Rioters are not Niggers! Or something.

[Grotonian]

@BigT

It’s not about calling him a name, it’s about calling him a racist name. The word “nigger,” when used against someone, means I hate you because you are a black. It cannot be used against someone objectively horrible because you’re still hating them for wrong reason.

A child murderer is a bad person because they are a child murderer. Their race should not remotely enter into the conversation about how horrible they are. The fact that you see this horrible person and still want to use a term that disparages them for being black–that’s disgusting.

I guess it’s possible that you have been so sheltered that you don’t know this. But I was born and raised in a community that has been so historically racist that we still can’t get black people to stick around. I’ve had exactly two real life black friends in my entire life.

Yet I know how offensive terms work. I know you can’t do that shit where you say “them’s black people, but them assholes over there’s niggers.” That’s something my great uncle would say and everyone would look at him like he had two heads. (And he only got that nice a response because he was old and drunk.)

NO BLACK PERSON, NO MATTER HOW VILE, IS A NIGGER.

I agree completely. I’m not looking for permission to call people slurs. My concern was that Hail Ants’ post seemed to me to be his opinion that draconian measures should be taken against the rioters, not that he was condemning all African-Americans and certainly not that he was advocating genocide.

But the N-word sent everyone into a tizzy. From which some have not yet recovered.

[BigT]

@Grotonian

You’ll have to forgive me, I’m just a dumb honkey.

(So that should get me banned? That sentence is so hateful and so damaging to respectful discourse that a warning or note couldn’t cover it? People who see it will recoil in disgust? I suppose I should apologize to all the Dopers who will lose sleep tonight over it. To those Dopers: I apologize.)

1. “Honky” is barely a racial epithet and is more of a joke. Almost no one uses it seriously anymore.
2. And, even when it was used, it was relatively light–the type of thing that could show up on TV and not as a “very special episode.” (I still hear George Jefferson in my head every time I see it in print.)
3. Even if we don’t treat it like a joke, you aren’t using it in a truly disparaging way. You are self effacing. You don’t think you are a bad person because you are white.
4. If it were being used to mean “you are horrible because you are white,” it would indeed hamper discourse. I guarantee you’d be flipping out because the person you were talking to had just proven they were racist against white people.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@Grotonian

But the N-word sent everyone into a tizzy. From which some have not yet recovered.

Why shouldn’t it cause a “tizzy”? Why shouldn’t a term that for generations was used by white people in conjunction with the worst kind of institutional oppression not be weeded out of our language like the diseased tissue it is?

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

Wow. There are just way too many racists at the SDMB these days.

[Duckster]

@Grotonian

But the N-word sent everyone into a tizzy. From which some have not yet recovered.

The n-word is not sending anyone into a tizzy. You’re new here. For many of the rest of us with a few more months under our belts than you, we’ve been there and done that, several times. As already stated, if you want debate the n-word or any other word for its intellectual edification, have at it. Fighting ignorance and all that. But to use it as a pejorative, you know, to denigrate people, doesn’t work. We take the four-letter word, hate, seriously around here in all its forms.

[Happy_Lendervedder]

@Grotonian

I wondered about that, but the official police policy in the Detroit riots of '67 was to shoot rioters (looters?) on sight. It’s not, historically, a terribly controversial policy.

Do you mean shoot to kill the looters? This was never Detroit police policy.

[BlankSlate]

There should be a hall of fame for stupid threads.

Grotonian knows perfectly well why Hail Ants’s post merited a suspension. This is just an excuse to go hurr durr nigger nigger hurr durr the libtards are in a tizzy derpy derpy do.

Grow up, dude.

[Claverhouse]

Meh, if I saw that on my board anyone who said that would be perma-banned in 30 seconds.

[Jonathan_Chance]

@cmyk

It appeared to me that Hail Ants was attempting to re-define the word “nigger” to apply to black criminals—whom he also thought of as racists towards whites (or something )—as if that would somehow not make it racist anymore, since they’re conducting criminal behavior.

