Is "Uncle Tom" Hate Speech?

I know there is a rule against hate speech in GD. And this rule extends to those who are not members of the SDMB - one cannot refer to Obama as “that stupid nigger”.

Is referring to other black public figures as "Uncle Tom"s also against the rule? It seems that it should be - it is certainly hate speech against black people, racist and derogatory in nature, and fits the other criteria for hate speech.

What say you, mods?

Regards,
Shodan

I’ll think about it, but you seem to be assuming the conclusion here. My first impression is that it is not hate speech. I find it distasteful, but it’s not a negative comment about all black people.

Stay vigilant. You’ll find that delicious “gotcha” if you keep turning stones… even tiny pebbles, like this one.

No it’s not hate speech. It’s not a slur black people, it’s an accusation that an individual is trying to ingratiate himself to racists. There’s no equivalency to “nigger” here, because it’s not an expression of bigotry against a racial group.

To my mind an insult that, by definition, can only be leveled at a subset of a group doesn’t constitute hate speech of the larger group, per say. Personally, I find it distastefull enough as to constitute well poisoning, however, and would not object it being forbidden.

This isn’t kindergarten. Why should it be forbidden?

I think a ban on hate speech against non-posters is silly. But if you’re going to have the rule, the only animating principle that makes any sense is that such speech is insulting to posters because it constitutes a kind of collective insult. Since calling someone an Uncle Tom is in most contexts a vile insult, but not a collective insult, then it is most consistent with the rest of the speech rules on this board to keep it in-bounds so long as it is directed at a non-poster.

How is it different. Nigger is a word directed at an individual Black. So is Uncle Tom. Both are insults and neither can be hurled against a non-Black person.

Jesus Christ. Why do racists insist on playing these ridiculous games?

“Someone used the term ‘Uncle Tom’ and didn’t get a warning. Why can’t I call a black man a spearchucker and not get warned for hate speech? It’s the same thing!!”

Just because something’s an insult doesn’t automatically make it hate speech. I would think in some rare cases one could use it against a non-black individuals, even.

I haven’t read the thread that evidently contend the post, so I’m not sure what you’re talking about. Rather than get all in a tizzy—and seem mighty tough, I’ll tell ya bubb—why don’t you attempt to explain your point of view. You responded to me. What do you think is wrong with my reasoning. Go ahead, give it a try.

You first. Explain to us how referring to an individual as an “Uncle Tom” is equivalent to calling a black person a nigger.

And this is why hate speech shouldn’t be banned to begin with. I mean, we’ve had “Ask the racist” threads before, so certainly those were packed with hate speech. But because they didn’t call anyone a nigger it’s OK?

I will after you respond to my initial post with some reasoning. What about the thinking I supplied do you disagree with.

I just explained how it’s different. “Uncle Tom” does not express hostility towards a racial group.

Your reasoning does not constitute a criterion for hate speech. That was easy.

Note–Poting as a member here, not as a mod-so you don’t get your panties in a twist.

I really think you need to first define “hate speech” as you understand it, as the board authority understands it. If you don’t know what “hate speech” means to all involved, then any posts trying to answer a question about what is or is not allowed is meaningless.

Context is everything around here. Words should not be used as clubs to beat people.

I’ve made that abundantly clear to any yutz who can read. Your post implied that there is no fundamental difference between referring to someone as an Uncle Tom and calling someone a nigger. I implied that you are full of the well-known article. I then asked you to explain how the two situations are in any way equivalent.

You have yet “supply” any “thinking” for me to disagree with.

Maybe the difficulty is that you don’t recognize what thinking looks like. Allow me to help:

So, I pointed out the similarities. Now feel free to show where that thinking is faulty. Or is outweighed by another point of view.