# Can right and left agree on anything? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 19, 2017, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094 "2017-11-19T19:28:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 21
**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:** [November 26, 2017, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/401 "2017-11-26T23:23:47Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > The question is, why _would_ I? > > I’ve never been in a situation where it’s been worth saying. I’ve also never been in a situation where I’ve had any reason to call someone a “dryknee”. I’ve also never been in a situation where I’ve pondered calling someone a “scarredthigh”. > > That’s as may be, but my answer is merely true. Then why would you call someone a slur like “illegal”? That’s a choice you’re making, and it’s not one you have to make. You can use plenty of other non-slur terms to describe those who you believe have broken laws in coming to or remaining in this country. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2017, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/402 "2017-11-26T23:24:13Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > First, “illegal immigrant”, while slightly more descriptive, is still a derogatory term, so shortening a derogatory term doesn’t make it any better. You know, in the current discussion of immigration policy, i probably agree with a lot of what you believe, and with posters like **iiandyiiii**. I certainly agree with you two a lot more than i agree with people like **The Other Waldo Pepper** and **octopus** and **Starving Artist**. But i have to admit—as a lefty who supports immigration reform, who supports DACA, who supports a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants, and who is not morally outraged by illegal immigration—that i’ve never really understood the obsession some people have with eliminating the term “illegal immigrant.” I don’t know why this is the hill you’re spending so much time defending. Sure, there are people in the country who might have legitimate claims as refugees, or that could qualify for other categories of authorized entry. And there are probably people who have accidentally overstayed their entry visas. But let’s be honest with ourselves here: the vast majority of undocumented or unauthorized or overstayed-their-visa people in the United States know that they entered the country without proper authorization, or that they should have left the country before a certain date. And even those who might qualify to apply for legal status still know, in most cases, that they are are not currently authorized to be in the country. It is not a secret that you’re not supposed to enter the country without authorization. If anyone could get in just by turning up at the border posts, they would do it, but they know that they’re going to get turned away. Mexicans don’t walk miles in the middle of the desert, risking death by snakebite or dehydration or sheer exhaustion, because they think that it might be a fun way to start their new life in the United States; they do it because they know that they’re entering illegally. Chinese people don’t stow away in cramped, overheated cargo containers, risking death from asphyxiation, because they’re scared of flying; they do it because they know that they’d be turned away if they arrived at the airport. And so on, for many other groups. Of the 10-million-plus undocumented people in the United States, the fact is that the vast majority of them are illegal immigrants - people who knew that they were not supposed to enter the country, but did so anyway, or people who knew that they were supposed to leave by a certain date, but who decided to stay in the hope of avoiding detection. I don’t attach any particular moral opprobrium to this status. As i said earlier in the thread, i understand why they come here, i understand why they want to stay, and i also think that we should make an effort to provide those who are already here with a pathway to legal status. But as a simple descriptor, i think that “illegal immigrant” isn’t the derogatory term that you and some others are making it out to be. ---
**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:** [November 26, 2017, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/403 "2017-11-26T23:32:37Z")
I’m not morally outraged by illegal immigration at all, but I recognize that borders have to exist and be controlled. I understand that lots of people are desperate, and even more aren’t desperate for their lives but are still desperate for a chance at a way out of poverty for themselves and their children, and thus that they want to come and might try to come outside the law doesn’t surprise or outrage me. So I’ll advocate for compassionate treatment of those already here who are not violent criminals, especially Dreamers and others who have demonstrated the ability to be good Americans and contribute to society, with strong border controls, along with significantly increased amounts of legal immigration and refugees. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2017, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/404 "2017-11-26T23:36:42Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’ve criticized liberals who blanket insult conservatives many times on this board. Slurs are wrong, as are blanket attacks on millions, no matter the target. It’s always funny when people on this board throw this at me, since I routinely tell liberal posters that it’s wrong to tar all conservatives for the sins or deficiencies of a few. > > If you want to be the kind of guy who justifies using slurs like “illegal” to himself, feel free, but I’m going to continue to call you and others out for it. There’s no reason for it, and it’s just dehumanizing people for no reason at all. And what if I reject your assertion that illegals is a slur and that it’s ‘dehumanizing’ whatever that means? And it’s one thing to call out broad brush criticism of conservatives, and another to jump on people for specifics. I’ve yet to see you correct anyone for mocking conservative modes of dress, hairstyles, family values, etc. ---
