NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBOeY_MYh6U

Funny as hell, it uses primarily the n-word to create humor, which has been recently banned in New York. And yet, even though it uses a word that is mostly associated with rascism, it appears not to be rascist.

If America is a free democracy, why are words like the n-word and "Negro" being banned from schools and other public places? I mean, I understand that going up to an African American person and calling him the n-word isn't a good idea, and it isn't nice - but is it necessarily rascist? And even if something is rascist, is outlawing the right thing to do?

http://newyork.broowaha.com/article.php?id=864

and

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17382727/

1. The word has racist origins, but the context in which it is used makes the difference. If you're shouting it at a black person as an epithet, then it's racist. If you're using it to mock the positions held by white supremacists, then less so. If you're discussing its use in a work of literature, then not at all.

2. The word isn't being banned, unless you consider a non-binding suggestion a ban, and if you do, you've got problems that this discussion can't fix.

I don't know anymore. Black people can say it because the word applies to them (how flattering), but white people cannot because they are not black.

It is double standards like this that makes me hate the world.

Sorry dude, but there are 6 billion standarts on this world. Or Mike Tyson and Cristina Aguilera offering to give you a blow job means you will consider both offerts the same way?

For me, black saying ****** is ok, white saying ****** isnt.

I don't know anymore. Black people can say it because the word applies to them (how flattering), but white people cannot because they are not black.

It is double standards like this that makes me hate the world.

Typical cracker.

No word should ever be banned for any reason. 'Nuff said.

I'm fine with double standards.

I can sit around with my friends, and we call call each other wagon-burning savages all we want. YOU do it? I'll kick your teeth in.

I call my white friends trailer-trash. Ha ha. It's okay, because we know it's okay. YOU don't know it's okay.

It's really very simple. Until you know someone well enough to say something that would normally, without context, be insulting...DON'T.

But don't bitch because you are required to have that context first. Nigga'.

2. The word isn't being banned, unless you consider a non-binding suggestion a ban, and if you do, you've got problems that this discussion can't fix.

Yeah, but an NS thread sans unreasonable hysteria...

It's just wrong.

I'm fine with double standards.

I can sit around with my friends, and we call call each other wagon-burning savages all we want. YOU do it? I'll kick your teeth in.

I call my white friends trailer-trash. Ha ha. It's okay, because we know it's okay. YOU don't know it's okay.

It's really very simple. Until you know someone well enough to say something that would normally, without context, be insulting...DON'T.

But don't bitch because you are required to have that context first. Nigga'.Es no bueno.

Note you is just a reference.

lol. to say if you call someone a racist slur and they attack your person. You win the case in legal terms to begin with as your are not adovacting violence. In real life they may well get away with assualt due to hate speech.

The presentation you made is what I am really pointing out to you that if you call some guy trailer-trash the term might be as offensive as saying ****** to a black person as you might not know where they came from and the term trailer-trash implies being stuid, white trash, bad family, poor education, and as many bad things as the big n word.

As well, to call someone a hick, aka hillbillie, is quite bad as in many aspect it offends as much as ****** as you describing the person as crude, poor, stupid, inbreed, makes loves to his own sister, is inhernatly racist, little or no educatin, intolerant, and many other things to many to list so do not justify calling white people racist slurs unless if you want them thrown back.

Here is a little Savages pardoy from both sides though: http://youtube.com/watch?v=6dXSkgLrm-Y

Sorry dude, but there are 6 billion standarts on this world. Or Mike Tyson and Cristina Aguilera offering to give you a blow job means you will consider both offerts the same way?

Maybe if you used an example other than Mike "the Cannibal" Tyson you would get a yes response from the local bi population . . . no one wants it bitten off.

I don't know anymore. Black people can say it because the word applies to them (how flattering), but white people cannot because they are not black.

It is double standards like this that makes me hate the world.

explain to me the context in which you feel this overwhelming urge to call people niggers which you then have to fight down

I'm fine with double standards.

I can sit around with my friends, and we call call each other wagon-burning savages all we want. YOU do it? I'll kick your teeth in.

I call my white friends trailer-trash. Ha ha. It's okay, because we know it's okay. YOU don't know it's okay.

It's really very simple. Until you know someone well enough to say something that would normally, without context, be insulting...DON'T.

But don't bitch because you are required to have that context first. Nigga'.

Yeah, I've never really understood this particular complaint. It's not exactly as if anyone is likely to be unfamiliar with the idea that context matters. I'd be willing to bet that almost anyone reading this would agree that they would not particularly mind if their significant other called them a "dirty slut" in bed, but would quite definitely mind if a stranger in a bar addressed them as such. Some things that are okay for person X to say are not okay for person Y to say, and poor li'l person Y will just have to deal with that. :p

A lot to do with this word comes from its origins. The more common theories include that the word comes from the Latin word "niger" meaning black or simply the mispronunciation of the word "negro." This is certainly racist, though not necessarily derogatory. However, I have also come across the theory that it comes from the French word "nigaud" meaning a fool or one who is ignorant. This could be considered derogatory, but not necessarily racist.

Regardless of its origin the usage of it has caused it to be so offensive. The word itself means exactly that and is quite innocuous, but the connotations that have been added to it over the years have caused it to be quite possibly the most inflammatory word in the English language.

If America is a free democracy, why are words like the n-word and "Negro" being banned from schools and other public places?

Um, because they're SCHOOLS?

If you're honestly expecting a school to be run in a democratic fashion, I'm just going to suggest that perhaps you don't know what a school actually is like.

I don't know anymore. Black people can say it because the word applies to them (how flattering), but white people cannot because they are not black.

It is double standards like this that makes me hate the world.

