How would that be an analog of Richard’s post? It would not. Why would I have written about a GOP member calling out the GOP on this board? What sense would that make in the analogy? Why would you add that detail?
I agree it’s minor. Is it a non-issue? Just do a search for “trash” in GD, Elections and the Pit on this MB. You see it fairly often here.
Not everyone agrees that this is a bad thing.
But, I think the OP has a good point. And yeah, not everybody does it. If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it.
If you do a google search on the SDMB for “white trash” and “trailer trash” you get plenty of hits.
I’m with the OP - I think the term is not appropriate. Doesn’t matter who’s using it.
I can still call raccoons ‘trash pandas’ though, right?
Excluding the Pit, where calling people “trash” is the very least you can expect to see, the other forums contain a few mentions of the word “trash”…but not too often in the context mentioned in the OP.
The problem with relying in word or phrase searches to point out a problem is that context is important. For instance, the word in question has been used over a dozen times in this thread but no one has actually called anyone else “trash”, and some of the posts that would pop up on a search of the word never actually used the word directly at all-they contained a quote using the word that they responded to.
You’re either hyperbolic or equivalent to or worse than the average person involved in dog-fighting.
Somewhere in this Great Land of ours, a Conservative just called a Liberal “trash”.
Seen on Trump’s twaddle feed where he made that “Pictures 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6” remark (whose spelling, BTW, is every bit a good as Trump’s):
Agreed. Anything beyond expressing some contempt for others is going too far. I get that we are emotional creatures, swearing and calling names to blow off steam can serve a purpose. I think that should be done in private mostly. If you are representing yourself and your views online, name calling may well generate blowback (even if hypocritical) and perpetuate ideas which dehumanize others. I would much prefer getting flack from someone on the right for being considered intolerant of theories and practices that are imo horrible than being intolerant because I was calling those people involved names, 100 times out of 100.
The point of my question is, I’d like to look at those tweets myself and make up my own mind, but I wouldn’t know whose tweets to look at.
Why, exactly?
“Dogfighting is reprehensible.” 3.
I lean left in some ways, and am mostly center-right. Richard, I like what you are doing here. Good on ya! I will avoid using such labels. Thank you.
And, dogfighting is cruel.
Dogfighters are reprehensible and cruel. Since we are talking about calling people trash and not actions, per the OP.
Op did not provide an example of the use of the term, I gave one, he still has no examples and no alternative as opposed to the excellent parry below. Your post would seem to be the hyperbolic one.
Good answer. I stand somewhat corrected. Though I think trash is stronger and sums it up better.
I actually agree. We could amend it to something like, “Dogfighters are like trash and should be similarly thrown out of society,” to meet the OP’s goal of not actually calling them trash.
Is “deplorable” still a safe alternative? 
I think you’ve got the point backwards. Talking about the actions and not the person is the goal. The whole idea is that calling people trash reduces them to inhuman status, which it would be better not to do, since presumably we don’t actually support treating them like they have no humanity. Because, you know, if they’re trash, then we might as well just murder them all and throw them in a pit.
“Dogfighters are like trash” is the kind of idea the OP is asking to get away from.