Yes, indeed.
If you are looking to get your suspension upped to a ban, you are doing a good job of trying to attract Mod attention. This sort of tale smells a lot like trolling–particularly since well over 90% of males in the U.S. since the 1940s have been circumcised, regardless of religion–a point of which it would be unlikely that you are ignorant. Creepy declarations that are also implausible suggest that you are not interested in actual discussion.
[ /Moderating ]
Had to use two hands to keep it out of the water, did he?
Which is why I was able to identify the Gabe Kaplan lookalike as a non-Jew, but wouldn’t have been able to identify him as a Jew. My post was totally germane to the discussion as I have come around to the majority opinion in this thread that jewfros can’t be worn by non-Jews. I identified a stranger as a non-Jew by his lack of a circumcision scar. Therefore, no circumcision scar = no jewfro.
Now, if other posters come to the conclusion that it’s ludicrous to require ethnic knowledge of someone to identify his hairstyle, I cannot possibly help that. Moreover, the jewfro argument in this thread is a quite minor point in the larger question of “Jew-bros.” I thought my last two posts ended the jewfro argument on a very light-hearted note with the implicit point that I was done arguing that all white people can have a jewfro. Jewfros for Jews only; I’m totally on board.
It was certainly not my intent to “troll” anyone, nor do I think I have.
How am I included in this? The only thing I’ve advocated in this thread is for more inclusivity in hairstyles!
It was actually discussed back in 2009, also with reference to tomndebb. Here’s the thread, where I posted in favor of this. Personal views in a Mod Post. - About This Message Board - Straight Dope Message Board
I’m younger than 40 and jewfro is not limited to jewish people in my experience.
Your Google must work different than mine. I’ll blame Win 10 then.
Let’s let those who the “defamation” is directed at define what is defamatory, not google.
For instance,
I appreciate that your goal is to eliminate hate speech on the board. I applaud that. However, I think you’re finding it where it’s not, nor is it meant to be.
Is it really any different calling the man a Jewish baker vs a Jew baker? I think people see the word Jew and assume it’s being used as a verb, when in fact, it’s not (hopefully).
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. That is the crux of the issue. If you can’t see the difference, then maybe it’s just ignorance on your part.
OK, tom’s replied to me, this thread can be closed, I got my answer: While he doesn’t always feel compelled to judge racist/hate speech, apparently in some cases tom is just fine with judging what is and isn’t such.
Yes! Jewish baker is acceptable common English. Jew banker is used to offend or demean.
Your own cite suggests avoiding the use of “Jew” as a verb or adjective.
Let’s just say I’m familiar with your body of work.
Thanks for finding that, rowrrbazzle. I do know it’s been discussed but couldn’t find it. More important, I’m just still astonished that this commonplace, common sense policy has yet to be implemented, especially since one of the mods is so often accused of moderating people who disagree with him in the same thread. Even if this mod insists the instances are exaggerated, such a policy would at least stop the accusations.
(In fairness, I can think of two other mods who were often deficient in that area too, but since neither of them is still serving in this capacity, I’m pretty sure that tomndebb’s now flying solo. And again this is coming from someone who usually agrees with the guy.)
Actually you do get a say. It’s your language too.
You are overreacting, at this point.
I made no claim that you were engaged in hate speech and certainly made no claim that your statement was racist. The construction you used was one that is typical of insults directed at a group in the U.S. and I noted that it was inappropriate. It was not “hate speech,” by any definition, and you were in no danger of being Warned. You were simply advised that such language was inappropriate.
It would be no different than my suggesting that a poster refrain from using the word Hottentot, that drives you up the wall, even though it has no racist history in the U.S., not even picking up the tag “offensive” in dictionaries until after 2000, and I doubt that one person in 50 in the U.S. would even be aware that other people in other countries found it offensive.
Sorry I missed most of this. Kids, Halloween and such.
Just a few points I want to make.
I find it interesting that MrDibble - who upthread explicitly claims he’s OK with insulting people - is protesting that he was not being offensive or antisemetic with his use of ‘jewbros’. Perhaps he was tone-deaf. I’ll concede the possibility. Yet the thread in which this all started is enormously about a great of very young men being tone deaf about racial issues. I don’t believe those kids were being racist. I think they were responding to popular culture’s use of ‘thug’ for a subclass of musical artist. Tone deaf? Sure, what the hell. Evil? Not really. Dumb kids? Almost certainly.
Second, I also find it interesting that the entire focus here has been on only one of the two fraternities involved. Alpha Epsilon Pi is indeed a historically Jewish fraternity. Fine. But the other one, Pi Kappa Alpha, is not. However, led by MrDibble’s focus on the Jewish nature of one of the two fraternities, the entire discussion here has been about things that can be offensive to Jews. Wouldn’t have been better to focus on the fact that the party was sponsored by two Greek organizations rather than just the one that with a Jewish focus? I believe that bears thinking about by all involved.
I was raised Jewish - though I’m a terrible one. I don’t practice, nor do I raise my children in any faith whatsoever (except maybe Star Wars and geek culture in general) but I’ll offer than reading ‘jewbros’ made me twitch a bit. Like using ‘boy’ to a black man, using ‘jew-X’ to a jewish person is a construction best avoided. The minefield there is thick and one is all too likely to misstep.
I didn’t say you did make such a claim.
Then why was it modded?
If it wasn’t viewed as possibly racist, why was it inappropriate? It certainly wasn’t personal insult, and it was directed at an off-board group.
Is it just because a lot of people complained and it could be disruptive? Because that certainly doesn’t seem to be the standard applied to anti-Black and anti-Muslim speech.
I’m well aware of this, as I’ve “noted” in this thread, in the OP and other subsequent posts.
The analogy falls down as Hottentot is an actual slur whether Americans are ignorant of the fact or not, whereas “jewbro” is no such thing. Or are all the Jews who use it as a twitter hashtag or instagram tag just self hating?
I’m OK with insulting people for what they do, not what they are.
Are you questioning my honesty?
As the evidence in that thread shows, you’re not likely to be correct.
That’s because AEPi is the raison d’etre for the party. The point of the party was to advertise their introduction to the Greek community at SMU, as they’ve only been there a year. Also, maybe it’s silly to say this, but I expect way better from them than the already notoriously shitty PiKE.
Is all insult racist in your world view? The construction that uses Jew as an adjective is offensive. Regardless whether it is perceived as racist, religious bigotry, or some other form of insult, it is insulting. Are you OK with a poster using Hottentot directed against an off-board group?
using Jew as adjective is every bit as insulting as Hottentot. That you are unaware of this means that I did not regard your use as deliberately inflammatory and simply told you to not do it again.
I agree with Tom’s moderation here, and only wish he were consistent in moderating similarly eyebrow-raising language used to reference black people. MrDibble, it’s past time you acknowledge that your usage here is problematic. Here’s another usage note for you:
Edit: and here’s an interesting note that this pejorative usage is at least a century old. It’s Google Books, so I can’t quote it, but it’s interesting.
I agree with both statements.