DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site

General => Political and Religious Forum (aka the echo chamber) => Topic started by: KevShmev on August 02, 2013, 12:48:39 PM

Title: The n-word and its use
Post by: KevShmev on August 02, 2013, 12:48:39 PM
I saw a lot of talk about how appropriate it is for blacks to be using the n-word when the whole Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case was hot, and now with the Riley Cooper controversy in Philadelphia, there is a lot of talk again about how appropriate it is for blacks to be using the word.  The argument by many is that, if it is so offensive (which it most certainly IS), then why do blacks call each other that?  I have never quite gotten that.  And I don't think changing the end of the word from -er to -a makes much of a difference either. 

I am not saying it is right, but I think a lot of people have been desensitized to the word, thinking it is okay because the word is commonplace in rap music, certain types of movies, etc.  But you ask me, I don't think anyone should be saying the word, even Samuel Jackson, who seems to be the one guy who can make saying it sound funny (see: Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown).  It is a vile word, used to dehumanize blacks, regardless of who says it.

Thoughts?
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: rumborak on August 02, 2013, 01:04:45 PM
I would say that I totally understand why they chose to call each other that. It's a tried-and-true way of emboldening a subdued group by taking away one of the main weapons of their opponents, and by using it yourself, neutralizing it. Happened the same with the "queers" who started using the term that was formerly used by gay haters.

That said, I think the use of the n-word has run its course and at this point harms them more than it helps them. It actively sets them apart from the rest of the population, thus hindering integration. If you look at other immigrant cultures (e.g. Chinese), they have sailed straight past black people in terms of status at this point. Obviously those cultures are hard to compare to each other because they had different histories, but I can't help but think that the black community holds itself back to a good amount.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 02, 2013, 01:08:49 PM
It is a vile word, used to dehumanize blacks, regardless of who says it.

Thoughts?

^^^This.

I've not yet heard a compelling reason why it's "okay" to EVER say.  It is profanity, as far as I'm concerned.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: kirksnosehair on August 02, 2013, 01:59:07 PM
Some pretty good thoughts on this topic from this guy who is someone that one of my clients interviewed for one of his books:
https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/number-40-fall-2011/feature/straight-talk-about-n-word (https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/number-40-fall-2011/feature/straight-talk-about-n-word)


My mom is from the Cape Verde islands (e.g. she's African American) and we've talked about this before.  Her generation has a very strong dislike of the word and she hates that a lot of younger generation blacks use it among themselves. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on August 02, 2013, 02:35:45 PM
I would say that I totally understand why they chose to call each other that. It's a tried-and-true way of emboldening a subdued group by taking away one of the main weapons of their opponents, and by using it yourself, neutralizing it. Happened the same with the "queers" who started using the term that was formerly used by gay haters.

That said, I think the use of the n-word has run its course and at this point harms them more than it helps them. It actively sets them apart from the rest of the population, thus hindering integration. If you look at other immigrant cultures (e.g. Chinese), they have sailed straight past black people in terms of status at this point. Obviously those cultures are hard to compare to each other because they had different histories, but I can't help but think that the black community holds itself back to a good amount.

Great post.

That being said, I'm somewhat with Kev about the inconstency.  I get why things are the way they are.  But as you pointed out, rumborak, it creates other problems. 

At the same time, I think that now, in this day and age, it's use is way overblown.  I mean, the problem with the word is its historical context, right?  It was an intentionally-bastardized version of negro to eventually be used as an insult and a slur.  In that context, of course it is a vile term that shouldn't be used.  But by the same token, I feel that we overreact to it.  For example:  We pretty much have to have a forum rule that prevents use of it at all, and Kev wisely chose to follow that rule in his thread title and instead substitute the euphemism "the n-word" in his thread title.  I weep for a society that we so overreact that we can't use common sense.  If Kev had actually used the term in the thread title rather than "the n-word," that should not be a problem.  It should be obvious that he is not approving of the term or that he is not using it to disparage anybody or any race of people.  But yet, we must bow to the paranoia and be paranoid ourselves lest someone be offended.  Sorry, but I just feel that is dumb.  Again, I'm not advocating for its use, and I'm not saying it isn't a "big deal."  It is.  And I acknowledge that as someone who is not of African descent, I will never really understand what it is to have that term used on the same level as someone with that background.  I get it.  It's just the paranoia that bothers me. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: GuineaPig on August 02, 2013, 03:09:42 PM
Context is everything.  Words are not inherent degrading or spiteful or cruel.  The way they are used and the intent behind them is what matters.

It's honestly a little baffling to see that people cannot differentiate "nigger" between how it is used among friends and as it is used as a slur.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 02, 2013, 04:03:12 PM
I don't think it's baffling at all.  I am older than you, though.  :jingleboy:

One thing's for sure -- it should not be the purview of anyone other than the hearer to determine what is hurtful to him/her or not.

Just coz someone "doesn't *mean*" a slur doesn't mean it won't be taken as such.  There isn't a whole lot of reason to call anyone anything other than their name, in my opinion.  Even amongst friends.  Then, I don't have any friends that would use some sort of slur in reference to me, nor I to them.

 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: orcus116 on August 02, 2013, 04:32:56 PM
Context is everything.  Words are not inherent degrading or spiteful or cruel.  The way they are used and the intent behind them is what matters.

It's honestly a little baffling to see that people cannot differentiate "nigger" between how it is used among friends and as it is used as a slur.

Pretty much this. I get more amusement out of how it is used in culture than anything.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 02, 2013, 05:12:21 PM
I think it's because quite a few people don't find the word amusing at all.    :yeahright
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: AngelBack on August 02, 2013, 07:23:54 PM
This may come off as insensitive or uninformed, but it occurs to me that people or groups that elevate the importance or severity of such language are in effect empowering those that would use it to insult them.  I am white and could not care less what racial slurs or stereotypes might be used against me.  Granted my history and that of my ancestors does not include a time when we were discriminated against purely on race.  However, I have 4 kids and they come to me from time to time when someone has said something ugly to them.  I ask them, "Is it true?  If not, why let it bother you?  You know who you are".  I think if everyone ignored language like this, or let it roll off their back, it would do a lot more to eliminate it than the current atmosphere where if you call someone the N-word, they feel justified in ANY level of retaliation and political correctness and "hate crime" legislation has only served to give tacit approval to such an attitude. 

Now I will go hide.....
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 02, 2013, 07:42:59 PM
This may come off as insensitive or uninformed, but it occurs to me that people or groups that elevate the importance or severity of such language are in effect empowering those that would use it to insult them.  I am white and could not care less what racial slurs or stereotypes might be used against me.  Granted my history and that of my ancestors does not include a time when we were discriminated against purely on race.  However, I have 4 kids and they come to me from time to time when someone has said something ugly to them.  I ask them, "Is it true?  If not, why let it bother you?  You know who you are".  I think if everyone ignored language like this, or let it roll off their back, it would do a lot more to eliminate it than the current atmosphere where if you call someone the N-word, they feel justified in ANY level of retaliation and political correctness and "hate crime" legislation has only served to give tacit approval to such an attitude. 

Now I will go hide.....

I feel much the same.  However,  as words are the main things we use for communication, I believe it is disingenuous to claim they have little meaning.  Or can't be used to hurt others.  The very fact that your kids took issue at ugly words rather proves the point.

Now we do teach about "sticks & stones" and names not hurting but if we're honest, we know that it does hurt.  That's why we're encouraged to get over it.  And why there is such a thing as verbal abuse.

I'm pretty good at letting things roll off me, coz I had parents like you that instilled positive self worth and knowing who I am.  But I'd be lying if I said it wouldn't bother or hurt me to be cussed out.  Or called a racial slur.  And let's not forget that there is often ill intent behind ugly words.

There is no need for such language, IMO.  Since people *know* it can hurt, why use it?  To me, it's not so much being politicalky correct as being respectful of others.  God knows there is precious little respect out there...
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Frank on August 03, 2013, 07:58:57 AM
If Kev had actually used the term in the thread title rather than "the n-word," that should not be a problem.  It should be obvious that he is not approving of the term or that he is not using it to disparage anybody or any race of people.  But yet, we must bow to the paranoia and be paranoid ourselves lest someone be offended.  Sorry, but I just feel that is dumb.  Again, I'm not advocating for its use, and I'm not saying it isn't a "big deal." . . . It's just the paranoia that bothers me.

I absolutely agree and I understand your standpoint as the administrator of a forum like this and the actions you must take regarding this issue (if you find issue with the fact that I'm going to be using these words in my post I understand that too, ha ha!). The "context matters" argument is also of critical importance to me, in the same vein as George Carlin talking about it or the Louis C.K. episode where he dissects the word "faggot". I'm a student of linguistics, although I study subfields completely different than this (neurolinguistics and linguistic anthropology) so in this particular discussion I don't have much insight to add. It does mean that I find issues like this particularly fascinating/concerning.

I remember when I was in high school, not a particularly long time ago, when some of my classmates were throwing around this term "nigg-nogg" derived from "nigger". It was all white kids doing this, and my school was roughly fifty-fifty between white people and black people. At the same time, certain black people called each other "nigger" and I have no doubt that if any of the white people used it some of them would have gotten their asses kicked. So they turned to that strange derivation. I remember just feeling that it was a bizarre situation. They also used "nigglet" now that I think about it. Paranoia and complex social situations created that environment. I remember feeling disgusted with the word derivations by the white people and disgusted by the use of the actual word by the black people. It wasn't necessarily the words that disgusted me - words are just words - but the social meaning and context they were used in. And in that front I don't have any solution to offer.

What I do think is that we need to stop feeling paranoid and stop giving words so much power. I detest PC language - let me give an example. I'm deaf in one ear and have a severe impairment in the other. All my life I grew up calling myself "hearing impaired". I never had a problem with it. It accurately describes my condition. But suddenly in the last few years this new movement, especially online, has sprung up - suddenly people think words like "hearing impaired" and "disabled" are discriminatory and we have to use words like "differently abled" instead. To me, that's just trying to hide and the term "differently abled" is actually unconscionable as it ignores the actual struggles of disabled people like me. Movements like this spring up because of the paranoia people hold toward words, and when they result in things like this it creates a less honest environment where it's harder to discern what the actual problems are and how to address them. It becomes an unhealthy and unproductive distraction.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: rumborak on August 03, 2013, 08:45:51 AM
"Differently abled" is a ludicrous term, honestly. The X-Men are differently abled.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: BlobVanDam on August 03, 2013, 08:55:44 AM
"Differently abled" is a ludicrous term, honestly. The X-Men are differently abled.

We're only one step away from "handi-capable" being the officially accepted term. How hyper-sensitive must society be for "hearing impaired" to offend anyone? As you said Frank, it accurately describes the condition, and it's perfectly neutral.
"Differently abled" offends me more. :lol
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Zook on August 03, 2013, 09:05:00 AM
Back in my senior year of high school, during my English class one day we had a substitute, and this white kid who was kind of weird just yells out really loud "nigger nigger nigger!", and the substitute, who was also white busted out laughing. The end.


Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: antigoon on August 03, 2013, 06:43:39 PM
Context is everything.  Words are not inherent degrading or spiteful or cruel.  The way they are used and the intent behind them is what matters.

It's honestly a little baffling to see that people cannot differentiate "nigger" between how it is used among friends and as it is used as a slur.

I agree with this. Additionally, I don't think it's really my business whether black people use the word. I only wish that "the n-word" ceased to be a thing among adults.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Ben_Jamin on August 05, 2013, 08:52:09 AM
It is pretty weird that the saying "sticks and stones" has completely been ignored.

It is funny that they use the word, but then they did actually reverse the meaning to cancel out the derogatory term. I dont mind what people call me, I'm Native American and people think we are extinct still.  I ain't got time to worry about a word.

Words never hurt, unless you take it to heart...I actually have a good sense of humor, and if I were a little person I would love to be called midget or better yet,  if I was irish, leprachaun.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 05, 2013, 10:05:05 AM
It's bad if those "names" open the way for abuse.  If there is an automatic bad thought in the minds of the users/hearers that may lead to evil actions.

That is where care must be taken.  Since one can never tell what's on the mind of a speaker or a hearer, IMO it's best to stick to the given name of an individual or if that's not known, "Excuse me, sir/ma'am".  Avoids offense.     :|
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: kirksnosehair on August 05, 2013, 12:45:32 PM
Quote from: bosk1
But by the same token, I feel that we overreact to it.  For example:  We pretty much have to have a forum rule that prevents use of it at all, and Kev wisely chose to follow that rule in his thread title and instead substitute the euphemism "the n-word" in his thread title.  I weep for a society that we so overreact that we can't use common sense.  If Kev had actually used the term in the thread title rather than "the n-word," that should not be a problem.  It should be obvious that he is not approving of the term or that he is not using it to disparage anybody or any race of people.  But yet, we must bow to the paranoia and be paranoid ourselves lest someone be offended.  Sorry, but I just feel that is dumb.

THISTHISTHISTHISTHISTHISTHIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 05, 2013, 12:49:01 PM
I, for one, would feel sad if the entire word were spelled out in the title.

It's a disgusting racial slur and just because it doesn't hurt you doesn't mean it doesn't hurt others.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: KevShmev on August 05, 2013, 01:19:47 PM
I never even considered spelling out the word in the threat title.  When you say, "n-word," people know what you mean, and that was good enough for me.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 05, 2013, 01:20:51 PM
I never even considered spelling out the word in the threat title.  When you say, "n-word," people know what you mean, and that was good enough for me.


 :tup
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: orcus116 on August 05, 2013, 06:55:16 PM
I never even considered spelling out the word in the threat title.  When you say, "n-word," people know what you mean, and that was good enough for me.

I dunno, I think Louis CK put it best:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnKLxDlFS5c

NSFW, although I've never seen a workplace that allows Youtube.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Ħ on August 05, 2013, 07:28:19 PM
Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF1NUposXVQ
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 05, 2013, 10:02:46 PM
I never even considered spelling out the word in the threat title.  When you say, "n-word," people know what you mean, and that was good enough for me.

I dunno, I think Louis CK put it best:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnKLxDlFS5c

NSFW, although I've never seen a workplace that allows Youtube.

Every place I've ever worked allows YouTube.    :biggrin:

Although seriously,  I don't see a reason to use "the n word" or the spelled out/pronounced version.   It is nothing but bad, nasty and offensive sounding.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Frank on August 06, 2013, 10:04:43 AM
I understand and respect your opinion and where it comes from, but I respectfully disagree with you. It's just a word. It's not even an onomatopoeia of some sort where the word is trying to imitate something in real life. It's absolutely arbitrary. We don't call a bag a bag because something about it makes us think of the sounds that make up the word. It's mochila in Spanish and 鞄 (kaban) in Japanese and different words in all other languages (excluding borrowing and other things that make language a hell of a lot messier than many think).

The arbitrariness is just one factor in how I feel. Like I've iterated before, being afraid of words is, in my opinion, only going to cloud the solutions to the situations rather than help anybody. You know what's REALLY nasty and offensive? Racism. And while I don't see the problem of racism ever truly being solved, I can damn near guarantee you that within 500 to 1000 years the word "nigger" will either be completely antiquated or its meaning will change entirely, because that's just how language works.

Also, I know I just used the word "nigger" to illustrate an intellectual point. Are you against that, as well? If you are, then I'm sad to say that I would absolutely disagree with you, because that contributes to an atmosphere of fear that doesn't even allow us to easily TALK about the problem, much less try to find a solution to the more sinister underlying problems in society that sometimes emerge with the use of the word. Also, if I had used "n-word" in the previous paragraph, as Louis C.K. mentioned, it's just, in my opinion, a fairly silly way of trying to get around the "problem". I see no reason why I can't say "nigger" in contexts like this. I speak English, and I want to embrace this awesome language - and I will not have my language restricted when I know my intentions are clean.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 06, 2013, 10:20:56 AM
I find it curious how using this one, derogatory, never-positive, definitely NOT "awesome" word seems to be the only way people can "embrace" the language and throw off restrictions.  How not using it somehow makes a person "afraid of words".   :|

Why is someone's life experience lessened because people would prefer not to have derogatory speech uttered around them?  Or used to refer to them?  Are people so excited to use other ethnic slurs?  For some reason, "nigger" is the only word people want to say.   :tdwn

You may know your intentions are clean.  However, the persons you are referring to or who may be within earshot may *not* know that.  You use the word "respect" in your post but you are showing little respect to others if you don't seem to care how your words may affect them.  Such words are very useful in expressing racist thoughts and attitudes...or ignorance; no two ways about it.  That is what is perceived when the word "nigger" is used.

Now.  I am speaking from a place of never having that word used against me, personally.  However, I do know that it offends others (people whom I love dearly) and the connotations are anything but respectful -- I don't care who uses it or "owns" it.  Out of respect for others, and indeed myself, I would easily refrain from using such a word or any other words that I realize are designed to hurt or denigrate other people.

Obviously, some here do not see it that way.  That's cool.  I'm just here to let you know that there are many people out here who may not appreciate your way of embracing the language.  Try a Word-A-Day Calendar if you want to expand your vocabulary.    :\
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Frank on August 06, 2013, 10:47:54 AM
In regard to your first sentence, the Louis C.K. joke in the video about the coffee barista is a perfect example of how to use the word in a funny context. I disagree on the word being "never-positive". Of course many racist pricks use the word in an awful, disgusting context. But Louis C.K. used the word and turned it into a joke. Whether or not it's funny is more subjective, but it can't reasonably be argued that Louis C.K. was trying to use the word in a negative way. Hell, he's a comedian; his livelihood depends on using words in positive ways to make people laugh.

By the way, the word I just used, "hell", in that context is HORRIBLY offensive to many people. For these people, "hell" should either never be said at all or should be restricted to talking only about the place in religious connotations, and even then with appropriate hints of fear and hatred. But I refuse to allow those people to control how I use the word hell, because it's a colorful, useful word to expand on my points (more accurately, to give my posts a tinge of a personality I want to portray myself as) and it hurts nobody in the context of my value system. Of course that value system changes depending on who you are, but both you and I, I'm sure, ignore other value systems in almost all of our day to day life. I shave my face because I like doing it and I think I look better that way. But many people find the shaving of facial hair an abomination and they are seriously offended. This may sound harsh, but I'm not hurting anybody and it's my body, and I don't care if they're offended or not. I'm sorry, I just don't. It's their problem, not mine. It's the same reason why I'm disgusted with homophobes who want people to live their lives exactly as THEY want to prescribe them. To again cite Louis C.K.:

Quote from: Louis
It doesn't have any effect on your life. What do you care?! People try to talk about it like it's a social issue. Like when you see someone stand up on a talk show and say, "How am I supposed to explain to my children that two men are getting married? . . .  I dunno. It's your shitty kid. You fuckin' tell 'em. Why is that anyone else's problem? Two guys are in LOVE and they can't get married because you don't want to talk to your ugly child for five fuckin' minutes?

Keep in mind, I almost never use the damn word to begin with ("damn", another one that WILL piss people off and I'll still use it). It has almost no utility except in a joke context or to talk about it in a serious fashion like we're doing now. You're right about other people who may not know my intentions are clean, which is another reason I'm less inclined to use it because I don't feel like pissing people off for no good reason and many times it's not worth it to take a gamble on whether somebody will be offended or not. But sometimes I do so only out of practical utility in my life and not because I legitimately respect (or to put it better, agree with) other people's views on the subject.

Going on that thought, it's not that I'm not showing respect to other PEOPLE, it's that I'm not showing respect to (or again to put it better, agree with) the VIEWPOINTS and VALUES of other people. Many people have a problem separating those two. I like to believe that I really don't. I have an ideal that I would like to live in a harmonious world where people with different value systems get along, and I strive for that in compromising my own values temporarily in a context in which if I do so greater harmony will result, but the reality is that people will always be offended at something. That's not to say we should give up, but it's just a reality we need to recognize if we want to address the problems of our world and societies.

I love English. I think it's a really, really cool language with a fascinating history. Again, I study linguistics (although I do think Japanese is a little bit cooler :lol). A word-a-day calender will never give me the word "nigger", and there are contexts, like in this discussion and the Louis C.K. joke in the video, where the word can be use in a "positive" context to make communication clearer. And just to be clear, appreciating a language is not synonymous with expanding one's lexicon just for the sake of doing so. I have absolutely no interest in that.

I want to again reiterate I completely understand where you're coming from and I agree with the feelings that inspire your opinions. And I'm sorry if my continued use of the word offends you - I truly am. But we're having the discussion about the word, and not saying it potentially makes things murkier which is never appreciated. And I don't want to say "n-word" because it makes it sound like I'm scared or the word or hiding from it. I'm not. It's just a word.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 06, 2013, 11:14:13 AM
So basically you're saying that because you don't see where someone should be offended by your "just words", they should get over it rather than you stepping back and choosing other words to express yourself.   :|

Personally, I don't use swear words at all.  I don't think using those words add anything to my personality that would be attractive.  I have many other words that allow me to express myself just fine.  And I don't find profanity inherently "funny".  But I certainly don't campaign against it; people will speak how they will (and I am permitted to draw my own conclusions about their character...  :P ).  But we're talking about a particular profanity in this thread so that's why I'm on this particular kick.

