On December 27 2013 14:19 Pierrot wrote: I wonder how white, cis-gendered, and male you are, OP...hmm.
I love how little pretend sociologist come up with those one-liner. Pearls of ignorance and misguided arrogance, truly.
I'm not a sociologist, pretend or otherwise. But I certainly feel like the OP is posting from a position of privilege. And I feel like that has an effect on his opinions regarding the use of language.
And your little one-liner was just as much of a one-liner as mine.
On December 27 2013 14:19 Pierrot wrote: I wonder how white, cis-gendered, and male you are, OP...hmm.
I love how little pretend sociologist come up with those one-liner. Pearls of ignorance and misguided arrogance, truly.
I'm not a sociologist, pretend or otherwise. But I certainly feel like the OP is posting from a position of privilege. And I feel like that has an effect on his opinions regarding the use of language.
And your little one-liner was just as much of a one-liner as mine.
The funny thing is that you would be wrong on all counts of your assumptions on race, biological sex, and gender identity.
The other part is that it's silly how desperate you are to believe that because you don't have an actual rational argument.
The third part is that you didn't read, I clearly referred to racial minorities as 'us', a couple of times in the text.
So you don't mind if there's a group of white people at a bar or something casually dropping n***** this and n***** that in conversation? Orb isn't racist for using n***** because he claims he isn't prejudiced against black people? He just uses extremely charged racial epithets to denigrate his opponents and describe play that he considers bad, inferior, or cowardly? Maybe we should just bring n***** back for casual use then, since you have put our fears to rest with actual rational arguments. Or do you have a more circumscribed usage in mind?
On December 27 2013 12:51 Djzapz wrote: "Whining about being offended is like asking that other people deal with your emotions because you can't do it yourself".
If you condition yourself to react poorly to words that people can say with their mouths and this is what you choose to fight against rather than real discrimination, then perhaps you're a bit of a moron. And in my everyday life, I make sure to be "politically correct" and I censor myself and I don't use the particularly sensitive stereotypes that people have decided they don't like because they could rub some people the wrong way.
Funny enough, some of the people who are the most anal about these things, the people who jump on their high horse at the slightest hint of a "black guy" joke, they don't give a fuck when people crack jokes about drunk american natives.
So this whole debate is between the people who can tell that these social norms are bullshit and the hypocrites who go with the flow and agree with society about which groups of people are worthy of respects and which ones (the natives, the Roma people) haven't lobbied hard enough for the white man to take its plea seriously. I can say I got gypped and nobody raises an eyebrow but all those soccer moms would go apeshit if I said I got jewed. That ain't okay Carl. The Gypsies are fair game until they get their own Hitler though, go to fucking town.
Edit: The point that you should read between the lines is that even though I sometimes make jokes between friends that may sound racist, I'd argue that the white knights are the actual racists and they don't even know it. They operate according to this informal hierarchy of the classifications of people who need to be protected.
So you are saying that minorities can protect themselves when you make racist jokes to your friends. Ah ok.
They can protect themselves, when there are words involved and only words. The problem with the US is that the state jumps in when there are only words involved.
For a country that claims it has so much freedom of speech, the US has this bizarre fetish with controlling language (all the while ignoring actual actions of people). How about we start solving actual racial inequalities before we start to worry about language? The use of the word 'nigger' seems to offend people in the US more than the sweeping racial inequality that exists there with entire poor neighbourhoods in harlem filled with black people and not a single white person the entire block.
I mean, let's consider some other things, how often do you see interracial unions on TV in the US? Every white person dates a white person, every black person a black person on every TV show almost, if it's interracial it's a big deal. I'm sorry but the repeated doing of that is far more offensive to me than someone who might say 'nigger' on TV in a non racial context. Let's talk about my nickname. Benjamin Sisko, dauntless no-nonsense captain of Starbase Deep Space Nine and the warship USS Defiant. The first black captain in Star Trek, yeah, cool and all, but they still made every single one of his girlfriends black as well. Okay, so Kirk shared the first interracial kiss in Star Trek 40 years before that, that's cool and all but they still afterwards made all of Kirk and Picard's girlfriend white, all of Sisko's girlfriends were black. Why? Do Americans seriously get offended by interracial unions? It took up to Star Trek Enterprise, for a minor character who was black to get a white girlfriend, not a one off episode kiss, no an actual girlfriend. Also, that guys character description was literally 'pilot, black, born in space', he had no qualities whatsoever beyond being black and he was concordantly not really used that much. They just added him because they felt they needed a racial minority beyond Sato who's character description can be summed up with 'Translator, Asian, linguistic genius capable of learning new languages in weeks fluently', at least she has something to her but she also wasn't used a lot.
Bashir was a lot better, yeah, he was Arabic, that wasn't his character description, he was a Doctor, upper class British Accent, brilliant, arrogant, juvinile, idealistic, sarcastic sense of humour, he was selfless, but all too proud and arrogant and in a way he was only selfless because he couldn't accept his own failures and he had an overinflated sense of self-importance and he was also genetically engineered. Oh yeah, he was Arabic which was basically indicated by his name, that he looks Arabic and that it was eventually revealed that one of his ancestors was an Arabic poet Singh el-Bashir. His first name was Julian and it was heavily implied he grew up in England. This guy actually was a character, not some token racial minority who was put in because they needed someone of another race. Which happens all too often. The casting directors realize 'oh my god, everyone is white, let's add a black guy' and that's what happens, you get a black guy who's character description starts and ends there.
But hey, as long as we don't say 'nigger' I guess that kind of treatment is all not offensive right? White protestant male politicians coming from rich families can continue to not give a shit about poor black people living in the ghetto as long as they don't say 'nigger', hell, I'd rather have a guy who just says 'Okay guys, we're going to help them niggers out a bit.' and actually does something all the while using racial slur than someone who doesn't use it but also doesn't give a shit.
On December 27 2013 09:21 MarlieChurphy wrote: People like to overreact to shit from people who are clearly not racist or people that don't care. Examples recently, The washington redskins name was debated and native americans didn't give a shit. Jimmy kimmel had that segment where the kid said 'kill the chinese people then' and jimmy said 'thats not very nice' and people went after him like crazy.
I'm pretty sure a majority of people are in favor of changing the name Redskins. Beyond being racist, it should be changed because it's an idiotic name.
Sports clubs tend to have idiotic names. Chicago Bulls, Seattle Sounders, come on.
On December 27 2013 19:29 IgnE wrote: So you don't mind if there's a group of white people at a bar or something casually dropping n***** this and n***** that in conversation? Orb isn't racist for using n***** because he claims he isn't prejudiced against black people? He just uses extremely charged racial epithets to denigrate his opponents and describe play that he considers bad, inferior, or cowardly? Maybe we should just bring n***** back for casual use then, since you have put our fears to rest with actual rational arguments. Or do you have a more circumscribed usage in mind?
Nigger is back in casual use in a lot of countries. 99% someone complains about that word they're from the US.
Now, I'm not black, I'm Caribbean. I mind when people call me black to some extend because I'm not and I feel all they see is 'oh, a slightly darker skin colour, that's black', I'm not from Africa and there is more to race than skin colour, my skin isn't nearly as dark, being Caribbean I have a lot of native-American blood in me which shows in my body structure, my fingers are very long and I have a very slender build and a slender face like most native Americans. I'm still part of a racial minority, but I'm also part of Caribbean culture, in Caribbean culture, we aren't that sensitive about language. So like, I'm from a former Dutch colony, I live in the Netherlands, I wasn't born there, my native language is Sranan but I speak it poorly and the only person I speak it with is my grandmother and she laments my poor grammar. I speak Dutch. But Caribbeans, we can joke about all that stuff. I once had a discussion with some racist pig who said I was probably stealing because I was a foriegner or whatever and a friend of mine jumped in and said 'Caribbeans don't steal, only Turks, Caribbeans are too lazy to steal, Turks still no how to work.', I can laugh about that. It's kind of funny and true in a way. Turks statistically commit more crime than Caribbeans in this country but they are also a very undertaking people. 1/3 of the companies owned in this country are actually owned by Turks. The majority of Turks who come here feel they need to start their own company. Which is suuuuper fine with me because it usually ends up being a food business and I love Turkish food.
