Racism & Other Prejudices

[hopeandjoy]

Why? D: It's a good suggestion to the English corporation of the world.

Because A) LGBT rights are an ongoing struggle and B) faggot is as much as a slur as the n-word, Jew, Jap, or the c-word are.

 

[shy ♡]

Okay, can I just say, saying Jew is a slur is offensive. I'm a Jew. Suggesting that being Jewish is bad and can be used as a slur? What? I don't get it. You can't say 'you're black' and that's an insult.

Seriously, I'm just, what.

 

[Mendatt]

o.o
Jew can be used as a slur, as has been stated previously in this thread. If the word Jew is used with the intent of being a slur, it is a slur. Using Jew as a slur is suggesting being Jewish is bad. Obviously, if you're saying Jew and you don't believe or suggest that being Jewish is bad, it isn't a slur. The same goes for a lot of the other words, too. Obviously you should say "black" or similar as opposed to the n-word, or "queer" or similar as opposed to faggot, because those are generally used as insults, or at the very least more often than not, and therefore more likely to be taken as a derogative.

 

[Saith]

Two: No. The reason the n word is not to be said by non-black people is not because it's a 'bad word'. It's because the word was not used to oppress non-black people. Thus, it can only be said by the people who it was used to oppress. It is a matter of privileges. If you used the word to oppress people, and use it now, you are still oppressing people by using it. It's not a 'omg bad word bad word don't say bad word' thing.

Ignoring the fact that no one is their ancestor, this is completely baseless. Your argument comes from absolutely nowhere, and I can't see how it logically works. I'm pretty sure you're supposed to explain these things. I'm not feigning a lack of understanding here, I've heard this so many times but no one's been able to explain it to me.

If the word itself is offensive, then it doesn't matter who says it. It's still offensive. If it's only inoffensive when black people say it, then it's the context: We know that black people aren't racist against black people, so when they say it, it's in a way that isn't meant to be insulting. In the same vein, the word itself is harmless. Only people using it in an offensive manner are offensive.

If you've got an SA stance, and figure it's fine to say it as long as you're very definitely obviously not racist and that you might as well not because someone'll inevitably get outraged, then fine. That's fine. But stating that only blacks can say it just doesn't make any logic sense, at least not in the way you explained it. Seriously.

 

[Karkat Vantas]

@pathos-- Okay then. What's your stance on cracker/honky?

 

[Cap'n Sofa]

Oh my god, just stop.

Don't tell him to stop. He has opinions and they are legitimate and I don't care if you think otherwise. Stop if you want to, don't tell him what to do with his ideas.

(macro removed, was trying to signify how what you said can be used against you but apparently that's not the right way to do it or something)

I will admit, though, that his idea is basically impossible to put into practice, because legitimately prejudiced people will still use the original connotations and the meaning will simply return. So I'd go with Saith--if you're absolutely sure all of your company at a given time realizes you're just fucking around and legitimately don't mean any harm, go for it. If somebody would, or even might, be offended, choose better words for the situation.

It's only because you can be a lot more sure that a black person means no harm by saying "nigger" than a person of another race that it's more acceptable for them to say it.

 

[Aobaru]

Okay, can I just say, saying Jew is a slur is offensive.

Well, prepare to be offended: any word can be a slur. All that matters is the emotion behind it. If I hated Jews, I could very well walk up to a Jewish person and say, "I hate you, you fucking Jew," or something along those lines. (Sorry for the vulgarity, but I'm trying to make a point.)

Conversely, if I was with a Jewish friend, I could say something like, "You're such a Jew", a la Cartman on South Park. (Not saying I would ever say something like that, it's not really my personality to potentially offend anyone.) In my opinion, context is everything. I'm with Cap'n Sofa up there: the vocabulary you use should be chosen according to the people you're with.

But, yeah, "Jew" can definitely be used as a slur, and I think it's horribly naive to think it can't.

 

[ultraviolet]

for the record, I would like to see less of this:

Fucking Chill.

[deal w/it macro]

because hey guys, you can act with slightly more maturity, can't you?

Oh my god, just stop.

because there are surely more ways to reply without being quite so antagonistic?

seriously guys. tone it down. if you can't discuss things reasonably without resorting to thinly-veiled flaming or ever so subtly calling someone an idiot, you'll just get kicked out of serious business.

 

[shy ♡]

o.o
Jew can be used as a slur, as has been stated previously in this thread. If the word Jew is used with the intent of being a slur, it is a slur. Using Jew as a slur is suggesting being Jewish is bad. Obviously, if you're saying Jew and you don't believe or suggest that being Jewish is bad, it isn't a slur. The same goes for a lot of the other words, too. Obviously you should say "black" or similar as opposed to the n-word, or "queer" or similar as opposed to faggot, because those are generally used as insults, or at the very least more often than not, and therefore more likely to be taken as a derogative.