**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:** [November 26, 2017, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/405 "2017-11-26T23:43:20Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > And what if I reject your assertion that illegals is a slur and that it’s ‘dehumanizing’ whatever that means? Then you’re basically just **Clothahump** claiming that “wetback” isn’t a slur. If that’s the kind of person you want to be, go ahead, but you’ll probably be criticized for it just as **Clothahump** is. But hell, believe what you want – if you at least accept that lots of decent people, including lots of decent Hispanic people who have been called “illegal” (whether or not they actually broke any laws), think that “illegal” is a slur, and decide that that’s good enough reason not to use it, then good for you and that’s good enough for me. > [@](#): > > And it’s one thing to call out broad brush criticism of conservatives, and another to jump on people for specifics. I’ve yet to see you correct anyone for mocking conservative modes of dress, hairstyles, family values, etc. I’m pretty sure I’ve done this before, but I’ll keep my eyes open for that kind of attack, and if I see it I’ll call it out. ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2017, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/406 "2017-11-26T23:45:52Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Then you’re basically just **Clothahump** claiming that “wetback” isn’t a slur. If that’s the kind of person you want to be, go ahead, but you’ll probably be criticized for it just as **Clothahump** is. > > I’m pretty sure I’ve done this before, but I’ll keep my eyes open for that kind of attack, and if I see it I’ll call it out. To be fair to **Clothy** , I _think_ he claimed that “wetback” isn’t a \*racial \*slur because there is only one human race. But he did (again _I think_) admit it was a slur. I could be mistaken though, and I’m too lazy to look it up. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2017, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/407 "2017-11-26T23:47:35Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > If someone _makes_ a better life for themselves and their family, they also make the community they are in better, the state and country as well. I offer the current resident of the White house and his family in contradiction. 😃 (I would guess that your statement is true for the overwhelming majority of immigrants, regardless of their legal status, but without clarification, the statement is too broad.) ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2017, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/408 "2017-11-27T00:00:42Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > So, you only use slurs to refer to people behind their back, never to their face. > > Shitty and a coward. Immigrant isn’t a slur. Illegal immigrant shouldn’t be considered a slur. Just because some people are malicious with the term shouldn’t make it forbidden for all. IMO, this attempt at speech control is very counterproductive. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2017, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/409 "2017-11-27T00:14:00Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Then why would you call someone a slur like “illegal”? Because I actually have a reason to so refer to that particular group of people: they have something in common – the fact that they’re here _illegally_ – which is the very feature at issue in the discussion I happen to be having. If someone asks me a question that revolved around “convicted felons” – you know, whether I personally know any, or whether I think they should have the right to vote or the ability to practice law as a member of the bar, or whatever – then I assure you that I would, _right then,_ toss the phrase around in my replies. I wouldn’t shout it out, apropos of nothing; nor would I, upon shaking hands with one, explain to him _“say, you’re a convicted felon, aren’t you? Yes! Yes, you are! Why, I remember it like it was yesterday: you were convicted of a felony, and so you’re a Convicted Felon!”_ But I’d use the term “convicted felons” – even though I suppose a guy could take it as a slur, despite it being accurate – if it were a useful way to note that I’m referring to, you know, _This Group Of People,_ when I’m in fact referring to said group. > [@](#): > > That’s a choice you’re making, and it’s not one you have to make. You can use plenty of other non-slur terms to describe those who you believe have broken laws in coming to or remaining in this country. I could swap in plenty of other terms for “Convicted Felons”, too. I could, I suppose, describe them as – oh, I don’t know; what would be just as accurate? Like, I’d go through some rigmarole that kicks off when I explain that sometimes a person gets officially found guilty of a crime that can carry a higher penalty than if they’d instead committed a misdemeanor – a d a guy I’m talking with would presumably blink, and then tilt his head to the side, and say _Uh, You Mean ‘Convicted Felons’, Right? Okay. See, I Thought That You Meant ‘Convicted Felons’, But I Wasn’t Sure._ But why would I do that? ---
**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:** [November 27, 2017, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/410 "2017-11-27T00:17:36Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Because I actually have a reason to so refer to that particular group of people: they have something in common – the fact that they’re here _illegally_ – which is the very feature at issue in the discussion I happen to be having. > > If someone asks me a question that revolved around “convicted felons” – you know, whether I personally know any, or whether I think they should have the right to vote or the ability to practice law as a member of the bar, or whatever – then I assure you that I would, _right then,_ toss the phrase around in my replies. I wouldn’t shout it out, apropos of nothing; nor would I, upon shaking hands with one, explain to him _“say, you’re a convicted felon, aren’t you? Yes! Yes, you are! Why, I remember it like it was yesterday: you were convicted of a felony, and so you’re a Convicted Felon!”