But in the end, the word nigger gets used on TV here, and not in a racial context, this isn't the US. Dutch culture is not as unsensitive as Caribbean or Finnish culture to words, but still a lot less than US culture. Here's some Dutch culture for you:
Intro of a Dutch kids cartoon meant at like 10 year old kids. Imagine the amount of American mums that would get angry over this? The intro alone features nudity, drugs. The show itself goes further, there's this episode of the 'homo museum' which is about gay stuff or something. And it like displays the primitive ancestor of the gay man the 'homo erectus' who obviously has a huge fucking boner. In the US, people wouldn't be able to say 'It's just a joke, it's not really homophobic'. and there's the issue, even though Dutch culture tolerates these jokes about gay people, we are renowned for our acceptance of gay people. And that's something that doesn't seem to mix in US culture, the realization that a joke need not equate to actual biggotry. NL simultaneously is one of the most accepting cultures to racial and sexual minorities, but also one of the cultures that tolerates joking about it and having racial and sexual humour the most.
This sensitivity to language, is really isolated to the US for the most part, most countries care less about it, NL cares about the least and it's a very multicultural society. And like I said, I'm Caribbean and there it's even more multicultural and there people care even less about this stuff. Yeah, there is mad racial inequality in Surinam. Let's face it, the descendants of the original white families who owned slaves are still the richest. White people are richer there, the country has problems, Desi Bouterse ehh... but in the end, all those races can come together, they live in the same neighbourhoods, there is no china town or ghetto slums filled with poor black people there. They live together in one neighbourhood and blend their culture and the overwhelming philosophy is to just chill out and get along and don't take life that seriously. Hell, if we Caribbeans took life as seriously as that, then we would have never invented Malibu.
No this is isolated to kids like you who feel that if they are ok with something, then everyone should follow suit
You are racist and making the world a worse place
The only reason why people are not flocking to tell you stems from the "ignore the troll and he will leave" syndrom that is destroying the world slowly but surely
glhf telling rosa parks or mike tyson that it is ok to make nigger jokes
I'm pretty sure a majority of people are in favor of changing the name Redskins. Beyond being racist, it should be changed because it's an idiotic name.
No I'm saying it's harmless when I make jokes that pertain to people's skin color or religion with my friends. Those jokes are not racist because I don't believe any race of people is inferior or whatever. Minorities don't need to protect themselves from what happens on the 7th moon of Saturn and they don't need to protect themselves from my drunken banter. People make jokes.
Meanwhile some white folks spend time condemning the use of words like "nigger" while not giving the slightest amount of fuck about the despicable life conditions that exist in ghettos. Furthermore, they ignore certain of the slang for other minorities, as well as the despicable life conditions of said minorities. Those are apparently not problems worth looking because lazy mofos like to take the moral high ground with little effort.
Your jokes influence yours and your friends subconscious perceptions of other people's race. Telling yourself, "I'm not a racist" does not make your jokes not racist. People make racist jokes.
Who said those aren't problems? Who are you talking to?
I don't think so, nor do I crack jokes that pertain to race to anybody who I believe to be racist. I also rail on white being asshats all the time. I generalize horribly when I'm semi-serious about white people being massive douchebags. And when I joke about how asians can't drive, I'm messing around (I never actually joke about that particular thing btw, that stereotype doesn't amuse me). As for influencing people's subconscious perceptions, we're not children. Fine, everything influences everything. Let us deal with that and stop judging us mr. Holier Than Thou.
Yeah and I'm the Queen of England. Even if it were true, the point is people give a particular amount of fuck about the plea of certain groups of people.
The fact that you're seemingly unaware of this is part of the problem. You think you treat all people equally? Good on you. Look how natives are treated in your country, though. Look at those second class citizens. We have them too, in Canada. Many if not most of them are stuck with terrible living conditions and no way out of their "reserves" that we've given them out of the goodness of our hearts (lol). And yet tomahawk jokes will fly in a party while a mention of the word nigger will stop a party in its track.
And I don't care that you feel like somehow all people are given the same amount of respect from you. We're not talking about you and your little contest of who's more down with the minorities. I'm talking about reality. It's true that some of the people who go apeshit when they hear the word "nigger" are also the people who don't care about the other minorities because those haven't managed to institutionalize themselves to get our sympathy.
People don't know nor care about what we did to our natives. People don't know nor care who are the Roma people. We can shit on those folks and we do, while certain other groups of people have immunity
That said, congratulations about your denunciation of the word Redskins, I'm sure they'll live much better lives when we pick different words to call them instead of actually doing anything.
So people have no intention of solving anything. They'll scold people who use bad words but they're not going to pay taxes or discuss things that could improve equality in real life. All they want is the sympathetic and nice discourse.
I don't know what you are talking about? Are you making the argument that because some people are hypocrites that makes it ok for you to make racist jokes? Because maybe you really care about "equality in life" and are "actually doing" something?
I don't know people who make tomahawk jokes. What are you trying to accomplish by arguing that some people are quick to condemn use of one racial epithet while making jokes about another race? Those people are making racist jokes as well. Do you commonly make non-sequitur arguments and expect to be taken seriously? Redskins is a fine name because I, personally, am not out crusading for native american something? You sound like you are drunk.
I don't make racist jokes as per my standards. I have no ill intentions. I strongly believe that we're all equals. My point is that I think I and my friends are a whole lot less racist than the people who are anally retentive about some words which seem to have a racial connotation but only protect the interests of some minorities which according to them are more deserving of respect. When I see actual racism, I'll stand up and I'll defend my position because those are the times people need to act. My drunken banter shouldn't be censored on the basis that it can affect someone's subconscious. Let us fucking deal with our own brains "IgnE" while you clumsily try to deal with your own.
As for your shitload of links, you're still missing the point which doesn't surprise me of you... It doesn't matter that people are in favor of changing a name... You think a name change is what it takes to deal with the gross amount of racism that actually affects the natives? You're giving me fucking polls about a name change after I've spoken very clearly about how they're living in shit.
If anything, the name change thing goes to show how systemically unimportant they are to our countries. We ignore them and now they live in slums. We're unwilling to give them any kind of respect and your argument is, we're not that bad, we want to abolish the racist name we have for us. And yet whenever they ask for stuff we turn them down.
Since your brain is probably clouded with your bullshit beliefs, let's go overseas and talk about Europe. In many european countries, there are Roma people, also referred to as Gypsies as well as other terms. In many cases, they are doing just fine, but in many countries, they're essentially viewed as scum by many, for various reasons. They're accused of doing human trafficking, they steal a lot, etc. The Roma people are discriminated against a lot, even in some countries that are viewed as progressive. The racism against those people is rampant, and it's disgusting. Many of my colleagues where I teach have been to Eastern Europe and they said it's incredible. Oftentimes, the intellectual circles tend to be more on the left and understand that the reason why Roma people commit crimes and live in poverty is circumstantial. And yet even some university professors who are otherwise really smart and thoughtful are racist toward the Roma people.
And they too would argue that they frown upon racism, much like yourself. And yet they're blind.
So my point has nothing to do with fucking names. My point is that the natives are more discriminated against than black people but a lot less people give a crap. And your polls are about changing a name. I'd argue that you're less sensitive to actual racism and actual inequalities than I am because of the bullshit argument you've pulled.
And no I'm not perfect, I undoubtedly have prejudice that I carry with me, but for fuck's sake, I don't spend my time reacting poorly to hearing words even when I know that there are no ill intentions behind them. I've got better shit to do with my time.
On December 27 2013 14:19 Pierrot wrote: I wonder how white, cis-gendered, and male you are, OP...hmm.
I love how little pretend sociologist come up with those one-liner. Pearls of ignorance and misguided arrogance, truly.
I'm not a sociologist, pretend or otherwise. But I certainly feel like the OP is posting from a position of privilege. And I feel like that has an effect on his opinions regarding the use of language.
And your little one-liner was just as much of a one-liner as mine.
Sure but my opinion is available in other posts. I don't limit myself to passing judgement on someone's opinion based on their sex, race and sexual identity. That just seems like a bad thing to do. Hopefully it's not rendered irrelevant by my status as a white cis-gendered male.
... Saying words have no power, sigh. Idk maybe you're just desensitized, but I'm too lazy to argue with idiocy. Let me quote authors at you instead. Also, it's about context, but also audience. If you say words which offend your audience, it is not their fault for being offended (they just react), but your fault for communicating poorly when there are other options available. Anyway, onto quotes:
“It doesn't matter if you and everyone else in the room are thinking it. You don't say the words. Words are weapons. They blast big bloody holes in the world. And words are bricks. Say something out loud and it starts turning solid. Say it loud enough and it becomes a wall you can't get through.” - Richard Kadrey
“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” - George Orwell
“Without knowing the force of words, it is impossible to know more.” - Confuscius
“of all the weapons of destruction that man could invent, the most terrible-and the most powerful-was the word. Daggers and spears left traces of blood; arrows could be seen at a distance. Poisons were detected in the end and avoided. But the word managed to destroy without leaving clues.” - Paul Coelho
“There is indeed power in words. Most of the lasting change that has been forged in the history of this world came not from a wielding of the swift and bloody sword of battle but from the shaping scalpel of ideas, and what are ideas without the words to deliver them?” - Mark Dunn
And perhaps the most horrifying thought: “To see evil and call it good, mocks God. Worse, it makes goodness meaningless. A word without meaning is an abomination, for when the word passes beyond understanding the very thing the word stands for passes out of the world and cannot be recalled.” - Stephen Lawhead.