Well, keep hating then, because the world ain't changing for you. And if you read the stories surrounding this so-called ban, you'll see this is a debate raging within the Arfican-American community, with some saying the word is offensive no matter who uses it, and others saying that they're reclaiming the word, taking away the offense by redefining it.

I don't know anymore. Black people can say it because the word applies to them (how flattering), but white people cannot because they are not black.

It is double standards like this that makes me hate the world.

Grow up. There are double standards everywhere in what one can and cannot say, depending on gender, relationships, sexuality etc.

The reason a white person can't say that word is because for a couple of hundred years white people used that word for the express purpose of subjugating and humiliating the black population. Black people are reclaiming the word for themselves.

But don't bitch because you are required to have that context first. Nigga'.

Really, what a bunch of fags.

Really, what a bunch of fags.
Marlboros? Chesterfields? Camels?

Marlboros? Chesterfields? Camels?

That only works for limy bastards, you dixie yank.

That only works for limy bastards, you dixie yank.

:D

On that topic:

How do you call a black person flying a plane?

Pilot, you racist!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBOeY_MYh6U

Funny as hell, it uses primarily the n-word to create humor, which has been recently banned in New York. And yet, even though it uses a word that is mostly associated with rascism, it appears not to be rascist.

If America is a free democracy, why are words like the n-word and "Negro" being banned from schools and other public places? I mean, I understand that going up to an African American person and calling him the n-word isn't a good idea, and it isn't nice - but is it necessarily rascist? And even if something is rascist, is outlawing the right thing to do?

http://newyork.broowaha.com/article.php?id=864

and

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17382727/

The word is demeaning and racist, although a lot of black people who are 'ghetto' refer to themselves and their compatriots as niggers. In Live and Let Die, the novel heavily features 1950s black culture and the only people who say ****** are black. Negro is old-fashioned, and just not used.

I was not aware that nutmeg is a racist term….

Now I know, and will consequently cease to use the n-word

1. The word has racist origins, but the context in which it is used makes the difference. If you're shouting it at a black person as an epithet, then it's racist. If you're using it to mock the positions held by white supremacists, then less so. If you're discussing its use in a work of literature, then not at all.

2. The word isn't being banned, unless you consider a non-binding suggestion a ban, and if you do, you've got problems that this discussion can't fix.

Well said.

Don't see anything wrong with it. So what if one is, in fact, black? I think it should be avoided if objected by someone, but I attach no derogatory meaning to it.
All these euphemisms are quite tiring. I find "black" a better word, though - plain and simple.

Offense depends on context. "Hey, you, white!" and "Hey, you, ******!" are both offensive. "White Bigot Association" and "Gay ****** Association" are both fine.

A lot to do with this word comes from its origins. The more common theories include that the word comes from the Latin word "niger" meaning black or simply the mispronunciation of the word "negro." This is certainly racist, though not necessarily derogatory. However, I have also come across the theory that it comes from the French word "nigaud" meaning a fool or one who is ignorant. This could be considered derogatory, but not necessarily racist.

Regardless of its origin the usage of it has caused it to be so offensive. The word itself means exactly that and is quite innocuous, but the connotations that have been added to it over the years have caused it to be quite possibly the most inflammatory word in the English language.

LOL ever have to teach the word "niggardly"? Guess the reaction.

Um, because they're SCHOOLS?

If you're honestly expecting a school to be run in a democratic fashion, I'm just going to suggest that perhaps you don't know what a school actually is like.

Untrue. I teach Huckleberry Finn, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, and a host of other literature where the word ****** is mentioned quite a bit. When we read aloud passages for context, we don't say, "n-word" or any other euphemism -- we say ******, understanding the context of the time period.

I am not PC. That being said I do not usually call people niggers. Usually I refer to blacks as "Colored" because that is more polite. Now if I see some trashy black wearing gang colors, that boy is a stinking dirty ******.

If someone called my black friends a bunch of niggers I would be pissed. My black friends are not in gangs (unless you call heavy church involvement gang activity). They speak proper English and do not have bastard children and they work hard and pay taxes.

I am not PC.

What an ironically PC way of saying you're racist.

LOL ever have to teach the word "niggardly"? Guess the reaction.



Untrue. I teach Huckleberry Finn, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, and a host of other literature where the word ****** is mentioned quite a bit. When we read aloud passages for context, we don't say, "n-word" or any other euphemism -- we say ******, understanding the context of the time period.

Similar in Of Mice and men that I did in school. The book is not racist, yet the word is used a lot when describing the only black character, because it was set in the 1930's.

Personally I believe a word is only hurtful in its intent to cause hurt. If you were to call me "spaz" or "retard" I would very likely attack you, as the word is not meant kindly. I believe that calling someone a "******" is bad on account of how the word is meant. It's hard to call someone it in a good light.

What an ironically PC way of saying you're racist.

So what? Not all racists are stupid and ignorant. Just about every PC type I ever met though was dumb as heck.

You might be surprised to know that plenty of racists have friends of different races. You might also be surprised that they are capable of being some of the least prejudicial people on Earth.

Grow up. There are double standards everywhere in what one can and cannot say, depending on gender, relationships, sexuality etc.

The reason a white person can't say that word is because for a couple of hundred years white people used that word for the express purpose of subjugating and humiliating the black population. Black people are reclaiming the word for themselves.

And in reverse order, it is also being used to subjugate and humiliate others. Not to mention the coining of the term "Cracker" to refer to Caucasians in the same sense, along with other terms.

Ho-well. I live in a less than ideal world, where equality is only a word, and nobody wants it.

I liked the Daily Show's take on this ban, especially near the end:

"What about the rappers who need the word?"

"I don't know if they really need the word..."

"Finish the sentence: 'I aint sayin she's a gold digga, but she aint hangin with no broke--'."

