• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How many racist comments in the example?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
OCNewbie said:
Until we can all read each other's minds, there will always be misinterpretation through words. Expression without constraints is much more important to preserve than an individual's ever-narrowing list of words they're comfortable with.
Click to expand...


Ding ding ding true this.

My grandparents are from Italy and that generation casually referred to all black people as molegnane which is a dialect word for eggplants; supposedly due to the resemblance of their skin and color of the vegetable. Another word is tizzune which is a piece of charcoal. If these words were more widely known, according to the arguments posted here, I would have to stop using them to avoid offending any blacks.
 
rudeguy said:
Yes you did.

You obviously have a very negative view of black people and specifically black people from the ghetto. I hope one day you open your eyes and address your hate.
Click to expand...

Go ahead and quote it then. Quote where I said those terms are the same. Go ahead. I'll wait.
 
keird said:
Right on, Dank. Obvious micro-aggression and cisgender bigotry is obvious. 'Brigand' is my trigger.[/s] :biggrin:

I think your understanding of other's offence is kind of enabling the perpetuation of this crap. Neither 'ghetto', nor 'savage' was a 'dog whistle' word until a year or two ago. With 'ghetto' in use for 175 years or so, it's kind of peculiar that it's been re-defined and can now be potentially offensive. In the 1970's I was in kindergarten and knew it was bad to use the N word. I think the pendulum is swinging the other way. Re-defining words is absurd on it's face. I just take the opportunity to heap scorn on the concept.
Click to expand...
Sorry buddy, but as racists use certain words more and more, our language evolves. Good luck stopping it.
 
dank69 said:
Well you just said the dictionary definition of race-baiting is the dictionary definition of racism so yeah, lol ok :thumbsup:
Click to expand...


I said your explanation of race-baiting is actually closer to the definition of racism. Race-baiting is another concept that you have confused
 
NetWareHead said:
I said your explanation of race-baiting is actually closer to the definition of racism. Race-baiting is another concept that you have confused
Click to expand...

My explanation of race-baiting was the dictionary definition of race-baiting, so yeah, who is confused now?
 
dank69 said:
If you are being serious then you seriously don't understand what I am saying. For example, what is wrong with saying I understand how people can be offended by certain words or phrases?
Click to expand...

There's nothing wrong with saying that you understand how people can get offended by certain words or phrases. I haven't noticed anyone here disagreeing with that notion. I also understand that that happens. That's not all you're saying though. You're actively supporting the suppression of such words, merely because some people get offended by them, as if being offended is some catastrophic violation of human rights.

For example, what you say here:

dank69 said:
Ghettos don't need to be acknowledged as ghettos, they can be referred to as poor neighborhoods...
Click to expand...

I suppose you'll claim that the above quote is not you advocating the avoidance of the term ghetto because some people find it offensive?

dank69 said:
You are just don't want to deal with the baggage that comes with using certain words. Sorry, this is reality, and we have just as much a right to criticize you as you do to use those words.
Click to expand...

Again, you want to criticize others for using words that you or some people find offensive. Your focus, again, is on the fact that some people find it offensive, therefore anyone who uses those words should expect incoming (and justified) criticism.

dank69 said:
Ghetto has been used in the past to mean black neighborhoods. Sorry, that means that the word ghetto has the potential to be used pejoratively. If it can be used pejoratively, then someone can assume you are using it pejoratively even if you aren't or think you aren't. Again, deal with it.
Click to expand...

And one more time for good measure, you're not merely pointing out that you "understand how people can be offended by certain words or phrases", you're implying it's wrong, and because some people may be offended, those words shouldn't be used.
 
Last edited:
OCNewbie said:
There's nothing wrong with saying that you understand how people can get offended by certain words or phrases. I haven't noticed anyone here disagreeing with that notion. I also understand that that happens. That's not all you're saying though. You're actively supporting the suppression of such words, merely because some people get offended by them, as if being offended is some catastrophic violation of human rights.

For example, what you say here:



I suppose you'll claim that the above quote is not you advocating the avoidance of the term ghetto because some people find it offensive?
Click to expand...
No. I'm saying avoid those words if you don't want people to think you might be racist.



Again, you want to criticize others for using words that you or some people find offensive. Your focus, again, is on the fact that some people find it offensive, therefore anyone who uses those words should expect incoming criticism.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is what I am saying. You should expect criticism. I am not saying they need to be suppressed.



And one more time for good measure, you're not merely pointing out that you "understand how people can be offended by certain words or phrases", you're implying it's wrong, and because some people may be offended, those words shouldn't be used.
Click to expand...
I am not implying that it is wrong. I am saying people may think you are saying something you didn't intend to say. That is all.
 
It seems when there are multiple ways to interpret a persons meaning, you often assume the offensive one. I think that reveals a character deficiency in you, not them. I understand it can be a bit of a minefield to determine real racism from possible racism or "sounds like racism" but you seem to default to "racist" whenever possible.
 
dank69 said:
Which benefit of which doubt?
Click to expand...

That choosing to use terms such as savage or ghetto makes us ignorant, and/or racist. I don't think I'm the only one who has interpreted your posts as intending to imply that. Maybe I've just misinterpreted what you were trying to say though.
 
Cerpin Taxt said:
It seems when there are multiple ways to interpret a persons meaning, you often assume the offensive one. I think that reveals a character deficiency in you, not them. I understand it can be a bit of a minefield to determine real racism from possible racism or "sounds like racism" but you seem to default to "racist" whenever possible.
Click to expand...

Then you aren't reading my posts correctly. I have never said I am offended by anything. I am saying I understand how the words/phrases can be interpreted as offensive.
 
OCNewbie said:
That choosing to use terms such as savage or ghetto makes us ignorant, and/or racist. I don't think I'm the only one who has interpreted your posts as intending to imply that.
Click to expand...
I have never said using those words makes you ignorant or racist. I only said "taking every opportunity to use the word savage to describe a black person makes a person appear racist."



Maybe I've just misinterpreted what you were trying to say though.
Click to expand...
Maybe. Possibly. Very likely. Definitely.
 
dank69 said:
Then you aren't reading my posts correctly. I have never said I am offended by anything. I am saying I understand how the words/phrases can be interpreted as offensive.
Click to expand...

I think you're trying to redefine your point, but if that's really all you're saying (what I bolded), congrats for your understanding - quite the accomplishment.
 
OCNewbie said:
I think you're trying to redefine your point, but if that's really all you're saying (what I bolded), congrats for your understanding - quite the accomplishment.
Click to expand...
Well, judging from the hornet nest it seems to have stirred up I'd say it's kind of a big deal. :colbert:
 
celery could be offensive to people with thin dicks, or maybe lesbians or dieters or something. Obviously.
 
Cerpin Taxt said:
You bastard.
Click to expand...
I'm offended.


My point remains. Interpretations are the responsibility of the interpreter.
Click to expand...

I don't know that I agree with that. I think it is important for all of us to examine the way we think and how we communicate. It is up to me to communicate what I want someone else to hear. Clearly I am no good at it judging from all the confusion my statements have caused in this thread alone. It's definitely not because people entered this thread with preconceived biases against SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIORS BLARRGH.

Maybe you are right. :hmm:
 
justoh said:
That's ok. So are you saying that these comments must have to have been racist, logically?
Click to expand...

Not going to get pulled into another debate with you about whether or not a word or phrase can be racist. Yes I know you think they cannot be and that only people can be racist. Not many people agree with your position yet you feel you have "won" the debate regarding it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top