Should we desensitize ourselves to the meaning of the n-word, and in the very process, forget the pain and suffering caused by the atrocities committed? No, I say, that the very fact the n-word is taboo is a form of historical and cultural memory for the American people. The fact that the word carries so much weight is good, not bad, for it jostles American memory when its people become complacent. To take the power of such a word away would mean breaking a word from its etymology, and in the process, becoming desensitized to the history which created a word in the first place.
On December 28 2013 01:17 ghrur wrote: ... Saying words have no power, sigh. Idk maybe you're just desensitized, but I'm too lazy to argue with idiocy. Let me quote authors at you instead. Also, it's about context, but also audience. If you say words which offend your audience, it is not their fault for being offended (they just react), but your fault for communicating poorly when there are other options available.
Words only have the power the listener gives them. You can walk away from words, you can choose to not let them affect you, you can't walk away from lethal force. You can't walk away from chains or they're pretty bad chains. Words have never been used to oppress anyone, physical force has. Slavery didn't exist because of words. Slavery existed by means of force and chains.
“It doesn't matter if you and everyone else in the room are thinking it. You don't say the words. Words are weapons. They blast big bloody holes in the world. And words are bricks. Say something out loud and it starts turning solid. Say it loud enough and it becomes a wall you can't get through.” - Richard Kadrey
“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” - George Orwell
“Without knowing the force of words, it is impossible to know more.” - Confuscius
“of all the weapons of destruction that man could invent, the most terrible-and the most powerful-was the word. Daggers and spears left traces of blood; arrows could be seen at a distance. Poisons were detected in the end and avoided. But the word managed to destroy without leaving clues.” - Paul Coelho
“There is indeed power in words. Most of the lasting change that has been forged in the history of this world came not from a wielding of the swift and bloody sword of battle but from the shaping scalpel of ideas, and what are ideas without the words to deliver them?” - Mark Dunn
And perhaps the most horrifying thought: “To see evil and call it good, mocks God. Worse, it makes goodness meaningless. A word without meaning is an abomination, for when the word passes beyond understanding the very thing the word stands for passes out of the world and cannot be recalled.” - Stephen Lawhead.
And this is supposed to contribute anything tot the discussion? I can cite just as many authors that disagree, doesn't prove anything.
Should we desensitize ourselves to the meaning of the n-word, and in the very process, forget the pain and suffering caused by the atrocities committed?
Of for crying out loud, see this is the problem. People focus on words and not on the actual issues because focussing on words means they can act like they care when they actually don't give a shit. If you want to stop racial injustice, how about actually doing something about the ridiculous class society that exists in the US, doing something about the fact that people born poor tend to say poor. How about universal health care for a start or state financed education rather than people being smart enough for Yale not being able to go there because their parents can't afford it. That's how you combat racial injustice, not getting offended over words.
No, I say, that the very fact the n-word is taboo is a form of historical and cultural memory for the American people. The fact that the word carries so much weight is good, not bad, for it jostles American memory when its people become complacent. To take the power of such a word away would mean breaking a word from its etymology, and in the process, becoming desensitized to the history which created a word in the first place.
They are already desensitized, the political leaders don't do a flying fucking crap to help the poor, getting wound up about nigger is the perfect way to act like you care because everyone can afford to care about words, but once it comes down to actually act, to say "Yes, I am willing to give some of my money to help the poor, I am willing to discuss this in the news, I am wiling to be your champion and campaign your plight.", then no, then they don't rise up, instead of that, let's discuss in the senate just how offended we all should be because South Park made another off colour joke.
you keep saying words can never harm anyone you keep saying people can choose to ignore those words on both accounts you are wrong, on both you take your ill contructed fantasy as fact
facts: you advocate to make fun of the fat kid because it will make him grow up thinner, you juvenily just ignore that he is overweight from a genetic disposition and will have to forego all the pleasure that you take for granted each time you eat or he will die from this predisposition
you advocate that a guy of another etnicity (that you feel deserves to be mocked) can defend himself of this... presumably by retorking with a verbal response? then what? you all go your seperate ways and have a dandy evening not thinking about it or not changing anything at all? who's kidding who?
you advocate that "things more important" should be done instead of punishing people for using words that offend "some weak minded" people ... how do you propose they go about doing it? start by forgeting about any related history because you have decided it is the best course of action to take, then what? you decide what else for all of us?
you are so much part of the problem that you are causing the world you reject
political corectness is your doing, racism is your doing
respect is earned through conscious efforts not from lazyness professed as a credo, you have earned nothing but contempt apparently in your life (if your aggressive posts are any proof of your lack of character), that does not mean this is something everyone thinks acceptable practices;;; demeaning people is wrong
you deserve the bleak world we live in, you can't respect others even when you contemplate having fun, .. you will fail miserably at any attempt at solving more serious difficult issues (not that you will do any of that it seems)
.. but then again it is painfully obvious that you have been hurt and that you feel it is propper to repay others in kind
some days, alone in your head, you realize this and you immediately find things to cover it up, this is not even lazyness it is despair
On December 27 2013 12:51 Djzapz wrote: "Whining about being offended is like asking that other people deal with your emotions because you can't do it yourself".
If you condition yourself to react poorly to words that people can say with their mouths and this is what you choose to fight against rather than real discrimination, then perhaps you're a bit of a moron. And in my everyday life, I make sure to be "politically correct" and I censor myself and I don't use the particularly sensitive stereotypes that people have decided they don't like because they could rub some people the wrong way.
Funny enough, some of the people who are the most anal about these things, the people who jump on their high horse at the slightest hint of a "black guy" joke, they don't give a fuck when people crack jokes about drunk american natives.
So this whole debate is between the people who can tell that these social norms are bullshit and the hypocrites who go with the flow and agree with society about which groups of people are worthy of respects and which ones (the natives, the Roma people) haven't lobbied hard enough for the white man to take its plea seriously. I can say I got gypped and nobody raises an eyebrow but all those soccer moms would go apeshit if I said I got jewed. That ain't okay Carl. The Gypsies are fair game until they get their own Hitler though, go to fucking town.
Edit: The point that you should read between the lines is that even though I sometimes make jokes between friends that may sound racist, I'd argue that the white knights are the actual racists and they don't even know it. They operate according to this informal hierarchy of the classifications of people who need to be protected.
So you are saying that minorities can protect themselves when you make racist jokes to your friends. Ah ok.
They can protect themselves, when there are words involved and only words. The problem with the US is that the state jumps in when there are only words involved.
For a country that claims it has so much freedom of speech, the US has this bizarre fetish with controlling language (all the while ignoring actual actions of people). How about we start solving actual racial inequalities before we start to worry about language? The use of the word 'nigger' seems to offend people in the US more than the sweeping racial inequality that exists there with entire poor neighbourhoods in harlem filled with black people and not a single white person the entire block.
I mean, let's consider some other things, how often do you see interracial unions on TV in the US? Every white person dates a white person, every black person a black person on every TV show almost, if it's interracial it's a big deal. I'm sorry but the repeated doing of that is far more offensive to me than someone who might say 'nigger' on TV in a non racial context. Let's talk about my nickname. Benjamin Sisko, dauntless no-nonsense captain of Starbase Deep Space Nine and the warship USS Defiant. The first black captain in Star Trek, yeah, cool and all, but they still made every single one of his girlfriends black as well. Okay, so Kirk shared the first interracial kiss in Star Trek 40 years before that, that's cool and all but they still afterwards made all of Kirk and Picard's girlfriend white, all of Sisko's girlfriends were black. Why? Do Americans seriously get offended by interracial unions? It took up to Star Trek Enterprise, for a minor character who was black to get a white girlfriend, not a one off episode kiss, no an actual girlfriend. Also, that guys character description was literally 'pilot, black, born in space', he had no qualities whatsoever beyond being black and he was concordantly not really used that much. They just added him because they felt they needed a racial minority beyond Sato who's character description can be summed up with 'Translator, Asian, linguistic genius capable of learning new languages in weeks fluently', at least she has something to her but she also wasn't used a lot.