"... Hm. Fool?"

"... Do you even understand how rap works?"

If someone called my black friends a bunch of niggers I would be pissed. My black friends are not in gangs (unless you call heavy church involvement gang activity). They speak proper English and do not have bastard children and they work hard and pay taxes.

There is no such thing as proper English. There is "Standardized English", in a sense, but not social group or community actually uses it on a day to day basis(Think New-Reporter type). There are various different dialects of English in America, all of which are unique and different. The English you speak is a different english that what is spoken on the otherside of the country, which is different than what is spoken in England, which is different than what is spoken in Scotland, which is different than what is spoken in Ireland, etc and so forth.

To say there is "proper" English is to be wholy ignorant of the language itself.

So what? Not all racists are stupid and ignorant. Just about every PC type I ever met though was dumb as heck.

You might be surprised to know that plenty of racists have friends of different races. You might also be surprised that they are capable of being some of the least prejudicial people on Earth.

You might also be surprised that no one's buying your crap.

There is no such thing as proper English. There is "Standardized English", in a sense, but not social group or community actually uses it on a day to day basis(Think New-Reporter type). There are various different dialects of English in America, all of which are unique and different. The English you speak is a different english that what is spoken on the otherside of the country, which is different than what is spoken in England, which is different than what is spoken in Scotland, which is different than what is spoken in Ireland, etc and so forth.

To say there is "proper" English is to be wholy ignorant of the language itself.

You are only partially correct. The only appropriate forms of English are the Standard English we learn in school and the colloquial English we speak in our given areas. That being said, Ebonics is not appropriate for any civiized discourse.

LOL ever have to teach the word "niggardly"? Guess the reaction.I did it just last week in the context of the DC politician who was forced to apologize for using the word. It got my students' attention.



Untrue. I teach Huckleberry Finn, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, and a host of other literature where the word ****** is mentioned quite a bit. When we read aloud passages for context, we don't say, "n-word" or any other euphemism -- we say ******, understanding the context of the time period.
Me too. The above discussion came when we were discussing "Raisin in the Sun," and students, black, white and Latin were all forced, at one point or another, to read the word aloud. Somehow we survived. :D

It was interesting, though, that outside of the reading, we didn't use the word. We changed to black or African-American.

I am not PC. That being said I do not usually call people niggers. Usually I refer to blacks as "Colored" because that is more polite. Now if I see some trashy black wearing gang colors, that boy is a stinking dirty ******.

If someone called my black friends a bunch of niggers I would be pissed. My black friends are not in gangs (unless you call heavy church involvement gang activity). They speak proper English and do not have bastard children and they work hard and pay taxes.

"Colored" is more polite? More polite than "boy," perhaps, but that's like saying that calling a homosexual person a fairy is more polite than calling him a fag.

You might also be surprised that no one's buying your crap.

There you go withthe prejudice. You are prejudiced against racists and believe them to be a bunch of dummies. If racism is such a bunk theory how can you explain that Ashkenazi Jews have high IQs and are 96% less likely to be convicted of a violent offense than the average American?

How do you explain that the prisons are disproportiantely full of Blacks? Don't give me any of that crap about poverty because I have done the research to prove it dead wrong.

Racism has nothing to do with hatred. It has to do with race. That is why it is not called hatredism. You anti-racists make me sick.

Race-based violence is what I blame for this ignorance. Wake up and realize that only a small percentage of racists are skinheads or Nazis or would like to hang someone just for being a certain color.

People like you probably are also duped into thinking that most Muslims are terrorists.

You are only partially correct. The only appropriate forms of English are the Standard English we learn in school and the colloquial English we speak in our given areas. That being said, Ebonics is not appropriate for any civiized discourse.

Neither are your posts.

"Colored" is more polite? More polite than "boy," perhaps, but that's like saying that calling a homosexual person a fairy is more polite than calling him a fag.

There is nothing wrong with colored. Only in your ever shifting PC language where something is doubleplus good on one day and ungood the next.

You are only partially correct. The only appropriate forms of English are the Standard English we learn in school and the colloquial English we speak in our given areas. That being said, Ebonics is not appropriate for any civiized discourse.

Yes. Yes it is. It is a culturally constructed dialect that is just as unique as any dialect. Also, I prefer AAVE(African American Vernacular English), as it is a dialect of English, not an entirely different language(Although it does have aspects of a new language). Ebonics was coined pretty much specifically so it could be taught as a "Foreign Language".

But, that's beside the point. The real point is, there is no such thing as a more "civilized" dialect or language. To say otherwise is to be an out-right bigot, and completely ignorant of language structures, and how they relate to intelligence. For your learning pleasure, Intelligence and language used are not related. At all. Ever. Ad-infinitum. And honestly, many black people who seem to speak standardized english actually do infact use AAVE in their homes. Just as a Hispanic person will use Spanish at home, but English in public. Let that soak in. Deep.

I hate that shit. It's a suttle way of oppressing the majority.

There you go withthe prejudice. You are prejudiced against racists and believe them to be a bunch of dummies. If racism is such a bunk theory how can you explain that Ashkenazi Jews have high IQs and are 96% less likely to be convicted of a violent offense than the average American?

How do you explain that the prisons are disproportiantely full of Blacks? Don't give me any of that crap about poverty because I have done the research to prove it dead wrong.

Racism has nothing to do with hatred. It has to do with race. That is why it is not called hatredism. You anti-racists make me sick.

Race-based violence is what I blame for this ignorance. Wake up and realize that only a small percentage of racists are skinheads or Nazis or would like to hang someone just for being a certain color.

People like you probably are also duped into thinking that most Muslims are terrorists.

Nope, still not forking over my kronor for that excrement.

