What’s wrong with “nor”. I is that now racist, so we have to use “or”? 
What?
Lets be clear. If Sean Hannity (or someone like him) makes the statement: “Jay Z and his entourage of thugs” are you going to object if I or someone else calls him out for using coded (racist) language?
It’s amazing how fully half of the people participating in this thread don’t seem to have actually read the thread.
I’m not that familiar with Jay Z. Does he actually have an entourage of thugs?
Steve Urkel was a popular character played by Jaleel White on the sitcom Family Matters (1989-1998). For a while, he had his own—real—breakfast cereal—Urkel-Os.
He is a rapper (probably the most popular living rapper) and I don’t really know if he has an entourage.
So - if he does have an entourage of thugs, is it ok to say that he has an entourage of thugs?
Of course, it was cryptic. None of this further “explanation” is contained in your earlier post. Beyond that, of course, you have attributed to me views that I have not expressed, so consideration of your motives appears to be appropriate.
meh
You are pretending that one single word, that does not yet have universal racial meaning, indicates that black leaders are buying into racist language. As I noted, had either the president or the mayor employed a term such as “home boy” that is clearly racial in its application, you might have a point. Recent uses of the word thug to identify the actions of white guys: references to Eric Williams, a white man who murdered attorneys in Texas; the gang of university idiots singing racist chants on a bus on Youtube were called thugs.
As the result of this particular foofaraw, the word might NOW become a synonym for black youth, but prior to this event, I have seen no evidence presented, here, that it was used solely or even primarily with that meaning. The proposed racial meanings, to this point, have suggested that it is a favorable term in the black community. If that is so, you need to explain why the mayor and president were using it in a disparaging way. Are you suggesting that they were winking at the black youth, playing to the white audience with condemnation while playing to black youth with a message of “we’ve got your back”?
However, I am clearly either too young or too culturally oblivious to know who or what an “Erkel” is.
So, in other words, migration of a term towards racist overtones does not exist unless TomnDebb says that it does?
Not even close to what I said. Of course.
Yes - like I said, the chip is not on my shoulder.
Then don’t assume “thug” is a racist term unless there are further indicators.
“The rioters in Baltimore are thugs”. See? No racist indications at all.
Regards,
Shodan
I suppose if I mentioned a famous Mormon named Jon Smithe you’d be clueless as well?
OK so what is your assessment of the following to situations:
-
Sean Hannity (or someone like him) says "Oh yeah, Jay Z and his entourage of thugs… "
-
A handful of young black men are seen standing on a dimly lit street corner. They look like they are most likely dealing drugs. A person walking by says… “look at those [insert heavy sarcasm] thugs [now back to normal voice] I wonder if they…”
Your scenario needs a bit of work at this point.
Yet you admitted that you have no idea whether Jay Z actually has an entourage of thugs. So why would you automatically assume that he doesn’t?
Let’s say, for argument’s sake, that Jay Z has an entourage of thugs. Is it ok to say then that he has an entourage of thugs?
Oh,please, really? You are playing trap to your own ideological trappings (to use fancy terminology you are acting reflexively to your own ideology). Thug is a word that is in transition. In the most technical terms yes it can be used in a “neutral” manner. But in situations where race is involved it is becoming code. Can you acknowledge this?
Definitely needs more cowbell. A little dog whistle wouldn’t hurt, either.
no actually you just need to quit ducking the question
LOL, keep digging