Bashir was a lot better, yeah, he was Arabic, that wasn't his character description, he was a Doctor, upper class British Accent, brilliant, arrogant, juvinile, idealistic, sarcastic sense of humour, he was selfless, but all too proud and arrogant and in a way he was only selfless because he couldn't accept his own failures and he had an overinflated sense of self-importance and he was also genetically engineered. Oh yeah, he was Arabic which was basically indicated by his name, that he looks Arabic and that it was eventually revealed that one of his ancestors was an Arabic poet Singh el-Bashir. His first name was Julian and it was heavily implied he grew up in England. This guy actually was a character, not some token racial minority who was put in because they needed someone of another race. Which happens all too often. The casting directors realize 'oh my god, everyone is white, let's add a black guy' and that's what happens, you get a black guy who's character description starts and ends there.
But hey, as long as we don't say 'nigger' I guess that kind of treatment is all not offensive right? White protestant male politicians coming from rich families can continue to not give a shit about poor black people living in the ghetto as long as they don't say 'nigger', hell, I'd rather have a guy who just says 'Okay guys, we're going to help them niggers out a bit.' and actually does something all the while using racial slur than someone who doesn't use it but also doesn't give a shit.
On December 27 2013 09:21 MarlieChurphy wrote: People like to overreact to shit from people who are clearly not racist or people that don't care. Examples recently, The washington redskins name was debated and native americans didn't give a shit. Jimmy kimmel had that segment where the kid said 'kill the chinese people then' and jimmy said 'thats not very nice' and people went after him like crazy.
I'm pretty sure a majority of people are in favor of changing the name Redskins. Beyond being racist, it should be changed because it's an idiotic name.
Sports clubs tend to have idiotic names. Chicago Bulls, Seattle Sounders, come on.
There are actually multiple tv shows and movies now with interracial "relationships."
Please tell me how the state gets involved. You can say n***** all you want. It doesn't make you not a racist, but at least you are free to be racist.
On December 27 2013 19:29 IgnE wrote: So you don't mind if there's a group of white people at a bar or something casually dropping n***** this and n***** that in conversation? Orb isn't racist for using n***** because he claims he isn't prejudiced against black people? He just uses extremely charged racial epithets to denigrate his opponents and describe play that he considers bad, inferior, or cowardly? Maybe we should just bring n***** back for casual use then, since you have put our fears to rest with actual rational arguments. Or do you have a more circumscribed usage in mind?
Nigger is back in casual use in a lot of countries. 99% someone complains about that word they're from the US.
Now, I'm not black, I'm Caribbean. I mind when people call me black to some extend because I'm not and I feel all they see is 'oh, a slightly darker skin colour, that's black', I'm not from Africa and there is more to race than skin colour, my skin isn't nearly as dark, being Caribbean I have a lot of native-American blood in me which shows in my body structure, my fingers are very long and I have a very slender build and a slender face like most native Americans. I'm still part of a racial minority, but I'm also part of Caribbean culture, in Caribbean culture, we aren't that sensitive about language. So like, I'm from a former Dutch colony, I live in the Netherlands, I wasn't born there, my native language is Sranan but I speak it poorly and the only person I speak it with is my grandmother and she laments my poor grammar. I speak Dutch. But Caribbeans, we can joke about all that stuff. I once had a discussion with some racist pig who said I was probably stealing because I was a foriegner or whatever and a friend of mine jumped in and said 'Caribbeans don't steal, only Turks, Caribbeans are too lazy to steal, Turks still no how to work.', I can laugh about that. It's kind of funny and true in a way. Turks statistically commit more crime than Caribbeans in this country but they are also a very undertaking people. 1/3 of the companies owned in this country are actually owned by Turks. The majority of Turks who come here feel they need to start their own company. Which is suuuuper fine with me because it usually ends up being a food business and I love Turkish food.
I'm pretty sure a majority of people are in favor of changing the name Redskins. Beyond being racist, it should be changed because it's an idiotic name.
No I'm saying it's harmless when I make jokes that pertain to people's skin color or religion with my friends. Those jokes are not racist because I don't believe any race of people is inferior or whatever. Minorities don't need to protect themselves from what happens on the 7th moon of Saturn and they don't need to protect themselves from my drunken banter. People make jokes.
Meanwhile some white folks spend time condemning the use of words like "nigger" while not giving the slightest amount of fuck about the despicable life conditions that exist in ghettos. Furthermore, they ignore certain of the slang for other minorities, as well as the despicable life conditions of said minorities. Those are apparently not problems worth looking because lazy mofos like to take the moral high ground with little effort.
Your jokes influence yours and your friends subconscious perceptions of other people's race. Telling yourself, "I'm not a racist" does not make your jokes not racist. People make racist jokes.
Who said those aren't problems? Who are you talking to?
I don't think so, nor do I crack jokes that pertain to race to anybody who I believe to be racist. I also rail on white being asshats all the time. I generalize horribly when I'm semi-serious about white people being massive douchebags. And when I joke about how asians can't drive, I'm messing around (I never actually joke about that particular thing btw, that stereotype doesn't amuse me). As for influencing people's subconscious perceptions, we're not children. Fine, everything influences everything. Let us deal with that and stop judging us mr. Holier Than Thou.
Yeah and I'm the Queen of England. Even if it were true, the point is people give a particular amount of fuck about the plea of certain groups of people.
The fact that you're seemingly unaware of this is part of the problem. You think you treat all people equally? Good on you. Look how natives are treated in your country, though. Look at those second class citizens. We have them too, in Canada. Many if not most of them are stuck with terrible living conditions and no way out of their "reserves" that we've given them out of the goodness of our hearts (lol). And yet tomahawk jokes will fly in a party while a mention of the word nigger will stop a party in its track.
And I don't care that you feel like somehow all people are given the same amount of respect from you. We're not talking about you and your little contest of who's more down with the minorities. I'm talking about reality. It's true that some of the people who go apeshit when they hear the word "nigger" are also the people who don't care about the other minorities because those haven't managed to institutionalize themselves to get our sympathy.
People don't know nor care about what we did to our natives. People don't know nor care who are the Roma people. We can shit on those folks and we do, while certain other groups of people have immunity
That said, congratulations about your denunciation of the word Redskins, I'm sure they'll live much better lives when we pick different words to call them instead of actually doing anything.
So people have no intention of solving anything. They'll scold people who use bad words but they're not going to pay taxes or discuss things that could improve equality in real life. All they want is the sympathetic and nice discourse.
I don't know what you are talking about? Are you making the argument that because some people are hypocrites that makes it ok for you to make racist jokes? Because maybe you really care about "equality in life" and are "actually doing" something?
I don't know people who make tomahawk jokes. What are you trying to accomplish by arguing that some people are quick to condemn use of one racial epithet while making jokes about another race? Those people are making racist jokes as well. Do you commonly make non-sequitur arguments and expect to be taken seriously? Redskins is a fine name because I, personally, am not out crusading for native american something? You sound like you are drunk.
I don't make racist jokes as per my standards. I have no ill intentions. I strongly believe that we're all equals. My point is that I think I and my friends are a whole lot less racist than the people who are anally retentive about some words which seem to have a racial connotation but only protect the interests of some minorities which according to them are more deserving of respect. When I see actual racism, I'll stand up and I'll defend my position because those are the times people need to act. My drunken banter shouldn't be censored on the basis that it can affect someone's subconscious. Let us fucking deal with our own brains "IgnE" while you clumsily try to deal with your own.
Since your brain is probably clouded with your bullshit beliefs, let's go overseas and talk about Europe. In many european countries, there are Roma people, also referred to as Gypsies as well as other terms. In many cases, they are doing just fine, but in many countries, they're essentially viewed as scum by many, for various reasons. They're accused of doing human trafficking, they steal a lot, etc. The Roma people are discriminated against a lot, even in some countries that are viewed as progressive. The racism against those people is rampant, and it's disgusting. Many of my colleagues where I teach have been to Eastern Europe and they said it's incredible. Oftentimes, the intellectual circles tend to be more on the left and understand that the reason why Roma people commit crimes and live in poverty is circumstantial. And yet even some university professors who are otherwise really smart and thoughtful are racist toward the Roma people.
And they too would argue that they frown upon racism, much like yourself. And yet they're blind.
So my point has nothing to do with fucking names. My point is that the natives are more discriminated against than black people but a lot less people give a crap. And your polls are about changing a name. I'd argue that you're less sensitive to actual racism and actual inequalities than I am because of the bullshit argument you've pulled.
