I think I agree. The problem is perhaps that what we would prefer to measure would be the intent of the speech or action, rather than the outward expression of it: that is, judge the hate, not the speech, but that’s impossible.
Same here. Doesn’t mean it’s a hate crime. A hate crime is an act that would be criminal regardless of the hate part, the hate is tacked on as a classifier.
From one of the cites of that same wiki article:
For example, it’s a hate crime if someone assaulted you and used homophobic language or threw a brick through your window and wrote racist graffiti on your house.
It’s still a hate crime if someone made a mistake about your identity. For example if they attacked you because they thought you were Muslim, but you aren’t.
The penalty for a crime is more serious if it’s a hate crime.
If you’ve experienced something that wasn’t a crime, but you think it was motivated by prejudice against you, it’s a hate incident. For example, if someone shouted abuse at you from their car.
My motivations aren’t to make anything easier or quicker for everyone else.
If this was GD, I might be more careful with my phrasing. It’s not, so get fucked. You “well, actually!”-ed me, not the other way around, motherfucker.
Hey! McLeod! Get offa my ewe! was a joke constructed in a vacuum, then?
I’m surprised anyone got it.
I don’t either, honestly. Not in real life, in practice. But for the question posed, I think it does. “All them West Virginians fuck their cousins,” for example. If you asked me if it’s bigoted and hateful, I’d likely say yes (I guess it could be taking the piss, depending upon context). Is it racist? I don’t think so.
I think the effect or impact of the hate speech, or the impression that a dispassionate observer would form, is probably the relevant criterion. In general when it comes to laws to protect people from me, I’m responsible for the (foreseeable) consequences of my actions even if they are not the consequences that I intended.
Where I come from (south west England) I think “sheep shagger” is very much a racial slur against the Welsh, albeit probably most commonly used in an almost affectionate, teasing way. But you could say that about a lot of hate speech - doesn’t make it acceptable, in my view.
What are your motivations, other than being gratuitously rude for no obvious reason? I normally respect and appreciate your contributions - in this thread, not so much. Other people’s opinions are highly relevant, especially in a discussion forum and all the more so on a topic that can be controversial. You appear to be saying “here’s how I see it and everyone else can get fucked”, which doesn’t do much to advance the conversation.
My motivation was to give my opinion to the OP. Not get “um, but”-ed by someone else.
Everyone else trying to dilute the meaning of the phrase so it applies to every possible subgroup (conveniently, often ones that suffer from congenital White fragility) can get fucked. I have no interest in “advancing the conversation” along those lines.
“Hate speech” isn’t an academic exercise to me and mine, it’s a lived experience. I don’t care to see it diminished in usage. Especially when the nett effect of that diminishment is that it isn’t taken seriously when it does correctly apply.
Even in this thread, we’re seeing the same “I don’t see the need for the term” bullshit that led to GD not getting moderated for it for years by one senior mod. And dilution of the term is partly to blame for giving cover to such crap.
No. It was constructed because McLeod is a Scottish name and the joke
wouldn’t work without it.
Thank you, that makes a lot more sense and helps me to understand.
I completely agree with this from your first post:
However, it seems to me that your assertion here:
might make it difficult to know where to draw the line. For example, in your opinion should the following be moderated on this board?
- A joke about a (generic) Welshman being a sheep shagger.
- A poster calling another poster a sheep shagger in the Pit.
- An English poster calling a Welsh poster a sheep shagger in the Pit.
- A Welsh poster calling a Welsh poster a sheep shagger in the Pit.
- Me calling you a “kaffir” in the Pit (I would never contemplate doing such a thing and have never used that word, this is purely by way of example, which is the only context in which I believe it’s acceptable to mention such words).
- Depends
- Not in a general joke thread. Poor taste, and a little bigoted, but not moddable. We don’t mod any and all bigotry here.
- Inserted into some other discussion about the Welsh? At least a note.
- Not unless there’s reason to believe it’s related to Other Poster’s ethnicity.
- Yes
- Yes
- Definitely yes (even though I’m not Black).
BUT only the last should be modded as hate speech.
It is certainly impossible to do so perfectly and if you want to catch all potential cases of hate speech then yes, do what the UN does and make the definition broad enough that anything can be designated as such.
I don’t agree with that. I err on the side of judging words with reference to their intent and their context. Potentially offensive words can be used in a non-hateful way and perfectly banal utterances that wouldn’t raise an eyebrow when written in isolation can be hateful and hurtful in the hands of someone with malign intent.
I agree. I don’t like losing words that just happen to have more than one context of use, and one of them is hateful.
But I think the UN definition is trying to rule out the sort of argument where something is hateful, but arguable doesn’t qualify because the group it is directed at is not in some list.
A more correct phrasing would be:
“G’day shagger, how they hanging?”
Which is pure bogan and an anachronism.
Last time I heard it spoken was by John Clark in “The Games”.
I have always understood the term ‘sheep shagger’ to be a form of bigotry directed to folks from locations that have a reputation for being largely rural. Not a racial slur.
I wouldn’t have associated it with Wales. If I had to choose an country of origin, I guess I would choose New Zealand because of all those comments about them having more sheep than people. But, I just associate it with rural life, I guess.
For what it’s worth, there’s a Scottish ale call Sheepshaggers Gold. It must be a pretty mild slur (if it is one at all) for them to put it in the name.
Around here, the joke is:
Montana, where the men are men and the sheep are scared.
In MT, they insert WY, in WY they insert ID. Just shifts.
Of course, the real joke should be about big city schools like University of Washington:
https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19900125&slug=1052653
Not a racist slur. Typically making fun of rural locales.
So, classism rather than racism.
Kinda sorta. Seems like the whole urban vs rural bigotry is one of the oldest forms of bigotry known. Been around since the first cities were built.
There’s a regionalist/nationalist element to it too, it’s not just classist. Whether you consider that a form of racism is up to you (I don’t) but it’s definitely has a more specific character beyond urban/rural class warfare.
It’s definitely bigotry, either way. But not exactly the same kind of bigotry.
I don’t doubt they have good intentions, I just think the exercise is probably doomed to failure and isn’t actually a practical benefit in the real world.