So, what should we call the Tim McVeighs of the world?
Sikhs wear turbans, and they are no big fans of Islam (pardon the sweeping generalization as well as the one approaching). They are also the “warrior” caste in South Asia–you might want to refrain from pissing them off. Women with cancer wear them, and I understand they do a damn fine job of hiding adhesive tape from a temporary facelift as well. How long will it last if one third of the women in Beverly Hills and Scottsdale take offense?
If you insist on this (I’m NOT advocating it!) can’t you come up with something a bit more clever and al Qaeda specific? The problem with epithets is the people who come up with them . . .
If Jesus Christ came back, would he have the same body he did when he made his earthly debut 2000 or so years ago?
Just think, Yeshua Bin Yusef has come back, as the Bible says, as a ‘thief in the night’ - in other words unannounced, and in his previous earthly form…
People would probably call him a “sand n*gger” or a “camel jockey” too.
On another note I find those slurs not only derogatory, but rather lame. I mean if you are going to insult people be creative. I mean “towelhead”? I doubt if foreigners call Americans things like “capheads”, “denimasses”, and “burgerflippers”. That’s how silly ethnic slurs are when they come from another perspective.
I find it hard to believe someone actually posted this. What happened to the Str8 Dope saying about getting rid of ignorance. The original post here just shows that it is taking longer than expected to get rid of ignorance.
I don’t think it’s necessary at all to stoop to name calling of the so called enemy, especially if you are justified in going to war. Furthurmore, These names not only attack the enemy but attack others of the same origins that might live in the USA. They attack those from the many other cultures that also wear turbans. They attack the Sikhs that wear turbasn and beards as part of there religion.
It is this kind of behavior that causes the racist backlash that is running rampant in the uSA now, after the WTC bombing. Sikhs across the nation are being targeted in murder, assault, and general racist insanity. Please reffer to:
http://65.42.195.102/sikhs/ (This is an excellent site re:Crimes against Sikhs resulting from the WTC attacks)
These sites are logging some of the attacks on Sikhs resulting from the racist hate that is brewing in the country after the WTC attack. They can also explain in detail who Sikhs are and what they believe.
engaging in this sort of racist behavior, yes that includes name calling, only pulls this country apart. UNited we stand can no longer be true. The terrorist attacks are working. They are tearing the USA apart from the inside. Does the USA want to be like the countries in the Middle East and Asia? People in those countries have a hard time living together with differences like religion and culture. They kill each other everyday. They are at war constantly. Is the uSA to suffer the same fate? It will if racism is allowed to remain apart of the Fabric of the nation.
I heard this too. Actually so did the Sikhs of America. They even mentioned it to Pres. Bush when their rep was meeting along with leaders of other religions and the Pres. The Pres actually made Cooksey give a public apology, whic still showed his racist roots.
Nostradamus, your idea is a good one, but mostly Bill likes the attention he gets from starting his own threads too much to read and participate in anyone else’s.
WILDEST BILL, no, it is not acceptable to call people “towel-heads” even if you only mean terrorists. It is the equivalent of calling all middle-aged white men named Bill “blockheads” when really I only mean you.
Your apology, if I may borrow a word that’s been thrown around on the boards quite a bit lately, is “tepid.” You are looking for an excuse to hate and belittle people who are different than you, people who worship God in a different way, people that you secretly suspect may not be “real Americans” because they look different. You apologize for one thread, and then start a new thread in the same vein the very next day.
The term “towel head” (I prefer rag head)is a term used in reference to number of people and cultures that wear a turban as head gear. In context it is used to describe someone that you may be UNCERTAIN of their nationality or religion. The only thing certain is that they wear a turban. Hence it is ridiculous to see this as a stereo type other than the stereo type of people who wear turbans which is the point of the exercise. Anyone offended by the term “cotton legs” would be an idiot and like wise with the use of towel head to describe a person of otherwise unknown origin. It is alot shorter than the politically correct label we would have to give such a person: possible Iranian, Iraqi, Saudi, Kuwaiti, Yemeni, Pakistani, Afganistani, Indian, Sudanese, Egytian, etc. etc. etc.