And no I'm not perfect, I undoubtedly have prejudice that I carry with me, but for fuck's sake, I don't spend my time reacting poorly to hearing words even when I know that there are no ill intentions behind them. I've got better shit to do with my time.
On December 27 2013 14:19 Pierrot wrote: I wonder how white, cis-gendered, and male you are, OP...hmm.
I love how little pretend sociologist come up with those one-liner. Pearls of ignorance and misguided arrogance, truly.
I'm not a sociologist, pretend or otherwise. But I certainly feel like the OP is posting from a position of privilege. And I feel like that has an effect on his opinions regarding the use of language.
And your little one-liner was just as much of a one-liner as mine.
Sure but my opinion is available in other posts. I don't limit myself to passing judgement on someone's opinion based on their sex, race and sexual identity. That just seems like a bad thing to do. Hopefully it's not rendered irrelevant by my status as a white cis-gendered male.
You are an uncivilized boor who makes tasteless, racist jokes. I don't really care whether you continue to do it or not.
So your argument is the same non-sequitur. Some people ignore institutional violence, especially against your favorite mistreated people, the Roma, so therefore you have license to make racist jokes without becoming an uncivilized boor. Sorry that argument doesn't work. Please try a new one.
As for your shitload of links, you're still missing the point which doesn't surprise me of you... It doesn't matter that people are in favor of changing a name... You think a name change is what it takes to deal with the gross amount of racism that actually affects the natives? You're giving me fucking polls about a name change after I've spoken very clearly about how they're living in shit.
If anything, the name change thing goes to show how systemically unimportant they are to our countries. We ignore them and now they live in slums. We're unwilling to give them any kind of respect and your argument is, we're not that bad, we want to abolish the racist name we have for us. And yet whenever they ask for stuff we turn them down.
No, sorry that's not my argument. You are making shit up again. I don't see the point in waiting to change the name Redskins until some hazy future date in which Native Americans have full equality, however you want to define it. If you want to argue that it's not enough, I agree with you. If you want to argue that it would be disgusting for people to pride themselves on their tolerance and respect based solely on a name change, I agree with you. That does not mean the name shouldn't be changed.
On December 27 2013 12:51 Djzapz wrote: "Whining about being offended is like asking that other people deal with your emotions because you can't do it yourself".
If you condition yourself to react poorly to words that people can say with their mouths and this is what you choose to fight against rather than real discrimination, then perhaps you're a bit of a moron. And in my everyday life, I make sure to be "politically correct" and I censor myself and I don't use the particularly sensitive stereotypes that people have decided they don't like because they could rub some people the wrong way.
Funny enough, some of the people who are the most anal about these things, the people who jump on their high horse at the slightest hint of a "black guy" joke, they don't give a fuck when people crack jokes about drunk american natives.
So this whole debate is between the people who can tell that these social norms are bullshit and the hypocrites who go with the flow and agree with society about which groups of people are worthy of respects and which ones (the natives, the Roma people) haven't lobbied hard enough for the white man to take its plea seriously. I can say I got gypped and nobody raises an eyebrow but all those soccer moms would go apeshit if I said I got jewed. That ain't okay Carl. The Gypsies are fair game until they get their own Hitler though, go to fucking town.
Edit: The point that you should read between the lines is that even though I sometimes make jokes between friends that may sound racist, I'd argue that the white knights are the actual racists and they don't even know it. They operate according to this informal hierarchy of the classifications of people who need to be protected.
So you are saying that minorities can protect themselves when you make racist jokes to your friends. Ah ok.
They can protect themselves, when there are words involved and only words. The problem with the US is that the state jumps in when there are only words involved.
For a country that claims it has so much freedom of speech, the US has this bizarre fetish with controlling language (all the while ignoring actual actions of people). How about we start solving actual racial inequalities before we start to worry about language? The use of the word 'nigger' seems to offend people in the US more than the sweeping racial inequality that exists there with entire poor neighbourhoods in harlem filled with black people and not a single white person the entire block.
I mean, let's consider some other things, how often do you see interracial unions on TV in the US? Every white person dates a white person, every black person a black person on every TV show almost, if it's interracial it's a big deal. I'm sorry but the repeated doing of that is far more offensive to me than someone who might say 'nigger' on TV in a non racial context. Let's talk about my nickname. Benjamin Sisko, dauntless no-nonsense captain of Starbase Deep Space Nine and the warship USS Defiant. The first black captain in Star Trek, yeah, cool and all, but they still made every single one of his girlfriends black as well. Okay, so Kirk shared the first interracial kiss in Star Trek 40 years before that, that's cool and all but they still afterwards made all of Kirk and Picard's girlfriend white, all of Sisko's girlfriends were black. Why? Do Americans seriously get offended by interracial unions? It took up to Star Trek Enterprise, for a minor character who was black to get a white girlfriend, not a one off episode kiss, no an actual girlfriend. Also, that guys character description was literally 'pilot, black, born in space', he had no qualities whatsoever beyond being black and he was concordantly not really used that much. They just added him because they felt they needed a racial minority beyond Sato who's character description can be summed up with 'Translator, Asian, linguistic genius capable of learning new languages in weeks fluently', at least she has something to her but she also wasn't used a lot.
Bashir was a lot better, yeah, he was Arabic, that wasn't his character description, he was a Doctor, upper class British Accent, brilliant, arrogant, juvinile, idealistic, sarcastic sense of humour, he was selfless, but all too proud and arrogant and in a way he was only selfless because he couldn't accept his own failures and he had an overinflated sense of self-importance and he was also genetically engineered. Oh yeah, he was Arabic which was basically indicated by his name, that he looks Arabic and that it was eventually revealed that one of his ancestors was an Arabic poet Singh el-Bashir. His first name was Julian and it was heavily implied he grew up in England. This guy actually was a character, not some token racial minority who was put in because they needed someone of another race. Which happens all too often. The casting directors realize 'oh my god, everyone is white, let's add a black guy' and that's what happens, you get a black guy who's character description starts and ends there.
But hey, as long as we don't say 'nigger' I guess that kind of treatment is all not offensive right? White protestant male politicians coming from rich families can continue to not give a shit about poor black people living in the ghetto as long as they don't say 'nigger', hell, I'd rather have a guy who just says 'Okay guys, we're going to help them niggers out a bit.' and actually does something all the while using racial slur than someone who doesn't use it but also doesn't give a shit.
On December 27 2013 09:21 MarlieChurphy wrote: People like to overreact to shit from people who are clearly not racist or people that don't care. Examples recently, The washington redskins name was debated and native americans didn't give a shit. Jimmy kimmel had that segment where the kid said 'kill the chinese people then' and jimmy said 'thats not very nice' and people went after him like crazy.
I'm pretty sure a majority of people are in favor of changing the name Redskins. Beyond being racist, it should be changed because it's an idiotic name.
Sports clubs tend to have idiotic names. Chicago Bulls, Seattle Sounders, come on.
There are actually multiple tv shows and movies now with interracial "relationships."
Yes, in 2013 there are some, but 1990's wasn't ripe for that. The Star Trek actors and writers fought to have a gay character included but the executives stopped it.
There are some right now, but the overwhelming majority of the time, if you see a black man, he will hav ea black wife, white man, will have a white wife.
Please tell me how the state gets involved. You can say n***** all you want. It doesn't make you not a racist, but at least you are free to be racist.
The state fires people for saying niggard, the state fines TV stations for language. The state forced the Comic Book Code on comic book publishers. The state fines record stores for selling things with 'parental advisory' to children. There are organizations like the 'Federal Communications Commission" which actually regulate what public TV networks can and cannot say. They can get fined for 'indecency', I'm sorry, but that is a huge blow in the face of democracy that the state can regulate what broadcasting can and cannot say. If they can fine people for swear words, you enter a slippery slope of fining people for being critical of leaders.
Oh I see now. Racism is "true" in a way.
What?
No, sorry that's not my argument. You are making shit up again. I don't see the point in waiting to change the name Redskins until some hazy future date in which Native Americans have full equality, however you want to define it. If you want to argue that it's not enough, I agree with you. If you want to argue that it would be disgusting for people to pride themselves on their tolerance and respect based solely on a name change, I agree with you. That does not mean the name shouldn't be changed.
Why? It's a name..? Courations of skins have always been exaggerated, black people do not have black skin but rather dark brown, white people have biege skin, Asians do not have yellow skin either.
