2007 12:17 Orlandu wrote:
That's interesting.
I guess from now on when my black friends are describing certain white girls as having nappy hair, and that they're hos, I should just call them idiots for being so blind as to see that they aren't black.
Oh shit! Thread debunked! He is speaking in absolutes, because "social understanding or use" obviously has rules that are not to be broken and if are broken are disproven! Fuck, you are brilliant Orlandu.
How about if your black friend calls a white haired girl "nappy headed" you call him a fucking cracker. That'd be along the same lines as the previous joke. Or, if the white girl does have nappy hair you should tell your black friend to silence himself and go aid the girl because she has just been verbally harrassed.
|
And that proves your point how?
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Alright so what other words should people stop thinking are offensive? Why dont you go to the black community in the US to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and stop being offended when white people use racial terms FROM THE ERA OF OPPRESSION AND SLAVERY as a means of degrading and dehuminizing? Tell them to stop thinking anything of it when a white person reduces them to a hair style and generalizes them as a "ho." That is brilliant orlandu, I see nothing wrong with this logic at all.
|
shoot bine! your so right, i was so blinded by the fact that all blacks in the USA have been TOTALLY and irriversably short handed by slavery and they will all need the help of the white man to get back on their feet.
Believe me, I recognize that your impulse to continue living off of other people's suffering and maintain relative wealth by getting jobs over more qualified black people is really virtuous, but something about it just doesn't feel right. I guess I'm naive, and don't understand how gritty your life is. On blindness: you betray your foolishness and lack of education when you say things like you are.
and what about that retarded system known as "affirmative action"
and WTF, no one is living as a slave to support anyone in the United States
WHERE are black people suffering as a result of my "living off" the benefits i've reaped from them?
Bine, people like you and your parents are the only ones perpetuating the effects of slavery in the United States, sure it was horrible but there is absolutely NO reason to continue to flounder around sucking welfare and pretending the country owes you b/c your ancestors got the shaft.
what about the American Indians?? if anything the people of the United States owe them WAY more than they owe the blacks that got shipped over. They lost an entire country.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On April 11 2007 12:23 Orlandu wrote:
And that proves your point how?
My point is it isnt the victims fucking fault they are being generalized by racial remarks. You saying "they should just learn to not perceive it that way" is so circular and so completely not the important issue it is slightly angering. How about, you preach the people who use this rhetoric work on understanding the offensive nature of said words and even become more sensitive to their peers? Why is it the victim or the subjugated that have to take the initiative? Why is it those that are in the minority that should fucking convert their comfort and dignity to FIT OUR racial insecurity?
|
Of course you don't see anything wrong with your logic.
People rarely can see an error in their own reasoning. No matter what I say, you'll think I'm an idiot, and I'll still think you're an idiot. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise.
I'm simply pointing out something you seem to be completely forgetting and misinterpreting.
|
On April 11 2007 12:25 {88}iNcontroL wrote:My point is it isnt the victims fucking fault they are being generalized by racial remarks. You saying "they should just learn to not perceive it that way" is so circular and so completely not the important issue it is slightly angering. How about, you preach the people who use this rhetoric work on understanding the offensive nature of said words and even become more sensitive to their peers? Why is it the victim or the subjugated that have to take the initiative? Why is it those that are in the minority that should fucking convert their comfort and dignity to FIT OUR racial insecurity?
Who is insecure here?
You're completely misunderstanding my entire point. I'm not saying they should just not perceive it that way. That's a completely different issue. I'm saying perception is the ROOT of this problem. And, if it ever hopes to get solved, that issue of perception needs to be addressed rather than ignored as many seem to want to do.
I watch what I say, because I know how it offends people. But that doesn't mean I limit myself to that one perception.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On April 11 2007 12:26 Orlandu wrote:
Of course you don't see anything wrong with your logic.
People rarely can see an error in their own reasoning. No matter what I say, you'll think I'm an idiot, and I'll still think you're an idiot. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise.