My little sister married a Jordanian immigrant. Aside from his attendance at Tenn. State, he’s a fine man. He’s considered by his community to be a good christian. I currently have two little nephews of Middle-Eastern descent.
If one of them comes to me sobbing because a bigot called him a towel-head, rag-head, camel jockey, sand nigger, or any other slur - even if the bigot prefaces it by saying that he considers my nephew to be one of the “good” towel-heads - I will take it personally.
I will smack that person upside the head with the King James Version so hard that sh*t squirts out of both of his ears.
Say it if you must.
But look over your shoulder first.
I suggest earlier that responders to the threads of Wildest Bill should launch their own kites in response to the kites of Wildest Bill in his threads, and not commence threads of their own, and I regret any confusion in my recommendation.
Note also that Wildest Bill does not post on this thread for 89 hours. The reason is that this kite is flying so high he does not need to make aeronautical adjustments to its flight.
Furthermore, Wildest Bill does not wish other posters to agree with him. I post on one of his threads once and fully endorse his views in order to test my theory. Wildest Bill acknowledges my support but says immediately, ‘Any other points of view?’
Also, to use this thread as an example, I reach the conclusion that Wildest Bill has no intention of calling anyone a towel head, he does not approve of others using the term towel head, he may even wish to plant his fist on anyone he hears use the phrase towel head for all I know.
I must repeat that Wildest Bill is a kite flyer par excellence, I never see his like before, and everyone who responds to his kites is simply keeping them aloft.
Of course, this thread goes back to the top of the pile following this post, but at least I know what I am doing.
People, please. This is not a Utopian society. I can’t go around saying “spic, gook, chink, wop, nigger.” these names bring up deep emotions in many people.
The analogy of calling someone cotton legs is entirely rediculous. The point is that if someone is offended by the way another reffers to them, then don’t call them that name. It’s simple. Most names like the afore mentioned were created out of hate. These names were created with the intention to hurt those they refer to.
Let’s be a little more reasonable. Instead of defending your love of calling people names that we know will offend them. Just not do it.
Lovely post. I have a rather visual imagination, and I can just See the thwacking administered…
BTW, for the record, No, it is not acceptable. Over this side of the pond, we are also seeing racial hatred against our muslim (and many other middle eastern) groups. Seems sad, given that a large portion of muslims here are of Pakistani origin, and with Pakistan offering its help to the US.
Gee, Bill, I would imagine that Jesus probably wore a “towel” on his head from time to time too. He did live in the Middle East, you know. Gets awfully hot out there in Galilee. But you, being the good Christian that you are, must know all about Jesus already. I’m sure he’s looking down at you right now with great affection, marveling at how you so completely embody the spirit of Christ.
On another note, Fenris and Nostradamus are rapidly becoming two of my favorite posters. I don’t think I’ve ever posted that about anyone before.
People, please. This is not a Utopian society. I can’t go around saying “spic, gook, chink, wop, nigger.” these names bring up deep emotions in many people.
So rather than learn tolerance we should censor the speech of Americans. How many millions is it now that have died defending my right to speak freely? If you don’t care for what I have to say or can’t control you emotions against simple words you are free to move away from earshot of me. Again I believe the problem lies with those offended. Just because you take it offensively gives you absolutely no right to assume it was meant to be offensive. I am not racist nor do I harbor an ounce of hatred for anyone so I feel no need to walk around on egg shells in the country that my father died for worried about who I might offend with a silly word like towel head. Get real here people, there are numerous terms used to describe all kinds of people and those terms are not going to disappear.
portajon, I salute you as the anti-PC revolutionary that you claim to be. :rolleyes:
We have freedom of speech in this country. And people have died to defend it. So why do you want to waste your free speech, this amazing gift, on terms you know that other people find offensive?