Quote
it's not that I'm not showing respect to other PEOPLE, it's that I'm not showing respect to (or again to put it better, agree with) the VIEWPOINTS and VALUES of other people.

I honestly don't understand this bit.  How can you claim to be showing respect to people but having no respect to their viewpoints or values?  You don't care what may offend or hurt another person?  There is no way to have this "harmonious" living experience if you don't respect others' viewpoints.

Of course, you will do what you want because your rights and freedoms trump others' more delicate sensibilities.  All I'm doing is letting you know that everyone is not amused.  Maybe that's just my problem -- and I'm fine with that; I've never required consensus to justify how I feel about something.  I do know that it is possible to get thru life without ever referring to someone with a derogatory profanity and anyone who says differently, I believe is severely limited.




And I still don't see where people are clamoring for permission to use the beauty and expressiveness of other ethnic slurs in the English language.   :|
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Frank on August 06, 2013, 01:12:40 PM
Quote
So basically you're saying that because you don't see where someone should be offended by your "just words", they should get over it rather than you stepping back and choosing other words to express yourself.  :|

Yes and no.

The "no" part: If you recall, I said that I occasionally "compromis[e] my own values temporarily in a context in which if I do so greater harmony will result". I don't like doing it, but I do it when I think the situation calls for it. Trust me, I understand that people hold different value systems that differ from me, and if I feel like it will prevent a problem I will step back. And this doesn't just apply for swearing or offensive words, by the way. This applies to every aspect of my interaction with people.

The "yes" part: That being said, I gave the examples of "hell", "damn", and shaving body hair to effectively say, yes, there are situations where you and I both (if you don't shave just substitute in something else - like I said it WILL offend SOMEBODY or SOME group) violate the very seriously held principles of other people because there comes a point where we don't consider it worth it to adjust our lifestyles or habits to appease value systems that we just don't take part in.

It's admittedly a judging game, and I'm not always going to be perfect. My basic heuristic for the judgment call:

Does my avoiding a particular action prevent an unnecessary and damaging, inter-personally as well as intra-personally, emotional reaction from a person?
Is this person a "good person"? (A whole different discussion, but to simplify things let's just say if I were in front of, I don't know, Hitler, and I was physically safe, I wouldn't any problem offending him)
Is this an issue I'm willing to compromise on?

Among other less conscious questions, if the answer to all of those question is "yes", then I will refrain myself. I understand that we could have a debate about each of these questions, and I welcome that. :)

Quote
Personally, I don't use swear words at all.  I don't think using those words add anything to my personality that would be attractive.

Sure, I understand that. Whatever floats your boat. I don't think swear words are intolerantly funny either, and I don't use them to try to be funny. I use them to reflect the speaking style I feel most comfortable with and the speaking style that I feel like I express both my points and my personality the best.

Quote
How can you claim to be showing respect to people but having no respect to their viewpoints or values?

Let me put it this way: I don't like organized religion, as is probably evident from my previous posts on this forum. But this doesn't mean I don't like people who adhere to organized religions. One of my best friends is Catholic, and I especially have problems with the Catholic Church (if only because I'm more familiar with it). I still love her and I am very loyal to her, and I indeed respect her tremendously, but I have no respect for some of her Catholic values. It has absolutely nothing to do with HER - I disagree with those values no matter who holds them. In this specific regard it's very impersonal. You might think this sounds harsh, but I'm wording this in the most up-front and honest way possible. I'm not sugarcoating this at all. To me, it just seems inherent that we can respect people while, at the same time, disagreeing with (and/or disrespecting) certain opinions and values they hold. Many people on this forum are Catholic or Christian, and I hold no disrespect toward them because they subscribe to a religion and I don't. If I did judge people solely on that, THAT in and of itself would be worthy of disrespect, in my opinion. People are multi-faceted. I can disagree with and disrespect the origins of one opinion of somebody while respecting a different opinion of that same person while respect some aspect of their personality while disagreeing with some other aspect of their personality. The way that last sentence is a bit convoluted reflects my point that this is a complicated topic of how we (or I) judge and respect other people. It's never an all-or-one thing.

Quote
You don't care what may offend or hurt another person?  There is no way to have this "harmonious" living experience if you don't respect others' viewpoints. Of course, you will do what you want because your rights and freedoms trump others' more delicate sensibilities.

See my response to the first quote above. Of course I care and I try to avoid offending or hurting people when possible.

And by the way, because of the value system I explained in my response to the third quote, there ABSOLUTELY can be a harmonious living experience even without respecting others' viewpoints. The key is instead to respect the RIGHT of people to hold different viewpoints.

...again, if we want to blow this up to all of society it becomes more nuanced, and ultimately societies need to decide on certain axioms by which to conduct themselves, but I digress.

Quote
I've never required consensus to justify how I feel about something.

You and I both. :tup The very opinions I'm expressing in this post aren't particularly popular with many people.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 06, 2013, 01:16:55 PM
Third time, though:

Quote
And I still don't see where people are clamoring for permission to use the beauty and expressiveness of other ethnic slurs in the English language.

Anyone???
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Frank on August 06, 2013, 01:24:08 PM
I didn't respond to that part because I didn't see it come up before and it didn't strike me as particularly relevant. Nobody in this thread, as far as I'm aware, has claimed that ethnic slurs are beautiful and/or expressive. I certainly haven't. All I'm really arguing is for my right to use such words in a non-racist context (everything else in my posts has to do with side-issues of respect and understanding that arise from it). That's all.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 06, 2013, 01:46:51 PM
I didn't respond to that part because I didn't see it come up before and it didn't strike me as particularly relevant. Nobody in this thread, as far as I'm aware, has claimed that ethnic slurs are beautiful and/or expressive. I certainly haven't.

I guess I inferred that from this statement below of yours, using the word helps you embrace awesomeness:

Quote
I see no reason why I can't say "nigger" in contexts like this. I speak English, and I want to embrace this awesome language - and I will not have my language restricted when I know my intentions are clean.


Quote
All I'm really arguing is for my right to use such words in a non-racist context (everything else in my posts has to do with side-issues of respect and understanding that arise from it). That's all.

I suppose I don't see how on earth that is possible (from anyone), but I'm old-fashioned that way.  :(

I do stand by my observation that absolutely no one seems to be clamoring for the "right" to use any other ethnic slur or mean name to refer to someone, though.  Only black people should just "take" it -- from other blacks and everyone else.  :(  It is truly sad.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Frank on August 06, 2013, 02:00:17 PM
Ha ha, I get excited about language and defensive about language, because it IS awesome. My apologies if it seemed like I was saying something else. I'm very emotional and excited when it comes to things I love and am fascinated with.

We'll just have to disagree on the racist context part. Language is dynamic and constantly shifting - I can promise you that. Language is NEVER set on stone. It's a crucial element of what makes language what it is in the first place. "Faggot" used to refer to a bundle of sticks, "gay" used to mean happy, etc. And their meanings can and probably will change again - just give it enough time. Not to mention I gave the example of Louis C.K. in that video earlier telling a joke where the word "nigger" is the punchline and yet it has essentially nothing to do with a black person (admittedly part of the humor comes precisely from that last point, f you want to be very specific about it).

Quote
I do stand by my observation that absolutely no one seems to be clamoring for the "right" to use any other ethnic slur or mean name to refer to someone, though.

I assume you live in the USA like me. Consider the time period we're living in and our recent history in the last fifty years or so. Consider the population living here. In other societies and in other times this would be different. I know it's different in Japan and east Asia where the word "racism" is moreso applied to the cycle between Chinese, Korean, and Japanese people. And again, it WILL be different. I essentially guarantee you this. People will be having the same basic debate we're having, just with something else that would sound meaningless to us, like "terrank" or something. That's not a word to us. But it might be to people 200 years from now in a society where, I don't, Icelandic people are dominant and Asian people are the victims of racism with "terrank" being as awful as "nigger" can be in a brutal racist context. Despite the different circumstances, the same basic points behind the debate will be the same.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that talking about specific words isn't necessarily the main point at hand. It just HAPPENS to be "nigger", and my two main points are that 1) I should have the right to say it in a non-racist context and 2) avoiding the word may actually obscure potential solutions to a more sinister problem. 2) is far more importantly socially speaking than 1) is, so I'm agree I agree with 2) as well otherwise I would sound very selfish, if I don't already! But I would argue I should be able to use "Jap" if I'm talking about racism in America in a WWII context, I should be able to use the word "gook" if I'm talking about racism against Hmong people in the context of a movie like "Grant Torino", etc.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 06, 2013, 02:13:44 PM
Trust me, I know ALL about this country's history regarding people the majority consider "other" (Natives, Blacks, Japanese - heck, Irish, Italian, Jewish)...it is inexcusable.  My parents were born in 1936 and 1940 respectively...in The South.  I KNOW the ugliness they experienced and can attest to, first hand.

I don't see how avoiding the use of ethnic slurs would "obscure potential solutions" to racism/prejudice (seems like a valid first step, to me), but...

Okay.   :|

Use any word when/however you see fit; you seem to be "down" like that.  It will not matter about its disgusting, vile history or how it sickens others just to see it in print, let alone hear it.  Others will eventually evolve to your state of enlightenment.

It's a pity you cannot find other words to describe people, even in historical context.  I can only fathom referencing such slurs prefaced with: "Yes, ignorant, hateful people used *slur* to describe and oppress  *ethnic group* back in the day, but fortunately, we are past using such hurtful, divisive language today." 

Aside from that, IMO there is *no* place in comedy, conversation, entertainment or amongst "friends" where it is appropriate.  At least not in my presence or the presence of anyone I love.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Frank on August 06, 2013, 02:48:51 PM
When it comes to "obscuring potential solutions", as I claimed, I can speak with more confidence if I referenced my first post about the difference between "hearing impaired"/"disabled" and "differently abled". The term "differently abled" implies something very different from "disabled", and it covers up and obscures original meaning. I could talk about this specific issue for hours. It is logical that the same type of obscuring PC style language could be applied to ethnic slurs as well.

Quote
Use any word when/however you see fit; you seem to be "down" like that.  It will not matter about its disgusting, vile history or how it sickens others just to see it in print, let alone hear it.  Others will eventually evolve to your state of enlightenment.

It's unfortunate that just because I disagree with you, you seem to be fine to make me out to seem like an arrogant prick who believes he's enlightened versus other people. Hint: I'm not. I just disagree with you. You don't see me making assumptions about YOU, so let's keep this about the arguments involved and not the characters involved.

Quote
I can only fathom referencing such slurs prefaced with: "Yes, ignorant, hateful people used *slur* to describe and oppress  *ethnic group* back in the day, but fortunately, we are past using such hurtful, divisive language today."

I gave the "Jap" example because I have personal experience with it. I study modern Japanese history, and that inevitably includes modern war history and racism on all fronts. I've had conversations with scholars of all races about the issue and we all can use "Jap" in those conversations understanding the situation we're in. Sure, situations like this aren't common, but they exist, and they should abide by their own rules.

Quote
Aside from that, IMO there is *no* place in comedy, conversation, entertainment or amongst "friends" where it is appropriate.  At least not in my presence or the presence of anyone I love.

Fine. But that shouldn't and won't stop people who disagree with you. Your opinions do not get to limit what others can say, especially when they're not around you. Just like my opinions on religion don't and shouldn't influence how people practice it in their lives.

This discussion is starting to go in circles, and with each post of yours you're starting to insinuate things about me more and more that I don't appreciate. Please, stop. I'm not particularly inclined to keep responding if that's going to keep happening.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 06, 2013, 02:53:47 PM
I'm sorry for any insinuations.  I only know of you what I read.  If I was perceiving a more accepting attitude towards the use of ethnic slurs on your part than you intended, I truly apologize.  I've just never seen a good justification for calling people outside their names and I don't think I ever will.  :(

All we can really do is be kind to others.  :)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Frank on August 06, 2013, 03:43:01 PM
All we can really do is be kind to others.  :)

:tup

'Tis all good!
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: GuineaPig on August 07, 2013, 04:17:28 AM
I should point out that "nigger" is definitely not the only word with offensive/insulting origins that is used among friends.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: hefdaddy42 on August 07, 2013, 04:48:13 AM
Bitch please.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: GuineaPig on August 07, 2013, 05:20:18 AM
Shut up, ya cunt.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: KevShmev on August 07, 2013, 09:35:21 AM
https://www.nydailynews.com/douglas-threatens-slurs-espn-cohost-article-1.1419698

Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Progmetty on August 07, 2013, 09:45:58 AM
I resent any use of n-word not unless followed by the word "what".
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on August 07, 2013, 11:19:13 AM
I resent any use of n-word not unless followed by the word "what".

1.21 nigga-whats?
Great Scott!
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 07, 2013, 11:25:56 AM
I should point out that "nigger" is definitely not the only word with offensive/insulting origins that is used among friends.

So far in this thread, I haven't seen any other ethnic slur used in such a way.  Nor do I hear of folks commenting about other groups desiring to use ethnic slurs peculiar to their own group.

I think the word is vile no matter who uses it for whatever reason.  But there is rarely any uproar about other groups.  Unless...they have grown beyond referring to themselves in derogatory ways?   :justjen

I don't know.  I don't have friends that use offensive/insulting words, in or outside my ethnic group.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: kirksnosehair on August 07, 2013, 12:37:56 PM
I should point out that "nigger" is definitely not the only word with offensive/insulting origins that is used among friends.

So far in this thread, I haven't seen any other ethnic slur used in such a way.  Nor do I hear of folks commenting about other groups desiring to use ethnic slurs peculiar to their own group.

I think the word is vile no matter who uses it for whatever reason.  But there is rarely any uproar about other groups.  Unless...they have grown beyond referring to themselves in derogatory ways?   :justjen

I don't know.  I don't have friends that use offensive/insulting words, in or outside my ethnic group.




I am of mixed heritage - mother Cape Verdian (a weird ethnic mixture of black and Portuguese) and my biological father Italian.


My best friend is 100% Italian


Now, I grew up in a place called New Bedford, which is well-known in New England as a hub of Portuguese immigrants.  Indeed, my mother was not born in the US, nor was my biological father.


Two of the most commonly used racial slurs to describe the Portuguese in New Bedford were/are "Greenhorn" or "Portagee" (pronounced "Por-tah-gee" with a hard "g" as in "green")


Two of the most commonly used racial slurs to describe the Italian are "Dago" and "Wop"


If you heard my best friend (who happens to be my brother-in-law since we're married to sisters) and me going back and forth when we are working on some projects together, and you didn't know us, you might think we hate each other.


Me: Hand me that screwdriver you fucking dago grease-ball.
Him: Shut the fuck up ya gawdamned greenhorn, can'tcha see I'm doin' sumptin?
Me: Come on you fucking wop immigrant nut sack, hurry up!
Him: Bite me you damned portagee, go eat some fava beans!


We almost never do this unless we have an unsuspecting audience.  It's always comical to watch the reactions.   :lol




All I'm saying is, it may not be the most common thing in the world, but there ARE people who use "racial slurs" in everyday language and they often do it IN SPITE OF the fact that it makes some people uncomfortable.  Hell, my brother-in-law and I do it precisely because of the affect it has on some folks. 


Words are nothing more than letters arranged in a certain order that articulate sounds that we've assigned a meaning to.  They have precisely the amount of power that we allow them to have.  No more or no less.  Yes, there are certain times and places where it may be inappropriate and/or insensitive to use certain words, but I think at some point it becomes a little bit too much to give a single word so much power that its mere utterance triggers avalanches of unadulterated horror and outrage.









Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sueño on August 07, 2013, 12:55:18 PM
Interesting, truly.

Ah well.  Enjoy!  :)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: slycordinator on August 07, 2013, 08:19:24 PM
I, for one, would feel sad if the entire word were spelled out in the title.

It's a disgusting racial slur and just because it doesn't hurt you doesn't mean it doesn't hurt others.
So you'd feel less sad seeing a word that literally means the exact same thing?
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: KevShmev on June 04, 2017, 08:02:36 AM
And the controversy is back, thanks to Bill Maher jokingly referring to himself as a "house n-word" the other night on HBO.  Before it was, "Well, blacks have taken ownership of it and turned it into a positive, but whites still can't say it (as they shouldn't)," but now some are saying, "Well, Maher said it and he is white, but he is a comedian and a liberal, so it's okay."

Can't we all agree that no one should be saying it, at this point?  Abolish that terrible word from everyone's vocabulary and eliminate the confusion.  :tup :tup
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on June 04, 2017, 10:01:40 AM
And the controversy is back, thanks to Bill Maher jokingly referring to himself as a "house n-word" the other night on HBO.  Before it was, "Well, blacks have taken ownership of it and turned it into a positive, but whites still can't say it (as they shouldn't)," but now some are saying, "Well, Maher said it and he is white, but he is a comedian and a liberal, so it's okay."

Can't we all agree that no one should be saying it, at this point?  Abolish that terrible word from everyone's vocabulary and eliminate the confusion.  :tup :tup
I don't agree. Banning words just continues to dumb us all down by removing context from discourse. That's the last thing we fucking need.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: XeRocks81 on June 04, 2017, 10:57:46 AM
My take is to just stay out of it.  Part of the black community has re-claimed the word and I think that's legit but like any group they are not just a big monolithic block so there's disagreements on that subject. 


Oh and ugh,  :facepalm: Bill Maher.  I wish he would just pull a Deniis Miller already and become a  conservative host on a different platform,  it's obviously where this is headed.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: pogoowner on June 04, 2017, 11:04:28 AM
My take is to just stay out of it.  Part of the black community has re-claimed the word and I think that's legit but like any group they are not just a big monolithic block so there's disagreements on that subject. 


Oh and ugh,  :facepalm: Bill Maher.  I wish he would just pull a Deniis Miller already and become a  conservative host on a different platform,  it's obviously where this is headed.   
I kind of agree on Maher. He's a huge pothead, and he hates religion, so he's always lumped in with liberals and progressives, but other than those issues, he largely doesn't fit the bill.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: antigoon on June 04, 2017, 12:08:28 PM
My take is to just stay out of it.  Part of the black community has re-claimed the word and I think that's legit but like any group they are not just a big monolithic block so there's disagreements on that subject. 


Oh and ugh,  :facepalm: Bill Maher.  I wish he would just pull a Deniis Miller already and become a  conservative host on a different platform,  it's obviously where this is headed.   

agree on all of this.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: KevShmev on June 04, 2017, 01:28:32 PM

I kind of agree on Maher. He's a huge pothead, and he hates religion, so he's always lumped in with liberals and progressives, but other than those issues, he largely doesn't fit the bill.

Someone has to fit a specific definition to be a liberal or progressive?  ???

I don't watch him a lot, but his views are pretty liberal, from where I sit.

  Banning words just continues to dumb us all down by removing context from discourse. That's the last thing we fucking need.

In most cases, I would agree, but with this word, there is too much gray area now.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on June 04, 2017, 02:24:28 PM
In most cases, I would agree, but with this word, there is too much gray area now.
Gray area? If you utter the word and you're anything but black you're a racist and should be banished from society. By eliminating context from the equation we've removed every bit of gray, and it's now wholly binary.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on June 04, 2017, 02:44:46 PM
Echoing what I think Kev was trying to get at, why do we need someone to be a "liberal" or a "conservative" commentator? Isn't that part of our overall issue, people only listening to those hosts/journalists who parrot their beliefs?

And no, words shouldn't be "banned" but if you have an IQ over 40 you should realize that depending on your race/gender/whatever, some words should just not be in your lexicon, and using them to be witty, funny, or to make a point is never going to work in your favor.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: KevShmev on June 04, 2017, 03:34:51 PM
In most cases, I would agree, but with this word, there is too much gray area now.
Gray area? If you utter the word and you're anything but black you're a racist and should be banished from society. By eliminating context from the equation we've removed every bit of gray, and it's now wholly binary.

But that goes back to my earlier point about some who are defending Maher's use of it, saying it okay because he is a liberal, as well as a comedian.  Do I think Maher is a racist?  Probably not.  Do I think he was trying to make a joke?  Yes, and a bad one

Echoing what I think Kev was trying to get at, why do we need someone to be a "liberal" or a "conservative" commentator? Isn't that part of our overall issue, people only listening to those hosts/journalists who parrot their beliefs?

