And I disagree. I don’t keep a spreadsheet of people’s data nor do I believe in treating different groups differently. You folks and your bigotry aren’t intellectually consistent.
Okay, grandma.
What’s not intellectually consistent is your arbitrary ignoring of issues of history and custom only when it suits you.
Is that you, John Wayne Gunnery Sgt. Hartman?
“There is no racial bigotry here. I do not look down on niggers, kikes, wops, or greasers. Here you are all equally worthless.”
The problem isn’t your belief in not treating different groups differently, the problem is how you think groups that do things you disagree with should be treated.
Don’t care. I don’t trust the judgement of folks who are consistently trying to apply bigoted double standards because it makes them feel warm and fuzzy.
You don’t even have the sense to realize that calling me grandma implies that there is something wrong with being old and/or female. That’s double bigoted. Yet you have internalized misogyny and ageism so deeply that you can’t recognize it.
By that logic, your calling MrDibble “son” implies that there’s something wrong with being young and/or male.
Honestly, octopus, you can’t even manage to be intellectually consistent in your attempts to criticize other people for allegedly being inconsistent.
On a deeper level, it’s just plain nonsensical to think that “not treating different groups differently” is either practically possible or morally devoid of bigotry. All language use, particularly modes of address, is steeped in historical particularity, and what’s an insulting address to or from a member of one group is often not viewed as insulting to or from someone in another group. Recognizing that is just acknowledging reality.
Claiming to “not treat different groups differently” is just a woke-sounding excuse for a lazy and entitled policy of ignoring inconvenient truths about how different groups historically and persistently are treated differently. You’re not being principled or egalitarian, you’re just sulking because you might have to put in a little effort to avoid inadvertently coming across as a racist asshole.
Don’t care. If women are called cunts and bitches on this forum I’m going call who I want when I want son. Your connotation of a word is not mine and I have no compulsion to use or interpret language according to your manipulative standards.
Like I said way back in post #501, “I’m not claiming that I’m allowed to tell you what you can and can’t say to another poster, especially not in the Pit”. But you’re likewise not allowed to demand that other posters have to ignore recognized meanings and established connotations of the words that you use just because you can’t be bothered to pay attention to them.
Like it or not, in the English language a white man calling a black man “son” comes across as racist and demeaning in ways that calling another white man “son” does not. That was pointed out to you at least as far back as post #488.
You could have just let it go then, and that would have been that. But nope, you had to keep doubling down on it and picking new fights about it, and then throwing Don’t care! I’m gonna say it if I want to and you can’t stop me, nyah nyah nyah! toddler temper tantrums about it when other posters expressed disgust at the racist implications of it.
Throwing a tantrum about your “right” to use racist-sounding language without intending it to sound racist is kind of like insisting on your “right” to stamp on your phone without intending it to break. In both cases, the consequences for your attempts at communication are going to be determined more by what you actually did than by your wilfully obtuse intentions.
Again, I disagree with your interpretation. Your racist double standards are your problem. I’ve made it clear in practically every thread that I don’t believe dealing with bigotry is to be bigoted. Now, of course, that is not the method that the dems/left use in their exploitation of group identity, oppression, and perpetual victimhood. However, that is not my problem.
Really, you folks on the left think the so-called black man is so inept they can’t get an ID and so fragile that they can’t be treated as an equal. Sad!
-
So now you’re channeling Donald Trump tweets. Wow, a new low.
-
You’re on record now. You want to be able to use racist terms and language. Fine fill your boots. Type what you want. However, when someone calls you a racist asshole for using racist asshole terminology, you cannot now say “oh, I had no idea”. We now know you are doing it deliberately.
I disagree that it’s racist. I’m aware you dishonest folks use rhetoric to the contrary. I don’t believe you really mean it as the cognitive dissonance to be bigoted to fight bigotry is too large for even the brain of the hive. What you folks want to do is control language in order to eliminate meaningful debate or disagreement. I oppose that at a fundamental level.
ISTM that you’re the one trying to “control language” here by denying the effects of historical realities on the perception of language.
Liberals say “There is a long racist history of white men calling adult black men by patronizing diminutive epithets like ‘son’ and ‘boy’ to emphasize their social inferiority. So when white men nowadays call a black man ‘son’ it carries echoes of that racist practice even when the speakers don’t intend any racism.”
octopus says “Don’t care! I disagree! Recognizing the existence of bigotry is bigoted! Double standard! I’ll call anybody anything I want! I don’t admit the existence of unintended connotations!”
It’s your Humpty-Dumpty attitude of “words mean just what I choose them to mean, and if I wasn’t explicitly trying to be racist then there can’t be anything racist about my language, so there!” that’s an attempt (and ultimately a futile attempt) to “control language”.
Describing how historical patterns of language use affect our contemporary perceptions of language use is an attempt to be honest about language, not to “control” it.
Please, tell us exactly what meaningful debate or disagreement requires you to call a Black man boy?
I’m not the Humpty Dumpty around here. The left is not an honest group when it comes to bigotry or language.
It’s the pit. If I want to call someone son, daughter, or child of unknown gender I will. If I want to call criminals in other forums thug I will. I don’t need your permission. Your hangups over language are yours. I don’t know what Color you Are or what Gender you are nor do I caRe. If I find certain language useful I’ll use it. If I find certain language ridiculous I’ll ridicule it.
Yes, because boy and thug won’t get you banned but the word everyone knows they are being substituted for would.
Are you stupid? If someone is a violent criminal then thug is perfectly appropriate. Hell, Bill Laimbeer wasn’t a criminal but he was a thug on the court. Oh Noes! The dog whistles!11!
When this board isn’t crusading against Ginger and Mary-Ann threads it’s on quixotic quests to disingenuously police the language of everyone.
‘Sometimes it means an actual violent criminal, sometimes it don’t!
Regards,
octy’
Furthermore, I don’t think some of you house bound eggheads actually know how language is really used in certain circles. It’s like you read some academic thesis posted by somebody on the historical meaning of something someone said and then extrapolated it to everyone in every situation. You silly fools would probably have corrected my black neighbors who used the word colored to describe themselves and other black folk.
Now, of course, being the sensible fellow that I am I didn’t give them the woke memo of contemporaneously used language to let them know that they were either ignorantly anachronistic or racist for using such intrinsically hurtful language. Because in the real world people don’t typically use language the way you clowns think.
Uh-huh, you can call somebody else any term you want and it’s not racist or bigoted at all, but if somebody calls you “grandma” then suddently waaaaahh that’s so ageist and misogynist!
It’s you who are splashing the double standards all over the place here, octopus. Your arbitrary insistence on being able to say any bigoted-sounding thing you want without being criticized for bigotry, while at the same time accusing everybody else of bigotry every time they mention the issue, makes meaningful rational discussion with you impossible.
This from the guy who was explicitly told back in post #488, by the black man he had sneeringly called “son”, that his language use made him come across as a “racist” “asshole”, and has spent the remaining four hundred posts of this thread throwing an intermittent tantrum about it.
I’m not perfect in my antiracism but at least I’m capable of listening when a member of “certain circles” (cute expression, btw) explicitly tells me how my language use sounds to them.
The Right is extremely honest when it comes to bigotry or language. They say exactly what they think.