# Myspace racist cowards **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 27, 2009, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700 "2009-02-27T18:56:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/121 "2009-03-01T17:21:15Z")
> [@hawksgirl](#): > > OH MY GOD JUST DROP IT ALREADY. Seriously, take this somewhere else. I think that dropping the issue would make sense, since it’s simply a semantic argument. However, the fact is that my initial interpretation of **Cisco’s** words was not unreasonable. If **Cisco** or **dante** wishes to continue debating the point, I am happy to accomodate them. Within my rules of course. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/122 "2009-03-01T17:32:02Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Within my rules of course. Heh. I’m impressed that to this point, **brazil84** has only fallen back on the “you have insulted my honor, sir!” thing once or twice. Of course nothing’s been achieved regardless… ---
**Author:** ![Dante](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dante/32/9673_2.png) [@Dante](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dante)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/123 "2009-03-01T19:02:15Z")
I’m sorry, I’ve made my answer as clear as I’m able to make it. The fact that you don’t like it is your problem, not mine. > [@brazil84](#): > > > [@Dante](#): > > > > I don’t think this can be explained any more clearly or simply, so I’m not going to try. You have chosen not to see it, I can’t make you. > > i.e. You don’t want to answer my simple, reasonable question. Please do not put words in my mouth or mischaracterize my statements. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/124 "2009-03-01T19:44:36Z")
> [@Dante](#): > > I’m sorry, I’ve made my answer as clear as I’m able to make it. The fact that you don’t like it is your problem, not mine. It’s a simple, reasonable yes or no question. Not only that, but the answer is obvious. You would seem to have enough intelligence to answer it. My conclusion is that you are evading it because you do not want to answer. I will repeat it again: Do you agree that under at least one such definition [of the word "Hispanic], “Hispanic” includes Brazillians? > [@](#): > > Please do not put words in my mouth or mischaracterize my statements. Let’s make it clear and explicit: I’m characterizing what I believe to be your state of mind. In other words, I am supplying an explanation for your evasion. (I’m not claiming that you have explicitly admitted that you do not want to answer the question.) I will repeat the question again: **Do you agree that under at least one such definition [of the word "Hispanic], “Hispanic” includes Brazillians?** By the way, the world is very unlikely to come to an end if you simply admit that the answer is “yes.” ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/125 "2009-03-01T20:20:24Z")
For Christ’s sake, somebody just agree to let the other guy have the last word on this, whether you think he’s wrong or not. ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/126 "2009-03-01T22:01:09Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > **CanvasShoes** , if you believe that the folks on Dr. Phil are a representative sample of the population, you should maybe try getting out more. I’m not the one living under a rock. :rolleyes: Yes, because that’s exactly what I meant by using few moments of an interview I caught on Dr. Phil as one example, that is that they were a representative sample. Your claim was > [@](#): > > Umm… how sick and tired can you get of **something that has absolutely never been said?** bolding mine. By all means ignore the fact that I also used BET, an actual movie reference where this attitude was stated, Hollywood, the media, and black comedians’ “white people are X” jokes etc as examples. Be real! Of course my post did not in any way state that the was the be all and end all of where I’ve seen this sort of thing. But yet that’s immediately where you went, and the extent of your argument? The next few are complete nutbags, but add Louis Farrakhan (sp?), Rev. Wright, and Jesse Jackson to those fostering the attitude I described and as pretty solid proof that your claim that this attitude “… **has absolutely never been said** ” is untrue. ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/127 "2009-03-01T22:08:09Z")
To **brazil** and pals, I’m confused. Why exactly does it matter what the _ **Exact Universally Perfect** _ (ting!) definition of “hispanic” is? ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/128 "2009-03-01T22:26:41Z")
> [@CanvasShoes](#): > > To **brazil** and pals, I’m confused. Why exactly does it matter what the _ **Exact Universally Perfect** _ (ting!) definition of “hispanic” is? It doesn’t matter at all for this argument, which is part of the reason I have repeatedly offered to accept the OP’s definition for purposes of this discussion. For some reason, this is unacceptable to the OP. My charitable guess is that it’s similar to a person who is peeved at hearing the word “infer” used to mean “imply.” ---