Excellent point.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on June 04, 2017, 11:26:20 PM
Far more complicated than just "a word".   I despise Bill Maher on every level, but in terms of general use of a word, he didn't actually say anything racist (kind of just the opposite).   Even if you do think it "racist", el Barto is right; driving it underground doesn't eliminate it, it just allows it to fester without any counter argument.  He shouldn't have said it because it just exposes what a hypocritical attention whore he really is.  He's the first one to call bullshit on people that he doesn't agree with, then claim "who, me?" when his bullshit is called on. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Chino on June 05, 2017, 06:04:18 AM
I'm wondering if HBO edited this episode for streaming. I watched it Saturday morning before hearing of this news, and I didn't even notice him say this in the interview. It was possible I was completely zoned out when he said it because I feel like I wouldn't have noticed it otherwise. I watched the clip afterward and honestly don't get what the big deal is. Maher has said many things significantly more offensive than than the word "nigger" and got a studio full of laughs for doing so. I don't know. Seems like a lot of misplaced anger to me. Given the context it was used in, and the fact that he has regular civil dialogue with blacks on his show, I don't understand how this can be considered racist.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: cramx3 on June 05, 2017, 02:53:01 PM
My take is to just stay out of it.  Part of the black community has re-claimed the word and I think that's legit but like any group they are not just a big monolithic block so there's disagreements on that subject. 


Oh and ugh,  :facepalm: Bill Maher.  I wish he would just pull a Deniis Miller already and become a  conservative host on a different platform,  it's obviously where this is headed.   
I kind of agree on Maher. He's a huge pothead, and he hates religion, so he's always lumped in with liberals and progressives, but other than those issues, he largely doesn't fit the bill.

I think this is why I *kind of* like him.  I think he's an asshole that stirs the pot too much, but in terms of views, I see him actually more in the middle which aligns moreso with myself and therefore when he's shitting on both democrats and republicans, I can find him enjoyable.  however, he's an annoying ass and is hard to watch so there's that.  He also used some homosexual slang recently with Milo.  It's all for ratings (just like him smoking pot on live TV).  It's a show and it's hard to take him seriously when he acts like this.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on June 05, 2017, 06:59:10 PM
I'm wondering if HBO edited this episode for streaming. I watched it Saturday morning before hearing of this news, and I didn't even notice him say this in the interview. It was possible I was completely zoned out when he said it because I feel like I wouldn't have noticed it otherwise. I watched the clip afterward and honestly don't get what the big deal is. Maher has said many things significantly more offensive than than the word "nigger" and got a studio full of laughs for doing so. I don't know. Seems like a lot of misplaced anger to me. Given the context it was used in, and the fact that he has regular civil dialogue with blacks on his show, I don't understand how this can be considered racist.


They did edit subsequent sources of the show; streams, replays, etc. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on June 05, 2017, 08:49:41 PM
They did edit subsequent sources of the show; streams, replays, etc. 

Oh good, this will make it as if it never happened, and no feelings will get hurt.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: jingle.boy on June 05, 2017, 10:11:38 PM
I just watched a segment on CNN (Lemon, whom I detest along with most of his regular "guests") of them discussing it, and man I wish I had that 5 minutes of my life back.  My impression .... it was a bad and tasteless joke.  Maher's guest referenced "in the fields", and Maher himself tried to quip a witty remark.  "the fields" can certainly represent an image of slavery, so that's the path he took to make a quick comeback.  The media is what is giving this attention and legs - just as they did Michael Richards' tirade oh those many years ago (jeez, it's been 10+ years for that).

It references a terrible time in America's history, but I struggle to see how that uttering the word is the most reprehensible thing about that history.  Considering the recent events surrounding the confederate monuments coming down (or not coming down), this scenario is what the media wants to shine a flashlight on as being an absolutely detestable action?

And it's not "the word" that is the issue.  Hell, 12 Years A Slave won the best f'n picture, and there were plenty of uses of the word there.  What makes their use of it earn the highest film-making honor, where Bill's use of it (granted, poorly), worthy of negative attention?  It seems to me that the who/when/why of its use is the issue that people want to pick apart.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on June 06, 2017, 07:54:39 AM
I just watched a segment on CNN (Lemon, whom I detest along with most of his regular "guests") of them discussing it, and man I wish I had that 5 minutes of my life back.  My impression .... it was a bad and tasteless joke.  Maher's guest referenced "in the fields", and Maher himself tried to quip a witty remark.  "the fields" can certainly represent an image of slavery, so that's the path he took to make a quick comeback.  The media is what is giving this attention and legs - just as they did Michael Richards' tirade oh those many years ago (jeez, it's been 10+ years for that).

It references a terrible time in America's history, but I struggle to see how that uttering the word is the most reprehensible thing about that history.  Considering the recent events surrounding the confederate monuments coming down (or not coming down), this scenario is what the media wants to shine a flashlight on as being an absolutely detestable action?

And it's not "the word" that is the issue.  Hell, 12 Years A Slave won the best f'n picture, and there were plenty of uses of the word there.  What makes their use of it earn the highest film-making honor, where Bill's use of it (granted, poorly), worthy of negative attention?  It seems to me that the who/when/why of its use is the issue that people want to pick apart.


Here's the thing, though:   you could argue (I'm not sure I feel this way, I go back and forth, but you could argue this) that Colbert's "cockholster" comment was predicated on the idea that it is disparaging to be a man sucking a cock.  (The alternative view is that it is a subservient position regardless of gender or sexual preference, which is how I think I view it, though again, I go back and forth).   Thus, homophobic.    But Maher's comment wasn't meant to demean the black experience, it wasn't meant to minimize it or ridicule it.  It wasn't predicated on the idea that a black man (or woman) IS inferior.   It was meant - tastelessly, to be sure - to reference that the Republican (yes, that's important, at least to Maher) was treating him subhuman, and that was perhaps the best example of "subhuman treatment" he could come up with.   Having said that, he'd be the first to come back with some snarky, pseudo-intellectual put down if a conservative made reference to the black experience, and thus he's a hypocrite to the extreme in my opinion. 


I can't fucking believe I am defending Bill Maher.  I can't stand that guy and otherwise consider him to be an arrogant, self-centered, egotistical, not-as-smart-as-he-thinks-he-is, liberal elitist.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: jingle.boy on June 06, 2017, 08:48:45 AM
Is there anyone you wouldn't defend?   :lol
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on June 08, 2017, 08:59:24 AM
Is there anyone you wouldn't defend?   :lol

Not if they deserve it.  What kind of question is that?  EVERYONE deserves due process and fair treatment under the law.    That's the very premise of our Constitution.   None of this is - or should be - personal.

(You shouldn't be at all surprised that my favorite of all the Founding Fathers is John Adams.  Google "John Adams Boston Massacre Trial"). 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Chino on June 08, 2017, 09:00:43 AM
Is there anyone you wouldn't defend?   :lol

Not if they deserve it.  What kind of question is that?  EVERYONE deserves due process and fair treatment under the law.    That's the very premise of our Constitution.   None of this is - or should be - personal.

(You shouldn't be at all surprised that my favorite of all the Founding Fathers is John Adams.  Google "John Adams Boston Massacre Trial").

Have you ever seen the John Adam's mini series on HBO? I absolutely love that scene. One of the best of the series no doubt.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on June 08, 2017, 09:20:56 AM
Is there anyone you wouldn't defend?   :lol

Not if they deserve it.  What kind of question is that?  EVERYONE deserves due process and fair treatment under the law.    That's the very premise of our Constitution.   None of this is - or should be - personal.

(You shouldn't be at all surprised that my favorite of all the Founding Fathers is John Adams.  Google "John Adams Boston Massacre Trial").

Have you ever seen the John Adam's mini series on HBO? I absolutely love that scene. One of the best of the series no doubt.

LOVE that series. I have it on DVD.  My daughter was studying that time period about a year ago, and we did a little mini-screening of it.  I'd cook dinner and we'd watch an episode or two, until it was done.  Good times.   (Plus Paul Giamatti is just amazing). 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: kaos2900 on May 22, 2018, 08:02:32 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/kendrick-lamar-interrupts-white-fan-after-she-raps-the-n-word-onstage/ar-AAxB7XU?li=BBnb7Kz

Just read this article. In a nut shell Kendrick Lamar invited a white girl on stage to rap/sing along to his song and she did. The issue is that she said the N word. I guess I don't understand this. She sang the song word for word and she is obviously a fan of his since she was at his concert and and knew the words. She was not being racist by any means. He seemed nice enough and let her "try" again, but the whole story just seems odd to me.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on May 22, 2018, 08:15:03 AM
*Gets mad at a girl for using the n-word in a song he wrote.

*Follows it with a song called "Bitch Don't Kill My Vibe."
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 22, 2018, 08:18:35 AM
Maybe if it's going to be problem pick a different song for people to sing. This isn't rocket science.

Quote
"Man down
Where you from, nigga?"
"Fuck who you know, where you from, my nigga?"
"Where your grandma stay, huh, my nigga?"
"This m.A.A.d city I run, my nigga"
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 22, 2018, 10:27:39 AM
Isn't that "art"?  Isn't "art" in part anyway about exploring different points of view?   If that woman couldn't sing that song verbatim, then perhaps no gay/straight actor should play a straight/gay part.   Perhaps Bruce Springsteen should shut the fuck up about singing about the "female" experience, or the blue collar factory experience.   Now that Gene Simmons is married, does Kendrick suggest he retire all those songs about banging chicks with abandon?   Can Ozzy only sing "Suicide Solution" when he's off the wagon?
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Implode on May 22, 2018, 12:08:39 PM
Morals aren't exactly cut and dry a lot of times, so all of this is just my opinion (which I shouldn't have to say, but I am anyway).

Isn't that "art"?  Isn't "art" in part anyway about exploring different points of view?

It is art, but it being art doesn't automatically free you from any criticism. This is something I've switched sides on a few years ago, but I'd argue that it's better off if we dont use those most extreme slurs if we don't belong to those marginalized groups, even in art. Even in cases like the old one where Macklemore talks about he was called a bundle of sticks as a kid. His song is supposed to be positive, but it kind of gets muddled in the fact that he talks about how he cried and was bullied and called gay while he's straight. He puts in the context of his own experience instead of those actually marginalized, which isn't really great, but I digress. A woman merely reciting the lyrics isn't quite as bad, but still is a bit negligent. The "art" of the song isn't confined to just the lyrics; I'd argue that the performer themselves is a part of it. There's a huge difference in the contexts depending on who is rapping. I'm not going to condemn her as a bad person, but that's not something I'd ever feel comfortable doing and something I don't think is the right move.

If that woman couldn't sing that song verbatim, then perhaps no gay/straight actor should play a straight/gay part.

With your straight/gay actor example, a couple things. First, this is not a two-way street. Straight people aren't ostrisized and marginalized in the way gay people are, so the same rules can't apply to both sides. Second, yes, it'd absolutely be preferable if a gay character were played by a gay person. Again, I'm not going to condemn a straight person that plays a gay character as a terrible human being, but I think it's important that we at the very least give the oppressed groups the chance to represent themselves.

Perhaps Bruce Springsteen should shut the fuck up about singing about the "female" experience, or the blue collar factory experience.

These kinds of things really depend on the context that his message is conveyed, e.g. the Macklemore exmaple I mentioned above. I'm not familiar with these songs, so I can't really comment.

Now that Gene Simmons is married, does Kendrick suggest he retire all those songs about banging chicks with abandon?

I don't know what Kendrick would say, but now the strawmen are getting a bit more obvious. Perhaps banging chicks with abandon isn't the greatest subject to write a song about. Of course this isn't nearly as big of a deal to most people since songs like this were and are still wildly popular.

Can Ozzy only sing "Suicide Solution" when he's off the wagon?

Ozzy partly wrote this song about his own experiences as well, so him being on or off the wagon has nothing to do with it. Same logic applies to the above as well.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Podaar on May 22, 2018, 12:30:18 PM
Relevant?

Prejudice - Tim Minchin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVN_0qvuhhw)

Oh, and NSFW
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 23, 2018, 02:38:34 PM
With your straight/gay actor example, a couple things. First, this is not a two-way street. Straight people aren't ostrisized and marginalized in the way gay people are, so the same rules can't apply to both sides.

And I couldn't disagree with you any more than if you said "Stadler, your name begins with an L."   I am literally 180 degrees diametrically opposed to that.  The whole premise of ANY equality movement is that we are all the same; we are HUMAN.   If we ascribe to that, then there is no difference; intolerance is intolerance, and bigotry is bigotry, regardless the reason.   Your position is the fundamental problem with the identity politics movement; it's gone beyond just wanting equality; it wants, basically, superiority.   

All you're talking about is shifting the power so that the bigotry and intolerance is coming from a different direction.  I'm not down with that at all. 

Quote
Second, yes, it'd absolutely be preferable if a gay character were played by a gay person. Again, I'm not going to condemn a straight person that plays a gay character as a terrible human being, but I think it's important that we at the very least give the oppressed groups the chance to represent themselves.

And in the very next sentence, an example of what I'm talking about.  Why not have "the best actor" play the part?  You're not putting the gay person in there for his/her ability, you're putting them in there BECAUSE they're gay, and now they have a platform.  They want a platform? EARN IT like everyone else.  And lest you think that's bigotry itself, it's not, because I would say that to a white, straight male, a black gay female, and all points in between.  If we're equal, it's based on one criteria and one criteria ONLY:  Best human for the job.  PERIOD.   "Platform" and "groups" and "chances to express ourselves" don't at all come into play. 

Quote
Perhaps Bruce Springsteen should shut the fuck up about singing about the "female" experience, or the blue collar factory experience.

These kinds of things really depend on the context that his message is conveyed, e.g. the Macklemore exmaple I mentioned above. I'm not familiar with these songs, so I can't really comment.

I disagree.   The art is their message, their statement.   We get to interpret that, when the artist is unclear ("Metal Machine Music"; profound statement on the subjectivity of music, or big 'ole fuck you to the record company?  You decide!  "One In A Million: by Guns and Roses; profound statement on the bigotry of small towns, and how it takes interpolation to teach inclusiveness, or just flat out hate and lazy lyric writing? You decide!).  And we haven't even gotten to the topic of... even if it is bigotry and hate; why not?  Why do you get to decide what's "hate" and what's not?  Why do you get to decide what others can say or not? 

Quote
I don't know what Kendrick would say, but now the strawmen are getting a bit more obvious. Perhaps banging chicks with abandon isn't the greatest subject to write a song about. Of course this isn't nearly as big of a deal to most people since songs like this were and are still wildly popular.

Who are you to say what's a good subject to write about or not?   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Implode on May 24, 2018, 07:39:27 AM
And I couldn't disagree with you any more than if you said "Stadler, your name begins with an L."   I am literally 180 degrees diametrically opposed to that.  The whole premise of ANY equality movement is that we are all the same; we are HUMAN.   If we ascribe to that, then there is no difference; intolerance is intolerance, and bigotry is bigotry, regardless the reason.   Your position is the fundamental problem with the identity politics movement; it's gone beyond just wanting equality; it wants, basically, superiority.   

All you're talking about is shifting the power so that the bigotry and intolerance is coming from a different direction.  I'm not down with that at all. 

You're putting words in my mouth. I am absolutely not advocating for some power differential to reverse or anything. Also, I'm sorry you think my position is the problem with identity politics, but it absolutely is not, unless you really are misunderstanding what I'm saying here. I think you're over estimating what "special treatment" I'm advocating or what level of differences I'm suggesting people be aware of. The example I was directly responding to was simply using hurtful words. You can't say there's no difference between a black person and a white person saying the n-word. You can't say there's no different between saying n-word or cracker. You can't say there's no difference between saying even jokingly you to end all Jews and wanting to end all clowns (for a ridiculous and silly example).

All I'm trying to get across is that maybe someday, we'll live in a perfect world where people can act the same towards one another, and it'll be wonderful. We do not live in that world today. I'm sorry, but we don't. And the whole strategy of "fake it 'til you make it" does not apply here. The contexts surrounding all of this are very important, and just applying the same rules of etiquette to every single group isn't the best way to tackle inequality imo.

And in the very next sentence, an example of what I'm talking about.  Why not have "the best actor" play the part?  You're not putting the gay person in there for his/her ability, you're putting them in there BECAUSE they're gay, and now they have a platform.  They want a platform? EARN IT like everyone else.  And lest you think that's bigotry itself, it's not, because I would say that to a white, straight male, a black gay female, and all points in between.  If we're equal, it's based on one criteria and one criteria ONLY:  Best human for the job.  PERIOD.   "Platform" and "groups" and "chances to express ourselves" don't at all come into play.

My last paragraph applies here.

I disagree.   The art is their message, their statement.   We get to interpret that, when the artist is unclear ("Metal Machine Music"; profound statement on the subjectivity of music, or big 'ole fuck you to the record company?  You decide!  "One In A Million: by Guns and Roses; profound statement on the bigotry of small towns, and how it takes interpolation to teach inclusiveness, or just flat out hate and lazy lyric writing? You decide!).  And we haven't even gotten to the topic of... even if it is bigotry and hate; why not?  Why do you get to decide what's "hate" and what's not?  Why do you get to decide what others can say or not? 

People can say what they want. We all have opinions. We all get to make decisions as to what we think is right or not, and even then, nothing is completely black and white. I'm not going to say artists can't ever say things, but I will think about and discuss whether I think their message is constructive or not. I'm not going to choose "questionable subject matter in old pop music" as my hill to die on. It's simply not worth it and really a bad thing in the grand scheme of all things. However, sometimes it is worth considering or at least thinking about.

Who are you to say what's a good subject to write about or not?   

A person? My previous paragraph applies here. Am I not allowed to have an opinion about art? Discuss and interpreting my experience with art is the whole point of art.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 24, 2018, 09:42:29 AM
And I couldn't disagree with you any more than if you said "Stadler, your name begins with an L."   I am literally 180 degrees diametrically opposed to that.  The whole premise of ANY equality movement is that we are all the same; we are HUMAN.   If we ascribe to that, then there is no difference; intolerance is intolerance, and bigotry is bigotry, regardless the reason.   Your position is the fundamental problem with the identity politics movement; it's gone beyond just wanting equality; it wants, basically, superiority.   

All you're talking about is shifting the power so that the bigotry and intolerance is coming from a different direction.  I'm not down with that at all. 

You're putting words in my mouth. I am absolutely not advocating for some power differential to reverse or anything. Also, I'm sorry you think my position is the problem with identity politics, but it absolutely is not, unless you really are misunderstanding what I'm saying here. I think you're over estimating what "special treatment" I'm advocating or what level of differences I'm suggesting people be aware of. The example I was directly responding to was simply using hurtful words. You can't say there's no difference between a black person and a white person saying the n-word. You can't say there's no different between saying n-word or cracker. You can't say there's no difference between saying even jokingly you to end all Jews and wanting to end all clowns (for a ridiculous and silly example).

I think your three examples are not at all the same things; and I say that to illustrate the point, not to be a douche.   The problem with all of this is "intent".    The problem comes in when you try to assume "intent".  Saying that "there's a difference between whites and blacks using that word" by definition has to assume an intent.   So when you assume that ALL blacks have good intent with that word, and all white must have bad intent with that word, well, that's where the problem comes in.   

Quote
All I'm trying to get across is that maybe someday, we'll live in a perfect world where people can act the same towards one another, and it'll be wonderful. We do not live in that world today. I'm sorry, but we don't. And the whole strategy of "fake it 'til you make it" does not apply here. The contexts surrounding all of this are very important, and just applying the same rules of etiquette to every single group isn't the best way to tackle inequality imo.

But see, be careful what you wish for; I too would  love a world where everyone can act the same towards one another, but that doesn't necessarily mean "good".   I'd love a world where if a black man gets into a beef with a white man, it's only because the white man was a dick, not because he was white (or vice versa).   Or if a white man gets into a beef with a black man, it's only because the black man was a dick, not because he was a "n*****.    There will ALWAYS be conflict (so I believe); so the solution isn't to hope for no conflict ever again, or to define things such that the conflict can only happen across races, it's to change the assumption so that all conflict - even those across races - is not deemed guilty of being race based right out the gate. 

Quote
And in the very next sentence, an example of what I'm talking about.  Why not have "the best actor" play the part?  You're not putting the gay person in there for his/her ability, you're putting them in there BECAUSE they're gay, and now they have a platform.  They want a platform? EARN IT like everyone else.  And lest you think that's bigotry itself, it's not, because I would say that to a white, straight male, a black gay female, and all points in between.  If we're equal, it's based on one criteria and one criteria ONLY:  Best human for the job.  PERIOD.   "Platform" and "groups" and "chances to express ourselves" don't at all come into play.

My last paragraph applies here.

