|
Post by randomvioce on Aug 20, 2010 20:09:46 GMT
An answer would be good, RV. How will you stop black men being racist, ie how will you stop them using the N word? Do tell We are at the point where I can only reiterate. When a black man (or woman) uses the term 'black person' it is not necessarily used as an insult. It is used as a general term of address. So if it not being used as an insult then I cannot see what the problem is. Same goes for Yid. It is the context that counts. It is only when it is being used in an offensive way or likely to taken as an offence does it come a social taboo.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 21, 2010 15:46:18 GMT
Mouse (and riot): looks like its adressed to me... My #42 was addressed to Anna. You replied to it in your #50 - you even quoted my 'Anna' in your reply. You missed the point of what I was saying to Anna. So then I addressed my #51 to you, and had to explain further in my #53, also to you. In #53, I said 'my post was addressed to Anna.' The 'was' indicated that I was talking about a previous post, not the current one. Clear now? as mud...but who really cares......its another day...life moves on
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 21, 2010 15:52:17 GMT
what a get out....or likely to be taken as an offence...... sorry but if a word is so offencive then its offensive..full stop
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 21, 2010 16:02:54 GMT
An answer would be good, RV. How will you stop black men being racist, ie how will you stop them using the N word? Do tell We are at the point where I can only reiterate. When a black man (or woman) uses the term 'black person' it is not necessarily used as an insult. It is used as a general term of address. So if it not being used as an insult then I cannot see what the problem is. Same goes for Yid. It is the context that counts. It is only when it is being used in an offensive way or likely to taken as an offence does it come a social taboo. What utter bollox you spout, RV. We are at the point where you have been rumbled... yet again. Either the word is offensive or it isn't.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 21, 2010 16:26:39 GMT
but a honkey being a person is only acording to SOME just as only SOME black people refer to nig-ers..i mix with quite a few black people not once have i heard any of them use the term perhaps its as was decribed to me as some thing only the ""low class"" do or those wishing to go"" backwards and play victim"" a little like those who complain people are ""too white""when those people have gone beyond ""the hood and all its invented constraints""and live different lives very true. you'll seldom hear blacks who are real people using the word, except to refer to the trash
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 21, 2010 16:28:47 GMT
The point, mouse, is that a honky tonk is not a person at all. Though it can be used as an adjective with a noun, it isn't a noun itself. And as an adjective, it doesn't mean 'white', either pejoratively or otherwise. Just let's be accurate here. looks like its adressed to me..but its of no real concern ....as i have never thought a honkey tonk was a person in the first place.... nor did i think the word mean white....it may be used in that context...however just because a word is used/abused ...but no worries a honky tonk is a bar. there is no other definition
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 21, 2010 16:32:55 GMT
While I would not particularly defend the use of insulting epithets;particularly the term "Nig*er, what I DO find objectionable is the reaction of our society to the use of racial insults. It should never be a criminal offence to insult another person; nor should people be hounded out of their jobs for what is often something said in the heat of the moment. Nor should anyone be financially compensated because their feelings were allegedly offended. That's all, I guess! because you are totally correct. as i have pointed out, several times, if you are offended by anything that someone says, it is because of YOUR character defect, not another's, and you certainly have no right to be compensated for your wilful failure to be an adult
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Aug 21, 2010 17:02:45 GMT
Either the word is offensive or it isn't. Don't talk stupid, fretty. You know perfectly well that with anything that is deemed offensive, it is entirely the context that counts. A joke at 7pm on the TV can be highly offensive compared to the same joke at 11pm on BBC2. Even a joke in a theater taken out of context, will be offensive, if put on the TV. Frankie Boyle makes jokes in his stand up routine that never make it to TV and people like Chubby Brown never got onto the TV with 90% of his material. There are words I use with other adults that I would never utter in front of my grandchildren or my mother. You surely must understand that? You cannot have gone through your entire adult life unaware that there are terms that are offensive within a given context, yet in others are perfectly acceptable? You are surely not just playing dumb for effect are you? That begs the question; why do you do this? What do you get from denying the existence of perfectly well established social convention? Surely you must have realised that every decent person would be able to come up with at least ten examples of words that are perfectly acceptable is some contexts, yet would never dream of using in others? What are you trying to prove, fretty? What is it that you are humiliating yourself to achieve? Acceptance from your peer group? Are you willing to sacrifice what is left of your dignity among the normal people to score a cheap point with the halfwits? Get a life mate, because all you have managed on this message board is make a full sized chump of yourself. Your next reply should be another train wreck.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 21, 2010 17:07:06 GMT
you consider your self NORMAL!!!!!!!!!! on my ears and whiskers.....
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Aug 21, 2010 17:09:30 GMT
because you are totally correct. as i have pointed out, several times, if you are offended by anything that someone says, it is because of YOUR character defect, not another's, and you certainly have no right to be compensated for your wilful failure to be an adult Who voted you spokesman for the entire planet? Where do you get off on your little cod psychology? What evidence have you got for your statement that ‘taking offence’ is a character flaw? What studies are you referring too?
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 21, 2010 20:14:34 GMT
because you are totally correct. as i have pointed out, several times, if you are offended by anything that someone says, it is because of YOUR character defect, not another's, and you certainly have no right to be compensated for your wilful failure to be an adult Who voted you spokesman for the entire planet? Where do you get off on your little cod psychology? What evidence have you got for your statement that ‘taking offence’ is a character flaw? What studies are you referring too? Could it by any chance be the same person who voted you spokesman for the entire planet on climate change?