There you go withthe prejudice. You are prejudiced against racists and believe them to be a bunch of dummies. If racism is such a bunk theory how can you explain that Ashkenazi Jews have high IQs and are 96% less likely to be convicted of a violent offense than the average American?

Likely due to their society and how it is structured, and very little to do with actual biological differences. Infact, the only actual biological difference are purely superficial, relating in no way to intelligence or comprehension skills.


How do you explain that the prisons are disproportiantely full of Blacks? Don't give me any of that crap about poverty because I have done the research to prove it dead wrong.

Juries are more likely to believe a black man did a crime, even if he did not. Juries are not 100% accurate, and there are always underlying biases. Racism plays a large role, believe it or not. I'm sure if you were on a Jury, and a black man was a defendant, you would have a much higher chance of voting guilty than not, simply because he is black. Such is the way of Racism.


Racism has nothing to do with hatred. It has to do with race. That is why it is not called hatredism. You anti-racists make me sick.

Racism leads to hate. It's pretty simple.


Race-based violence is what I blame for this ignorance. Wake up and realize that only a small percentage of racists are skinheads or Nazis or would like to hang someone just for being a certain color.

Not all racists are violent, yes. However, that does not mean that they cannot cause problems


People like you probably are also duped into thinking that most Muslims are terrorists.

Okay, now this statement actually stands out.

Yes. Yes it is. It is a culturally constructed dialect that is just as unique as any dialect. Also, I prefer AAVE(African American Vernacular English), as it is a dialect of English, not an entirely different language(Although it does have aspects of a new language). Ebonics was coined pretty much specifically so it could be taught as a "Foreign Language".

But, that's beside the point. The real point is, there is no such thing as a more "civilized" dialect or language. To say otherwise is to be an out-right bigot, and completely ignorant of language structures, and how they relate to intelligence. For your learning pleasure, Intelligence and language used are not related. At all. Ever. Ad-infinitum. And honestly, many black people who seem to speak standardized english actually do infact use AAVE in their homes. Just as a Hispanic person will use Spanish at home, but English in public. Let that soak in. Deep.

Oh my gosh do you actually believe this? Do you think that I could use ebonics in a board meeting for example?

That being said, I loved the part in Airplane II where a colored jive talker was sworn in to give testimony in a hearing.

Bailiff "Do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?"

Jive Talking Soul Brother "Aint no thing."

I loved it.

There is nothing wrong with colored. Only in your ever shifting PC language where something is doubleplus good on one day and ungood the next.

Tell you what---walk down Sistrunk Avenue in Fort Lauderdale and start calling the inhabitants colored and see how they react. They'll let you know what's wrong with it.

How does believing that Blacks constitute a disproportionately high percentage of Blood and Crip membership mean that I hate my nice Black neighbor?

How does believing that Ashkenazi Jews are smart lead me to hate anyone?

How does believing that Japs are smart make me hate them? I love Kurosawa movies and think sushi rocks!

Yes, there are a violent minority of racists. Duh.

Anti-racists probably think that modern racism is what keeps the brother down and makes him have worse health problems in the US. The truth is that descendants of slaves are predisposed to heart trouble and high blood pressure because the only slaves that made the trans-Atlantic journey in abominable conditions were the ones that could retain salts. Otherwise they died of diareah dehydration. What helped you survive the hold of a slave ship prevents your descendants from thriving in a society where a lot of the food has a high salt content.

You know, I have done business deals with coloreds and I never once took their race into account. I tell you what though, I never did business with ebonics speakers. No wait, I did once with a trashy miscegenating white woman and guess what she was a real loser and I got cheated.

Tell you what---walk down Sistrunk Avenue in Fort Lauderdale and start calling the inhabitants colored and see how they react. They'll let you know what's wrong with it.

Ever hear of the NAACP? What does the C stand for?

miscegenating

Oh, careful, your white robes are showing even more.

I liked the Daily Show's take on this ban, especially near the end:

"What about the rappers who need the word?"

"I don't know if they really need the word..."

"Finish the sentence: 'I aint sayin she's a gold digga, but she aint hangin with no broke--'."

"... Hm. Fool?"

"... Do you even understand how rap works?"


i loved that bit! the white guy had to have the black guy along with so that the black guy could say the word ******.

larry wilmore (the black guy) is quickly becoming my favorite "reporter" on that show.

Ever hear of the NAACP? What does the C stand for?

And how old is that group? When they were established, colored was an improvement, largely because the most common word used to describe them was ******. Times have changed, thankfully, and now colored is considered a pejorative, whether you want to accept it or not. After all, it's not the racists who get to decide what another group finds offensive.

You know, I have done business deals with coloreds and I never once took their race into account. I tell you what though, I never did business with ebonics speakers. No wait, I did once with a trashy miscegenating white woman and guess what she was a real loser and I got cheated.

Someone who uses the word miscegenation in a negative context really has no right to insist that he isn't filled with racist views. You should admit to yourself that you do in fact take race into account.

And how old is that group? When they were established, colored was an improvement, largely because the most common word used to describe them was ******. Times have changed, thankfully, and now colored is considered a pejorative, whether you want to accept it or not. After all, it's not the racists who get to decide what another group finds offensive.

I find something odd about a language that constantly shifts and changes espescially when the change is based on good and bad. It is so close to the language used in Orwell's 1984 that it makes me shudder. Only the individual gets to decide what is offensive or not. There ought be no language editors in a free society. If you want such editors you are not on the side of Liberty.

Someone who uses the word miscegenation in a negative context really has no right to insist that he isn't filled with racist views. You should admit to yourself that you do in fact take race into account.

Is there a non-negative context that I've never heard it used in?