Not sure how (that's on me, not you).  You say "fake it till you make it doesn't work", but I see your solution (as I understand it) is exactly that.   Fake it - put gays in because they're gay - and when the novelty wears off we can get back to selecting the best actor.   But you discount that the reverse discrimination does nothing to dissipate the resentment that SOMEONE is being treated preferentially.  I don't bring it up here often, but I'm firmly and indelibly in the camp that believes that Trump did NOT get elected because half the population is racist, I believe he got elected because more than half of the population believes that the general good of ALL humanity comes before the specific good required by a special interest.  In 2016, the vote for Trump was, to many, a vote for economic solvency for the entire population over identity politics machinations for a distinct minority of the population.   

Quote
I disagree.   The art is their message, their statement.   We get to interpret that, when the artist is unclear ("Metal Machine Music"; profound statement on the subjectivity of music, or big 'ole fuck you to the record company?  You decide!  "One In A Million: by Guns and Roses; profound statement on the bigotry of small towns, and how it takes interpolation to teach inclusiveness, or just flat out hate and lazy lyric writing? You decide!).  And we haven't even gotten to the topic of... even if it is bigotry and hate; why not?  Why do you get to decide what's "hate" and what's not?  Why do you get to decide what others can say or not? 

People can say what they want. We all have opinions. We all get to make decisions as to what we think is right or not, and even then, nothing is completely black and white. I'm not going to say artists can't ever say things, but I will think about and discuss whether I think their message is constructive or not. I'm not going to choose "questionable subject matter in old pop music" as my hill to die on. It's simply not worth it and really a bad thing in the grand scheme of all things. However, sometimes it is worth considering or at least thinking about.

Of course it is, but it only applies to you.  We have no beef there; the problem arises when you (not you specifically, but some random listener in the crowd) hears "immigrants and faggots" in that song and decides it's not a constructive message, THEN, as is inevitable in a country like ours where some people are petrified that the rest of us won't arrive at the same conclusion they do, they decide that NONE of us should  be able to consider that for ourselves.   I was mildly disappointed in the grand scheme of things when Guns and Roses put out a definitive version of "Appetite For Destruction" and purposefully left off that particular song.  Not because I agree with the most negative interpretation of those lyrics, but because they might have felt bullied.   If a rock band of the caliber and danger of G'n'R isn't willing to ruffle a few feathers, what's the point of art and/or rock and roll?   

Quote
Who are you to say what's a good subject to write about or not?   

A person? My previous paragraph applies here. Am I not allowed to have an opinion about art? Discuss and interpreting my experience with art is the whole point of art.

Of course, but we're not simply talking about any one person's response to art; we're also talking about whether others should  be allowed to arrive at their own conclusions, and more specifically, at OPPOSING conclusions, without undue consequence. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Implode on May 24, 2018, 10:43:56 AM
I think your three examples are not at all the same things; and I say that to illustrate the point, not to be a douche.   The problem with all of this is "intent".    The problem comes in when you try to assume "intent".  Saying that "there's a difference between whites and blacks using that word" by definition has to assume an intent.   So when you assume that ALL blacks have good intent with that word, and all white must have bad intent with that word, well, that's where the problem comes in.

I don't think you're being a douche; no worries. You have a point about adding intent as another variable to consider. While I do think intent does play a role in exactly how to respond to an act and to what degree the "offender" is guilty, I don't think it absolves the person of all responsibility or criticism. Sure, the white rapper means no harm, but perhaps to some people, there is harm being done. Now we could shift the topic back to this case specifically, but this whole train has gone more general than that, so I won't address that here. But generally, I guess you're right that this does go back to what we consider to be "harmful" and to what degree intent plays a role.

But see, be careful what you wish for; I too would  love a world where everyone can act the same towards one another, but that doesn't necessarily mean "good".   I'd love a world where if a black man gets into a beef with a white man, it's only because the white man was a dick, not because he was white (or vice versa).   Or if a white man gets into a beef with a black man, it's only because the black man was a dick, not because he was a "n*****.    There will ALWAYS be conflict (so I believe); so the solution isn't to hope for no conflict ever again, or to define things such that the conflict can only happen across races, it's to change the assumption so that all conflict - even those across races - is not deemed guilty of being race based right out the gate.

Not much I disagree with here. That's a worthy goal to work towards.

Not sure how (that's on me, not you).  You say "fake it till you make it doesn't work", but I see your solution (as I understand it) is exactly that.   Fake it - put gays in because they're gay - and when the novelty wears off we can get back to selecting the best actor.   But you discount that the reverse discrimination does nothing to dissipate the resentment that SOMEONE is being treated preferentially.  I don't bring it up here often, but I'm firmly and indelibly in the camp that believes that Trump did NOT get elected because half the population is racist, I believe he got elected because more than half of the population believes that the general good of ALL humanity comes before the specific good required by a special interest.  In 2016, the vote for Trump was, to many, a vote for economic solvency for the entire population over identity politics machinations for a distinct minority of the population.

I acknowledge that the line to where it ends it difficult to see, but I do know that we're not at a point where most of the time, people are simply choosing "the best actor", which of course is due to all kinds of biases and whatnot. I'd rather not get into the latter point because it'll go far too off topic.

Of course it is, but it only applies to you.  We have no beef there; the problem arises when you (not you specifically, but some random listener in the crowd) hears "immigrants and faggots" in that song and decides it's not a constructive message, THEN, as is inevitable in a country like ours where some people are petrified that the rest of us won't arrive at the same conclusion they do, they decide that NONE of us should  be able to consider that for ourselves.   I was mildly disappointed in the grand scheme of things when Guns and Roses put out a definitive version of "Appetite For Destruction" and purposefully left off that particular song.  Not because I agree with the most negative interpretation of those lyrics, but because they might have felt bullied.   If a rock band of the caliber and danger of G'n'R isn't willing to ruffle a few feathers, what's the point of art and/or rock and roll?

Of course, but we're not simply talking about any one person's response to art; we're also talking about whether others should  be allowed to arrive at their own conclusions, and more specifically, at OPPOSING conclusions, without undue consequence.

I'll lump my responses to these together. I think we do agree more on this topic than is initially apparent. All in all, I'm a huge proponent of freedom of speech especially within the confines of artistic expression. There are plenty of people that are fighting tooth and nail to scrub any trace of unholiness from the world, particularly in the youngest generation, but I am not one of them and even find myself getting into fights with them now and then. That being said, I know we might differ a bit in the latter part of this: I'd argue there is such a thing as "bad" art, mainly in that it's ineffective based mainly on criteria we've already discussed far above (context, intent, etc.). That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist or should be banned. But any criticism it may receive, even in mass,  is justifiable depending on the circumstances. If a culture deems something undesirable, that's simply the free market at work, which I suppose could be considered bullying to a degree.

But of course in my opinion it's really hard to make sweeping statements about bullying vs cultural shift vs free market stuff without considering the intricacies of each scenario. I don't really know much about the scenario involving Appetite For Destruction, so it's hard for me to comment on that.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 24, 2018, 02:21:52 PM
I don't think you're being a douche; no worries. You have a point about adding intent as another variable to consider. While I do think intent does play a role in exactly how to respond to an act and to what degree the "offender" is guilty, I don't think it absolves the person of all responsibility or criticism. Sure, the white rapper means no harm, but perhaps to some people, there is harm being done. Now we could shift the topic back to this case specifically, but this whole train has gone more general than that, so I won't address that here. But generally, I guess you're right that this does go back to what we consider to be "harmful" and to what degree intent plays a role.

And that's really the central point, isn't it?  Is the N-word SO egregious that ANY use of it constitutes intent to harm?  I don't think so. I may be being stubborn here, but I believe we have to have dialogue about these things, even the prickly things.   I also do not trust absolutes in any way, shape or form that are put in place by nebulous "societies" or, in other words, don't have a check and a balance.   So for me, when someone says "there is NEVER an acceptable use for that word", my spider-sense is immediately calling bullshit.   

Quote
Not much I disagree with here. That's a worthy goal to work towards.

No, but I'll ruin it (haha) by saying, I don't believe we can FORCE people to get there.  They have to come of their own volition; you can lead the horse to the water...

Quote
I acknowledge that the line to where it ends it difficult to see, but I do know that we're not at a point where most of the time, people are simply choosing "the best actor", which of course is due to all kinds of biases and whatnot. I'd rather not get into the latter point because it'll go far too off topic.

It's a small group; let's go!  Off topic it is!   Haha.   Seriously, though, if they DON'T choose "best actor", so what?  At some point it will catch up to them.  Whether its a good catch up, like "Sharknado" that is trading on it's campiness and bad acting, or the Star Wars prequels which is still, to this day, getting raked over the coals for some of the casting choices.  I was commenting only on the identity politics side of things; how a casting director hires - including "because they're gay to help spread the message" - is on them as long as they are accepting of the results.  I just didn't think that doing so would achieve the desired aim. 

Quote
I'll lump my responses to these together. I think we do agree more on this topic than is initially apparent. All in all, I'm a huge proponent of freedom of speech especially within the confines of artistic expression. There are plenty of people that are fighting tooth and nail to scrub any trace of unholiness from the world, particularly in the youngest generation, but I am not one of them and even find myself getting into fights with them now and then. That being said, I know we might differ a bit in the latter part of this: I'd argue there is such a thing as "bad" art, mainly in that it's ineffective based mainly on criteria we've already discussed far above (context, intent, etc.). That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist or should be banned. But any criticism it may receive, even in mass,  is justifiable depending on the circumstances. If a culture deems something undesirable, that's simply the free market at work, which I suppose could be considered bullying to a degree.

But of course in my opinion it's really hard to make sweeping statements about bullying vs cultural shift vs free market stuff without considering the intricacies of each scenario. I don't really know much about the scenario involving Appetite For Destruction, so it's hard for me to comment on that.

Well, the AfD scenario is kind of singular; I'm basing more on the fact that the artist had the balls to make the statement to begin with, and decided to not stand behind it for whatever reason.  One thing if they felt the message was wrong, wrongly interpreted, or out-dated, that happens, but I didn't get the sense that was the case.  I'm reluctant to come right out and say it without some proof, but the implications were pretty strong that they didn't want to hurt sales of a $999 and $149 box set (the two "biggest" editions) over a song that was not a central or important part of the canon. 

We've talked about this before; I don't think there's bad art, per se.  I think there's bad PRODUCT, meaning, a commercial miscalculation ("Music From... The Elder") but absent an artist saying "Wow, we shot for this but really missed the mark" (also, see, "Music From... The Elder") I don't think you or I can say about someone else's work that it is "bad art".   I think where you get into the comparison between Rebecca Black and Beethoven is, "is it art?"  Whether Beethoven intended it that way or not, his work has transcended into art and it should be treated as such.   Rebecca Black isn't there yet (ever?).   More appropriate to this conversation, I certainly do not think that "art" should be deemed "good" or "bad" by the content of it's message.   

Good conversation, Implode; thank you for having it with me.  This is a subject that is very interesting to me.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 24, 2018, 06:41:48 PM
Good read guys, thanks.  It made me think a little more deeply.  I have also considered that what some see as "mob rule" is a perhaps just a more vocal form of the free market at work.

It also brought to mind an interesting exchange I had with one of my kids the other day.  We were admiring Janet Jackson and commenting how good she looked.  At one point I said, 'Black don't crack' in a complimentary way.  A few moments later my kid says, "Mom, you shouldn't say that.  Black people don't like that."  I said, "I've heard it said by many black women and the first time I heard it was from Oprah Winfrey a long time ago.  Why would it be seen as a derogatory thing?"  I was genuinely perplexed.

But I've thought about it since then and I'm wondering if I'm being insensitive without realizing it.  I'm not black.  Maybe only black people can say that?  I don't know.  I do know that I'm not always sure what the rules are.   :-\
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on May 24, 2018, 09:50:43 PM
....what some see as "mob rule" is a perhaps just a more vocal form of the free market at work.

It is a weird line. Stadler has spoken about it at length in other threads (Stadler spoke about something at length? No way! :p)

I do know that I'm not always sure what the rules are.   :-\

That there are "rules" is part of the problem. Along with the fact that only certain people are allowed to set the "rules" and that they can change at any time.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 25, 2018, 08:55:18 AM
....what some see as "mob rule" is a perhaps just a more vocal form of the free market at work.

It is a weird line. Stadler has spoken about it at length in other threads (Stadler spoke about something at length? No way! :p)

Uh, thanks?  Haha. 

I think for me the line is when you no longer have the checks and balances of free will and rational thought (ignoring for a second the concept that much of economics is influenced by irrational actors).    If a product comes on the market and I like it, I buy it.   If a product comes on the market and I don't like it - practically or morally - I don't buy it.  That's the free market.    If a product comes on the market and I consider it, and I use information I've gathered through research - anecdotal service records, product reviews - and I don't buy it, that's the free market.    If a product comes on the market and I consider it, but perhaps I don't buy it because I'm not willing to accept the societal consequences of that purchase, I believe that's the mob rule.    I should be able to buy a Phil Anselmo record or watch a Mel Gibson movie or vote for a President without being deemed a "racist" or "anti-Semite" or "both" by the peanut gallery. 

Quote
I do know that I'm not always sure what the rules are.   :-\

That there are "rules" is part of the problem. Along with the fact that only certain people are allowed to set the "rules" and that they can change at any time.

And that's the mob rule (and the problem with it), right there.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 25, 2018, 01:52:08 PM
....what some see as "mob rule" is a perhaps just a more vocal form of the free market at work.

It is a weird line. Stadler has spoken about it at length in other threads (Stadler spoke about something at length? No way! :p)

Uh, thanks?  Haha. 

I think for me the line is when you no longer have the checks and balances of free will and rational thought (ignoring for a second the concept that much of economics is influenced by irrational actors).    If a product comes on the market and I like it, I buy it.   If a product comes on the market and I don't like it - practically or morally - I don't buy it.  That's the free market.    If a product comes on the market and I consider it, and I use information I've gathered through research - anecdotal service records, product reviews - and I don't buy it, that's the free market.    If a product comes on the market and I consider it, but perhaps I don't buy it because I'm not willing to accept the societal consequences of that purchase, I believe that's the mob rule.    I should be able to buy a Phil Anselmo record or watch a Mel Gibson movie or vote for a President without being deemed a "racist" or "anti-Semite" or "both" by the peanut gallery. 

Quote
I do know that I'm not always sure what the rules are.   :-\

That there are "rules" is part of the problem. Along with the fact that only certain people are allowed to set the "rules" and that they can change at any time.

And that's the mob rule (and the problem with it), right there.

I disagree that this is "mob rule right there."  I don't feel bullied at all.  I see the discussion as an opportunity.  An opportunity to have a discussion with my kid about where the line is or even IF there is a line at all.  It can also be an opportunity for me to do some self-reflecting about my inherent biases and how these may come across even unintentionally.  I can then decide to change my thoughts/behaviors or not.  Isn't that ultimately a good thing? 

Like in the NFL kneeling player issue.  I can see standing for the flag as showing patriotism.  I can see it as a good thing because maybe I was brought up with that as a value that is worth holding.  But the person kneeling next to me, they have a different frame of reference for values that are worth holding.  We can be empathetic toward each other's POV and yet maintain our own values.  One need not detract from the other.  They can actually peacefully co-exist.

You can buy your Phil Anselmo record and I can still consider Mel Gibson's performance in The Bounty to be worthy of watching.  That someone holds another opinion about it is their prerogative and if that opinion is that it makes us racist or anti-semetic then that is their opinion.  Nothing more.  If I choose to take that opinion to heart and do some self-reflecting then I can do that.  But that isn't mandatory and I don't have to take that opinion on as valid at all.  I don't have to take it to heart if I know I am neither of those things.  Nor do I have to defend myself.

We all have choices to make in life.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 25, 2018, 02:36:40 PM
I disagree that this is "mob rule right there."  I don't feel bullied at all.  I see the discussion as an opportunity.  An opportunity to have a discussion with my kid about where the line is or even IF there is a line at all.  It can also be an opportunity for me to do some self-reflecting about my inherent biases and how these may come across even unintentionally.  I can then decide to change my thoughts/behaviors or not.  Isn't that ultimately a good thing? 

Everything after your second sentence is true for me, and yes it is a good thing.   But I DO feel bullied at times.  Don't blow that out of proportion.  I'm not saying I'm in the same place as, say, the gay kid who gets his ass kicked behind the bleachers for asking another boy to the dance.   But still.  I often feel censored with some of the thoughts and ideas I have, and believe me, I'm nowhere NEAR the line of real racism or bigotry.   I'm in the MIDDLE and I feel like in some people's eyes, I don't do enough.   I believe it's a racist's right to BE racist; abhorrent has that idea may be to me, it's not my call to tell someone else what to think.   But we're not even at that point; we're at the point where you're mocked for voting for a President that might or might not maybe have said something that someone somewhere MIGHT have deemed racist.   It's ridiculous.   I've never felt like I had to indicate who I DIDN'T vote for in my entire life and yet now I feel like I have to lead with "Well, I didn't vote for Trump, but..."

Quote
Like in the NFL kneeling player issue.  I can see standing for the flag as showing patriotism.  I can see it as a good thing because maybe I was brought up with that as a value that is worth holding.  But the person kneeling next to me, they have a different frame of reference for values that are worth holding.  We can be empathetic toward each other's POV and yet maintain our own values.  One need not detract from the other.  They can actually peacefully co-exist.

I don't disagree with you one bit.  I think the NFL thing is a bad example, buecause you have the employer/employee relationship to consider as well.  I know at work, I leave all politics, all personal beliefs at home.  If my company - within moral and legal boundaries - says "jump", I say "how high." 

Quote
You can buy your Phil Anselmo record and I can still consider Mel Gibson's performance in The Bounty to be worthy of watching.  That someone holds another opinion about it is their prerogative and if that opinion is that it makes us racist or anti-semetic then that is their opinion.  Nothing more.  If I choose to take that opinion to heart and do some self-reflecting then I can do that.  But that isn't mandatory and I don't have to take that opinion on as valid at all.  I don't have to take it to heart if I know I am neither of those things.  Nor do I have to defend myself.

We all have choices to make in life.

You are far more cavalier than I am about that.  I get that everything is a choice, but it's ridiculous that I can inadvertently listen to Superjoint not knowing it's Phil's project, and I'm now on the defensive with the label of "racist".  That's patent bullshit.   I feel like I'm increasingly in the position of being disadvantaged in these exchanges.  I can walk into a store and ask for a cake, and the proprietor can say "Eh, no.  Don't feel like it."   But if I was gay, I could FORCE him to make that cake.   If I walk into a woman's room by mistake, I can, in the #MeToo moment, be arrested.   If I claim that I identify as a "woman", well, thank you sir and sorry for your troubles.    These labels have power now, power that is unchecked.   It's easy to say "let it go", but what if that's a potential employer?   What if that's a potential mate?  THIS is what real tolerance is, not sloganeering and brightly colored rainbow stickers.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 25, 2018, 03:34:19 PM
I get that everything is a choice, but it's ridiculous that I can inadvertently listen to Superjoint not knowing it's Phil's project, and I'm now on the defensive with the label of "racist".  That's patent bullshit.   I feel like I'm increasingly in the position of being disadvantaged in these exchanges.

I'm not your shrink so don't take this the wrong way but it sounds like you are the one taking it on.  If you know in your heart, mind, and soul that you aren't a racist then I don't get why you have these conflicting feelings.

I assume you are straight and maybe I shouldn't but for argument's sake, let's say you are.  If someone calls you a faggot are you going to suddenly start second guessing yourself?  Are you going to feel the need to defend yourself, "Hey I'm married!"?  Or are you going to laugh it off and attribute it to the person making the comment?  Because I think it reflects way more on them than it does you.

Sorry if it sounds cavalier.  I don't mean it to at all.  I just think taking on everyone else's opinion as some sort of battle line that needs to be fought to the proverbial death over is part of the problem here.  And I am not immune.  But you know the old saying about opinions, right?

It just sounds like you are giving your power away too easily.  And now that sound cliche as hell, but think about it for a minute.  If you are truly content in yourself and your choices, what the hell difference does it make ultimately what artist or actor you choose to enjoy?
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: kingshmegland on May 26, 2018, 06:40:10 AM
When one man calls another a fag he's demeaning him saying he's weaker.  No man ever thinks "Am I gay"?
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: KevShmev on May 26, 2018, 06:57:16 AM
Harmony, I think you misread Stadler's post.  It didn't sound to me like he was having conflicting thoughts, but merely pointing out how people nowadays judge you right away for the tinniest of things.  Sure, it is easy to say, "who cares what people think?", but, for example, if someone at work takes something innocuous you say and blows it up into something by telling everyone, co-workers and even bosses could then assume you are a racist, bigot, etc. simply because people nowadays have such a low bar for using those words.  "OMG, you don't think Trump is as awful as I do? You must be a racist!!"  It's the reality we live in now.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 26, 2018, 10:33:06 AM
When one man calls another a fag he's demeaning him saying he's weaker.  No man ever thinks "Am I gay"?

That was probably not the best analogy to use, granted.  I was trying to find something that Stadler was rock solid about himself in to make a point.

