Since we are in the Pit, I am free to warn you that before you get into a whole back-and-forth with this poster, you should be advised that he has a history on this board of defining racism in such a way that either it applies so narrowly that it is very rarely “real,” or it applies so broadly that it is not “meaningful,” and regardless of which is applicable in the moment it can be disregarded and dismissed as a social effect worthy of comment and reform. Just so you know.
Times like this I wish this board had upvotes.
I have never suggested that racism is “very rarely real”. That is an outright lie and a pretty poor attempt at poisoning the well in what has so far been a pretty reasonable and well-intended discussion. I have said on countless occasions without any equivocations that racism is definitely real and definitely harmful.
Why on earth did you feel the need to make such a claim when the poster in question is perfectly able to interact with me?
You are an extremely frustrating poster on this subject. You will acknowledge in the abstract that racism is real and harmful but when presented with actual real-world examples you will dodge and equivocate. I am unaware of a single instance on this board where you were shown a representative anecdote and flatly accepted it as an example of harmful racism with no hedging or casuistry. I thought your correspondent should be advised of this history before attempting to begin a lengthy engagement with you on the topic.
Agreed, there is never a good reason to insult someone based on what they are, Deal with everyone as an individual and on what they actually do.
Would a single instance of that shut you up and get you to agree that I do indeed think that racism is real and harmful?
The typical UK 1970’s trope of “no dogs, no blacks, no Irish” was unequivocally racist and harmful. No room for debating that in my mind.
Is that clear enough for you?
You are looking at a skewed sample. I’m not particularly interested in discussing such clear-cut cases and so I don’t. I’d have nothing to add. When there is an interesting grey area then I may chime in. That necessarily means I’m only going to be present in discussions where there is likely to be a difference of opinion.
This thread isn’t about me so it would be good manners to drop the hijack.
Handy reference to avoid referencing copulation with the wrong Caprinae:
This is awesome
All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
In general two wrongs only make a right if they’re directed at the exact same individuals who perpetrated the original injustice and then only if the retributive harm is not so egregiously more than the original. So if a given Welsh was known to use racial slurs, then calling him a sheep shagger would be two wrongs making a right.
Not so much the case of someone else who happens to be Welsh and is otherwise an okay guy. One can’t defend calling him a sheep shagger out of the blue by saying “you’ve no right to complain when other people who look like you have said far worse to me!”
So, I believe we’ve established by this point that calling someone a cousin fucker is not generally hate speech or a racial slur, regardless of the fact that it may be targeted at people based on the area they live.
And most agree goat fucker is hate speech and a racial slur in the context that it most often is encountered, which is usually targeted at those of arab or middle eastern descent. If I call my American neighbor who happens to raise goats a goat fucker, that’s probably not hate speech, but very few people ever encounter the term in that context.
The opinions are divided about Sheep Shagger, but if Im analyzing it properly, the majority of the people here who are members of the demographic most targeted with the term do not consider it to be hate speech or a racial slur. It seemed most people who consider it to be hate speech are doing so academically, where those who do not consider it hate speech are welsh or rural dwellers who have been recipients of the insult themselves.
Which brings me to my next line of inquiry. What about pig fucker? I personally dont use any of the other terms mentioned, but I do occasionally use the term pig fucker, though not with any specific group of people in mind. Is there any group of people out there who should not be called pig fuckers due to hate speech / racial concerns? How about any other animals? Should I be careful about calling someone a chicken fucker, squirrel pumper, dog humper, horse buggerer, or any other form of animal intercourse haver?
You can freely use the phrase chicken fucker when referring to the late Larry Flynt without fear of it being hate speech, what with truth being the ultimate defense against the charge of slander.
Larry Flynt: Freedom fighter, pornographer, monster? | The Independent | The Independent
He lost his own virginity at the age of nine, to a chicken. He describes penetrating its egg sack, and how “when I let the chicken go, it started towards the main house, staggering, squawking and bleeding” – so he immediately killed it. Did you feel bad for the chicken? “What? No. It was a” – long breath, gasp – “chicken.”
Thank you kindly for your help stamping out my own ignorance of that subject. Youve no doubt made Cecil proud. And I now have a new image in my head, for better or worse.
On a somewhat unrelated note, this discussion brings to mind a tongue twister I once heard used in a college party drinking game years ago.
I’m not the fig-plucker, I’m the fig-plucker’s son, and I won’t pluck figs till the fig plucker comes.
Now say that fast three times.
No, calling the racist Welshperson an arsehole would be two wrongs making a right, and thus perfectly legitimate; calling him a sheep shagger would be insulting all other Welshpeople, many of whom are not racist. After all, you’re not insulting the racist because of their Welshness, you’re insulting them because they’re a pillock.
Random googling has informed me that Mongolia has Wales beaten wrt sheep per capita. Just numbers, not whatever people are doing with/to the sheep, which I’m not searching for on this device. I didn’t immediately see numbers for goats. China has everyone beaten in number of animals for both, followed by India.
We have a lot of chickens in the US.
Just think of how many recipes use chicken and/or eggs, it makes a lot of sense.
One less courtesy of Larry Flynt!
Exactly. This is precisely the problem with ‘punching up’ in response to prejudice and bigotry - it requires the person doing the punching to operate on the notion 'you deserve it because you people are all the same’