I find something odd about a language that constantly shifts and changes espescially when the change is based on good and bad. It is so close to the language used in Orwell's 1984 that it makes me shudder. Only the individual gets to decide what is offensive or not. There ought be no language editors in a free society. If you want such editors you are not on the side of Liberty.

Well, face it, there are language editors, and language police. Orwell was very prescient in foreshadowing "Newspeak".

Eventually, so many words will be forbidden, regardless of context, that people will have a hard time saying much that the "people" don't want us to say.

And eventually, if we can't say these things, we can't think them. Or so they believe.

I don't, for an instant, believe that racism has been reduced one whit by forbidding people to say certain words. People who are racists will continue to use the words out of earshot, continue to teach their children to hate, and continue to be racists - you just won't see them being stupid enough to let it out in the open.

I find something odd about a language that constantly shifts and changes espescially when the change is based on good and bad. It is so close to the language used in Orwell's 1984 that it makes me shudder. Only the individual gets to decide what is offensive or not. There ought be no language editors in a free society. If you want such editors you are not on the side of Liberty.

Let me clue you in on something--every language shifts and changes, and does so not only based on "good and bad" but on a myriad of other factors. It's nothing at all like the language in 1984, and the fact that you think it is just shows that you don't have the first fucking clue what that book was about.

I find something odd about a language that constantly shifts and changes espescially when the change is based on good and bad. It is so close to the language used in Orwell's 1984 that it makes me shudder. Only the individual gets to decide what is offensive or not. There ought be no language editors in a free society. If you want such editors you are not on the side of Liberty.

Let me clue you in on something--every language shifts and changes, and does so not only based on "good and bad" but on a myriad of other factors. It's nothing at all like the language in 1984, and the fact that you think it is just shows that you don't have the first fucking clue what that book was about.

Taken from UNITHU's sig...

"Censorship is the first step on the short path to dystopia."

Yes. Yes it is. It is a culturally constructed dialect that is just as unique as any dialect. Also, I prefer AAVE(African American Vernacular English), as it is a dialect of English, not an entirely different language(Although it does have aspects of a new language). Ebonics was coined pretty much specifically so it could be taught as a "Foreign Language".

But, that's beside the point. The real point is, there is no such thing as a more "civilized" dialect or language. To say otherwise is to be an out-right bigot, and completely ignorant of language structures, and how they relate to intelligence. For your learning pleasure, Intelligence and language used are not related. At all. Ever. Ad-infinitum. And honestly, many black people who seem to speak standardized english actually do infact use AAVE in their homes. Just as a Hispanic person will use Spanish at home, but English in public. Let that soak in. Deep.

well said.

the only thing i have against ebonics is what you said above, that its a word and concept made up so that bilingual money could be diverted to the regular classroom.

otherwise its just a semi-dialect of english. not all that different than cockney english or the english spoken in india.

Let me clue you in on something--every language shifts and changes, and does so not only based on "good and bad" but on a myriad of other factors. It's nothing at all like the language in 1984, and the fact that you think it is just shows that you don't have the first fucking clue what that book was about.

Actually, the idea behind Newspeak was to eliminate words that were conceptually anathema to the Party.

The idea was that if you eliminated the words, removed them from books, and forbade them from speech, people would forget the words, and ultimately, the concepts.

The idea that people can be forbidden from using the N-word is just such an idea, with the same desired result - to ultimately remove the concept so that people can't even think of it.

Not that it's very effective - people will still be racists, and people will still use other words for the same reason.

Is there a non-negative context that I've never heard it used in?

*considers*

No, I suppose not. But I think the racists hijacked the word since all it really means is the mixing of the races. By itself it is hardly insulting, just the implication of it for the bigoted.

Well, face it, there are language editors, and language police. Orwell was very prescient in foreshadowing "Newspeak".

Eventually, so many words will be forbidden, regardless of context, that people will have a hard time saying much that the "people" don't want us to say.

And eventually, if we can't say these things, we can't think them. Or so they believe.

I don't, for an instant, believe that racism has been reduced one whit by forbidding people to say certain words. People who are racists will continue to use the words out of earshot, continue to teach their children to hate, and continue to be racists - you just won't see them being stupid enough to let it out in the open.

I do not accept anything I find unacceptable. I will not be cowed by liberal PC Newspeakers. I am a racist in the sense that I find race to be imprtant and interesting and not irrelevant. However, I hate prejudice as much as anyone. I could never hate someone for something they have no control over to do so is extremely un-American. We are all born equal in the sense that we should be judged on our actions. However, it seems that you can see trends in groups of people that are grouped according to race. I do not try to deny these differences or to apply them to members of that racial group.

I do not like miscegenation. I am not sure why I do not like it. It just seems instinctively wrong. Perhaps this is ignorance. But it would be just as ignorant to instinctively believe that it is right. I would not want the right to miscegenate to be taken away by law because I think that in a free society people should be free to do things that I find objectionable

Actually, the idea behind Newspeak was to eliminate words that were conceptually anathema to the Party.

The idea was that if you eliminated the words, removed them from books, and forbade them from speech, people would forget the words, and ultimately, the concepts.

The idea that people can be forbidden from using the N-word is just such an idea, with the same desired result - to ultimately remove the concept so that people can't even think of it.

Not that it's very effective - people will still be racists, and people will still use other words for the same reason.
But Glorious Freedonia isn't talking about the elimination of words. He's talking about the elimination of particular usages of words. Colored is a word that is used all the time--it's only in one particular sense that it's considered impolite. But beyond that, our recent history has shown that issues like racism have done everything but limit the use of language--it has expanded the use of language because people have been involved in conversations about what they should be able to call themselves, and that is still a vibrant discussion. There are more options available now than ever before, so how is this anything like 1984, in which the goal was to reduce the vocabulary to a point where certain concepts wouldn't even exist anymore?