Another example could be - I have no idea if it pertains to Stadler - people who are solid and unwavering in their religious beliefs.  I have friends like this.  They don't feel the need to engage with people trying to denigrate their religious beliefs because they are strong in their faith.  They will engage in conversation about it with others but they don't spend time trying to defend anything because in their minds there is nothing they have to defend.  So if the conversation gets to that point, they simply disengage while remaining strong in their beliefs.

Harmony, I think you misread Stadler's post.  It didn't sound to me like he was having conflicting thoughts, but merely pointing out how people nowadays judge you right away for the tinniest of things.  Sure, it is easy to say, "who cares what people think?", but, for example, if someone at work takes something innocuous you say and blows it up into something by telling everyone, co-workers and even bosses could then assume you are a racist, bigot, etc. simply because people nowadays have such a low bar for using those words.  "OMG, you don't think Trump is as awful as I do? You must be a racist!!"  It's the reality we live in now.

I may have misread it, but I didn't miss this part:
I know at work, I leave all politics, all personal beliefs at home.

And while I agree that people judge you and that some will do it for the tiniest of things, again that is more of a reflection on them wouldn't you say?

I think maybe what you are getting at is called the knee-jerk response that people have when confronted with things that go against their own ways of thinking about the world.  This is nothing the Trump administration brought about.  It occurs across all religious and political ideologies, even social mores, and has since time began.  What I'm trying to get at is the reaction TO the knee-jerk response by US.  It can be easy to pour gasoline on that spark.  I'm simply asking why do some of us feel the need to do that IF we are so comfortable in our own beliefs?  Again, I'm using the example Stadler brought forward of enjoying the 'art' of a particular artist who many have been deemed untouchable in some way.  I'm suggesting that his assertion that "these labels have power now" can only be used against him IF he believes there is some kernel of truth behind them.  Because if he truly knows they do not, where is that power over him coming from?

I don't know, maybe I'm not explaining this very well.  It just seems like it is always easier to point the finger of blame at others when maybe the root of feeling the need to become defensive all the time is really inside of ourselves.  Just something I've been thinking more about in my own reactions and responses.  As always, YMMV.

Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sylvan on May 26, 2018, 12:15:50 PM
Harmony, you're not necessarily wrong, it just doesn't work that way in practice, or at least that's what some us are getting at. Sometimes, it doesn't matter if someone is confident in themselves when they've been labeled, potentially by the masses, as something that is not to be socially accepted, and that anyone that agrees should suffer the consequences of the mob.

Let's say you do or say something that someone else thinks is racist. YOU know that there was no intent to harm, perhaps even a misunderstanding, and that the other person is not correct in their assessment. BUT then that person takes to Twitter, explains why you're a racist, calls on others to see you as a racist, calls on that newly formed mob to demand that your life is irreparably altered, potentially effecting your family/career/LIFE. YOU can be comfortable all you like in your thoughts and actions, but when the mob isn't, it won't matter what you think of yourself.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sylvan on May 26, 2018, 12:29:36 PM
And on the topic of Free Market Capitalism vs. Social Bullying:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/05/25/publix-suspends-contributions-to-adam-putnam-amid-david-hoggs-anti-nra-protests/

Quote
“A lot of people don’t support who Publix is supporting,” Haylee Shepherd, a 15-year-old sophomore at Stoneman Douglas, told the Associated Press. “It’s going to reflect on them as a brand and people shopping there.”

(emphasis mine)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Adami on May 26, 2018, 12:34:05 PM
Stadler, I may be misremembering your overall stances, but aren't you under the impression that open racists should be able to say/do anything they want that isn't breaking the law? That black should tolerate being called the N word, or gay people tolerate being called fags, or Jews tolerate being called kykes or something because that's how free speech works? Does this not apply to you feeling insulted?
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 26, 2018, 12:39:45 PM
Thanks Sylvan.  And you've touched on one of the things I hate most about FB and Twitter.  I wasn't really going there because a) this isn't the social media thread and b) no one is forcing any of us to participate on those platforms.  The anonymity of a computer screen does allow for people to spew all sorts of things they likely wouldn't put forward in a face to face conversation.  No doubt about that.  But I'm not necessarily talking about that here.

Let's say you do or say something that someone else thinks is racist. YOU know that there was no intent to harm, perhaps even a misunderstanding, and that the other person is not correct in their assessment.

That is exactly what I said already happened when my kid admonished me for my "black don't crack" comment.  And I admit my initial response was to become defensive - I didn't mean it that way.  Why is it wrong for me to say it when I heard that very thing said by black women? - etc etc.  After I stopped feeling defensive about it, I was presented with a choice.  A choice to look at whether or not I am inadvertantly being offensive in the way I'm coming across or to feel fine with what I said and let it go.

I understand that Stadler is trying to take the conversation to the next level by bringing in social movements like issues around cake baking and what bathroom to use and I am purposefully not going there because it muddies the water of what I'm trying to say and maybe even takes the focus off of my point by design.  I'm not sure about that yet.

I do understand that we can allow ourselves to feel victimized by others pretty easily these days.  I see this in liberals and conservatives alike.  I'm trying to figure out if that need to make ourselves into the victim of something is actually a way to deflect from having to look deeper.  Maybe it is just a habit now.  Maybe people really and truly do feel they are victims in their lives.  But none of those options feel like good healthy ones to me.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sylvan on May 26, 2018, 01:21:18 PM
So on the point of your sons comment, this is only anecdotal, but my brother worked after-school with the kids at an elementary school, and it was common for kids to hear "black" when referring to race and associate that as racism. At the very least, it just seems like they're confused with the idea of seeing differences in race as being RACIST. So I think it was less "YOU can't say this", and more possibly "you said black and that's wrong" (which I strongly disagree with).

And on your further point regarding how you handled that comment from your son, or assessment if you will, it's different when it's fave to face between individuals. When your son says that, or if a friend of mine calls me racist, we can rebut or discuss in some way, and more than likely it will be over with when the conversation is done. But in real world practice, the real world where people take to Twitter and Facebook, it goes the way I've already described. It's not about looking within and questioning ourselves... It's about being branded, having that inaccurate image spread far and wide with the sole intention of gathering more voices to inflict some sort of social justice, and being able to do nothing about it. It's no longer something that can just be ignored like the dumbass that says hurtful shit for no reason.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sylvan on May 26, 2018, 01:30:34 PM
And for the sake of trying to stay on topic in some way lol, I'll say this:

Kendrick Lamar is a real asshole for doing this. It was entirely of his own doing, he set a trap for this girl and threw her in it. It's his fucking song, and he knows the words in it. So he thought it was a good idea to pull up a white girl to sing THAT song? Clearly he didn't think it through, but even when he heard her say it for the first time, he could have handled it way better. Instead, he somehow puts it on her, cuz SHE's wrong. So he's either a total asshole, or a total dumbass for not having the forethought to see this coming. As far as his handling of the situation, well that's just pure asshole. And all this from a Pulitzer prize winning "artist"...
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Adami on May 26, 2018, 01:41:00 PM
And for the sake of trying to stay on topic in some way lol, I'll say this:

Kendrick Lamar is a real asshole for doing this. It was entirely of his own doing, he set a trap for this girl and threw her in it. It's his fucking song, and he knows the words in it. So he thought it was a good idea to pull up a white girl to sing THAT song? Clearly he didn't think it through, but even when he heard her say it for the first time, he could have handled it way better. Instead, he somehow puts it on her, cuz SHE's wrong. So he's either a total asshole, or a total dumbass for not having the forethought to see this coming. As far as his handling of the situation, well that's just pure asshole. And all this from a Pulitzer prize winning "artist"...


Totally. Dude really screwed up there.

However, I read the article and it seemed like he tried to give her another shot but she was essentially booed off by the audience.

All in all, everyone BUT her seemed to be in the wrong here.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 29, 2018, 01:15:10 PM
I get that everything is a choice, but it's ridiculous that I can inadvertently listen to Superjoint not knowing it's Phil's project, and I'm now on the defensive with the label of "racist".  That's patent bullshit.   I feel like I'm increasingly in the position of being disadvantaged in these exchanges.

I'm not your shrink so don't take this the wrong way but it sounds like you are the one taking it on.  If you know in your heart, mind, and soul that you aren't a racist then I don't get why you have these conflicting feelings.

I assume you are straight and maybe I shouldn't but for argument's sake, let's say you are.  If someone calls you a faggot are you going to suddenly start second guessing yourself?  Are you going to feel the need to defend yourself, "Hey I'm married!"?  Or are you going to laugh it off and attribute it to the person making the comment?  Because I think it reflects way more on them than it does you.

Sorry if it sounds cavalier.  I don't mean it to at all.  I just think taking on everyone else's opinion as some sort of battle line that needs to be fought to the proverbial death over is part of the problem here.  And I am not immune.  But you know the old saying about opinions, right?

It just sounds like you are giving your power away too easily.  And now that sound cliche as hell, but think about it for a minute.  If you are truly content in yourself and your choices, what the hell difference does it make ultimately what artist or actor you choose to enjoy?

Well, King answered this already, but it's not really about power for me;   it's about the concern I have that the consequences are FAR in excess of the "crime".    I "worry" because I am self aware.  I am not on Facebook or any of the "****-chats" and "******-grams" because I won't take the chance of an employer taking something - whether I said it or in a conversation I am inadvertently in - and reading into it and applying their own, out of whack consequences.  It's just not worth it to me, and I find that to be concerning.   When ANY point of view has the power to chill someone else's speech or thought, it's problematic to me.   I like living an authentic life.   I don't like having to play those kinds of games. 

I happen to be straight, but I'm not at all intimidated or emasculated by any personal interactions like that.  I remember being in Stockholm on a work trip and a bunch of us went out on the last night.  There was dancing and a guy took interest.   I bought him a drink and told him look, you seem a nice guy, but I'm married.  That's it.   Our two groups hung for the rest of the night and I gave him a bro-hug as we left the bar.   That's not the concern here.  The concern is when those personal encounters start to have a life of their own. 

Roseanne just got fired because of a clearly racist statement.    EVEN FOX NEWS played tape of Trump celebrating her ratings a couple weeks ago and making the connection that he's now racist because of her comments.   WTF?   He might be, that's not the point, but he's certainly NOT because he celebrated HER ratings weeks before she makes a racist comment.   Does the girl I dated in high school become a racist because I say something today that might be racist?   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 29, 2018, 01:36:23 PM
Stadler, I may be misremembering your overall stances, but aren't you under the impression that open racists should be able to say/do anything they want that isn't breaking the law? That black should tolerate being called the N word, or gay people tolerate being called fags, or Jews tolerate being called kykes or something because that's how free speech works? Does this not apply to you feeling insulted?

Well, first, your examples are at the very limit of what I'm saying because some of that could be construed as fighting words and thus not protected; I don't at all condone someone walking up to a black man and taunting them with "n*****" until they snap.  That's intending to incite, and not the fair exchange of ideas.

I'm talking about something else.   And to Harmony's point, it's not about my certainty.    For the record, I'm not certain about ANYTHING, for two reasons:  one, I'm human, and humans are fallable. We are ALL - all of us, every single one - wrong about something.   SOMETHING.   Most humans will not admit that, for whatever reason.   Two, because I don't know everything, and if I get more/new information that forces me to change my position, well, my god, I have to change my position, else I'm ignorant.   

It's about the way that perception and consequence are way out of whack.   I don't care about what I look like or what people think about me.  But in today's environment, I have no idea how far out of proportion the consequences will be for the things I say, and since I'm not willing to jeopardize my family or my kids or my job, I have to control what I can control, and that's what I say.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 29, 2018, 01:49:15 PM

I do understand that we can allow ourselves to feel victimized by others pretty easily these days.  I see this in liberals and conservatives alike.  I'm trying to figure out if that need to make ourselves into the victim of something is actually a way to deflect from having to look deeper.  Maybe it is just a habit now.  Maybe people really and truly do feel they are victims in their lives.  But none of those options feel like good healthy ones to me.

I'm singling this out because you've said it three times now, so clearly it matters to you and it's a key part of your point.  Let me be clear:  this is not at ALL about "avoiding looking deeper", and in fact, I think you and I are very much in line on this point.  I WANT people to look deeper far more than they do.  I don't at all think we should EVER have anything - except maybe the love for our partner and/or kids - that we would EVER say "and nothing you will say will ever change my mind".   F*** that.   If you have information I don't have, then hell yeah I should be changing my mind.  How can I presume to be so right and so superior that I know everything and that I'm STILL right even when there is information that proves me wrong? 

What I'm talking about is not about the exchange of ideas, the process by which we get smarter/better/more informed.  I'm talking about when the process circumvents that, and won't even listen to what I'm saying but rather reacts on principle and chills any further dialogue. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 29, 2018, 03:05:57 PM

I do understand that we can allow ourselves to feel victimized by others pretty easily these days.  I see this in liberals and conservatives alike.  I'm trying to figure out if that need to make ourselves into the victim of something is actually a way to deflect from having to look deeper.  Maybe it is just a habit now.  Maybe people really and truly do feel they are victims in their lives.  But none of those options feel like good healthy ones to me.

I'm singling this out because you've said it three times now, so clearly it matters to you and it's a key part of your point.  Let me be clear:  this is not at ALL about "avoiding looking deeper", and in fact, I think you and I are very much in line on this point.  I WANT people to look deeper far more than they do.  I don't at all think we should EVER have anything - except maybe the love for our partner and/or kids - that we would EVER say "and nothing you will say will ever change my mind".   F*** that.   If you have information I don't have, then hell yeah I should be changing my mind.  How can I presume to be so right and so superior that I know everything and that I'm STILL right even when there is information that proves me wrong? 

What I'm talking about is not about the exchange of ideas, the process by which we get smarter/better/more informed.  I'm talking about when the process circumvents that, and won't even listen to what I'm saying but rather reacts on principle and chills any further dialogue.

Yet I've said it 3 times and my point still isn't coming across.

I give up. I know it's on me for not explaining it correctly. 

Nevermind
(https://i.imgur.com/6Eu0uSP.jpg)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 29, 2018, 03:21:57 PM

I do understand that we can allow ourselves to feel victimized by others pretty easily these days.  I see this in liberals and conservatives alike.  I'm trying to figure out if that need to make ourselves into the victim of something is actually a way to deflect from having to look deeper.  Maybe it is just a habit now.  Maybe people really and truly do feel they are victims in their lives.  But none of those options feel like good healthy ones to me.

I'm singling this out because you've said it three times now, so clearly it matters to you and it's a key part of your point.  Let me be clear:  this is not at ALL about "avoiding looking deeper", and in fact, I think you and I are very much in line on this point.  I WANT people to look deeper far more than they do.  I don't at all think we should EVER have anything - except maybe the love for our partner and/or kids - that we would EVER say "and nothing you will say will ever change my mind".   F*** that.   If you have information I don't have, then hell yeah I should be changing my mind.  How can I presume to be so right and so superior that I know everything and that I'm STILL right even when there is information that proves me wrong? 

What I'm talking about is not about the exchange of ideas, the process by which we get smarter/better/more informed.  I'm talking about when the process circumvents that, and won't even listen to what I'm saying but rather reacts on principle and chills any further dialogue.

Yet I've said it 3 times and my point still isn't coming across.

I give up. I know it's on me for not explaining it correctly. 

Nevermind
(https://i.imgur.com/6Eu0uSP.jpg)

Well, not to beat a dead horse, but I'd invite you to try again, because it's important.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 29, 2018, 05:14:44 PM
And as an example of what Stadler is talking about, let's look at cancelation of Roseanne due to her "racist tweet."  Maybe you like her show; maybe you don't (I don't).  She made a tasteless tweet.  But it wasn't racist.  But she's now canceled because of it, and every article you see out there describes it as a "racist" tweet, despite that it isn't.  It's hard to say, "well, if people don't like what she said, she should just not worry about it" when she is now unemployed because her speech was labeled as something that it is not.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 29, 2018, 05:34:13 PM
And as an example of what Stadler is talking about, let's look at cancelation of Roseanne due to her "racist tweet."  Maybe you like her show; maybe you don't (I don't).  She made a tasteless tweet.  But it wasn't racist.  But she's now canceled because of it, and every article you see out there describes it as a "racist" tweet, despite that it isn't.  It's hard to say, "well, if people don't like what she said, she should just not worry about it" when she is now unemployed because her speech was labeled as something that it is not.
In principle I agree with you. At the same time ABC saw this coming a mile away. I'd bet good money they started this show knowing very well they'd wind up having to fire her and bail on the show. It was inevitable. They had her on a very, very short leash and dumped her at the first sign of trouble.

What's telling to me is that she didn't even understand where the outrage was coming from. This seems like a really stupid woman.

And don't worry too much about Rosanne. She's weathered just as bad, and this time she'll have the Trumpers come to her defense and rally round.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 29, 2018, 05:41:26 PM
Oh, I'm not worried about her.  As I said, I don't care for her.  But I do care about the message that such a thing sends.  As we've discussed on this forum for a long time, that sort of thing has a chilling effect, and that isn't cool (pun sorta intended).
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 29, 2018, 05:43:06 PM
I'd argue that what Roseanne said wasn't racist.  But that isn't what I'm talking about AT ALL.  ABC knew very well what they were in for with the reboot.  So I don't feel sorry for anyone in this scenario except for the crew and other behind the scenes folks on that show who are now unemployed through no fault of their own.

The problem in this discussion is that people keep trying to bring social media into it.

My whole point was going off of Stadler's post about not being able to enjoy an artist because people might construe he's racist or pro-child molestation or whatever.  Social media was never part of that discussion.

I'll use Mel Gibson because I can admit that I have admired some of his work in the past and will occasionally still indulge in a movie of his from time to time.  NEVER, not once, has it occurred to me that someone would think me anti-Semitic for doing so.  And if someone actually accused me of that, I'd never even spend a millisecond worrying about it because I know it to be patently false.  Just like someone has faith in their religion, I have faith in myself to KNOW I am not harboring any ill will toward Jews.  If someone wants to think that then a) they don't know me at all and b) their opinion doesn't bother me because see "a".

When I get all defensive about it then it comes across like maybe I'm over compensating for something.  It makes it look like I'm not very sure about it at all.

Last thing - if I let my fear of someone's opinion on Mel Gibson keep me from enjoying a movie he's in even BEFORE I get to watch it, then I'm behaving like a victim.  I'm letting my fear of being labeled run my life.  FUCK THAT.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 29, 2018, 05:54:14 PM
I'd argue that what Roseanne said wasn't racist.  But that isn't what I'm talking about AT ALL. 
Awesome.  But that is what I am talking about.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 29, 2018, 06:10:15 PM
I'd argue that what Roseanne said wasn't racist.  But that isn't what I'm talking about AT ALL. 
Awesome.  But that is what I am talking about.

Ok, fine.  But when you post this:

And as an example of what Stadler is talking about, let's look at cancelation of Roseanne due to her "racist tweet."

It sounded like you were getting into the discussion between me and Stadler.   :chill
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Podaar on May 29, 2018, 06:12:01 PM
I'd be interested in hearing those arguments. I admit to not being immersed in all the particulars or the context of what set Rosanne off on that particular tweet, but frankly, I find it hard not to see it as--at least--dog whistle racism.

Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: XeRocks81 on May 29, 2018, 06:17:03 PM
it’s kind of like blackface.  At this point the intention behind it almost doesn’t matter.  There’s a history of reducing black people to apes in caricatures.   Sure it was referring fictional movie apes not real ones but still. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 29, 2018, 06:23:24 PM
I'd be interested in hearing those arguments. I admit to not being immersed in all the particulars or the context of what set Rosanne off on that particular tweet, but frankly, I find it hard not to see it as--at least--dog whistle racism.
Her point was most likely that the VJ person in question looked like Zera from PotA. However, in the post-context world there's an assumption that any sentence that references a black person and an ape is automatically racist, and this is what some of us are pushing back against.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on May 29, 2018, 06:24:35 PM
She made a tasteless tweet.  But it wasn't racist. 

Maybe, maybe not. The issue is that someone thought it was racist, and that is all that matters these days.

I was going to chime in on the current discussion, but I have nothing to add that hasn't been said.

Being in SBUX country, news of their DAY OF TRAINING ON HOW TO NOT BE RACIST is a hot topic in my local news today. Saw this gem which put things in perspective, from Richard Levick, the CEO of an international crisis communications firm: “This is probably the greatest crisis response since Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol three-and-a-half decades ago." For reference, that had to do with people dying from taking cyanide-laced capsules of Extra-Strength Tylenol. Clearly something similar to a couple guys being asked to leave a place of business while not engaging the business in any sort of transaction.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 29, 2018, 06:30:05 PM
She made a tasteless tweet.  But it wasn't racist. 