Well, anything can be used as a slur, that isn't the point. Sorry, I can't articulate myself further on this issue, possibly because of outside events so I'll just back down.

Ignoring the fact that no one is their ancestor, this is completely baseless. Your argument comes from absolutely nowhere, and I can't see how it logically works. I'm pretty sure you're supposed to explain these things. I'm not feigning a lack of understanding here, I've heard this so many times but no one's been able to explain it to me.

If the word itself is offensive, then it doesn't matter who says it. It's still offensive. If it's only inoffensive when black people say it, then it's the context: We know that black people aren't racist against black people, so when they say it, it's in a way that isn't meant to be insulting. In the same vein, the word itself is harmless. Only people using it in an offensive manner are offensive.

If you've got an SA stance, and figure it's fine to say it as long as you're very definitely obviously not racist and that you might as well not because someone'll inevitably get outraged, then fine. That's fine. But stating that only blacks can say it just doesn't make any logic sense, at least not in the way you explained it. Seriously.

What, who said anything about an ancestor? I said oppressor. What.

Aside from that, I really think you should listen to people who are from the minority telling you things.

@pathos-- Okay then. What's your stance on cracker/honky?

What is a honky? And uh, black people do not oppress white people based on colour, thus cracker = null.

Well, prepare to be offended: any word can be a slur. All that matters is the emotion behind it. If I hated Jews, I could very well walk up to a Jewish person and say, "I hate you, you fucking Jew," or something along those lines. (Sorry for the vulgarity, but I'm trying to make a point.)

Conversely, if I was with a Jewish friend, I could say something like, "You're such a Jew", a la Cartman on South Park. (Not saying I would ever say something like that, it's not really my personality to potentially offend anyone.) In my opinion, context is everything. I'm with Cap'n Sofa up there: the vocabulary you use should be chosen according to the people you're with.

But, yeah, "Jew" can definitely be used as a slur, and I think it's horribly naive to think it can't.

That's exactly my point though! Any word can be used as a slur! So why pick out Jew?

for the record, I would like to see less of this:
because hey guys, you can act with slightly more maturity, can't you?

because there are surely more ways to reply without being quite so antagonistic?

seriously guys. tone it down. if you can't discuss things reasonably without resorting to thinly-veiled flaming or ever so subtly calling someone an idiot, you'll just get kicked out of serious business.

 

[Saith]

What, who said anything about an ancestor? I said oppressor. What.

If you used the word to oppress people, and use it now, you are still oppressing people by using it.

The only way I can understand that is if I assume your argument is 'if you [white people] used the word to oppress people, and use it now, you [Saith] are still oppressing people by using it.'
If that is what you're saying then yeah, no, I'm not 'white people'. There's a bunch of things you can accuse me of, but being an eighteenth century plantation owner is a wee bit farfetched.

Aside from that, I really think you should listen to people who are from the minority telling you things.

I don't get it?

 

[Aletheia]

And uh, black people do not oppress white people based on colour, thus cracker = null.

Oh, so pejorative terms are perfectly fine as long as the group targeted isn't being oppressed by the term! That makes perfect logical sense!

 

[Firelord Alex]

I'm offended by the word cracker because I know the meaning behind it. It's not because they're white like a saltine, it's worse. It's a slave driver that would whip the slaves nearly to death to continuing working. The whip made a crack, and that's where the word formed. I would never whip anyone, and saying that I'm like those terrible people makes me feel like all the work that went into getting slaves freed was a waste.

Just because I'm white doesn't mean I'm the cause of slavery. Just because someone is black doesn't mean they are slaves or should be.

I know I'm preaching to the choir, but I thought I should just say that.

 

[shy ♡]

Seriously, does no one here know anything about white privilege? White privilege and the n word, n-word and white privilege.

 

[Mendatt]

Words like those can be used by those that they are targeted at because those they are targeted by cannot be in the archetype of person that would mean them pejoratively. Those that you cannot tell from appearance to not fit in that archetype cannot use the word if there are those nearby who do not know that they are not members of that archetype. It isn't actually all that complicated.

 

[Saith]

Seriously, does no one here know anything about white privilege? White privilege and the n word, n-word and white privilege.

The problem with that first second link is that it operates on the premise that I literally cannot understand what it's on about. It's basically saying 'there's this thing, and you can never see it, and you can never understand it, and you wouldn't know about it if I hadn't told you about it but it's there. It's totally there. Serious, man, honest.' Aaaaand that's why I don't follow the Bible. v0v

The second third one I mainly agreed with. Yes, stuff like that isn't a huge deal, stuff like not saying the n-word doesn't affect me much. However, no, I don't have to apologise for anything.
I think my main problem with this sort of thing is that when comparing events, they never compare realistic events. Like, it's never something along the lines of 'out of a black drop-out and a white drop-out applying to work part-time at McDonald's [...]', or 'out of a white guy and a black guy entering the military [...]', the comparisons are always things like 'out of a white supermodel who somehow became the governor of Alaska and a black guy who are applying to [...]'. And it just paints a strange sort of strawman.