I do not accept anything I find unacceptable. I will not be cowed by liberal PC Newspeakers. I am a racist in the sense that I find race to be imprtant and interesting and not irrelevant. However, I hate prejudice as much as anyone. I could never hate someone for something they have no control over to do so is extremely un-American. We are all born equal in the sense that we should be judged on our actions. However, it seems that you can see trends in groups of people that are grouped according to race. I do not try to deny these differences or to apply them to members of that racial group.

I do not like miscegenation. I am not sure why I do not like it. It just seems instinctively wrong. Perhaps this is ignorance. But it would be just as ignorant to instinctively believe that it is right. I would not want the right to miscegenate to be taken away by law because I think that in a free society people should be free to do things that I find objectionable
Which is it, because they can't both be accurate.

But Glorious Freedonia isn't talking about the elimination of words. He's talking about the elimination of particular usages of words. Colored is a word that is used all the time--it's only in one particular sense that it's considered impolite. But beyond that, our recent history has shown that issues like racism have done everything but limit the use of language--it has expanded the use of language because people have been involved in conversations about what they should be able to call themselves, and that is still a vibrant discussion. There are more options available now than ever before, so how is this anything like 1984, in which the goal was to reduce the vocabulary to a point where certain concepts wouldn't even exist anymore?

There are more options because the idea that you can ban a word and thus ban the thought is specious.

The N-word has effectively been banned from public speech, unless you can claim you're reading Huck Finn and have no intent to slur someone.

Even then, there are schools that ban the book strictly for that reason - so people will forget the old usage of the word (however rotten that usage might have been).

It's still the same "idea" - to ban thought by banning a word. It doesn't work, because people will still hate, and will switch to other words.

I do not like miscegenation. I am not sure why I do not like it.

<raises hand> Ooooh! Ooooh! I know Mr. Freedonia! I know! Pick me!

It's because you're a racist!

I do not like miscegenation. I am not sure why I do not like it. It just seems instinctively wrong. Perhaps this is ignorance. But it would be just as ignorant to instinctively believe that it is right. I would not want the right to miscegenate to be taken away by law because I think that in a free society people should be free to do things that I find objectionable

So you support a "separate but equal" policy that will somehow not be racist? Or just that the races shouldn't interbreed to keep them "pure" without somehow being racist? Or you could just admit how you really see non-whites.

Oh my gosh do you actually believe this? Do you think that I could use ebonics in a board meeting for example?
.

You missed the point entirely, and no I don't. Standardized English is pretty much accepted as the "business dialect" due to it's formal nature. However, in social situation, that are informal, nobody uses Standardized English, and it is actually seen as improper to do so. What I did say is that people who use Standardized English in social situation, and in public, often do not use it in private, informal situations. Such as with AAVE: Many Black people who speak Standardized English in formal situations use AAVE in informal situations, such as at home or among people of their society.

Honestly, is this concept difficult to understand for everyone?

There are more options because the idea that you can ban a word and thus ban the thought is specious.

The N-word has effectively been banned from public speech, unless you can claim you're reading Huck Finn and have no intent to slur someone.
Except that it hasn't, or am I hearing a number of rap lyrics incorrectly? Or is it that you mean the word has been banned from white people using it in a pejorative sense in polite company? The difference may seem subtle, but it's an important one, and it's at the heart of the issue in this thread.

Even then, there are schools that ban the book strictly for that reason - so people will forget the old usage of the word (however rotten that usage might have been).

It's still the same "idea" - to ban thought by banning a word. It doesn't work, because people will still hate, and will switch to other words.

Don't get me started on the stupidity of chickenshit school administrators. But I think you overestimate the danger here, especially since you can't really discuss 19th and 20th century British and American literature without that issue coming up. High schools may not want to deal with it, but universities attack the subject head on. I did it in my class last week while teaching "Raisin in the Sun."

I do not accept anything I find unacceptable. I will not be cowed by liberal PC Newspeakers. I am a racist in the sense that I find race to be imprtant and interesting and not irrelevant. However, I hate prejudice as much as anyone. I could never hate someone for something they have no control over to do so is extremely un-American. We are all born equal in the sense that we should be judged on our actions. However, it seems that you can see trends in groups of people that are grouped according to race. I do not try to deny these differences or to apply them to members of that racial group.

I do not like miscegenation. I am not sure why I do not like it. It just seems instinctively wrong. Perhaps this is ignorance. But it would be just as ignorant to instinctively believe that it is right. I would not want the right to miscegenate to be taken away by law because I think that in a free society people should be free to do things that I find objectionable

So, how do you propose to identify "race"? It appears that science is not with you on this one.

Which is it, because they can't both be accurate.

I hate prejudice that is applied towards a person. I also get really pissed at my wife's food prejudice. She will say that she does not like a certain type of food although she admits that it looks and smells appealing. When I ask her if she ever tried that type of food she will say that she has not. This gets me irritated but I especially hate it when prejudice actually is used to help or hurt someone.

I will give you an example. When I was in high school I was given a failing grade because I was accused of plagiarism. I did not plagiarize. I simply was smarter than my teacher and had a unique idea. I made an allusion to Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson. She said that she never heard of him and was a US History minor. She therefore prejudged me in a harmful way. It is interesting that she like many of the most prejudiced people I know was a PC type.

Another example that I see a lot in my profession is prejudice against younger businessmen. A young businessman may have a perfectly sound business idea and plan, but a lot of closed minded investors and creditors do not want to provide capital merely because he is smart and younger than them. Fortunately, I am not prejudiced and have made buttloads of money by investing in them.