Maybe, maybe not. The issue is that someone thought it was racist, and that is all that matters these days.

Exactly. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 30, 2018, 07:02:55 AM
I'd argue that what Roseanne said wasn't racist.  But that isn't what I'm talking about AT ALL.  ABC knew very well what they were in for with the reboot.  So I don't feel sorry for anyone in this scenario except for the crew and other behind the scenes folks on that show who are now unemployed through no fault of their own.

The problem in this discussion is that people keep trying to bring social media into it.

My whole point was going off of Stadler's post about not being able to enjoy an artist because people might construe he's racist or pro-child molestation or whatever.  Social media was never part of that discussion.

I'll use Mel Gibson because I can admit that I have admired some of his work in the past and will occasionally still indulge in a movie of his from time to time.  NEVER, not once, has it occurred to me that someone would think me anti-Semitic for doing so.  And if someone actually accused me of that, I'd never even spend a millisecond worrying about it because I know it to be patently false.  Just like someone has faith in their religion, I have faith in myself to KNOW I am not harboring any ill will toward Jews.  If someone wants to think that then a) they don't know me at all and b) their opinion doesn't bother me because see "a".

When I get all defensive about it then it comes across like maybe I'm over compensating for something.  It makes it look like I'm not very sure about it at all.

Last thing - if I let my fear of someone's opinion on Mel Gibson keep me from enjoying a movie he's in even BEFORE I get to watch it, then I'm behaving like a victim.  I'm letting my fear of being labeled run my life.  FUCK THAT.

You're looking more inward than I am.   I'm with you; I don't let anyone keep me from enjoying anything (I'm a Kiss fan, nuff said).   But it's bleeding out from that; it's not limited to just "that look" anymore.    Your kid's best friend's mom says to her precious little bundle of joy, "I don't really want that Harmony, Jr. kid coming over anymore" because she saw you looking at a Mel Gibson movie at RedBox or whatever it's called at the supermarket?  Still cool?   

Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 30, 2018, 07:10:15 AM
She made a tasteless tweet.  But it wasn't racist. 

Maybe, maybe not. The issue is that someone thought it was racist, and that is all that matters these days.

I was going to chime in on the current discussion, but I have nothing to add that hasn't been said.

Being in SBUX country, news of their DAY OF TRAINING ON HOW TO NOT BE RACIST is a hot topic in my local news today. Saw this gem which put things in perspective, from Richard Levick, the CEO of an international crisis communications firm: “This is probably the greatest crisis response since Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol three-and-a-half decades ago." For reference, that had to do with people dying from taking cyanide-laced capsules of Extra-Strength Tylenol. Clearly something similar to a couple guys being asked to leave a place of business while not engaging the business in any sort of transaction.

I mean, I've worked in Corporate America long enough, and taken enough training in that time, so I get it, but "Training in how not to be a racist" from my EMPLOYER smacks as so much thought police... what next?  Will my employer "teach" me how to vote?   Educate me on the best places to get an abortion, should I ever need one?   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sylvan on May 30, 2018, 07:20:34 AM
The Starbucks thing blows my mind. Are people actually buying into this? First of all, STARBUCKS didn't call the police on two black guys, some dumb ass INDIVIDUAL did that. STARBUCKS didn't handwrite "Beaner" on a Latino's cup, some dumb ass INDIVIDUAL did that. So apparently that means that ALL Starbucks employees need racial bias training, and we're supposed to believe that it will influence people who already found it acceptable to call 911 on black guys for waiting for a friend before ordering, or writing "racist" terms on people's cups. Why can't Starbucks just fire them and move on? "Some dumbass, not STARBUCKS. We've fired said dumbass and are moving on..."
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: kaos2900 on May 30, 2018, 07:26:22 AM
In regards to Starbucks, that was nothing but a publicity stunt and to try and keep they're "progressive" image.

In regards to Roseanne, i could care less. I think the fact that so many people care about what her opinion is and the state of a crappy rebooted TV show is more concerning that what she said.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 30, 2018, 07:58:10 AM
Your kid's best friend's mom says to her precious little bundle of joy, "I don't really want that Harmony, Jr. kid coming over anymore" because she saw you looking at a Mel Gibson movie at RedBox or whatever it's called at the supermarket?  Still cool?

More than cool.  I don't owe my kid's best friend's mom a goddamn thing and if she's that shallow and judgmental then I want nothing to do with her anyway.  Why would I?
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 30, 2018, 08:02:26 AM
I'd be interested in hearing those arguments. I admit to not being immersed in all the particulars or the context of what set Rosanne off on that particular tweet, but frankly, I find it hard not to see it as--at least--dog whistle racism.

Many people are focusing on the ape part of her tweet and forgetting the rest.  She also implied that VJ was a super secret Muslim extremist too.   ::)

But hey, it doesn't matter today because she's blaming the Ambien she took.

(https://i.imgur.com/gZouPXT.jpg)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 30, 2018, 08:10:26 AM
She made a tasteless tweet.  But it wasn't racist. 

Maybe, maybe not. The issue is that someone thought it was racist, and that is all that matters these days.

I was going to chime in on the current discussion, but I have nothing to add that hasn't been said.

Being in SBUX country, news of their DAY OF TRAINING ON HOW TO NOT BE RACIST is a hot topic in my local news today. Saw this gem which put things in perspective, from Richard Levick, the CEO of an international crisis communications firm: “This is probably the greatest crisis response since Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol three-and-a-half decades ago." For reference, that had to do with people dying from taking cyanide-laced capsules of Extra-Strength Tylenol. Clearly something similar to a couple guys being asked to leave a place of business while not engaging the business in any sort of transaction.

I mean, I've worked in Corporate America long enough, and taken enough training in that time, so I get it, but "Training in how not to be a racist" from my EMPLOYER smacks as so much thought police... what next?  Will my employer "teach" me how to vote?   Educate me on the best places to get an abortion, should I ever need one?
Yeah, this is where you and I part ways on this one. While we're both highly bothered by the policing of thought, this doesn't qualify. They have ~300k employees and training them to not be dicks is about as important as training them to draw those goofy tulips in milk. This is a business decision.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 30, 2018, 08:18:53 AM
Your kid's best friend's mom says to her precious little bundle of joy, "I don't really want that Harmony, Jr. kid coming over anymore" because she saw you looking at a Mel Gibson movie at RedBox or whatever it's called at the supermarket?  Still cool?

More than cool.  I don't owe my kid's best friend's mom a goddamn thing and if she's that shallow and judgmental then I want nothing to do with her anyway.  Why would I?
I think the difference is twofold. For one, you're just some chick posting on a music forum. If you were a person whose name and image were crucial to their livelihood (forgive me if you're secretly Debra Harry) you'd want a little more truthiness with regards to your standing. Moreover, there's a problem now wherein as long as a factoid is presented in a half-humorous way it hits 500k people within minutes. If somebody crafts a silly meme with your picture and "I admire anti-Semitic Mel Gibson" and it hits half a million people before you're even aware of it you'll very likely be far more concerned about it. Facebook and twitter have the unfortunate ability to spread bullshit like wildfire and the modern crowd digs the shit out of that very aspect.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 30, 2018, 08:20:39 AM
I'd be interested in hearing those arguments. I admit to not being immersed in all the particulars or the context of what set Rosanne off on that particular tweet, but frankly, I find it hard not to see it as--at least--dog whistle racism.

Many people are focusing on the ape part of her tweet and forgetting the rest.  She also implied that VJ was a super secret Muslim extremist too.   ::)

But hey, it doesn't matter today because she's blaming the Ambien she took.

I'd be a lot happier if she would defend it. Comparing a woman to a fictional movie character is not the same as calling black people apes. It's high time people started to learn this.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 30, 2018, 08:28:09 AM
Your kid's best friend's mom says to her precious little bundle of joy, "I don't really want that Harmony, Jr. kid coming over anymore" because she saw you looking at a Mel Gibson movie at RedBox or whatever it's called at the supermarket?  Still cool?

More than cool.  I don't owe my kid's best friend's mom a goddamn thing and if she's that shallow and judgmental then I want nothing to do with her anyway.  Why would I?
I think the difference is twofold. For one, you're just some chick posting on a music forum. If you were a person whose name and image were crucial to their livelihood (forgive me if you're secretly Debra Harry) you'd want a little more truthiness with regards to your standing. Moreover, there's a problem now wherein as long as a factoid is presented in a half-humorous way it hits 500k people within minutes. If somebody crafts a silly meme with your picture and "I admire anti-Semitic Mel Gibson" and it hits half a million people before you're even aware of it you'll very likely be far more concerned about it. Facebook and twitter have the unfortunate ability to spread bullshit like wildfire and the modern crowd digs the shit out of that very aspect.

2 things.  I wish I were secretly Debbie Harry and this is exactly why I am taking social media out of the conversation.  I've said this several times now and will probably be criticized for repeating myself but I will continue to say it as many times as I need to.

I'm talking about real life.  Not being a famous or even semi-famous person.  I'm talking about face to face interactions and conversations.  I'm talking about not putting myself in the framework of being a victim before I've even gotten out of the gate in life.  I'm talking about being confident in yourself enough to proudly admit you are a KISS fan and not giving a rat's ass who judges you for it.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Ben_Jamin on May 30, 2018, 09:05:22 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/kendrick-lamar-interrupts-white-fan-after-she-raps-the-n-word-onstage/ar-AAxB7XU?li=BBnb7Kz

Just read this article. In a nut shell Kendrick Lamar invited a white girl on stage to rap/sing along to his song and she did. The issue is that she said the N word. I guess I don't understand this. She sang the song word for word and she is obviously a fan of his since she was at his concert and and knew the words. She was not being racist by any means. He seemed nice enough and let her "try" again, but the whole story just seems odd to me.

I know I'm late to this....

That is just bullshit. Its almost Hypocritical to invite a (white) fan to sing along to a song that blatantly says NAEGGA. He likely did it to cause this very convo we are  having now
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on May 30, 2018, 10:41:50 AM
I mean, I've worked in Corporate America long enough, and taken enough training in that time, so I get it, but "Training in how not to be a racist" from my EMPLOYER smacks as so much thought police... what next?  Will my employer "teach" me how to vote?   Educate me on the best places to get an abortion, should I ever need one?   

My snarkiness resulted in inaccuracies in my post. This "training" isn't about how not to be racist. It is to illustrate that you that you are in fact racist, but are unaware of it because lies within your subconscious.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 30, 2018, 10:43:34 AM
Yeah, unfortunately, that sort of thing has increasingly crept into the typical "preventative" training through the years.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: contest_sanity on May 30, 2018, 11:05:38 AM
Do we even know what the Starbucks training entailed? Here's a short film that was produced for and used in the Starbucks training yesterday. I think it makes a good point. To me, that point is that people of color have an extra level of psychological anxiety they have to deal with in public spaces because of, in many cases subconscious, racial bias. I know people don't think it exists in themselves, but I know I see it within myself. And I think if you listen with an empathetic viewpoint to the testimony of a lot of black people, they will give you innumerable examples of how it has affected them. How long before we believe them? And maybe Starbucks isn't doing this just for good publicity, damage control, or solely for business purposes. Maybe at least part of why they're doing it is because they think it's really a problem and want to try and address it. Frankly, I'm happy a large corporation is doing something like this.

Short film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=20&v=o__5xvIE3bU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=20&v=o__5xvIE3bU)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Chino on May 30, 2018, 11:13:40 AM
Do we even know what the Starbucks training entailed?

Quite a bit of info this thread. Seems like it was more about diversity and not knowing each individual's life situation than it was race.

https://old.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/8n3hm6/starbucks_employees_how_was_your_implicit_bias/

If anyone doesn't know how Reddit works, you can minimize each parent comment next by clicking the " - " sign to the left of the username.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on May 30, 2018, 11:19:50 AM
Off-topic, I don't "get" Reddit at all. I don't understand value people extract from it.

And maybe Starbucks isn't doing this just for good publicity, damage control, or solely for business purposes.

Ignoring for a moment the merits of this training, being familiar with this business as a native PNW'er, they most certainly doing it for "good publicity, damage control, or solely for business purposes."
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Chino on May 30, 2018, 11:24:57 AM
Off-topic, I don't "get" Reddit at all. I don't understand value people extract from it.

It's a forum for just about any topic you can imagine. Reddit is great when you're not stuck in an echo chamber of a sub. I use it to discuss miniatures, rc trucks, stocks, aquarium stuff, hydroponics, stuff in my home state, individual video games, etc..
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Kattelox on May 30, 2018, 11:28:40 AM
Reddit is great... it's no different than a forum. You can learn a lot... lots of times I just google "Reddit (insert subject I'm curious about here)" and read funny anecdotes or actually learn a lot. Not all social stuff is cancerous if you just use it constructively
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on May 30, 2018, 11:32:53 AM
It doesn't look like a forum, at least as I think of them, but dtf.org is my model as it is the only forum I read and post on. I value the discussion that happens here (most of the time). Reddit just looks like people saying random things without any discussion, but I might just not be used to its structure

Carry on.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 30, 2018, 11:52:37 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/kendrick-lamar-interrupts-white-fan-after-she-raps-the-n-word-onstage/ar-AAxB7XU?li=BBnb7Kz

Just read this article. In a nut shell Kendrick Lamar invited a white girl on stage to rap/sing along to his song and she did. The issue is that she said the N word. I guess I don't understand this. She sang the song word for word and she is obviously a fan of his since she was at his concert and and knew the words. She was not being racist by any means. He seemed nice enough and let her "try" again, but the whole story just seems odd to me.

I know I'm late to this....

That is just bullshit. Its almost Hypocritical to invite a (white) fan to sing along to a song that blatantly says NAEGGA. He likely did it to cause this very convo we are  having now
It was definitely a setup. It certainly doesn't help that the four line chorus he had them rap had like 6 instances of nigga in it. Having said that, what it would really come down to is if he was using nigga himself throughout his show. If he was censoring himself than she should have known better. Moreover, other people on stage, and her in an earlier instant, also censored themselves, so she knew it was at least something of an issue. In any case, once again I'll say that people need to learn to understand context and quit getting butthurt over unintentional "slights.".
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 30, 2018, 12:12:30 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/kendrick-lamar-interrupts-white-fan-after-she-raps-the-n-word-onstage/ar-AAxB7XU?li=BBnb7Kz

Just read this article. In a nut shell Kendrick Lamar invited a white girl on stage to rap/sing along to his song and she did. The issue is that she said the N word. I guess I don't understand this. She sang the song word for word and she is obviously a fan of his since she was at his concert and and knew the words. She was not being racist by any means. He seemed nice enough and let her "try" again, but the whole story just seems odd to me.

I know I'm late to this....

That is just bullshit. Its almost Hypocritical to invite a (white) fan to sing along to a song that blatantly says NAEGGA. He likely did it to cause this very convo we are  having now
It was definitely a setup. It certainly doesn't help that the four line chorus he had them rap had like 6 instances of nigga in it. Having said that, what it would really come down to is if he was using nigga himself throughout his show. If he was censoring himself than she should have known better. Moreover, other people on stage, and her in an earlier instant, also censored themselves, so she knew it was at least something of an issue. In any case, once again I'll say that people need to learn to understand context and quit getting butthurt over unintentional "slights.".

Maybe.  But I'm kinda willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on that unless there is other information.  Speaking from experience, when I was selected to get up and do my thing with Y&T onstage years ago, when my number was called, my mind was just racing from that point on, and I was kind of oblivious to EVERYTHING.  I can totally see if her mind went blank and she was basically rapping on autopilot, whether she SHOULD have consciously known better or not. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 30, 2018, 12:28:16 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/kendrick-lamar-interrupts-white-fan-after-she-raps-the-n-word-onstage/ar-AAxB7XU?li=BBnb7Kz

Just read this article. In a nut shell Kendrick Lamar invited a white girl on stage to rap/sing along to his song and she did. The issue is that she said the N word. I guess I don't understand this. She sang the song word for word and she is obviously a fan of his since she was at his concert and and knew the words. She was not being racist by any means. He seemed nice enough and let her "try" again, but the whole story just seems odd to me.

I know I'm late to this....

That is just bullshit. Its almost Hypocritical to invite a (white) fan to sing along to a song that blatantly says NAEGGA. He likely did it to cause this very convo we are  having now
It was definitely a setup. It certainly doesn't help that the four line chorus he had them rap had like 6 instances of nigga in it. Having said that, what it would really come down to is if he was using nigga himself throughout his show. If he was censoring himself than she should have known better. Moreover, other people on stage, and her in an earlier instant, also censored themselves, so she knew it was at least something of an issue. In any case, once again I'll say that people need to learn to understand context and quit getting butthurt over unintentional "slights.".

Maybe.  But I'm kinda willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on that unless there is other information.  Speaking from experience, when I was selected to get up and do my thing with Y&T onstage years ago, when my number was called, my mind was just racing from that point on, and I was kind of oblivious to EVERYTHING.  I can totally see if her mind went blank and she was basically rapping on autopilot, whether she SHOULD have consciously known better or not.
Yeah, I'll buy that.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: contest_sanity on May 30, 2018, 01:11:46 PM
Well, first off, re: the Kendrick Lamar thing. The girl was unsurprisingly going to get on stage and sing the song the same way she always sings it in her car or whatever.

I would argue that white people using any form of the word is at the very least problematic, except perhaps in a totally descriptive context (and even that sometimes still makes me feel weird: for instance if the title of this thread had instead used the full word). As to WHY it is problematic, I'm not surprised many people have not thought about it, or at least not given enough empathic listening to that perspective which says: white people shouldn't use it even though people of color (at least many of them) have reclaimed usage of a form of it. So, in my view, ignorance can be a justification for the lack of ill-intent, but that still doesn't mean it's not a problem. Really, we have to have honest, sometimes complex, conversations about this stuff.

Do I personally wish the girl had handled it differently? Yes. Could Kendrick have also handled it differently? Perhaps. And maybe he deliberately wanted to start this larger conversation, which is possibly a good objective, but I too would hate for this girl to get labeled a "bad person" for what happened. Of course, this gets into a larger discussion of striving to disassociate racially problematic acts from categorizing the person who does them as a bad person. People will always defend their own character. And attacking someone else's character is not usually a great way to have a productive conversation. Maybe Kendrick could have turned it more into a teaching moment, and maybe privately he did. I'm not sure. I mean, even publicly he still gave her a second chance. But I think I can simultaneously wish it was handled a little differently on social media afterward AND still wish she had chosen to censor herself.

I know it doesn't make my opinion more valid, but I have thought about this issue A LOT, being a white language arts teacher in a mostly minority school where this word is ubiquitous vernacular, who also loves hip-hop and even makes my own hip hop. It's a complicated thing, and I go back-and-forth on certain complexities of the discussion at times. In general, though, I tend towards "white people just shouldn't say it."

Lastly, Ta-Nehisi Coates' response to this same question had some good insights, I thought, particularly that being a white hip-hop fan who self-censors using the n-word provides a small window into how black people have to navigate the world being extra-careful about their actions in ways that most white people do not.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QO15S3WC9pg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QO15S3WC9pg)

Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 30, 2018, 01:18:42 PM
She made a tasteless tweet.  But it wasn't racist. 

Maybe, maybe not. The issue is that someone thought it was racist, and that is all that matters these days.

I was going to chime in on the current discussion, but I have nothing to add that hasn't been said.

Being in SBUX country, news of their DAY OF TRAINING ON HOW TO NOT BE RACIST is a hot topic in my local news today. Saw this gem which put things in perspective, from Richard Levick, the CEO of an international crisis communications firm: “This is probably the greatest crisis response since Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol three-and-a-half decades ago." For reference, that had to do with people dying from taking cyanide-laced capsules of Extra-Strength Tylenol. Clearly something similar to a couple guys being asked to leave a place of business while not engaging the business in any sort of transaction.

I mean, I've worked in Corporate America long enough, and taken enough training in that time, so I get it, but "Training in how not to be a racist" from my EMPLOYER smacks as so much thought police... what next?  Will my employer "teach" me how to vote?   Educate me on the best places to get an abortion, should I ever need one?
Yeah, this is where you and I part ways on this one. While we're both highly bothered by the policing of thought, this doesn't qualify. They have ~300k employees and training them to not be dicks is about as important as training them to draw those goofy tulips in milk. This is a business decision.

No, I get that.  We're not that far apart there; I think where I keep going is that I don't trust the SJWs of the world to see the difference you and I just agreed on.   Next it will be schools; then it will be "brown bag lunches at the subdivision community center", etc. etc.   I don't want schools lecturing my kid on how to treat people.  I want her to learn the old fashioned way; by facing people one on one and realizing that they are just like you, whether fat, skinny, black, white, Muslim, Jew, Christian, whatever. 