**Author:** ![Locrian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/locrian/32/14146_2.png) [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/129 "2009-03-01T22:37:56Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > I loved Morgan Freeman’s response to it [here](http://www.wimp.com/morganfreeman/). That was AWESOME! Morgan is class! ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/130 "2009-03-01T23:14:24Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > I don’t know what to tell you except that you are wrong, as shown by the definition I quoted in Post #114. > > There does appear to exist a dictionary definition of “Hispanic” which includes Brazilians. No mention of Brazil or Brazilian in that cite. I’m Hispanic so I will have to say that the dictionary that included “Latin America” in the definition of Hispanic was wrong. Many other related terms, like “Hispanoamerica” do exclude Brazil, Latin America can include Brazil, but “Hispanoamerica” does not include Brazil. > [@brazil84](#): > > To extend your analogy, let’s suppose that lots of people use the word “wrench” to mean “a thing used to adjust the brakes on a 1967 Volkswagen Beetle.” Enough so that it enters common parlance and is even included in a mainstream dictionary with that as one of the definitions. > > Then let’s suppose you use the word “wrench” in a debate and somebody understands it to mean “a thing used to adjust the brakes on a 1967 Volkswagen Beetle” The reasonable thing to do would be to tell the person "No, by ‘wrench’ I meant something else. And one reasonable response would be “Fine. I understood the word ‘wrench’ differently from the way you intended. Let’s use your definition of wrench.” > > At that point, it becomes unproductive and unreasonable for either person to insist that his definition is right and the other person’s definition is wrong. Then why you even have to get behind a Brazilian girl to keep your fortitude to keep this going? 😛 Drop it already. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/131 "2009-03-01T23:41:48Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > No mention of Brazil or Brazilian in that cite. Do you agree that “Latin America” includes Brazil? > [@](#): > > I’m Hispanic so I will have to say that the dictionary that included “Latin America” in the definition of Hispanic was wrong. I’m not sure why being Hispanic makes you an authority on English (or American English). To me, it’s just one more data point. > [@](#): > > Drop it already. I’m happy to drop it. In fact, I’ve offered multiple times to stipulate for the sake of argument to the OP’s definition of “Hispanic.” And yet people keep on insisting on arguing, in effect, that the dictionary definition I quoted was somehow “wrong.” So, if you want to debate an academic point, I’m happy to accomodate you. (as long as you follow my rules.) ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/132 "2009-03-02T00:00:54Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Do you agree that “Latin America” includes Brazil? Yes. but the dictionary was wrong to add it to the definition of Hispanic. > [@brazil84](#): > > I’m not sure why being Hispanic makes you an authority on English (or American English). To me, it’s just one more data point. To me, what you say here, is just another data point on why no one should take you seriously. 😛 Being Hispanic does make me an authority regarding the origins of the word and the meaning of it. Hispanic comes from “Hispano”, Brazil is not included when mentioning Hispanic America. But on the US side, the US census reports that: > **[Brazilian Americans](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_American)** > > Brazilian Americans (Portuguese: brasilo-americanos or americanos de origem brasileira) are Americans who are of full or partial Brazilian ancestry. The Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs estimates the Brazilian American population to be 1,775,000, the largest of any Brazilian diaspora. The largest wave of Brazilian migration to the United States occurred in the late 1980s and early 1990s as a response to hyperinflation in Brazil. Even after inflation stabilized in 1994, Brazilian immigrati... > [@](#): > > The official United States Census category of Hispanic or Latino is limited explicitly to people of “Spanish culture or origin”, and **therefore does not include Brazilian Americans**. > [@brazil84](#): > > I’m happy to drop it. In fact, I’ve offered multiple times to stipulate for the sake of argument to the OP’s definition of “Hispanic.” And yet people keep on insisting on arguing, in effect, that the dictionary definition I quoted was somehow “wrong.” > > So, if you want to debate an academic point, I’m happy to accomodate you. (as long as you follow my rules.) Yes, the definition was wrong. Are you having the impression that there is even a good size academic group that agrees with you on this point? Where I have seen this before? 😃 Frankly I don’t think you even have any desire to continue to deal with the subject of the OP, but we’ll see. ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/133 "2009-03-02T00:04:01Z")
> [@Locrian](#): > > That was AWESOME! Morgan is class! I cannot get this to play. I get to the site but the little screen just sits there with the spinning asterisk thingie (technical term :D) and never plays. Does anyone have an alternate site? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/134 "2009-03-02T00:07:23Z")