Miscegenation is something that I admit I have some prejudice in to the extent that I cannot abstractly come up with a reason why it is bad. In fact, such ideas of expanding the gene pool make it sound pretty good in the abstract. I have noticed that mutts are often a lot better than purebred dogs.

However, I have seen a lot of misegenation end up in single parent homes. There was a time when single parent homes were not as common as they are now but they were more prevalent among the miscegenators.

It seems that in a miscegenation there is a situation where the couple is attracted to each other for racial reasons instead of personal ones. For example a girl might like black boys much more than she likes nice boys regardless of color. The same could be said for the black men who like white girls. A relationship built on such superficiality would obviously be less successful than one based on deeper compatibility.

I find something odd about a language that constantly shifts and changes espescially when the change is based on good and bad. It is so close to the language used in Orwell's 1984 that it makes me shudder. Only the individual gets to decide what is offensive or not. There ought be no language editors in a free society. If you want such editors you are not on the side of Liberty.

This seems quite odd, as you seem so incredibly against AAVE. Odd.

Except that it hasn't, or am I hearing a number of rap lyrics incorrectly? Or is it that you mean the word has been banned from white people using it in a pejorative sense in polite company? The difference may seem subtle, but it's an important one, and it's at the heart of the issue in this thread.

Actually, it's banned from any public politician who is not an African-American from saying it in any context at all - it's a one-way ticket to the dump.

Same for a lot of public personalities. Anyone who is not African-American who uses it in almost any "company" is bound to be derided for using the word unless the context is clearly, clearly educational - and sometimes not even then.



Don't get me started on the stupidity of chickenshit school administrators. But I think you overestimate the danger here, especially since you can't really discuss 19th and 20th century British and American literature without that issue coming up. High schools may not want to deal with it, but universities attack the subject head on. I did it in my class last week while teaching "Raisin in the Sun."

Oh, I am not saying there's a danger. People will get around stupid rules like banning words, and they always have.

<raises hand> Ooooh! Ooooh! I know Mr. Freedonia! I know! Pick me!

It's because you're a racist!

Nice. That was a good and funny post.

Miscegenation is something that I admit I have some prejudice in to the extent that I cannot abstractly come up with a reason why it is bad. In fact, such ideas of expanding the gene pool make it sound pretty good in the abstract. I have noticed that mutts are often a lot better than purebred dogs.

However, I have seen a lot of misegenation end up in single parent homes. There was a time when single parent homes were not as common as they are now but they were more prevalent among the miscegenators.

It seems that in a miscegenation there is a situation where the couple is attracted to each other for racial reasons instead of personal ones. For example a girl might like black boys much more than she likes nice boys regardless of color. The same could be said for the black men who like white girls. A relationship built on such superficiality would obviously be less successful than one based on deeper compatibility.

I can't believe someone posted this.

And even then, it's not banned in the sense that you can't say it. You can say it all you want, but due to how our society works, it will be detrimental to how others view you, but there is nothing strictly banning the word in and of itself.

You can be fired from where I work for saying it. They won't really delve into the context, either.

Except that it hasn't, or am I hearing a number of rap lyrics incorrectly? Or is it that you mean the word has been banned from white people using it in a pejorative sense in polite company? The difference may seem subtle, but it's an important one, and it's at the heart of the issue in this thread.

And even then, it's not banned in the sense that you can't say it. You can say it all you want, but due to how our society works, it will be detrimental to how others view you, but there is nothing strictly banning the word in and of itself.

You missed the point entirely, and no I don't. Standardized English is pretty much accepted as the "business dialect" due to it's formal nature. However, in social situation, that are informal, nobody uses Standardized English, and it is actually seen as improper to do so. What I did say is that people who use Standardized English in social situation, and in public, often do not use it in private, informal situations. Such as with AAVE: Many Black people who speak Standardized English in formal situations use AAVE in informal situations, such as at home or among people of their society.

Honestly, is this concept difficult to understand for everyone?

I am an educated man and I use Standardized English. However, I do see your point.

You can be fired from where I work for saying it. They won't really delve into the context, either.

This does not sound like freedom to me.

Must be the truth in it.

There is some truth yes. I just really loved the way it was worded.

Nice. That was a good and funny post.

Must be the truth in it.

Miscegenation is something that I admit I have some prejudice in to the extent that I cannot abstractly come up with a reason why it is bad. In fact, such ideas of expanding the gene pool make it sound pretty good in the abstract. I have noticed that mutts are often a lot better than purebred dogs.

However, I have seen a lot of misegenation end up in single parent homes. There was a time when single parent homes were not as common as they are now but they were more prevalent among the miscegenators.

It seems that in a miscegenation there is a situation where the couple is attracted to each other for racial reasons instead of personal ones. For example a girl might like black boys much more than she likes nice boys regardless of color. The same could be said for the black men who like white girls. A relationship built on such superficiality would obviously be less successful than one based on deeper compatibility.

Blah blah blah. What's klan for sig heil again?

Blah blah blah. What's klan for sig heil again?

What is PC for seeing a good point but not wanting to address it so you just easily dismiss it by conjuring up an image of something nasty like the Nazis or the KKK?

What is PC for seeing a good point but not wanting to address it so you just easily dismiss it by conjuring up an image of something nasty like the Nazis or the KKK?

A "good point?" Please. You're not making a good point. You're just babbling typical racist bullshit about "mutts," "miscegenation," bringing in cheerfully academic anecdotes about how "miscegenators" lead to "single parent homes" and such nonsense.

Typical racist bullshit. No need to conjure up the nazis - they were far more relevant, important, and successful than you. Nor the KKK - I'm sure you can't be arsed to do anything like dress up for the part, you just feel the need to go online and make stupid, bigoted, racist trash statements on a forum where you know you can't be harmed or your reputation damaged in any way. In short, you're a typical racist coward. GTFO.