My experience - which is worth little, I grant you - is that real change is not from forced lectures, but from organic growth.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 30, 2018, 01:22:40 PM
Your kid's best friend's mom says to her precious little bundle of joy, "I don't really want that Harmony, Jr. kid coming over anymore" because she saw you looking at a Mel Gibson movie at RedBox or whatever it's called at the supermarket?  Still cool?

More than cool.  I don't owe my kid's best friend's mom a goddamn thing and if she's that shallow and judgmental then I want nothing to do with her anyway.  Why would I?
I think the difference is twofold. For one, you're just some chick posting on a music forum. If you were a person whose name and image were crucial to their livelihood (forgive me if you're secretly Debra Harry) you'd want a little more truthiness with regards to your standing. Moreover, there's a problem now wherein as long as a factoid is presented in a half-humorous way it hits 500k people within minutes. If somebody crafts a silly meme with your picture and "I admire anti-Semitic Mel Gibson" and it hits half a million people before you're even aware of it you'll very likely be far more concerned about it. Facebook and twitter have the unfortunate ability to spread bullshit like wildfire and the modern crowd digs the shit out of that very aspect.

Well, I was going for the angle of "affecting other people".   I know that the last thing I want is to explain to my kid why her best friend doesn't call her anymore (actually, I had to do that with her mom, so I know it sucks).   But whatever; maybe it doesn't bother other people like it does me.  I can accept that.   It is what it is.   I know I'm an acquired taste for some and I'd just prefer that if that's the case it be because of who I am authentically, not some caricature or meme.

And if you are Debbie Harry, a) I want your autograph, and b) you still look fine at 70.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 30, 2018, 01:27:54 PM
I would argue that white people using any form of the word is at the very least problematic, except perhaps in a totally descriptive context (and even that sometimes still makes me feel weird: for instance if the title of this thread had instead used the full word). As to WHY it is problematic, I'm not surprised many people have not thought about it, or at least not given enough empathic listening to that perspective which says: white people shouldn't use it even though people of color (at least many of them) have reclaimed usage of a form of it.

With regard to your first sentence, I don't think many disagree, at least in present company.

With regard to your second sentence, I'm not sure why there NEEDS to be any thought to why is it problematic.  People understand that it is, so why do we need to get into the why of it?

But issues like this Kendrick Lamar incident muddy the waters.  When it is used in popular music, and music is by design meant to be sung along to, it muddies the waters.  In Kendrick Lamar's defense, it didn't look like he personally had any ill intent.  It just seemed like the incident wasn't thought through very well, and then wasn't handled well in the moment when it went wrong.  But in my opinion, I think we are too hypersensitive to certain things, like the use of that word.  Hyper-awareness is good, because it leads to greater understanding.  Hyper-sensitivity--i.e. where we collectively gasp at even the unintended or innocent use of the term without regard for context--seems counterproductive to me.  It prevents any sort of understanding or common ground to be found.  This girl was dumb, or just caught in the moment, or whatever.  But I don't think use of the word in that context makes her a de facto racist or even racially insensitive.  I mean, maybe she is.  But maybe we {the collective we) could have more productive conversation and understanding if we didn't overreact to any use of the term. 

Here's an anecdote:  Years ago in law school, an elderly White professor used the term "niggardly" in class.  It was used perfectly in context.  There was not a hint of anything racial in the discussion whatsoever.  And yet, a couple of Black students took offense and made a huge issue out of it and tried to generate publicity and have the man's job threatened--simply because they had no idea what the word meant and wrongly assumed that since it sounds like the N-word, it must be racist comment.  Yeah, in this day and age, we're best avoiding archaic terms that sound like hotbutton offensive terms.  But, again, we've gotten to the point where we are so hypersensitive that we often overreact, and often wrongfully so.

EDIT:  And, yeah, I'm probably just restating what I and others have said on the subject in the past, but I keep hoping that approaching it from different angles may be helpful somehow.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Adami on May 30, 2018, 01:43:29 PM
I agree we are at that point, but I disagree that we've only recently gotten there. We've always been there. We just have MUCH more ways of hearing about things and expressing our opinions, compared to the past.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 30, 2018, 01:46:58 PM
You mean the point of hypersensitivity?  No, I think it is a fairly recent development.  In the '70s, you could hear it used on public TV.  I mean, not without any objection.  But not the mass outrage even a private, "innocent" use the term will elicit today.  Unless I misunderstand your point, I don't agree.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: contest_sanity on May 30, 2018, 01:48:25 PM
I basically agree with you, Bosk. My one quibble might be that while perhaps she wasn't purposefully being insensitive, the act still hits a lot of black people as being insensitive. Doesn't mean she's a bad person or was being malicious, yet she could still possibly stand to learn a little more about why, perhaps, she should alter her singing habits in the future.

Also, Chris Rock: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdlGeqwHjLE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdlGeqwHjLE)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 30, 2018, 01:48:59 PM
She made a tasteless tweet.  But it wasn't racist. 

Maybe, maybe not. The issue is that someone thought it was racist, and that is all that matters these days.

I was going to chime in on the current discussion, but I have nothing to add that hasn't been said.

Being in SBUX country, news of their DAY OF TRAINING ON HOW TO NOT BE RACIST is a hot topic in my local news today. Saw this gem which put things in perspective, from Richard Levick, the CEO of an international crisis communications firm: “This is probably the greatest crisis response since Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol three-and-a-half decades ago." For reference, that had to do with people dying from taking cyanide-laced capsules of Extra-Strength Tylenol. Clearly something similar to a couple guys being asked to leave a place of business while not engaging the business in any sort of transaction.

I mean, I've worked in Corporate America long enough, and taken enough training in that time, so I get it, but "Training in how not to be a racist" from my EMPLOYER smacks as so much thought police... what next?  Will my employer "teach" me how to vote?   Educate me on the best places to get an abortion, should I ever need one?
Yeah, this is where you and I part ways on this one. While we're both highly bothered by the policing of thought, this doesn't qualify. They have ~300k employees and training them to not be dicks is about as important as training them to draw those goofy tulips in milk. This is a business decision.

No, I get that.  We're not that far apart there; I think where I keep going is that I don't trust the SJWs of the world to see the difference you and I just agreed on.   Next it will be schools; then it will be "brown bag lunches at the subdivision community center", etc. etc.   I don't want schools lecturing my kid on how to treat people.  I want her to learn the old fashioned way; by facing people one on one and realizing that they are just like you, whether fat, skinny, black, white, Muslim, Jew, Christian, whatever. 

My experience - which is worth little, I grant you - is that real change is not from forced lectures, but from organic growth.
Absolutely. Yet education is an important part of that growth. Over the last two months have you not learned anything from the discussion here that might change the way you see, define, or interpret racism? I don't mean that to suggest you've got your head up your ass. I mean that I have picked up on a few things that I might not have recognized as being problematic, and as a similarly thoughtful guy I reckon you have, as well. If what Starbucks is doing is no different than what ConSan is doing here, then I don't have a problem with it. I don't see it as coercive or forcing a mode of thought upon people.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: contest_sanity on May 30, 2018, 01:57:43 PM
Special just for BOSK (as a Golden State fan): Jeremy Lin and Steph Curry have a funny moment over the lyrics to the YG song "My N*gga" -- still relevant to our discussion here:

https://youtu.be/izB8P8oyhJk?t=241 (https://youtu.be/izB8P8oyhJk?t=241)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 30, 2018, 02:01:12 PM
You mean the point of hypersensitivity?  No, I think it is a fairly recent development.  In the '70s, you could hear it used on public TV.  I mean, not without any objection.  But not the mass outrage even a private, "innocent" use the term will elicit today.  Unless I misunderstand your point, I don't agree.
I like your distinction between hyper-sensitivity and hyper-awareness. That said, times have changed, as have attitudes. I grew up watching the same shows as you, and we didn't think anything of it. Now if I'm watching a show from the 60s or 70s and I hear it it's a bit of a shock. There's a little twinge there because I realize that it's no longer as acceptable as it once was. You'll never hear me say that a show should be taken off the air, but I am more than just "aware." 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 30, 2018, 02:19:45 PM
Special just for BOSK (as a Golden State fan): Jeremy Lin and Steph Curry have a funny moment over the lyrics to the YG song "My N*gga" -- still relevant to our discussion here:

https://youtu.be/izB8P8oyhJk?t=241 (https://youtu.be/izB8P8oyhJk?t=241)

:lol  I love that.

You mean the point of hypersensitivity?  No, I think it is a fairly recent development.  In the '70s, you could hear it used on public TV.  I mean, not without any objection.  But not the mass outrage even a private, "innocent" use the term will elicit today.  Unless I misunderstand your point, I don't agree.
I like your distinction between hyper-sensitivity and hyper-awareness. That said, times have changed, as have attitudes. I grew up watching the same shows as you, and we didn't think anything of it. Now if I'm watching a show from the 60s or 70s and I hear it it's a bit of a shock. There's a little twinge there because I realize that it's no longer as acceptable as it once was. You'll never hear me say that a show should be taken off the air, but I am more than just "aware." 

Yeah, exactly.  And this probably doesn't need to be said, but:  I'm NOT suggesting that the lack of awareness/sensitivity back then was a good thing and that we should go back to it.  I'm just saying that times were different, that's all.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Adami on May 30, 2018, 02:30:29 PM
I think one big thing that changed, at least from my limited perception is who is doing the shouting and how loud it is.

Right now the loudest voices (in this context) are from liberals and using tools like social media to become much louder and feeling more free to speak up than people have previously. In the past, much of this kind of thing was from more of a conservative voice with no social media. They generally weren't quite as loud but had a ton of political power because that's what they went for, since there was no social media. Nowadays we just go for likes.


Let's not forget how so many people reacted to profanity in music or TV, or teaching sex-ed in schools.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on May 30, 2018, 04:56:38 PM
I'm not surprised many people have not thought about it, or at least not given enough empathic listening to that perspective which says: white people shouldn't use it even though people of color (at least many of them) have reclaimed usage of a form of it...

Straight while male take here but I don't like this "reclaiming" the word at all. The only way for people to stop using a word is for people to STOP using a word. This notion that different words "belong" to people is baloney. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Ben_Jamin on May 30, 2018, 07:01:22 PM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/kendrick-lamar-interrupts-white-fan-after-she-raps-the-n-word-onstage/ar-AAxB7XU?li=BBnb7Kz

Just read this article. In a nut shell Kendrick Lamar invited a white girl on stage to rap/sing along to his song and she did. The issue is that she said the N word. I guess I don't understand this. She sang the song word for word and she is obviously a fan of his since she was at his concert and and knew the words. She was not being racist by any means. He seemed nice enough and let her "try" again, but the whole story just seems odd to me.

I know I'm late to this....

That is just bullshit. Its almost Hypocritical to invite a (white) fan to sing along to a song that blatantly says NAEGGA. He likely did it to cause this very convo we are  having now
It was definitely a setup. It certainly doesn't help that the four line chorus he had them rap had like 6 instances of nigga in it. Having said that, what it would really come down to is if he was using nigga himself throughout his show. If he was censoring himself than she should have known better. Moreover, other people on stage, and her in an earlier instant, also censored themselves, so she knew it was at least something of an issue. In any case, once again I'll say that people need to learn to understand context and quit getting butthurt over unintentional "slights.".

Hence the stupidity of that word...if we want to overcome that. Why do we let words cause problems......its just stupid
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Ben_Jamin on May 30, 2018, 07:03:29 PM
Its exactly Mob Rule...

Roseanne just got her season cancelled for a simple tweet.

Imagine if everyone's beloved star said the very same?....
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 31, 2018, 12:16:36 AM
I basically agree with you, Bosk. My one quibble might be that while perhaps she wasn't purposefully being insensitive, the act still hits a lot of black people as being insensitive. Doesn't mean she's a bad person or was being malicious, yet she could still possibly stand to learn a little more about why, perhaps, she should alter her singing habits in the future.

Also, Chris Rock: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdlGeqwHjLE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdlGeqwHjLE)

But do you understand that part of the problem here is that in almost any other context, "offense" is a two-way street.   There's dialogue and the parties hopefully reach a point in the middle. Maybe I'm more sensitive to your feelings and maybe you are more understanding of what I meant.    Here, there is no such thing.  "Recognizing it's problematic" and "acting as if it is problematic" don't at all mean that it SHOULD be "problematic".   I would argue with you that since it is still such a hot button word, the idea that the black community has "reclaimed" the word is bull****.  The "reclamation" clearly has not released any of the pressure from the word.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 31, 2018, 12:26:04 AM
Absolutely. Yet education is an important part of that growth. Over the last two months have you not learned anything from the discussion here that might change the way you see, define, or interpret racism? I don't mean that to suggest you've got your head up your ass. I mean that I have picked up on a few things that I might not have recognized as being problematic, and as a similarly thoughtful guy I reckon you have, as well. If what Starbucks is doing is no different than what ConSan is doing here, then I don't have a problem with it. I don't see it as coercive or forcing a mode of thought upon people.

Of course I have.  You're right as rain here.  But see what I'm about to write to Adami... I think it fits...

I think one big thing that changed, at least from my limited perception is who is doing the shouting and how loud it is.

Right now the loudest voices (in this context) are from liberals and using tools like social media to become much louder and feeling more free to speak up than people have previously. In the past, much of this kind of thing was from more of a conservative voice with no social media. They generally weren't quite as loud but had a ton of political power because that's what they went for, since there was no social media. Nowadays we just go for likes.

And that's just as bad; "loud" does not equal "right".   That they can yell louder - and bully people into artificial but acceptable (for the moment) behavior is just as wrong in it's own way.    I'm going to torture the analogy here, but it's like a singer; when you go for sheer volume, you sacrifice tone and nuance and emotiveness.  And that's where we're heading, for better or worse, I think (very much for) the worse.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 31, 2018, 12:27:12 AM
Its exactly Mob Rule...

Roseanne just got her season cancelled for a simple tweet.

Imagine if everyone's beloved star said the very same?....

We don't have to imagine. Alec Baldwin.  Bill Maher.  (Well, Bill Maher is no one's "beloved" star, but still....).
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: contest_sanity on May 31, 2018, 03:56:20 AM
Straight while male take here but I don't like this "reclaiming" the word at all. The only way for people to stop using a word is for people to STOP using a word. This notion that different words "belong" to people is baloney.

Totally understand where you're coming from, and in fact there are many black people who just want the word to die a historical death. The NAACP even held a symbolic funeral for the word a few years ago. However, other black people DO believe in reclaiming the word as a serious tactic:

Linguistically, the phenomenon of a community taking a word meant as a slur and reappropriating it as a term of endearment is called semantic inversion or semantic looping. The word’s use by African Americans, wrote linguist Andrew T. Jacobs in 2002, "is a strategy for asserting the humanity of black people in the face of continuing racism, a strategy that celebrates an anti-assimilationist vision of African-American identity."

There is a full spectrum of opinions, actually, that is not influenced just by one's race but also one's age. I will link the Washington Post article below, but suffice to say that it alerted me to positions which I had not considered before, one of which was that of another professor who believes the word will eventually be completely accepted within mainstream society for anyone to use as a term of endearment akin to saying "my bro" or "my dude" -- so accepted that there would be no outrage surrounding the word at all. As a teacher of teenagers, I can attest that this is already happening in schools, where the form of the word ending in "a" is widespread (and not just among specifically black students). And, of course, the use of the word in rap lyrics has always presented white fans of hip-hop with a dilemma; a dilemma which some black artists have even navigated by telling white members of their audiences that it was ok to sing the word at their concerts (again: peep the article).

ESSENTIAL READING: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/11/09/the-n-word-an-entrenched-racial-slur-now-more-prevalent-than-ever/?utm_term=.cad55bd51e2a (https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2014/11/09/the-n-word-an-entrenched-racial-slur-now-more-prevalent-than-ever/?utm_term=.cad55bd51e2a)




Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 31, 2018, 07:36:43 AM
I get the scholastic aspect of this; but one of my pet bugaboos here (and elsewhere) is the notion of the "mob" as arbiter of some of these questions.    Why or how did "some rappers" get the authority to "give permission" to use the word and does that bind all of us?   The Kendrick Lamar issue is really indicative here:   he, by all accounts, appeared to make it acceptable - he implicitly "gave permission" - to use the word, then apparently rescinded that permission when it was acted on, almost as if to say "yeah, I told you to, but just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD."   

Please take it from me (someone who works with words every day and has in fact argued over "and" versus "or") that "codifying" something in fancy academic language doesn't make it so, doesn't make it right, and doesn't make it desirable.   It's like taking a Kiss song from 1973 and going back and saying "Ah, yes, the subtle interplay between the rhythm and lead guitars - one playing the root and one playing an inversion - coupled with the bass line - unusually playing a quasi-lead part using thirds and fifths of the harmonic minor scale - creates a tension that can only be resolved - and IS resolved - by the vocal, which beautifully completes the tonic scale."    No, none of that.  Gene was trying to get laid as often as possible, Ace was trying to get as high as possible, Peter was trying to get as rich as possible, and god knows what Paul was doing.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: XeRocks81 on May 31, 2018, 07:51:27 AM
social mores change over time.   I don't know if I'd call that "mob rule".
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: AngelBack on May 31, 2018, 07:56:51 AM
I get the scholastic aspect of this; but one of my pet bugaboos here (and elsewhere) is the notion of the "mob" as arbiter of some of these questions.    Why or how did "some rappers" get the authority to "give permission" to use the word and does that bind all of us?   The Kendrick Lamar issue is really indicative here:   he, by all accounts, appeared to make it acceptable - he implicitly "gave permission" - to use the word, then apparently rescinded that permission when it was acted on, almost as if to say "yeah, I told you to, but just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD."   

Please take it from me (someone who works with words every day and has in fact argued over "and" versus "or") that "codifying" something in fancy academic language doesn't make it so, doesn't make it right, and doesn't make it desirable.   It's like taking a Kiss song from 1973 and going back and saying "Ah, yes, the subtle interplay between the rhythm and lead guitars - one playing the root and one playing an inversion - coupled with the bass line - unusually playing a quasi-lead part using thirds and fifths of the harmonic minor scale - creates a tension that can only be resolved - and IS resolved - by the vocal, which beautifully completes the tonic scale."    No, none of that.  Gene was trying to get laid as often as possible, Ace was trying to get as high as possible, Peter was trying to get as rich as possible, and god knows what Paul was doing.


That was a joy to read, nominee for Post of the Year. :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 31, 2018, 08:18:02 AM
Absolutely. Yet education is an important part of that growth. Over the last two months have you not learned anything from the discussion here that might change the way you see, define, or interpret racism? I don't mean that to suggest you've got your head up your ass. I mean that I have picked up on a few things that I might not have recognized as being problematic, and as a similarly thoughtful guy I reckon you have, as well. If what Starbucks is doing is no different than what ConSan is doing here, then I don't have a problem with it. I don't see it as coercive or forcing a mode of thought upon people.

Of course I have.  You're right as rain here.  But see what I'm about to write to Adami... I think it fits...

I think one big thing that changed, at least from my limited perception is who is doing the shouting and how loud it is.

Right now the loudest voices (in this context) are from liberals and using tools like social media to become much louder and feeling more free to speak up than people have previously. In the past, much of this kind of thing was from more of a conservative voice with no social media. They generally weren't quite as loud but had a ton of political power because that's what they went for, since there was no social media. Nowadays we just go for likes.

And that's just as bad; "loud" does not equal "right".   That they can yell louder - and bully people into artificial but acceptable (for the moment) behavior is just as wrong in it's own way.    I'm going to torture the analogy here, but it's like a singer; when you go for sheer volume, you sacrifice tone and nuance and emotiveness.  And that's where we're heading, for better or worse, I think (very much for) the worse.
What we've been discussing here is the Starbucks training, which people here have assumed is indoctrination, as opposed to education.  You expressed concern that they were training their employees to be non-racist. As you put it, shoving tolerance down people's throats. What we're seeing is that it's more about pointing out how people can behave with racial bias without realizing it. I see no reason for outrage over the latter. In fact, as annoying as it may be to me, I think it's an overall benefit.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Chino on May 31, 2018, 08:22:26 AM
The Starbucks training went way beyond just racial judgement. From everything I've read, it focused heavily on how we perceive people (outside of race) without thinking about it. Everyone of us on this board is guilty of this from time to time. There's no way around it.

One example from Starbucks training involved a cashier observing an older, white, scruffy looking guy walking up to a woman in the store. The cashier misread the woman's visual cues (probably fueled by the man's looks and her idea of what that look meant) and told the man that panhandling wasn't allowed in the store. She assumed the guy was homeless and asking the woman for money. Turns out it was her husband.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 31, 2018, 09:32:03 AM
social mores change over time.   I don't know if I'd call that "mob rule".

Well, they are not the same, but they are intertwined.  I believe - or rather, I would suggest - that Bosk's "hypersensitivity" is the intersection point.   We recognize that the mores have to evolve, and we have the stimuli from the mob, and it's reflected in that hypersensitivity right now, until it can settle down.   