_ > > But I’d use the term “convicted felons” – even though I suppose a guy could take it as a slur, despite it being accurate – if it were a useful way to note that I’m referring to, you know, _This Group Of People,_ when I’m in fact referring to said group. > > I could swap in plenty of other terms for “Convicted Felons”, too. I could, I suppose, describe them as – oh, I don’t know; what would be just as accurate? Like, I’d go through some rigmarole that kicks off when I explain that sometimes a person gets officially found guilty of a crime that can carry a higher penalty than if they’d instead committed a misdemeanor – a d a guy I’m talking with would presumably blink, and then tilt his head to the side, and say _Uh, You Mean ‘Convicted Felons’, Right? Okay. See, I Thought That You Meant ‘Convicted Felons’, But I Wasn’t Sure._ > > But why would I do that? “Illegal” is a slur, just like “wetback” or other slurs. You’re insisting it’s just a descriptor, even though many decent folks, including many folks who have broken no laws, have been called “illegals” and consider it a slur. That’s a choice you’re making – that their view on what they’re called doesn’t matter. I think it’s shitty, but it’s increasingly clear that you don’t care about what those folks might actually think. Just like **Clothahump** doesn’t care what the folks he calls “wetback” actually think about the term “wetback”. Be that kind of person if you want, but it’s shitty and I’m going to keep calling it shitty. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2017, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/411 "2017-11-27T00:18:17Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > So, you only use slurs to refer to people behind their back, never to their face. > > Shitty and a coward. You quoted me as saying I’ve never had occasion to tell a particular woman – to, ah, her face – that she’s an immigrant, or that she’s five-foot-four. But, for one thing, _neither of those is a slur_; and, for another, I’d mention _either_ to her face if it ever came up. So you seem to be wrong in multiple ways. It’s breathtaking, really. ---
**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:** [November 27, 2017, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/412 "2017-11-27T00:22:11Z")
**The Other Waldo Pepper** , do you think it’s okay to call people “wetbacks”, even if it’s someone who’s dripping wet? Or do you think it’s reasonable to criticize someone who calls some people “wetbacks”? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2017, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/413 "2017-11-27T00:29:48Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > “Illegal” is a slur, just like “wetback” or other slurs. You’re insisting it’s just a descriptor, even though many decent folks, including many folks who have broken no laws, have been called “illegals” and consider it a slur. > > That’s a choice you’re making – that their view on what they’re called doesn’t matter. Excuse me? To the best of my knowledge, if “folks who have broken no laws” have a view on what they’re called, then of course their view on what they’re called matters to me: I’d agree that they shouldn’t be called “illegals”, and that they shouldn’t be called “convicted felons” – and that they shouldn’t be called “arsonists”, either. That’s the choice I’m making. > [@](#): > > I think it’s shitty, but it’s increasingly clear that you don’t care about what those folks might actually think. Just like **Clothahump** doesn’t care what the folks he calls “wetback” actually think about the term “wetback”. I don’t know anything about that. I know that I do “care about what those folks might actually think.” That said, to the best of my knowledge, I’ve of course never called any of “those folks” illegals – or “convicted felons”, for that matter – but if I have, I truly want to apologize for my past actions and vow to stop that right now. Again, though, as far as I know, that’s not the case in this case. ---
**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:** [November 27, 2017, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/414 "2017-11-27T00:32:28Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Excuse me? To the best of my knowledge, if “folks who have broken no laws” have a view on what they’re called, then of course their view on what they’re called matters to me: I’d agree that they shouldn’t be called “illegals”, and that they shouldn’t be called “convicted felons” – and that they shouldn’t be called “arsonists”, either. > > That’s the choice I’m making. > > I don’t know anything about that. I know that I do “care about what those folks might actually think.” That said, to the best of my knowledge, I’ve of course never called any of “those folks” illegals – or “convicted felons”, for that matter – but if I have, I truly want to apologize for my past actions and vow to stop that right now. > > Again, though, as far as I know, that’s not the case in this case. The choice you’re making is no different than someone trying to make sure they only call someone a “wetback” if their back is actually wet, or a “redskin” (assuming it’s not a football player) if their skin is actually red, or a “jungle bunny” only if they hop around in a bunny costume in the jungle, etc. It’s a shitty choice to make. Those are slurs, and they’re still slurs even if you try to use them “True”. Shitty to do, and worth criticizing. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2017, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/415 "2017-11-27T00:43:25Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > The choice you’re making is no different than someone trying to make sure they only call someone a “wetback” if their back is actually wet, or a “redskin” (assuming it’s not a football player) if their skin is actually red, or a “jungle bunny” only if they hop around in a bunny costume in the jungle, etc. > > It’s a shitty choice to make. Those are slurs, and they’re still slurs even if you try to use them “True”. Shitty to do, and worth criticizing. Is it shitty and a slur to refer to “convicted felons” upon making sure I’m actually talking about people who’ve been convicted of felonies? Is it shitty and a slur to call someone a “serial rapist” if I’m in fact talking about someone who in fact raped a series of victims? Is there _some_ point – _any_ point – for you where the guy being described could say “hey, that’s true, but it’s a shitty slur to say about me” and you’d grudgingly say “no, that’s mere accuracy” while siding with me? ---
**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:** [November 27, 2017, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/416 "2017-11-27T00:54:14Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Is it shitty and a slur to refer to “convicted felons” upon making sure I’m actually talking about people who’ve been convicted of felonies? Is it shitty and a slur to call someone a “serial rapist” if I’m in fact talking about someone who in fact raped a series of victims? Is there _some_ point – _any_ point – for you where the guy being described could say “hey, that’s true, but it’s a shitty slur to say about me” and you’d grudgingly say “no, that’s mere accuracy” while siding with me? Why do you keep bringing up terms that are not slurs? They’re as irrelevant as the word “pineapple” to this conversation. I’m not going to shit on you for using terms that aren’t slurs in any way. That has nothing to do with the slur “illegal”. I get that you don’t think this word is a slur, just like **Clothahump** doesn’t think “wetback” is a slur. But users of slurs usually don’t know that they’re using slurs (and the ones that do obviously don’t care). It’s the targets who always know. People who are called “wetback” know it’s a slur; people who are called “illegals” know it’s a slur. Even if you aren’t convinced, why would you insist on using a word that so many believe is a slur? Why would you want to use a word that has made many kids feel shitty based on their background? If you keep using slurs, I’m going to keep calling it shitty. If you use words that aren’t slurs, I’m not going to call it shitty. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2017, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/417 "2017-11-27T01:07:49Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Why do you keep bringing up terms that are not slurs? Because I can just as easily picture someone saying, _hey: ‘convicted felon’, that’s a slur. No, I know he was convicted of a felony; but I’m telling you, that’s a slur. It’s a shitty slur, and you’re shitty for using it to describe a guy who got convicted of a felony._ He’d sound as wrong to me as you do, and I’d reply to him like I’m replying to you: that, as far as I can tell, it’s as much a slur as calling a pineapple a pineapple. > [@](#): > > I get that you don’t think this word is a slur, just like **Clothahump** doesn’t think “wetback” is a slur. But users of slurs usually don’t know that they’re using slurs (and the ones that do obviously don’t care). It’s the targets who always know. But who do you think are the “targets”? You just got through telling me I don’t care about the views of people who “have broken no laws” – is that what you mean when you say “the targets” now? > [@](#): > > Even if you aren’t convinced, why would you insist on using a word that so many believe is a slur? Why would you want to use a word that has made many kids feel shitty based on their background? Like this: are you talking about kids who _are_ here illegally? Or kids who aren’t I’m not even agreeing or disagreeing with you yet; it’s that I don’t actually know what you have in mind. ---
**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:** [November 27, 2017, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/418 "2017-11-27T01:23:47Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Because I can just as easily picture someone saying, _hey: ‘convicted felon’, that’s a slur. No, I know he was convicted of a felony; but I’m telling you, that’s a slur. It’s a shitty slur, and you’re shitty for using it to describe a guy who got convicted of a felony._ He’d sound as wrong to me as you do, and I’d reply to him like I’m replying to you: that, as far as I can tell, it’s as much a slur as calling a pineapple a pineapple. > > But who do you think are the “targets”? You just got through telling me I don’t care about the views of people who “have broken no laws” – is that what you mean when you say “the targets” now? > > Like this: are you talking about kids who _are_ here illegally? Or kids who aren’t I’m not even agreeing or disagreeing with you yet; it’s that I don’t actually know what you have in mind. I’ve asked you multiple times, and you haven’t answered - do you think it’s wrong to criticize someone for using wetback to describe someone? If so, why? If not, then we’re done here - then you’re someone who is fine with using slurs, and there’s not much point to trying to reason with folks who are fine with using slurs. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2017, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/419 "2017-11-27T01:30:47Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’ve asked you multiple times, and you haven’t answered - do you think it’s wrong to criticize someone for using wetback to describe someone? If so, why? Sorry, must have missed it; there are tons of posts interspersing with each other. No, I don’t think it’s wrong to criticize someone for that. As for ‘why’ – again, I keep replying to your questions this way, but: why _would_ it be? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2017, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094/420 "2017-11-27T01:32:55Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’ve asked you multiple times, and you haven’t answered - do you think it’s wrong to criticize someone for using wetback to describe someone? If so, why? If not, then we’re done here - then you’re someone who is fine with using slurs, and there’s not much point to trying to reason with folks who are fine with using slurs. That’s the heart of the matter. Finally you get to your fallacy. The idea is to make certain language and thought so unacceptable that anyone using accurate language can be demonized. That might not be your personal motivation but it is a tactic. Why would you continue with a tactic that’s designed to demonize people? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094.md?page=20) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-right-and-left-agree-on-anything/802094.md?page=22)