> [@CanvasShoes](#): > > I cannot get this to play. I get to the site but the little screen just sits there with the spinning asterisk thingie (technical term :D) and never plays. > > Does anyone have an alternate site? [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10482634](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10482634) > [@](#): > > NEW YORK - Morgan Freeman says the concept of a month dedicated to black history is “ridiculous.” > > “You’re going to relegate my history to a month?” the 68-year-old actor says in an interview on CBS’ “60 Minutes” to air Sunday (7 p.m. EST). “I don’t want a black history month. Black history is American history.” > > Black History Month has roots in historian Carter G. Woodson’s Negro History Week, which he designated in 1926 as the second week in February to mark the birthdays of Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/135 "2009-03-02T00:07:58Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Yes. but the dictionary was wrong to add it to the definition of Hispanic. The dictionary simply reports how the language is being used. There is no Academie Anglaise. > [@](#): > > Being Hispanic does make me an authority regarding the origins of the word and the meaning of it. Oh really? So is it your position that the origins of the word should control? Simple question. > [@](#): > > Are you having the impression that there is even a good size academic group that agrees with you on this point? Ok, Mr. Authority on the English Language, I think you better look up the word “academic.” > [@](#): > > Frankly I don’t think you even have any desire to continue to deal with the subject of the OP, but we’ll see. Of course I do. For what seems like the tenth time, I am offering to stipulate for the sake of argument that the OP’s definition of “Hispanic” will control. ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/136 "2009-03-02T00:13:06Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Yes. but the dictionary was wrong to add it to the definition of Hispanic. Let me get this straight. Another poster looks up the definition of a word in a dictionary and has the audacity to actually believe the definition as stated in said dictionary and THAT is what has been causing all of these pages of back and forths? If I understand **brazil** correctly (and I apologize ahead of time, I’ve only now returned to posting regularly after a long absence, so **brazil** is not familiar to me and I could be completely off base). At any rate, based upon his posts, all he is saying is that “Dictionaries are accepted means of finding out what word “X” means. So, if a person can’t rely upon a commonly accepted source of definitions, where ARE they supposed to get the correct information? A random and anonymous person on a chat board is a more logical and accurate source than a dictionary?” ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/137 "2009-03-02T00:20:08Z")
> [@CanvasShoes](#): > > Let me get this straight. Another poster looks up the definition of a word in a dictionary and has the audacity to actually believe the definition as stated in said dictionary and THAT is what has been causing all of these pages of back and forths? > > If I understand **brazil** correctly (and I apologize ahead of time, I’ve only now returned to posting regularly after a long absence, so **brazil** is not familiar to me and I could be completely off base). That’s not exactly my position. I’m not disputing that many (perhaps most?) definitions of the word “Hispanic” exclude Brazilians. I’m not insisting that the definition I posted is correct and other definitions are wrong. My position is that it was not unreasonable for me to understand the word “Hispanic” to include Brazilians. And since the OP has indicated that he did not intend to include Brazilians when he referred to “Hispanic,” I’ve agreed to accept his definition. That should end the matter, but other posters apparently wish to debate whether my original (mis)understanding was unreasonable. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/138 "2009-03-02T00:25:32Z")
> [@CanvasShoes](#): > > so **brazil** is not familiar to me and I could be completely off base). I should warn you that I’m very unpopular on this message board. You should probably think twice before you do anything which could be seen as siding with me in a discussion. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/139 "2009-03-02T00:35:31Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > The dictionary simply reports how the language is being used. There is no Academie Anglaise. That dictionary does make the emphasis in the “Spanish-speaking” part in related terms. It is clear that even there “Latin-America”, in their Hispanic definition, is referring to the “nations that speak Spanish” [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Hispanicism](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Hispanicism) > [@](#): > > Oh really? So is it your position that the origins of the word should control? Simple question. [/quote] It is the Etymology, so yes; and the US census agrees also on the US side. > [@](#): > > Ok, Mr. Authority on the English Language, I think you better look up the word “academic.” Like if that would be important after it is clear that you are just a poser. > [@](#): > > Of course I do. For what seems like the tenth time, I am offering to stipulate for the sake of argument that the OP’s definition of “Hispanic” will control. Here is your chance once again: Drop it then and continue with the subject of the OP. Or are you so dense that you can not notice that you just broke your point here by the 11th time by the replies you just made here? ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700/140 "2009-03-02T00:41:25Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > I should warn you that I’m very unpopular on this message board. You should probably think twice before you do anything which could be seen as siding with me in a discussion. Thanks, but to be fair, and at the risk of further annoying everyone who is undoubtedly already sick of this subject, I’m just trying to simplify and understand exactly where the disagreement is. From both of your posts you and **GIGO’s** (and sorry I didn’t read all of them all of the way through, way too much), it appears as if you two are saying basically the same thing, only in slightly different ways. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/myspace-racist-cowards/487700.md?page=8)