And I responded to that point. See Post # 8.
You really didn’t. The term is insulting to the person being described as an Uncle Tom, but it doesn’t put all black people down. Although if black people object to anyone being compared to a slave, I’d understand that.
I’ll admit, the only time I’ve heard anyone call a black person an “Uncle Tom” was when the speaker was a black person.
Well the point of using Uncle Tom epithet is to adress a slave like mentality, whatever the colour or the ethnic background. Next, you cant tell a black guy he’s a wage slave?
“Uncle Tom” is a racially based and motivated insult, used to denigrate and suppress a certain type of behavior based upon race and preconceived notions about how people of a certain race “should” behave. So yes, I think it is every bit as much hate speech as any other insult which is based upon a person’s race.
And sorry, but I don’t agree with the “subset” argument either. After all, using the n-word to describe black athletes is just as offensive as using it about the entire race.
Yes, but I’ve never seen it used to describe anyone who wasn’t a black American. You can call anyone a wage slave.
To the degree this has ever been the case it most certainly isn’t so today. Today the term is applied mostly to blacks with conservative values, by people with liberal values.
Yeah, I did. I pointed out that his reasoning was flawed. THAT was the purpose of the post. His reasoning was that there was “no equivalency to “nigger” here, because it’s not an expression of bigotry against a racial group.”.
And here is my response:
It’s more about the idea that people of the same race or group share common interests and that members of the group shouldn’t do things that are perceived to be against those interests.
Yes, I read it already. It does not address the core issue: “Uncle Tom” may be applied only to black people, and it is insulting to the black person to whom it is being applied, but it is not simultaneously an insult to all black people. If one poster called another an Uncle Tom in GD, I’d give a note or warning. But that’s for insults, not hate speech.
We don’t need a proxy battle for liberals and conservatives. If this thread moves in that direction, it will get shut down.
This is acting like a jerk, especially in About This Message Board, where you are expected to maintain a civil tone when dealing with other posters.
If there’s any more of this in the thread from anyone this thread will be closed. If you want to fight with someone take it to the Pit.
“Insult” is not a criterion for hate speech and neither is “cannot be used against a non-black person.” You made up a fake criterion. “Hate speech,” as that phrase is commonly used, is language which directs hostility towards a group as a whole. “uncle Tom” does not meet that criterion. You cannot point to a group which is being disparaged by it.
For the record, I don’t have a problem with hate speech being allowed on the board anyway, but this isn’t hate speech.
Well, then the meaning has spectacularly changed and I had no idea.
Or some people are just making shit up. Cause, at the very least in British English, it can be used without any ref whatsoever to the target of the “insult” being black. I know this is an American board, not a British one, but still…
I’m not trying to start a battle here Marley, I’m really not. But at the same time we need to discuss how the term is used and why. Otherwise there’s no point in the thread. I submit that the term as it’s used currently is 100% political in nature and we have to address this fact if we’re going to have any meaningful discussion as to why it’s used, what it means, and its intended impact upon the people to whom it’s aimed.
ETA: And I believe we can do that without turning the discussion into a proxy battle between liberals and conservatives. I think even most liberals would agree that the term is used mostly by them against blacks with conservative values.
You have no idea. In American English, it has always been directed at black people, although most often by fellow blacks. The character in the original novel is black, although he is not subservient but rather heroic in defying his master. It has been used in a disparaging sense at least since the civil rights movement in the 1960s, and probably earlier.
The meaning in England then is quite different from what it has been historically in the US.
It was used by a black character against a white character in last week’s True Blood. Followed by “yeah, I went there.”
If “Uncle Tom” is OK, how about “House N----r”? Or “House Negro,” if that makes it easier to discuss?
I don’t think why it’s used or its political nature is relevant to whether or not it’s hate speech.
Okay, then. I’ll just go back to saying it’s a race-based insult targeting people of a certain race for defying race-based expectations. For that reason alone it seems to me that the term should qualify as hate speech. People should be free to follow their own path no matter what their race. Anything less is racism, and since “Uncle Tom” is used to condemn people not for what they believe but for believing it while black, I believe it constitutes racism as well.
Those phrases are modifiers for words that actually are sweeping derogations of an entire group.
Is this really rocket science? People can’t figure out if they’re insulting a whole group or not?