# An interesting racial discrimination suit **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 11, 2015, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414 "2015-02-11T19:51:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/81 "2015-02-12T20:33:22Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > Look up “ubiquitous”. It doesn’t mean, “universal”. > > Duh. It means “present, appearing, or found everywhere”, and such usage is not found everywhere in the black community. So no, the usage of the word that you describe is not ubiquitous in the black community, any more than it’s ubiquitous in the white community. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/82 "2015-02-12T20:34:36Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I thought we had established that he had not used it in an offensive or inappropriate manner unless the mere utterance is offensive or inappropriate. If a black guy had done the exact same thing in the exact same tone and manner, do you think he would have been fired? Of course not. There may have been other reasons for the termination but if it was just this then it looks like he might have a case. I’m not aware that we had established that he didn’t use it in an offensive or inappropriate manner. Asking “Does this mean we can finally say the word n-----?” might be offensive and inappropriate no matter who says it. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/83 "2015-02-12T20:34:42Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Women and minorities are considered members of a “protected class.” White guys are not. I’m about 99% sure you’re wrong here. Whether you’re black or white, your race puts you in a protected class. HOWEVER, if you’re willing to fire both white and black people for using racial slurs that apply to others but not to themselves, arguably you haven’t discriminated. If I touch my own butt in the office, that’s very different from my touching someone else’s butt. > [@Grotonian](#): > > I’m astonished that use of the word, “finally”, HAS to mean the speaker is expressing a personal desire to use the word and not a commentary on other people. I can easily imagine a scenario where the tv station regularly receives complaints from viewers who question use of the phrase, “the N-word”, if other slurs are not euphemized. It may have also been reflective of the fact that thousands of their viewers say, “nigger”, everyday to one another. > > In that context, the use of “finally” is suggestive of the expectation that _some_ viewers will be pleased, even if everyone else is uncomfortable. There’s nothing sinister there, just an acknowledgement of their audience. Sure, let’s imagine an anchor who is so goddamned stupid that he expects some black viewers will be pleased to see a white anchor saying “nigger” on the news. Stupidity is also not a protected class. Edit: Maybe when you talk about the “thousands of their viewers” who say the word every day you’re talking about white racists, in which case, see above re: stupidity not being a protected class. “Ubiquitous” means “found everywhere.” The word is not ubiquitous in black culture. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/84 "2015-02-12T20:54:08Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Ok, yes, I misspoke. You cannot fire someone for being white. However, when you start comparing treating white people different than black people for same conduct, you are talking about policies that have a “disparate impact” on a protected class. That’s what I meant to get at. Women and minorities are considered members of a “protected class.” White guys are not. > > Thus, you can fire a white guy for using language, even if you don’t fire a black guy for the same language. He’s not being fired for being white in that scenario. Again, this is wrong. The class being referred to in the phrase “protected class” is not “black,” or “female,” or “Muslim.” It means “race” or “gender” or “religion.” Every person in the US is part of a protected class, because every person in America has a race, or a gender, or some form of religious views (even if those views are, “religion is a bunch of hooey.”) ---
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/85 "2015-02-12T20:58:08Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It means “present, appearing, or found everywhere”, and such usage is not found everywhere in the black community. So no, the usage of the word that you describe is not ubiquitous in the black community, any more than it’s ubiquitous in the white community. No, it doesn’t, it means “widespread”. If it meant, literally, “present everywhere,” then neither cars, nor telephones, nor English would be ubiquitous in the US. Is that what you think the word means? > **[Merriam-Webster: America's Most Trusted Dictionary](https://www.merriam-webster.com/)** > > Find definitions for over 300,000 words from the most authoritative English dictionary. Continuously updated with new words and meanings. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/86 "2015-02-12T21:05:21Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Again, this is wrong. The class being referred to in the phrase “protected class” is not “black,” or “female,” or “Muslim.” It means “race” or “gender” or “religion.” Every person in the US is part of a protected class, because every person in America has a race, or a gender, or some form of religious views (even if those views are, “religion is a bunch of hooey.”) Nitpick: some civil rights statutes _do_ protect one particular group but not others. The ADEA only protects people over 40, and the Equal Pay Act only protects women. The vast majority are not like that, however. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/87 "2015-02-12T21:05:59Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > every person in America has a race, or a gender “or”? **Grotonian** , the most common definition of “ubiquitous” is [found here](https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=ubiquitous). If your claim is that the word is ubiquitous among black Americans in the way that phones are ubiquitous among Americans, you’re still wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/88 "2015-02-12T21:08:25Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > the Equal Pay Act only protects women. [Even here I’m pretty sure you’re wrong](http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/epa.cfm). The text of the law prohibits pay discrimination: > [@the law](#): > > between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex ---