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 21, 2010 20:17:33 GMT
because you are totally correct. as i have pointed out, several times, if you are offended by anything that someone says, it is because of YOUR character defect, not another's, and you certainly have no right to be compensated for your wilful failure to be an adult Who voted you spokesman for the entire planet? Where do you get off on your little cod psychology? What evidence have you got for your statement that ‘taking offence’ is a character flaw? What studies are you referring too? that is most of your problem. instead of opening your eyes and having a life, you prefer to live in a fantasy world of imbecilic and totally irrelevant "studies". your meaningless "studies" have NO relevance in the real world lad. sorry about your luck
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 21, 2010 20:20:25 GMT
Who voted you spokesman for the entire planet? Where do you get off on your little cod psychology? What evidence have you got for your statement that ‘taking offence’ is a character flaw? What studies are you referring too? that is most of your problem. instead of opening your eyes and having a life, you prefer to live in a fantasy world of imbecilic and totally irrelevant "studies". your meaningless "studies" have NO relevance in the real world lad. sorry about your luck There are millions of people on the planet - maybe billiions, I'm not good with numbers. Why should your view be the 'right' one Jumbo? At least studies offer some vague scientific basis. I can't imagine ever thinking so highly of myself that I considered my view, supported by no other evidence, was guaranteed to be correct.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 21, 2010 20:24:02 GMT
Either the word is offensive or it isn't. Don't talk stupid, fretty. You know perfectly well that with anything that is deemed offensive, it is entirely the context that counts. A joke at 7pm on the TV can be highly offensive compared to the same joke at 11pm on BBC2. Even a joke in a theater taken out of context, will be offensive, if put on the TV. Frankie Boyle makes jokes in his stand up routine that never make it to TV and people like Chubby Brown never got onto the TV with 90% of his material. There are words I use with other adults that I would never utter in front of my grandchildren or my mother. You surely must understand that? You cannot have gone through your entire adult life unaware that there are terms that are offensive within a given context, yet in others are perfectly acceptable? You are surely not just playing dumb for effect are you? That begs the question; why do you do this? What do you get from denying the existence of perfectly well established social convention? Surely you must have realised that every decent person would be able to come up with at least ten examples of words that are perfectly acceptable is some contexts, yet would never dream of using in others? What are you trying to prove, fretty? What is it that you are humiliating yourself to achieve? Acceptance from your peer group? Are you willing to sacrifice what is left of your dignity among the normal people to score a cheap point with the halfwits? Get a life mate, because all you have managed on this message board is make a full sized chump of yourself. Your next reply should be another train wreck. You are such a honky RV, if only because you take yourself so seriously. So because they're black its ok is what you're saying. Ok, by the same token lets erase the word whiteboard as, like Blackboard, it clearly has racial undertones. Let's call it a writing board. I think Whitewash is a dodgy word too. Topcoat sounds more neutral. But remember I'm white, and you sir, are white trash. No racism there.
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Aug 21, 2010 21:29:14 GMT
You are such a honky RV, if only because you take yourself so seriously. So because they're black its ok is what you're saying. You know perfectly well what I am saying, and yes when black people use the term within the context we are talking about, then it can be a valid use of the word. When used as a racial slur or a simple put down, then it become an offensive term. For me that is fairly simple to understand and I bet millions of others can understand it too, including you, of course. We both know that you perfectly understand the issue, so why the pretence of ignorance? That is the aspect of this I find most interesting. We both know that you have less excuse than others to act like a halfwit, so why pretend you are unaware that we use language differently in any given context? You know that Ian Dury could sing and talk about how disabled people were affected in a way that none of his able bodied contemporaries could. I cannot see what the problem is with the fact that the word 'black person' is unacceptable to use apart from when used by black people in a few circumstances? What is the big deal?
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Aug 21, 2010 21:31:44 GMT
that is most of your problem. instead of opening your eyes and having a life, you prefer to live in a fantasy world of imbecilic and totally irrelevant "studies". your meaningless "studies" have NO relevance in the real world lad. sorry about your luck You are the one that suggested that taking offence is a character flaw, not me. The onus is on you to back that up and from what you say here, you cannot show this. Therefore you have made a fool of yourself AGAIN.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 21, 2010 22:43:12 GMT
You are such a honky RV, if only because you take yourself so seriously. So because they're black its ok is what you're saying. You know perfectly well what I am saying, and yes when black people use the term within the context we are talking about, then it can be a valid use of the word. When used as a racial slur or a simple put down, then it become an offensive term. For me that is fairly simple to understand and I bet millions of others can understand it too, including you, of course. We both know that you perfectly understand the issue, so why the pretence of ignorance? That is the aspect of this I find most interesting. We both know that you have less excuse than others to act like a halfwit, so why pretend you are unaware that we use language differently in any given context? You know that Ian Dury could sing and talk about how disabled people were affected in a way that none of his able bodied contemporaries could. I cannot see what the problem is with the fact that the word 'black person' is unacceptable to use apart from when used by black people in a few circumstances? What is the big deal? I'm not sure you know, but there we go. If you're being called a derogatory name, the defining factor is, according to your 'learned' self, the skin colour of the person uttering it. Now if a black man called you white trash would you a) be offended by the term b) not let it bother you
|
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 22, 2010 7:40:55 GMT
there are an estimated 6 billion nearly 7 billion on the planet 2.6 billion christians 2.2 billion muslims 2. ? others it is estimated this figure will have a massive jump forward in the next 50 yrs to 8 billion
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Aug 22, 2010 9:21:56 GMT
If you're being called a derogatory name, the defining factor is, according to your 'learned' self, the skin colour of the person uttering it. We seem to be going round and round in circles. For some reason you are unable to accept the idea that context is the defining, not just 'skin colour'. Can you explain why you find why the context in which a word or phrase is used defines how offensive it is? What is the stumbling block here? Now if a black man called you white trash would you a) be offended by the term b) not let it bother you Again it depends on the context.
|
|