They named themselves in honour of the natives, they looked at the zeal with which they defended their homeland and said 'These are the qualities we which our players to embody', it was in no way meant as an insult for native Americans, it was meant as admiration. And this is exactly the context of which I keep speaking. The American audience can get so extremely phobic of the mere mention of any race that isn't white and overlook the context, it wasn't ever meant as an insult ever, quite the opposite.
On December 28 2013 03:47 IgnE wrote: You are an uncivilized boor who makes tasteless, racist jokes. I don't really care whether you continue to do it or not.
So your argument is the same non-sequitur. Some people ignore institutional violence, especially against your favorite mistreated people, the Roma, so therefore you have license to make racist jokes without becoming an uncivilized boor. Sorry that argument doesn't work. Please try a new one.
"Uncivilized boor". That's adorable. I'm perfectly presentable and public and never offend anybody, but you judge me because of what I do in private? Even if I may be "uncivilized" in private, you're the scum of the earth, telling people what they should and shouldn't do when they're with their folks.
You say my argument "doesn't work" because you personally don't like it.
No, sorry that's not my argument. You are making shit up again. I don't see the point in waiting to change the name Redskins until some hazy future date in which Native Americans have full equality, however you want to define it. If you want to argue that it's not enough, I agree with you. If you want to argue that it would be disgusting for people to pride themselves on their tolerance and respect based solely on a name change, I agree with you. That does not mean the name shouldn't be changed.
I don't disagree when you say that the name should be changed, but the problem is far deeper than that and pretending that wanting to change the name is somehow a testament to the American's great tolerance is ridiculous.
The point I've been trying to make is that people ought to think their shit through before they start judging others for making jokes which can be perceived as distasteful by soccer moms like yourself. Yes people are willing to change the "redskins" thing - that's free and convenient. People are willing to stop calling black people "niggers" because that's free and it makes them feel like they're better people. But SiskosGoatee is right when he says that this is all bullshit white people garbage. They wouldn't spend a penny to fix inequalities, they'll just deal with the language because if we don't hear it it's not there.
So you attack me, call me names all you want because I make tasteless (not racist) jokes in private, as if that somehow made me a bad person. I'll keep standing up for equality while not being uptight in my free time, while you fight against noises that people can make with their mouths because it's the only way you've found to make yourself feel good while not doing anything.
See, my occasional usage of racial slurs among friends, the most vile of which are targeted at white people, are incredibly mild in comparison to the shit that those minorities have to put up with due to actual racism. Now I'm not saying that my drunken banter is ok because worse things happen. I'm saying that my drunken banter is ok in the first place because it just is. And the fact that dumbshits would attack ME because I'm not politically correct in PRIVATE shows, as far as I'm concerned, that you're a joke.
I've probably done more than you ever have to deal with racism, not by stifling honest to god harmless jokes, but by coming in opposition to people's actual racist opinions. I think you're severely misguided, but more importantly, you're useless.
IMO the most tolerant people are those who make the distinction between actual racism (the belief that others are inferior in some way), and people who joke about sensitive world problems. I was talking to a colleague and a friend about the Roma problem in part of Europe and she called them "our very own dogs", not because she believed them to be dogs, far from it. It was kind of amusing and sad at the same because it's true that the Gypsies are treated like dogs in some parts of Europe. She didn't mean that they're dogs though, she wrote many articles about the disgusting conditions that those people live in and why it's not looking up for them because the political systems in Europe largely ignore them. This woman is not an "uncivilized boor". She's a suit-wearing, serious university professor who sometimes uses satire and humor to speak of very real problems.
Similarly, many of the "jokes" I make are not gratuitous (although admittedly some of them are). Much of the time, the things I say reflect sad realities and the fact that many of those minorities are left to themselves. And apparently the only people who defend them are dumbshits who'd rather talk about how the words "nigger" and "redskin" are bad to use even in private, instead of working on the issues that might give those minorities a better living.
Reading this thread reminds me of the Harry Potter series and how everybody is paranoid of saying Voldemort and how everybody tries to convince Harry Potter that you shouldn't use the name ever. It's treated with the same type of care that a racial slur is and everybody is so caught up on trying to control what people say that Voldemort basically takes over the wizard world. Meanwhile the only people that actually end up doing anything in the series are the ones that don't shit themselves every time somebody says something uncomfortable.
Maybe instead of trying to pretend racism doesn't exist by censoring the words we should put more of a focus on how to deal with the actual problem. I mean you don't eradicate racism in that way. It's treating a symptom not the illness.
On December 28 2013 03:47 IgnE wrote: You are an uncivilized boor who makes tasteless, racist jokes. I don't really care whether you continue to do it or not.
So your argument is the same non-sequitur. Some people ignore institutional violence, especially against your favorite mistreated people, the Roma, so therefore you have license to make racist jokes without becoming an uncivilized boor. Sorry that argument doesn't work. Please try a new one.
"Uncivilized boor". That's adorable. I'm perfectly presentable and public and never offend anybody, but you judge me because of what I do in private? Even if I may be "uncivilized" in private, you're the scum of the earth, telling people what they should and shouldn't do when they're with their folks.
You say my argument "doesn't work" because you personally don't like it.
No, sorry that's not my argument. You are making shit up again. I don't see the point in waiting to change the name Redskins until some hazy future date in which Native Americans have full equality, however you want to define it. If you want to argue that it's not enough, I agree with you. If you want to argue that it would be disgusting for people to pride themselves on their tolerance and respect based solely on a name change, I agree with you. That does not mean the name shouldn't be changed.
I don't disagree when you say that the name should be changed, but the problem is far deeper than that and pretending that wanting to change the name is somehow a testament to the American's great tolerance is ridiculous.
The point I've been trying to make is that people ought to think their shit through before they start judging others for making jokes which can be perceived as distasteful by soccer moms like yourself. Yes people are willing to change the "redskins" thing - that's free and convenient. People are willing to stop calling black people "niggers" because that's free and it makes them feel like they're better people. But SiskosGoatee is right when he says that this is all bullshit white people garbage. They wouldn't spend a penny to fix inequalities, they'll just deal with the language because if we don't hear it it's not there.
So you attack me, call me names all you want because I make tasteless (not racist) jokes in private, as if that somehow made me a bad person. I'll keep standing up for equality while not being uptight in my free time, while you fight against noises that people can make with their mouths because it's the only way you've found to make yourself feel good while not doing anything.
See, my occasional usage of racial slurs among friends, the most vile of which are targeted at white people, are incredibly mild in comparison to the shit that those minorities have to put up with due to actual racism. Now I'm not saying that my drunken banter is ok because worse things happen. I'm saying that my drunken banter is ok in the first place because it just is. And the fact that dumbshits would attack ME because I'm not politically correct in PRIVATE shows, as far as I'm concerned, that you're a joke.
I've probably done more than you ever have to deal with racism, not by stifling honest to god harmless jokes, but by coming in opposition to people's actual racist opinions. I think you're severely misguided, but more importantly, you're useless.
IMO the most tolerant people are those who make the distinction between actual racism (the belief that others are inferior in some way), and people who joke about sensitive world problems. I was talking to a colleague and a friend about the Roma problem in part of Europe and she called them "our very own dogs", not because she believed them to be dogs, far from it. It was kind of amusing and sad at the same because it's true that the Gypsies are treated like dogs in some parts of Europe. She didn't mean that they're dogs though, she wrote many articles about the disgusting conditions that those people live in and why it's not looking up for them because the political systems in Europe largely ignore them. This woman is not an "uncivilized boor". She's a suit-wearing, serious university professor who sometimes uses satire and humor to speak of very real problems.
Similarly, many of the "jokes" I make are not gratuitous (although admittedly some of them are). Much of the time, the things I say reflect sad realities and the fact that many of those minorities are left to themselves. And apparently the only people who defend them are dumbshits who'd rather talk about how the words "nigger" and "redskin" are bad to use even in private, instead of working on the issues that might give those minorities a better living.
You talk about institutional violence against the Roma and fail to realize that "jokes in private" can constitute institutional/cultural violence in themselves. Uncivilized boors can do whatever they want behind closed doors and are entitled to free speech in public. A racist joke is not absolved of its immoral patina simply because it's conducted in private. If you want to argue that the context of the joke is important, even central, to it's meaning and moral heftiness, I wouldn't argue with you. But that's not what you've been saying. If you want to talk about context, you brought up private jokes in a thread about the use of the word n*****. If you are using that word in private jokes with your friends, you are overwhelmingly likely an uncivilized racist boor. You would never use that word around a black person you didn't personally know, because you know it's racist and that there's a good chance you will be denounced/assaulted for it.