The third fourth one was ehhh, but it annoyed me when she said things like 'white people are only now learning that racism is bad' and 'white people have, historically, been and done terrible terrible things and so it's totally cool to dislike white people'. It's just a load of bull. I mean yeah, totally, just last February we abolished slavery, right? I mean, we were all in favour of hating black people before then, weren't we? Right?

Removed: Paragraph about slavery.

 

[shy ♡]

The problem with that first second link is that it operates on the premise that I literally cannot understand what it's on about. It's basically saying 'there's this thing, and you can never see it, and you can never understand it, and you wouldn't know about it if I hadn't told you about it but it's there. It's totally there. Serious, man, honest.' Aaaaand that's why I don't follow the Bible. v0v

What do you mean, can't understand what it operates on? A white person will not be discriminated on based on the colour of their skin. A person of colour will be, more often. How is that invisible?

The second third one I mainly agreed with. Yes, stuff like that isn't a huge deal, stuff like not saying the n-word doesn't affect me much. However, no, I don't have to apologise for anything.
I think my main problem with this sort of thing is that when comparing events, they never compare realistic events. Like, it's never something along the lines of 'out of a black drop-out and a white drop-out applying to work part-time at McDonald's [...]', or 'out of a white guy and a black guy entering the military [...]', the comparisons are always things like 'out of a white supermodel who somehow became the governor of Alaska and a black guy who are applying to [...]'. And it just paints a strange sort of strawman.

No one is asking for an apology. Please listen more carefully. It's just an acknowledgement of privilege. That doesn't mean you have to say 'dude sorry I'm white' to every person of colour you meet. That would actually be pretty douchey. It just means recognize that hey, you are pretty privileged in being white, and would probably have a harder time if you were not.

I don't get your point in regards to examples. If you know the statistics, why do they have to be pointed out to you...?

The third fourth one was ehhh, but it annoyed me when she said things like 'white people are only now learning that racism is bad' and 'white people have, historically, been and done terrible terrible things and so it's totally cool to dislike white people'. It's just a load of bull. I mean yeah, totally, just last February we abolished slavery, right? I mean, we were all in favour of hating black people before then, weren't we? Right?

No, no no. People are only learning about racism in terms of privilege. Nothing to do with slavery. Get that image out of your head because it is irrelevant. Racism does not have to mean 'I own you'. There are other sorts of racism, you know.

Since you are only now, apparently, learning about white privilege, I don't see how the statement that people are only now learning about racism is a load of bull.

 

[Eloi]

From all the way down here, I can't see any difference between me and the stereotypical black person.

Three words: Same, but more. (As in, if you weren't white, it'd be a lot worse, as unfathomable as that might be.)

 

[Firelord Alex]

The food stereotype for black people doesn't just apply to blacks. I love chicken, cornbread, koolaid, and watermelon. :D

 

[Saith]

e/n

Taking it down. Sorry about my embarrassing vent.

 

[Michi]

Since you are only now, apparently, learning about white privilege, I don't see how the statement that people are only now learning about racism is a load of bull.

Maybe it's because all the sources you provided, with the exception of Wikipedia, gave the impression that a majority of the population is racist. If I recall, the second link provided a 50-point list detailing white privilege. Most of them, however, don't apply to just African Americans, and some make no sense at all. I could argue with about 85% of this list, but I'll focus on my main point, detailed quite well in this part:

42. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to experience feelings of rejection owing to my race.

White people are just as prejudiced to tothers and themselves as any other race. They are subject to racism as much as any other race.

Throughout this list and the other articles provided, we are given the impression that a majority of white people are racist. We are also given the impression that a majority of minority races' populations are not racist. It's never explicitly stated at all, but is implied through the targeting of incedents of white racism and a lack of acknowledgement of the racist actions between and from other races.
That's the part I think is "a load of bull." White people, Asians, Africans, South Americans, and everyone else are all equally racist and prejudiced in terms of percentage. The only difference is that in much of the western world, white people simply outnumber other races. It's not that we as a race are more inclined to be racist, it's that there are simply more racists. Every part of the population is amplified to about the same degree - there are more racists, more people with neutral views, more people who support minorities, more of everyone.

Also, I don't think anyone here is learning of white privilege for the first time at all. Everyone meets someone in life who claims a race, which may be white people, is better, or has more rights, or is favored by some high-ranking group or something. The thing I disagree with most is that white privilege is often portrayed as something involving more than just a minority of white people. Many if not most white people in our time are not racist or do not act upon their prejudices. And before I forget, the concept of racism itself has been around for quite a while - people are not just now learning about racism.