I first ran into this type of thing in the early 80s when I moved from Los Angeles to Washington, DC. As a teen I heard a perfectly reasonable - I thought - girl argue with me that ‘there are black people and there are niggers’ and that I needed to learn the difference.

Oy.

What Hail Ants did was apply hurtful and destructive nomenclature on a group of people which could easily be defined as being insulting to all black people in the riot, in the city of Baltimore and in the world. It was entirely inappropriate usage and he got slapped for it. I, for one, am entirely comfortable with our discussion and actions in this matter.

I hope he rethinks his attitude during his time out.

And if you truly can’t grasp that, Grotonian, I’ll back up Colibri and suggest - speaking personally - that you think about whether this is the proper message board for you.

[Grotonian]

@Happy_Lendervedder

Do you mean shoot to kill the looters? This was never Detroit police policy.

I know. I looked it up at what I thought was my source and it wasn’t there. (After I posted it.) I think I meant something far more specific, like shoot snipers on sight, or I’m just wrong about the whole thing.

[Irishman]

I can totally get that an opinion that should be aired and discussed is the idea that the violent rioters are uneducated, racist, violent, self-serving criminal scumbags. I can accept an idea for discussion is to send in the National Guard and shoot them (via M-60s or whatever).

But there is no justification for calling them niggers. That word has a meaning beyond violent criminal rioters. That word has historically been used against all black people. It’a about race, and one of the most vile racial slurs around.

This thread in ATMB is the bizarrest thing. That anyone can’t understand that ?

Grotonian, maybe you should reconsider if this is a board you want to hang out at.

[Grotonian]

@IvoryTowerDenizen

Why shouldn’t it cause a “tizzy”? Why shouldn’t a term that for generations was used by white people in conjunction with the worst kind of institutional oppression not be weeded out of our language like the diseased tissue it is?

Because sometimes you have to be an adult and stop throwing tantrums.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@Happy_Lendervedder

Do you mean shoot to kill the looters? This was never Detroit police policy.

I think I remember some public official in Detroit saying that should be the policy but it certainly wasn’t.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@cmyk

It appeared to me that Hail Ants was attempting to re-define the word “nigger” to apply to black criminals—whom he also thought of as racists towards whites (or something )—as if that would somehow not make it racist anymore, since they’re conducting criminal behavior.

Kinda like the ‘No True Scotsman’ argument pejoratively applied to black people.

Which, of course, makes absolutely no sense at all and is abundantly racist.

Terr(at least I think it was Terr) tried to do that with raghead and the mods weren’t amused.

[Ambivalid]

@Irishman

Grotonian, maybe you should reconsider if this is a board you want to hang out at.

I’ve noticed him here for a bit now and he seems to, oh how do I put this, really relish the contrarian role. I think his time here will be self-limiting.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@Ibn_Warraq

Terr(at least I think it was Terr) tried to do that with raghead and the mods weren’t amused.

I misremembered. It wasn’t Terr and I should have checked before using his name.

I sincerely apologize to Terr.

[wonky]

@Grotonian

Because sometimes you have to be an adult and stop throwing tantrums.

Personally, I think banning someone is like kicking someone out of your house. The person standing on the front porch demanding to be let back in is more akin to the tantrum thrower.

Adults are allowed to find some behavior unacceptable and repellant and to cease fraternizing with people who can’t quite manage acceptable, non-repellant behavior.

[Jonathan_Chance]

Frankly, we’d be better off if more people did so.

[Little_Nemo]

@Grotonian

Because sometimes you have to be an adult and stop throwing tantrums.

I suggest you follow that advice and stop trying to figure out ways you can slip the word nigger back into acceptable usage.

[Colibri]

@Grotonian

Because sometimes you have to be an adult and stop throwing tantrums.

Moderator Note

Grotonian, you’ve gone beyond a simple complaint and are now verging on trolling. Given that board policy has been explained to you, and that everyone seems to understand it very well except you, I’m going to close this thread.