What is PC for seeing a good point but not wanting to address it so you just easily dismiss it by conjuring up an image of something nasty like the Nazis or the KKK?

Show me a good point and I'll address it. You ARE something nasty like the Nazis and the KKK, you're a racist. Worse you're trying to make excuses for your racism and actually claim that you are not in fact racist.

What is PC for seeing a good point but not wanting to address it so you just easily dismiss it by conjuring up an image of something nasty like the Nazis or the KKK?

You are arguing that you don't want the races to mix but that the reasons for it don't involve any kind of prejudice. You are just deluding yourself, other races make you uncomfortable and don't want them around you.

Show me a good point and I'll address it. You ARE something nasty like the Nazis and the KKK, you're a racist. Worse you're trying to make excuses for your racism and actually claim that you are not in fact racist.

No I am saying that I am not prejudiced but I am racist.

You are arguing that you don't want the races to mix but that the reasons for it don't involve any kind of prejudice. You are just deluding yourself, other races make you uncomfortable and don't want them around you.

No, my belief is partly instinctive and therefore suspect, however I have rebutted this suspiscion of my instinctive belief by observations. My belief is not prejudicial because it is in fact postjudicial. My hypothesis for why miscegenations seem to be not so great is because the actors in the relationship may be attracted to the idea of the black man or the white woman instead of the soul of the other partner in the relationship. I have seen people devestated by this sort of thing. Have you?

I hate that shit. It's a suttle way of oppressing the majority.

So are you and Glorious Freedonia just competing for who can be the most outrageous troll in this thread by who can make the stupidest, most laughably preposterous statements imaginable?

I think you're losing, mate. Why don't you post some tripe about how Hitler wasn't so bad again?

Well guys I have to check out of this conversation for a while. I have to go and earn a living. I'll check back later though.

Well guys I have to check out of this conversation for a while. I have to go and earn a living. I'll check back later though.

Goodbye, troll. See you next time you feel like trolling. Have fun looking up new ways to add meaning to your life by trolling. Be sure and remember that you're still a loser even if you manage to get some people riled up on an internet forum.

No, my belief is partly instinctive and therefore suspect, however I have rebutted this suspiscion of my instinctive belief by observations. My belief is not prejudicial because it is in fact postjudicial. My hypothesis for why miscegenations seem to be not so great is because the actors in the relationship may be attracted to the idea of the black man or the white woman instead of the soul of the other partner in the relationship. I have seen people devestated by this sort of thing. Have you?

If someone dates someone just because they are of a different race than they have other issues that have nothing to do with the question on how well the races could in fact live together. I mean, you could say the same thing with dating someone just because they have an expensive car, or are particularly handsome, charismatic, etc., etc. Someone is looking for an ideal and they don't have a clue what a relationship actually entails. These people probably watch to much dumbass tv shows about the exotic relationships of black/white couples.

Besides, there are plenty of other examples where it works just fine and of this case I do know personally a couple of pairs on inter-ractial couples. They are perfectly happy.

Freedo's just a troll, pay him no mind.

No I am saying that I am not prejudiced but I am racist.

I'm not human but I am Homo Sapiens. Makes as much sense.

I am not PC. That being said I do not usually call people niggers. Usually I refer to blacks as "Colored" because that is more polite. Now if I see some trashy black wearing gang colors, that boy is a stinking dirty ******.

If someone called my black friends a bunch of niggers I would be pissed. My black friends are not in gangs (unless you call heavy church involvement gang activity). They speak proper English and do not have bastard children and they work hard and pay taxes.

Wow.

This...is just...wow.

"Coloured"? What fucking decade are you living in?

"Stinking dirty ******"?

So what? Not all racists are stupid and ignorant. Just about every PC type I ever met though was dumb as heck.

You might be surprised to know that plenty of racists have friends of different races. You might also be surprised that they are capable of being some of the least prejudicial people on Earth.

:D

Laying it on a little thick aren't you?

You've got to learn to troll better than this, or Kat'll getcha.

*snip*So are you Glorious Freedonia's puppet, or is it the other way around?

Miscegenation is something that I admit I have some prejudice in to the extent that I cannot abstractly come up with a reason why it is bad. In fact, such ideas of expanding the gene pool make it sound pretty good in the abstract. I have noticed that mutts are often a lot better than purebred dogs.

However, I have seen a lot of misegenation end up in single parent homes. There was a time when single parent homes were not as common as they are now but they were more prevalent among the miscegenators.

It seems that in a miscegenation there is a situation where the couple is attracted to each other for racial reasons instead of personal ones. For example a girl might like black boys much more than she likes nice boys regardless of color. The same could be said for the black men who like white girls. A relationship built on such superficiality would obviously be less successful than one based on deeper compatibility.

Racist bastard. Just to throw you off your happy little world, I'll say this: I'm Indian (the kind from India) and I'm extremely sexually attracted to white girls, and not really attracted to Indian girls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBOeY_MYh6U

Funny as hell, it uses primarily the n-word to create humor, which has been recently banned in New York. And yet, even though it uses a word that is mostly associated with rascism, it appears not to be rascist.

If America is a free democracy, why are words like the n-word and "Negro" being banned from schools and other public places? I mean, I understand that going up to an African American person and calling him the n-word isn't a good idea, and it isn't nice - but is it necessarily rascist? And even if something is rascist, is outlawing the right thing to do?

http://newyork.broowaha.com/article.php?id=864

and

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17382727/

Wow, when was humor banned in NYC? No more Hillary jokes, huh? I consider using the word that sounds like niggardly to be an act of bigotry, more than racist. Too many people don't even know what the definition of all those words, they just know that to throw out the accusation of being racist will get them attention.