I'm simply pointing out something you seem to be completely forgetting and misinterpreting.
I never said I see "nothing wrong with my logic" perhaps you are confused by my sarcastic remark in regard to YOUR logic. Reread, try again and respond.
|
On April 11 2007 12:29 {88}iNcontroL wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2007 12:26 Orlandu wrote:
Of course you don't see anything wrong with your logic.
People rarely can see an error in their own reasoning. No matter what I say, you'll think I'm an idiot, and I'll still think you're an idiot. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise.
I'm simply pointing out something you seem to be completely forgetting and misinterpreting. I never said I see "nothing wrong with my logic" perhaps you are confused by my sarcastic remark in regard to YOUR logic. Reread, try again and respond.
I know what you meant. And I also know why you wrote what you did. Hence, my reply. If you don't understand it, that doesn't mean I'm the one misreading anything.
|
On April 11 2007 12:25 [angst]chraej wrote:shoot bine! your so right, i was so blinded by the fact that all blacks in the USA have been TOTALLY and irriversably short handed by slavery and they will all need the help of the white man to get back on their feet. Show nested quote +Believe me, I recognize that your impulse to continue living off of other people's suffering and maintain relative wealth by getting jobs over more qualified black people is really virtuous, but something about it just doesn't feel right. I guess I'm naive, and don't understand how gritty your life is. On blindness: you betray your foolishness and lack of education when you say things like you are. and what about that retarded system known as "affirmative action" and WTF, no one is living as a slave to support anyone in the United States WHERE are black people suffering as a result of my "living off" the benefits i've reaped from them?
books books books books books
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On April 11 2007 12:28 Orlandu wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2007 12:25 {88}iNcontroL wrote:On April 11 2007 12:23 Orlandu wrote:
And that proves your point how? My point is it isnt the victims fucking fault they are being generalized by racial remarks. You saying "they should just learn to not perceive it that way" is so circular and so completely not the important issue it is slightly angering. How about, you preach the people who use this rhetoric work on understanding the offensive nature of said words and even become more sensitive to their peers? Why is it the victim or the subjugated that have to take the initiative? Why is it those that are in the minority that should fucking convert their comfort and dignity to FIT OUR racial insecurity? Who is insecure here? You're completely misunderstanding my entire point. I'm not saying they should just not perceive it that way. That's a completely different issue. I'm saying perception is the ROOT of this problem. And, if it ever hopes to get solved, that issue of perception needs to be addressed rather than ignored as many seem to want to do. I watch what I say, because I know how it offends people. But that doesn't mean I limit myself to that one perception.
No i didnt misunderstand at all. "Perception" as the "root" of the problem is exactly what i am talking about. You are specifically speaking on the "perception" of the ones receiving the racial remarks. Not the "perception" of those giving the racial remarks. THAT is the crux of my point sir. I am beginning to see shreads of a lack of comprehension on your behalf, please try and actually refute my points rather than generalize it and massacre the points while shoving your own agenda. I clearly am speaking on your specification of "perception" I speak directly to that and state it is NOT the main issue. You ignore this and get confused..
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On April 11 2007 12:30 Orlandu wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2007 12:29 {88}iNcontroL wrote:On April 11 2007 12:26 Orlandu wrote:
Of course you don't see anything wrong with your logic.
People rarely can see an error in their own reasoning. No matter what I say, you'll think I'm an idiot, and I'll still think you're an idiot. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise.
I'm simply pointing out something you seem to be completely forgetting and misinterpreting. I never said I see "nothing wrong with my logic" perhaps you are confused by my sarcastic remark in regard to YOUR logic. Reread, try again and respond. I know what you meant. And I also know why you wrote what you did. Hence, my reply. If you don't understand it, that doesn't mean I'm the one misreading anything.
You uh, knew I never said that and decided to act as if I did anyways? That makes no sense. What the fuck?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