**Author:** ![robertliguori](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/46a35a/32.png) [@robertliguori](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robertliguori)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/89 "2015-02-12T21:12:14Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I’m about 99% sure you’re wrong here. Whether you’re black or white, your race puts you in a protected class. > > HOWEVER, if you’re willing to fire both white and black people for using racial slurs that apply to others but not to themselves, arguably you haven’t discriminated. If I touch my own butt in the office, that’s very different from my touching someone else’s butt. Given the precedent of miscegenation laws, which equally restricted people in who they could marry, I don’t think this is actually the case. At least, I am reasonably sure that you wouldn’t claim that miscegenation laws arguably aren’t discrimination. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/90 "2015-02-12T21:13:35Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > No, it doesn’t, it means “widespread”. If it meant, literally, “present everywhere,” then neither cars, nor telephones, nor English would be ubiquitous in the US. Is that what you think the word means? > > [Merriam-Webster: America's Most Trusted Dictionary](http://i.word.com/idictionary/ubiquitous) From your link: “existing or being everywhere at the same time” ---
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/91 "2015-02-12T21:24:30Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > From your link: > > “existing or being everywhere at the same time” From the same link, “widespread” \ You think a ubiquitous fashion is literally everywhere at the same time? Then I suggest you not use the word. ---
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/92 "2015-02-12T21:28:17Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > “or”? > > **Grotonian** , the most common definition of “ubiquitous” is [found here](https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=ubiquitous). > > If your claim is that the word is ubiquitous among black Americans in the way that phones are ubiquitous among Americans, you’re still wrong. I already gave a link, it means “widespread”. And it’s use is widespread in the black community. You don’t have to like it, but it’s true. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/93 "2015-02-12T21:33:10Z")
> [@robertliguori](#): > > Given the precedent of miscegenation laws, which equally restricted people in who they could marry, I don’t think this is actually the case. At least, I am reasonably sure that you wouldn’t claim that miscegenation laws arguably aren’t discrimination. Yeah, I’m conflicted about it. Socially, of course there’s a difference, and I look very skeptically on anyone who claims not to understand that difference. But I don’t know whether I think the law ought to recognize such a difference. > [@Grotonian](#): > > I already gave a link, it means “widespread”. And it’s use is widespread in the black community. You don’t have to like it, but it’s true. This is a silly argument. The word has two different meanings; you were originally unclear, but now you’ve clarified. If all you’re saying is that the word is used by many African American folk, of course that’s neither controversial nor especially relevant. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/94 "2015-02-12T21:37:11Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > From the same link, “widespread” \ Do you want to go back and count how many definitions you had to skip over to get the one you wanted? > [@](#): > > You think a ubiquitous fashion is literally everywhere at the same time? Then I suggest you not use the word. I suggest you stop using dictionaries as cites until you understand how they work. ---
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/95 "2015-02-12T21:45:01Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Do you want to go back and count how many definitions you had to skip over to get the one you wanted? > > I suggest you stop using dictionaries as cites until you understand how they work. I suggest you learn what a “context clue” is. Do you think the sentence, “The word “nigger” is ubiquitous in the black community” means that ALL black people say “nigger” all day long, all at the same time, repeatedly? Is that what you think it means? Because it doesn’t. And no one but you and **Dorkness** thinks it does. So I’ll repeat my advice to you: don’t use “ubiquitous” if you think it means that. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/96 "2015-02-12T22:02:42Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > I suggest you learn what a “context clue” is. Do you think the sentence, “The word “nigger” is ubiquitous in the black community” means that ALL black people say “nigger” all day long, all at the same time, repeatedly? Is that what you think it means? No, when I read that sentence, I thought it meant, “The vast majority of black people use the word on a regular basis.” Because that’s what the words you used in that sentence mean when strung together in that order. If you’d just meant “widespread,” you should have just said “widespread,” instead of trying to sound more impressive by using words you don’t fully understand. > [@](#): > > Because it doesn’t. And no one but you and **Dorkness** thinks it does. > > So I’ll repeat my advice to you: don’t use “ubiquitous” if you think it means that. I’m going to have to expand my earlier advice from, “not using dictionaries as a cite until you understand how they work,” to “not using the English language until you understand how it works.” Probably most other languages, too. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/97 "2015-02-12T22:09:45Z")
Meh. He’s clarified his point to the point of irrelevance, so I’m happy to let him have the victory. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/98 "2015-02-12T22:18:32Z")
Yep. It’s “widespread”. Unfortunately, it’s also widespread in some white communities as well. ---
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/99 "2015-02-12T22:36:18Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > No, when I read that sentence, I thought it meant, “The vast majority of black people use the word on a regular basis.” Because that’s what the words you used in that sentence mean when strung together in that order. If you’d just meant “widespread,” you should have just said “widespread,” instead of trying to sound more impressive by using words you don’t fully understand. > > I’m going to have to expand my earlier advice from, “not using dictionaries as a cite until you understand how they work,” to “not using the English language until you understand how it works.” > > Probably most other languages, too. “Vast majority”? No definition cited said anything about a “vast majority”. Here’s a fun activity that can help you. Look up “ubiquitous”, then re-read the sentence. Does “appearing everywhere at the same time” make sense, or does “commonplace” make sense, in that sentence? If you can figure out what makes sense, you might be able to figure out how the word is being used. Here’s another dictionary tip: dictionaries have different meanings listed because words can mean different things. You shouldn’t stop reading after the first definition. You might look foolish if you try and claim that ONLY the first definition is valid. Multiple definitions are included for a reason. In the future, if I see that you are contributing to a thread, I will use “common”, or “widespread”, or “frequent” so as not to confuse you. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2015, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414/100 "2015-02-12T22:38:43Z")
You know, it’s a lot easier, and less personally embarrassing, just to say, “Hey, I was wrong about that!” But some people prefer digging holes, apparently. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-racial-discrimination-suit/712414.md?page=6)