Is it because you wish to offend people? Or is it because you wish to show how “cool” you are “excercising your free speech”?
Towel-head, rag head, camel jockey, and other derisive terms for people from the Middle East are not cool, and mark the user as an bigoted ignoramus. I find it stunning that it is too much effort for you to find non-offensive descriptive terms (hint: Arab is one).
Now really, tolerance doesnt mena that sticks and stones will break our bones but names will never hurt us. Tolerance means we know that there are many different kinds of people out there with different beliefs and cultures, and this is all right with us. Tolerance is showing respect for all regardless of differences.
True we have the right to free speech, but with this comes responsibility. Free speech doesnt mean freedom to cause insults or freedom to slander.
Looks like some people are using some clasiscal thinking errors here. For a list of thinking errors see:
There is no need to walk around on egg shells. I never use the racust terms afore mentioned. I never feel as though I have to be careful of what I say. Towel head actually isnt a descriptive enough word to be used to describe a group of people. It could be anyone from the middle east, far east, India, Asia, muslims, Sikhs, cancer patients, surgery patients etc. If you want to argue about using descriptive words then calling them a Sikh, etc. is much better. At least there wouldn’t be any confusion.
People didnt die for this country to give us the right to call people names. They died so that we could have a place to live in religious freedom. So we could live free to express ideas.
To think that if someone is hurt by what we do is their fault is a complete thinking error (refer to website for definitions). The youth I work with that fill the group homes and detentiopn centers of this country, use this thinking pattern. If someone is hurt by what I do it’s their fault. I once had a young man steal a pair of sunglasses while I had taken him to the store to buy a soda. his reasoning was that it was my fault he stole them because I wouldnt buy them for him. This way he doesnt feel guilty, He doesnt take responsibility for his own actions.
Why do a few still insist on using language like this, I’ll never know.
The same people who use language like this are the ones who would like to respond to this attack on our freedom by restricting those same freedoms.
My first day back at work, as we watched the smoke still quite literally rising from the WTC attack site, I heard two of my co-workers decide that we were suffering from a surfeit of civil liberties.
Precisely what Osama thinks. Maybe we should send these fools to Afghanistan to join their co-religionists.
This doesn’t make sense. You openly use a broad brush to describe people who use “language like this”. How do you figure if I say towel head that I must want to restrict our freedoms? Then you call us fools. I am more offended by that than any slur you could think of. As a matter of fact alot of folks would be offended if called a fool. Should we add fool to the list of words to not use. It is offensive to us fools ya know.
Fool would describe a character trait (obviously not objectively, but objectivity - not to mention objectivism - is greatly overestimated.) Towel head would not. That you don’t get the difference says more than I could ever say.
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A leading U.S. dictionary publisher said it would revise entries for more than 200 offensive words after receiving complaints that some definitions, especially for the word ‘nigger’, were racist. Merriam-Webster Inc. said it would make the alterations to ethnic, religious and sexual slur words in the 1999 edition of its Collegiate Dictionary to ensure that readers were aware just how offensive the words are. The dictionary will also modify its entries for words considered vulgar and obscene.
But what, I ask, do they mean by racist, offensive, let alone vulgar? If, and one must assume they do, if they have a line, where exactly is it drawn? Who cannot be hurt; who, more vitally, can? The knee-jerk response is simple enough. The so called obscenities, natch; racism, of course, nationalist stereotyping, probably; homophobia, maybe; sexism, well, sometimes. The grey areas come swooping in. And, anyway, where do you stop? Because every group wants its say these days. The populist authoritarianism that is the downside of political correctness means that anyone, sometimes it seems like everyone, can proclaim their grief and have it acknowledged. The victim culture, every sufferer grasping for their own Holocaust, ensures that anyone who feels offended can call for moderation, for dilution, and in the end, as is all too often the case, for censorship. And censorship, that by-product of fear – stemming as it does not from some positive agenda, but from the desire to escape our own terrors and superstitions by imposing them on others – must surely be resisted.