Do you seriously think that things done in private are not racist by virtue of the fact that they are done only amongst friends? That there are no Others around to hear your racism and be offended?
For as much as you pride yourself on your "rationalism" and use of reason it's strange that you think your arguments are sound here. You've finally admitted in this post that you think making racist jokes in private is ok, because it "just is," but you still rail on with your ridiculous line of logic about how your boorish and racist behavior is justified by the existence of other hypocrites. If you want to think your behavior is fine because it "just is" then so be it. But don't pretend all this other bullshit you've been talking about makes any sense.
On December 27 2013 12:51 Djzapz wrote: "Whining about being offended is like asking that other people deal with your emotions because you can't do it yourself".
If you condition yourself to react poorly to words that people can say with their mouths and this is what you choose to fight against rather than real discrimination, then perhaps you're a bit of a moron. And in my everyday life, I make sure to be "politically correct" and I censor myself and I don't use the particularly sensitive stereotypes that people have decided they don't like because they could rub some people the wrong way.
Funny enough, some of the people who are the most anal about these things, the people who jump on their high horse at the slightest hint of a "black guy" joke, they don't give a fuck when people crack jokes about drunk american natives.
So this whole debate is between the people who can tell that these social norms are bullshit and the hypocrites who go with the flow and agree with society about which groups of people are worthy of respects and which ones (the natives, the Roma people) haven't lobbied hard enough for the white man to take its plea seriously. I can say I got gypped and nobody raises an eyebrow but all those soccer moms would go apeshit if I said I got jewed. That ain't okay Carl. The Gypsies are fair game until they get their own Hitler though, go to fucking town.
Edit: The point that you should read between the lines is that even though I sometimes make jokes between friends that may sound racist, I'd argue that the white knights are the actual racists and they don't even know it. They operate according to this informal hierarchy of the classifications of people who need to be protected.
So you are saying that minorities can protect themselves when you make racist jokes to your friends. Ah ok.
They can protect themselves, when there are words involved and only words. The problem with the US is that the state jumps in when there are only words involved.
For a country that claims it has so much freedom of speech, the US has this bizarre fetish with controlling language (all the while ignoring actual actions of people). How about we start solving actual racial inequalities before we start to worry about language? The use of the word 'nigger' seems to offend people in the US more than the sweeping racial inequality that exists there with entire poor neighbourhoods in harlem filled with black people and not a single white person the entire block.
I mean, let's consider some other things, how often do you see interracial unions on TV in the US? Every white person dates a white person, every black person a black person on every TV show almost, if it's interracial it's a big deal. I'm sorry but the repeated doing of that is far more offensive to me than someone who might say 'nigger' on TV in a non racial context. Let's talk about my nickname. Benjamin Sisko, dauntless no-nonsense captain of Starbase Deep Space Nine and the warship USS Defiant. The first black captain in Star Trek, yeah, cool and all, but they still made every single one of his girlfriends black as well. Okay, so Kirk shared the first interracial kiss in Star Trek 40 years before that, that's cool and all but they still afterwards made all of Kirk and Picard's girlfriend white, all of Sisko's girlfriends were black. Why? Do Americans seriously get offended by interracial unions? It took up to Star Trek Enterprise, for a minor character who was black to get a white girlfriend, not a one off episode kiss, no an actual girlfriend. Also, that guys character description was literally 'pilot, black, born in space', he had no qualities whatsoever beyond being black and he was concordantly not really used that much. They just added him because they felt they needed a racial minority beyond Sato who's character description can be summed up with 'Translator, Asian, linguistic genius capable of learning new languages in weeks fluently', at least she has something to her but she also wasn't used a lot.
Bashir was a lot better, yeah, he was Arabic, that wasn't his character description, he was a Doctor, upper class British Accent, brilliant, arrogant, juvinile, idealistic, sarcastic sense of humour, he was selfless, but all too proud and arrogant and in a way he was only selfless because he couldn't accept his own failures and he had an overinflated sense of self-importance and he was also genetically engineered. Oh yeah, he was Arabic which was basically indicated by his name, that he looks Arabic and that it was eventually revealed that one of his ancestors was an Arabic poet Singh el-Bashir. His first name was Julian and it was heavily implied he grew up in England. This guy actually was a character, not some token racial minority who was put in because they needed someone of another race. Which happens all too often. The casting directors realize 'oh my god, everyone is white, let's add a black guy' and that's what happens, you get a black guy who's character description starts and ends there.
But hey, as long as we don't say 'nigger' I guess that kind of treatment is all not offensive right? White protestant male politicians coming from rich families can continue to not give a shit about poor black people living in the ghetto as long as they don't say 'nigger', hell, I'd rather have a guy who just says 'Okay guys, we're going to help them niggers out a bit.' and actually does something all the while using racial slur than someone who doesn't use it but also doesn't give a shit.
On December 27 2013 09:21 MarlieChurphy wrote: People like to overreact to shit from people who are clearly not racist or people that don't care. Examples recently, The washington redskins name was debated and native americans didn't give a shit. Jimmy kimmel had that segment where the kid said 'kill the chinese people then' and jimmy said 'thats not very nice' and people went after him like crazy.
I'm pretty sure a majority of people are in favor of changing the name Redskins. Beyond being racist, it should be changed because it's an idiotic name.
Sports clubs tend to have idiotic names. Chicago Bulls, Seattle Sounders, come on.
There are actually multiple tv shows and movies now with interracial "relationships."
Yes, in 2013 there are some, but 1990's wasn't ripe for that. The Star Trek actors and writers fought to have a gay character included but the executives stopped it.
There are some right now, but the overwhelming majority of the time, if you see a black man, he will hav ea black wife, white man, will have a white wife.
Please tell me how the state gets involved. You can say n***** all you want. It doesn't make you not a racist, but at least you are free to be racist.
The state fires people for saying niggard, the state fines TV stations for language. The state forced the Comic Book Code on comic book publishers. The state fines record stores for selling things with 'parental advisory' to children. There are organizations like the 'Federal Communications Commission" which actually regulate what public TV networks can and cannot say. They can get fined for 'indecency', I'm sorry, but that is a huge blow in the face of democracy that the state can regulate what broadcasting can and cannot say. If they can fine people for swear words, you enter a slippery slope of fining people for being critical of leaders.
No, sorry that's not my argument. You are making shit up again. I don't see the point in waiting to change the name Redskins until some hazy future date in which Native Americans have full equality, however you want to define it. If you want to argue that it's not enough, I agree with you. If you want to argue that it would be disgusting for people to pride themselves on their tolerance and respect based solely on a name change, I agree with you. That does not mean the name shouldn't be changed.
Why? It's a name..? Courations of skins have always been exaggerated, black people do not have black skin but rather dark brown, white people have biege skin, Asians do not have yellow skin either.
They named themselves in honour of the natives, they looked at the zeal with which they defended their homeland and said 'These are the qualities we which our players to embody', it was in no way meant as an insult for native Americans, it was meant as admiration. And this is exactly the context of which I keep speaking. The American audience can get so extremely phobic of the mere mention of any race that isn't white and overlook the context, it wasn't ever meant as an insult ever, quite the opposite.
You claim it was an "honour" and yet most Native Americans find the name offensive and most white people think they are right to be offended. You claim it was an "honour" but it was really a dehumanization of a racial group, a patronizing objectification of a people and culture. Although I contest your interpretation of the name it doesn't matter what it was intended as. It's an idiotic name and a racial epithet.
On December 28 2013 05:12 omnic wrote: Reading this thread reminds me of the Harry Potter series and how everybody is paranoid of saying Voldemort and how everybody tries to convince Harry Potter that you shouldn't use the name ever. It's treated with the same type of care that a racial slur is and everybody is so caught up on trying to control what people say that Voldemort basically takes over the wizard world. Meanwhile the only people that actually end up doing anything in the series are the ones that don't shit themselves every time somebody says something uncomfortable.
Maybe instead of trying to pretend racism doesn't exist by censoring the words we should put more of a focus on how to deal with the actual problem. I mean you don't eradicate racism in that way. It's treating a symptom not the illness.
Yes because n***** is just like the word Voldemort.
On December 28 2013 05:27 IgnE wrote: You claim it was an "honour" and yet most Native Americans find the name offensive and most white people think they are right to be offended. You claim it was an "honour" but it was really a dehumanization of a racial group, a patronizing objectification of a people and culture. Although I contest your interpretation of the name it doesn't matter what it was intended as. It's an idiotic name and a racial epithet.
It is pretty obvious that it wasn't meant insultingly, why would you name your own club after anything else than what you admire? Do you honestly think they were like 'Hey, those natives are total filthy slime, let's name ourselves after total filthy slime!', of course not.
I'm prtty sure some people got offended yeah, just like some people got offended over someone using the word niggard. In the end, all I can think is that they deserve their own emotions if they get offended over something which if you allow yourself a single ounce of pensivity leads one to conclude it's nothing to be offended about. "Redskin" is no more an insult than 'white' or 'black'. In the end the tone of ones skin is the first visible thing about one's race and most races get named in some way after the tone of their skin.
Pretty much any sports club if they name themselves something like that it's because they want their players to embody those virtues. It's also important to respect historical context. Words change meaning over time. The redskins were founded in the 1930's, was it considered racially offensive back then the term 'red skin', the term African American wasn't even invented then? People used the word 'negro'.
Again, if you are offended where someone clearly means no ill will towards you then you have your own daemons to fight. It's pretty obvious that when the club was founded and the name was chosen the founders meant no disrespect to Native-Americans, nay, the inverse, it was clearly a sign of admiration.
On December 28 2013 05:12 omnic wrote: Reading this thread reminds me of the Harry Potter series and how everybody is paranoid of saying Voldemort and how everybody tries to convince Harry Potter that you shouldn't use the name ever. It's treated with the same type of care that a racial slur is and everybody is so caught up on trying to control what people say that Voldemort basically takes over the wizard world. Meanwhile the only people that actually end up doing anything in the series are the ones that don't shit themselves every time somebody says something uncomfortable.
Maybe instead of trying to pretend racism doesn't exist by censoring the words we should put more of a focus on how to deal with the actual problem. I mean you don't eradicate racism in that way. It's treating a symptom not the illness.
Yes because n***** is just like the word Voldemort.
It isn't, but it shows that just being paranoid of using certain words doesn't change anything and doesn't get stuff done. I mean, censorring it in this very topic? We are discussing the word here, it's called context okay, if you're discussing the nature of a word you can spell it out in full, what do you think is going to happen if you write nigger in full? Do you honestly feel that you're insulting people just by writing a word in full, we all know what the asteriskes stand for, just say it.
On December 28 2013 05:27 IgnE wrote: You talk about institutional violence against the Roma and fail to realize that "jokes in private" can constitute institutional/cultural violence in themselves.
Nope. Jokes in private can't possibly be "violence" because they're jokes and they're in private. It don't even really know how to respond to that without outright insulting your intelligence frankly. It's like I'm reading a self-help book of some description and it tells you erroneous definitions of violence. Moral violence! You can hurt others with your thoughts or some shit.
I know I'm twisting what you're saying but it's such an irrelevant and nonoperational string of words, I can't possibly make sense of it. And here's the thing: nor can you. Nobody can defend that bullshit.
Uncivilized boors can do whatever they want behind closed doors and are entitled to free speech in public. A racist joke is not absolved of its immoral patina simply because it's conducted in private. If you want to argue that the context of the joke is important, even central, to it's meaning and moral heftiness, I wouldn't argue with you. But that's not what you've been saying. If you want to talk about context, you brought up private jokes in a thread about the use of the word n*****. If you are using that word in private jokes with your friends, you are overwhelmingly likely an uncivilized racist boor.
I use racial slurs in private with my friends. I call my gay friend a faggot. Yet I don't think lowly of people of other races or sexual orientations, and much to the contrary, I defend them when they're attacked by actual intolerant and racist people. So when you try to fiddle with semantics to try to make me out to be a racist person because of my usage of words, you're an intellectually dishonest piece of shit.
And yes sometimes with my friends I lack class. That makes me a classless guy sometimes, but not a bigot, nor a racist.
You would never use that word around a black person you didn't personally know
No, and I also don't talk about how fucking terrible white people are in front of people who don't want to hear it. I change my language depending on what I know people can hear.
Do you seriously think that things done in private are not racist by virtue of the fact that they are done only amongst friends? That there are no Others around to hear your racism and be offended?
That's not the point, but I'm not surprised that you wouldn't understand. You're incredibly shallow.
Things are racist, or they aren't. To believe that people of other races are inferior in some way, that's what racism is. I say the word "nigger" here, and I can say the word "faggot". This last sentence is not racist or homophobic because those words are not inherently bad - they're bad in a context of intolerance. The fact that I jokingly call my gay friend a faggot (because he expressively told me it's ok and he calls me all kinds of shit himself) is not homophobic. My jokes are not racist because they're not meant to be hurtful, and furthermore they don't hurt anybody. I don't condone actual "racist jokes" that incite hatred or anything of the sort. I don't condone jokes made among racist fuckers who try to get a rise out of lowering others.
There are three reasons why I specifically mention that those jokes are made in private: 1- People like yourself exist. You don't understand the world and you wouldn't understand what I'm saying. + Show Spoiler +
A local comedian "offended" a bunch of people when he made a bit about cripples. They left the theater all pissed off and told the media about how offended they were. The comedian was making jokes which prefaced a bit about his crippled brother, and the foundation he made in his honor.
2- I'm worried that actual racists might hear me. This is in line with what you've been saying. I choose my friends carefully - and they're good people like myself. 3- Sensitive jokes like that can sound bad if you don't hear the whole thing.
For as much as you pride yourself on your "rationalism" and use of reason it's strange that you think your arguments are sound here. You've finally admitted in this post that you think making racist jokes in private is ok, because it "just is," but you still rail on with your ridiculous line of logic about how your boorish and racist behavior is justified by the existence of other hypocrites. If you want to think your behavior is fine because it "just is" then so be it. But don't pretend all this other bullshit you've been talking about makes any sense.
I think it's funny. Those two parts in bold show that you haven't listened. The "ridiculous line of logic" doesn't exist. I say that jokes about race are inherently okay, not that they're justified by the fact that worse things exist.
Jokes about race, as opposed to racist jokes, can be social commentary. Jokes about race can also be tasteless, like dead baby jokes - but none of these necessarily incite hatred of those people, or the belief that they're inferior.
I think that this entire little debate between us is rendered useless by the fact that you foolishly refuse to see the difference between racism and "jokes which pertain to race". So I want to reiterate that you're a shallow individual and you're wasting everybody's time with your silly and ineffective way of combating racism by attacking people like myself who make use of certain words in a completely innocent and harmless way. Fuck, I'm more disgusted and reactive than the average person when I see actual racism. By a fair margin too. My brother and I have been drifting apart because of his intolerance which I find completely despicable.
I also want to say that this following line is the stupidest thing I've heard in months and you should be ashamed
You talk about institutional violence against the Roma and fail to realize that "jokes in private" can constitute institutional/cultural violence in themselves.
Absolute garbo catchphrase. Get ahold of yourself.
On December 28 2013 05:12 omnic wrote: Reading this thread reminds me of the Harry Potter series and how everybody is paranoid of saying Voldemort and how everybody tries to convince Harry Potter that you shouldn't use the name ever. It's treated with the same type of care that a racial slur is and everybody is so caught up on trying to control what people say that Voldemort basically takes over the wizard world. Meanwhile the only people that actually end up doing anything in the series are the ones that don't shit themselves every time somebody says something uncomfortable.
Maybe instead of trying to pretend racism doesn't exist by censoring the words we should put more of a focus on how to deal with the actual problem. I mean you don't eradicate racism in that way. It's treating a symptom not the illness.
Yes because n***** is just like the word Voldemort.
I'm about to say something that I know to you is going to seem very very silly because you're completely missing the point.
In the wizard world Voldemort is worse than the word nigger.
On December 28 2013 05:12 omnic wrote: Reading this thread reminds me of the Harry Potter series and how everybody is paranoid of saying Voldemort and how everybody tries to convince Harry Potter that you shouldn't use the name ever. It's treated with the same type of care that a racial slur is and everybody is so caught up on trying to control what people say that Voldemort basically takes over the wizard world. Meanwhile the only people that actually end up doing anything in the series are the ones that don't shit themselves every time somebody says something uncomfortable.
Maybe instead of trying to pretend racism doesn't exist by censoring the words we should put more of a focus on how to deal with the actual problem. I mean you don't eradicate racism in that way. It's treating a symptom not the illness.
Yes because n***** is just like the word Voldemort.
I'm about to say something that I know to you is going to seem very very silly because you're completely missing the point.
In the wizard world Voldemort is worse than the word nigger.
Well, truth be told, V******** is not an insult in the Wizzard world, it's more like people are afraid to say 'mudblood' even in a non insulting context which is I suppose their form a racial slur.
Not saying V********* is like people being afraid to name Hitler by name or something which is also silly.
EPT