The problem here, which we keep going back to, is that "mores" are customs or characteristics of a society.   They are NOT rules.   There might be consequences for deviating from those customs, but generally those consequences are benign and subtle.   Tattoos are a great example; used to be, "tattoos" in and of themselves were a symbol of a deviation from the customary.  Was a time when the only people to have tattoos were military personnel and/or criminals.  That's clearly evolved, but in the meantime, no one was shamed, no one was bullied, no one was criminalized for having a tat.   About a year ago, I was in a bar, sitting next to a guy about my age, and on the other side a very attractive woman of about 25 or so - cute, blonde pixie cut, modest white tanktop, some pastel colored shorts... and a full sleeve down her right arm - comes up and orders a round of drinks for her table.  She leaves and the guy next to me says "She's your kid's kindergarten teacher", meaning, the times have changed and we don't even think twice about a full arm of tattoos on young women entrusted to care for our most precious cargo. 

The "punishment" - and let's not forget that it's a legit question as to whether there should even BE punishment here - for the violation of the "race" mores has become so beyond the scope of the underlying "crime" that it's now in the realm of "mob rule".   We're not administering subtle consequences  for choosing to walk a half-step out of step, no, we're now reigning down harsh consequences for same.  That's to me "mob rule".  That's to me forcing behaviors and thoughts to conform.  Not to "society" but to the preconceived acceptable form of society as espoused by a certain vocal ("loud") subsection of that society.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 31, 2018, 09:38:56 AM
Absolutely. Yet education is an important part of that growth. Over the last two months have you not learned anything from the discussion here that might change the way you see, define, or interpret racism? I don't mean that to suggest you've got your head up your ass. I mean that I have picked up on a few things that I might not have recognized as being problematic, and as a similarly thoughtful guy I reckon you have, as well. If what Starbucks is doing is no different than what ConSan is doing here, then I don't have a problem with it. I don't see it as coercive or forcing a mode of thought upon people.

Of course I have.  You're right as rain here.  But see what I'm about to write to Adami... I think it fits...

I think one big thing that changed, at least from my limited perception is who is doing the shouting and how loud it is.

Right now the loudest voices (in this context) are from liberals and using tools like social media to become much louder and feeling more free to speak up than people have previously. In the past, much of this kind of thing was from more of a conservative voice with no social media. They generally weren't quite as loud but had a ton of political power because that's what they went for, since there was no social media. Nowadays we just go for likes.

And that's just as bad; "loud" does not equal "right".   That they can yell louder - and bully people into artificial but acceptable (for the moment) behavior is just as wrong in it's own way.    I'm going to torture the analogy here, but it's like a singer; when you go for sheer volume, you sacrifice tone and nuance and emotiveness.  And that's where we're heading, for better or worse, I think (very much for) the worse.
What we've been discussing here is the Starbucks training, which people here have assumed is indoctrination, as opposed to education.  You expressed concern that they were training their employees to be non-racist. As you put it, shoving tolerance down people's throats. What we're seeing is that it's more about pointing out how people can behave with racial bias without realizing it. I see no reason for outrage over the latter. In fact, as annoying as it may be to me, I think it's an overall benefit.

No, no, I get you and don't really disagree.   I was really more concerned with one step further.  You and I (and I think most people here) see that S-Bux training for what it was and I think you articulated that very well.  I don't at all have any faith that the SJWs see it that same way.   I'm always for more education over less, and I'm sure I could learn a thing or two from a well-presented class.  I'm worried that the next time it WON'T be the positive "pointing out" to people, but will be the indoctrination.  When the "loudest voice" gets involved, the nuance of your explanation will undoubtedly be lost. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on May 31, 2018, 10:06:35 AM
The Starbucks training went way beyond just racial judgement. From everything I've read, it focused heavily on how we perceive people (outside of race) without thinking about it. Everyone of us on this board is guilty of this from time to time. There's no way around it.

One example from Starbucks....

That's not a good example though. The Starbucks gal looked at the dude, consciously thought, "hmmm.... looks like a bum, dressed like a bum, acting like a bum... probably a bum." That's not the same as the unconscious bias the training was supposed to address.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: kaos2900 on May 31, 2018, 01:16:06 PM
social mores change over time.   I don't know if I'd call that "mob rule".

Well, they are not the same, but they are intertwined.  I believe - or rather, I would suggest - that Bosk's "hypersensitivity" is the intersection point.   We recognize that the mores have to evolve, and we have the stimuli from the mob, and it's reflected in that hypersensitivity right now, until it can settle down.   

The problem here, which we keep going back to, is that "mores" are customs or characteristics of a society.   They are NOT rules.   There might be consequences for deviating from those customs, but generally those consequences are benign and subtle.   Tattoos are a great example; used to be, "tattoos" in and of themselves were a symbol of a deviation from the customary.  Was a time when the only people to have tattoos were military personnel and/or criminals.  That's clearly evolved, but in the meantime, no one was shamed, no one was bullied, no one was criminalized for having a tat.   About a year ago, I was in a bar, sitting next to a guy about my age, and on the other side a very attractive woman of about 25 or so - cute, blonde pixie cut, modest white tanktop, some pastel colored shorts... and a full sleeve down her right arm - comes up and orders a round of drinks for her table.  She leaves and the guy next to me says "She's your kid's kindergarten teacher", meaning, the times have changed and we don't even think twice about a full arm of tattoos on young women entrusted to care for our most precious cargo. 

The "punishment" - and let's not forget that it's a legit question as to whether there should even BE punishment here - for the violation of the "race" mores has become so beyond the scope of the underlying "crime" that it's now in the realm of "mob rule".   We're not administering subtle consequences  for choosing to walk a half-step out of step, no, we're now reigning down harsh consequences for same.  That's to me "mob rule".  That's to me forcing behaviors and thoughts to conform.  Not to "society" but to the preconceived acceptable form of society as espoused by a certain vocal ("loud") subsection of that society.

The "punishment" aspect of this is interesting to me. Rosanne got fired for telling a joke. The quality of the joke can and should be debated but I've heard way worse and offensive things from other comedians. Still, she got fired for typing some words which many deemed offensive and ultimately she'll be deemed a pariah and will probably never "work" in the business again. This is the land where child molesters and convicted murders can get second chances yet an offensive tweet, joke, etc. makes you nonredeemable? Just seems like we have priorities and values out of whack.

Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 31, 2018, 01:21:05 PM
I would argue that she got fired for damaging the brand of her employer.

And she'll be fine.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 31, 2018, 01:28:11 PM
And another famous female comedienne who has recently been making her bones as a "political commentator" just called another woman a "feckless c***" and implied - strongly - that she was involved in an incestuous relationship with her father.   Fired?  Nope.   Show cancelled?  Nope.   Actually, not a word from the station for which she works.   One "apology tweet" and the partisan double-standard bias train continues on to the next station, on schedule!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/samantha-bee-apologizes-for-%e2%80%98inappropriate-and-inexcusable%e2%80%99-ivanka-trump-insult/ar-AAy4BMZ?ocid=ientp
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: XeRocks81 on May 31, 2018, 01:28:37 PM
I would argue that she got fired for damaging the brand of her employer.

And she'll be fine.

for real, we haven't seen the last of Roseanne, for better or worse.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on May 31, 2018, 01:42:51 PM
social mores change over time.   I don't know if I'd call that "mob rule".

Well, they are not the same, but they are intertwined.  I believe - or rather, I would suggest - that Bosk's "hypersensitivity" is the intersection point.   We recognize that the mores have to evolve, and we have the stimuli from the mob, and it's reflected in that hypersensitivity right now, until it can settle down.   

The problem here, which we keep going back to, is that "mores" are customs or characteristics of a society.   They are NOT rules.   There might be consequences for deviating from those customs, but generally those consequences are benign and subtle.   Tattoos are a great example; used to be, "tattoos" in and of themselves were a symbol of a deviation from the customary.  Was a time when the only people to have tattoos were military personnel and/or criminals.  That's clearly evolved, but in the meantime, no one was shamed, no one was bullied, no one was criminalized for having a tat.   About a year ago, I was in a bar, sitting next to a guy about my age, and on the other side a very attractive woman of about 25 or so - cute, blonde pixie cut, modest white tanktop, some pastel colored shorts... and a full sleeve down her right arm - comes up and orders a round of drinks for her table.  She leaves and the guy next to me says "She's your kid's kindergarten teacher", meaning, the times have changed and we don't even think twice about a full arm of tattoos on young women entrusted to care for our most precious cargo. 

The "punishment" - and let's not forget that it's a legit question as to whether there should even BE punishment here - for the violation of the "race" mores has become so beyond the scope of the underlying "crime" that it's now in the realm of "mob rule".   We're not administering subtle consequences  for choosing to walk a half-step out of step, no, we're now reigning down harsh consequences for same.  That's to me "mob rule".  That's to me forcing behaviors and thoughts to conform.  Not to "society" but to the preconceived acceptable form of society as espoused by a certain vocal ("loud") subsection of that society.

The "punishment" aspect of this is interesting to me. Rosanne got fired for telling a joke. The quality of the joke can and should be debated but I've heard way worse and offensive things from other comedians. Still, she got fired for typing some words which many deemed offensive and ultimately she'll be deemed a pariah and will probably never "work" in the business again. This is the land where child molesters and convicted murders can get second chances yet an offensive tweet, joke, etc. makes you nonredeemable? Just seems like we have priorities and values out of whack.
I would argue that she got fired for damaging the brand of her employer.

And she'll be fine.

I would argue that both arguments have some validity to them.  But the one thing your argument does not really take into account is the bias issue that Stadler highlighted. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Chino on May 31, 2018, 01:45:48 PM
I have a hard time wrapping my head around how someone can sit through a whole episode of Full Frontal let alone watch it regularly. Even as a pretty liberal person, she's extremely cringe worthy to me. Her show makes no effort to reach anyone other than the lowest common denominator of the left.

I'd be willing to wager that Fox picks up Roseanne, especially seeing as they recently picked up Last Man Standing. My concern with Roseanne would be not being able to get all of the cast members willing to sign on again.

Also, the network did apologize for Samantha Bee. It's a garbage and hollow apology, obviously, but they still said something.

"Samantha Bee has taken the right action in apologizing for the vile and inappropriate language she used about Ivanka Trump last night. Those words should not have been aired. It was our mistake too, and we regret it."
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: kaos2900 on May 31, 2018, 01:46:22 PM
And another famous female comedienne who has recently been making her bones as a "political commentator" just called another woman a "feckless c***" and implied - strongly - that she was involved in an incestuous relationship with her father.   Fired?  Nope.   Show cancelled?  Nope.   Actually, not a word from the station for which she works.   One "apology tweet" and the partisan double-standard bias train continues on to the next station, on schedule!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/samantha-bee-apologizes-for-%e2%80%98inappropriate-and-inexcusable%e2%80%99-ivanka-trump-insult/ar-AAy4BMZ?ocid=ientp

And I'm sure she's really sorry.  ::)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 31, 2018, 01:55:54 PM
This is getting out of control.  I don't agree with Samantha Bee using that word.

But it is interesting to me that Ted Nugent can call Hillary the same word and be cordially invited to The White House.

One wonders where this will all end.   :justjen
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on May 31, 2018, 02:01:25 PM
edit: Oh, and then there's that ^^^^^^^

social mores change over time.   I don't know if I'd call that "mob rule".

Well, they are not the same, but they are intertwined.  I believe - or rather, I would suggest - that Bosk's "hypersensitivity" is the intersection point.   We recognize that the mores have to evolve, and we have the stimuli from the mob, and it's reflected in that hypersensitivity right now, until it can settle down.   

The problem here, which we keep going back to, is that "mores" are customs or characteristics of a society.   They are NOT rules.   There might be consequences for deviating from those customs, but generally those consequences are benign and subtle.   Tattoos are a great example; used to be, "tattoos" in and of themselves were a symbol of a deviation from the customary.  Was a time when the only people to have tattoos were military personnel and/or criminals.  That's clearly evolved, but in the meantime, no one was shamed, no one was bullied, no one was criminalized for having a tat.   About a year ago, I was in a bar, sitting next to a guy about my age, and on the other side a very attractive woman of about 25 or so - cute, blonde pixie cut, modest white tanktop, some pastel colored shorts... and a full sleeve down her right arm - comes up and orders a round of drinks for her table.  She leaves and the guy next to me says "She's your kid's kindergarten teacher", meaning, the times have changed and we don't even think twice about a full arm of tattoos on young women entrusted to care for our most precious cargo. 

The "punishment" - and let's not forget that it's a legit question as to whether there should even BE punishment here - for the violation of the "race" mores has become so beyond the scope of the underlying "crime" that it's now in the realm of "mob rule".   We're not administering subtle consequences  for choosing to walk a half-step out of step, no, we're now reigning down harsh consequences for same.  That's to me "mob rule".  That's to me forcing behaviors and thoughts to conform.  Not to "society" but to the preconceived acceptable form of society as espoused by a certain vocal ("loud") subsection of that society.

The "punishment" aspect of this is interesting to me. Rosanne got fired for telling a joke. The quality of the joke can and should be debated but I've heard way worse and offensive things from other comedians. Still, she got fired for typing some words which many deemed offensive and ultimately she'll be deemed a pariah and will probably never "work" in the business again. This is the land where child molesters and convicted murders can get second chances yet an offensive tweet, joke, etc. makes you nonredeemable? Just seems like we have priorities and values out of whack.
I would argue that she got fired for damaging the brand of her employer.

And she'll be fine.

I would argue that both arguments have some validity to them.  But the one thing your argument does not really take into account is the bias issue that Stadler highlighted.
It's a business decision. If the social climate were such that calling Trump's minions would result in a boycott of your product then we'd see greater consequences. The reality is that you can't assail random black women but you can go after Trump's minions.

And this won't matter to most, but I think there's a difference in the level of the insults. That Bee woman was addressing Ivanka directly. Rosanne took a random shot at somebody most of us had never heard of, based allegedly on her race.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 31, 2018, 02:58:42 PM
This is getting out of control.  I don't agree with Samantha Bee using that word.

But it is interesting to me that Ted Nugent can call Hillary the same word and be cordially invited to The White House.

One wonders where this will all end.   :justjen

Well, it ends when we can recognize the process for what it is: bullying and mob rule.   I personally don't want Samantha Bee fired - it's her prerogative to call someone whatever she wants; the incest thing is approaching slander, but it's not my case to bring - and I could care less about Ted Nugent (and counter with a Harvey Weinstein, the "good friend" of Michelle Obama).   Highlighting examples isn't the point - at least, it isn't MY point, because it implies one side is right and one side is wrong.    My point is more basic.   The problem for me is when we're celebrating SOME authenticity because we, the mob, is down with it at that point in time, but castigating others' authenticity because it "offends our sensibility". To me there ought to be NO sides.   

If there's a person, somewhere, that is offended that someone else is a racist - i.e. gravitates to racist ideologies - then for the life of me I can't fathom why it's not acceptable that there be a person, somewhere, that is offended that someone else is a homosexual.   Or pro-life; or pro-choice; or pro-Dream Theater; or pro-Sons of Apollo.   We've partitioned ourselves off into sides, and with sides comes disagreement, and with disagreement comes conflict, then, like children, we wonder, "why did that happen?"
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on May 31, 2018, 03:11:29 PM
But wait, didn't you bring her up in the conversation?  Why do that if you don't see anything wrong with what she said?

Frankly, I find the contortions some people are finding themselves in pretty amusing.

But nothing amuses me more than being lectured to about "vile and vicious language" by the White House.   :lol
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on May 31, 2018, 08:08:08 PM
But wait, didn't you bring her up in the conversation?  Why do that if you don't see anything wrong with what she said?

Frankly, I find the contortions some people are finding themselves in pretty amusing.

But nothing amuses me more than being lectured to about "vile and vicious language" by the White House.   :lol

There is absolutely zero contorting over here.  NONE.  I celebrate free speech almost to an absolute.    Sam Bee should be able to say what she wants (to a degree) and Roseanne should be able to say what SHE wants, to the same degree.    I pointed out Sam Bee because of the hypocrisy of the left and the mob that DEMANDS Roseanne be fired IMMEDIATELY, with her castmates scattering like roaches in the light, whereas Sam Bee says something that is arguably as offensive and not only does she get a slap on the wrist, but Kathy Griffin, Sally Field (in her own "c***"-laced tweet where she basically doubled down and said Ivanka isn't even good enough to be a "c***") and others have stepped on their pantyhose to back her up and praised her "courage".

Trust me; I've played sports for the better part of 30 years and been married for almost 20; it takes absolutely ZERO courage to call someone a "c***".  In fact, it takes exactly the same amount of courage as calling someone an "ape". 

As for the White House, that just makes it more subjective and more obnoxious.  I'm not exactly sure what we're calling "vile and vicious", but it is just another data point to show that the mob is not reliable enough to be the 'police officer' here.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on May 31, 2018, 09:05:10 PM
Feckless will be Webster's Word of the Year for 2018. I am calling it now. Or maybe it will be n***a.

Straight while male take here but I don't like this "reclaiming" the word at all. The only way for people to stop using a word is for people to STOP using a word. This notion that different words "belong" to people is baloney.

Linguistically, the phenomenon of a community taking a word meant as a slur and reappropriating it as a term of endearment is called semantic inversion or semantic looping. The word’s use by African Americans, wrote linguist Andrew T. Jacobs in 2002, "is a strategy for asserting the humanity of black people in the face of continuing racism, a strategy that celebrates an anti-assimilationist vision of African-American identity."

Boy that is a word salad. "...anti-assimilationist vision of African-American identity."  :huh: Is calling each other n***a really the best way you can figure to "assert your humanity?"

.....another professor who believes the word will eventually be completely accepted within mainstream society for anyone to use as a term of endearment akin to saying "my bro" or "my dude" -- so accepted that there would be no outrage surrounding the word at all.

Interesting. From the article:
Quote
“Let evolution happen. Let pop culture take that word away to the ocean, and let anyone use it. . . . That word’s not meant for us anymore. ‘Nigga’ is a part of pop culture. It’s just a word, but it shouldn’t be chained to us, for lack of a better word. It shouldn’t be a part of who we are.”

Why would we let "pop culture" define who can say what, where, when, and how? Why is Kendrick Lamar the arbiter of cultural mores?
Otherwise I agree it shouldn't be part of who you are.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Harmony on June 01, 2018, 08:14:40 AM
But wait, didn't you bring her up in the conversation?  Why do that if you don't see anything wrong with what she said?

Frankly, I find the contortions some people are finding themselves in pretty amusing.

But nothing amuses me more than being lectured to about "vile and vicious language" by the White House.   :lol

There is absolutely zero contorting over here.  NONE.

That part was meant as a general statement.  Not directed at anyone here.  That's why I said "some people" and not "you".
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on June 01, 2018, 10:53:05 AM
But wait, didn't you bring her up in the conversation?  Why do that if you don't see anything wrong with what she said?

Frankly, I find the contortions some people are finding themselves in pretty amusing.

But nothing amuses me more than being lectured to about "vile and vicious language" by the White House.   :lol

There is absolutely zero contorting over here.  NONE.

That part was meant as a general statement.  Not directed at anyone here.  That's why I said "some people" and not "you".

No, I get it; just using your word.   Even if you DID direct it at me, we're good. It's a good conversation. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: vtgrad on June 01, 2018, 02:05:28 PM
This is getting out of control.  I don't agree with Samantha Bee using that word.

But it is interesting to me that Ted Nugent can call Hillary the same word and be cordially invited to The White House.

One wonders where this will all end.   :justjen

Personally, I don't think it ever will end.  As long as someone is offended by a word (vowel and consonant sounds), someone else will use it as an offense... and someone else will be "OK" with certain people using the word and "not OK" with certain people using the word.  I guess it's up to us to make up our own minds about what we (spoken in the collective) will let offend us and what we won't... what we will consider fightn' words and what we will let run off our backs as the opinions or idiocies of someone else.

Our culture and our news/entertainment providers will reflect and feed on each other always I think (creating a loop); they're simply giving us what they think we want to see.  I don't understand why Rosanne is cancelled (not taking her part, just making a point), yet S. Bee can throw that term out and keep her show while Nugent is invited to the White House after using the same term... and I don't think we're (again used in the collective) meant to understand it.  We're just meant to absorb it into our culture and argue about who should be fired and who shouldn't... when that's not really the issue.  Maybe the issue is why do we try to hurt each other in the first place?  Or perhaps why do we let words take us to this point to begin with and give the people using these words the attention they're trying to amass and reward them by flooding the media with these stories?



Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on June 01, 2018, 02:09:53 PM
We're just meant to absorb it into our culture and argue about who should be fired and who shouldn't... when that's not really the issue.  Maybe the issue is why do we try to hurt each other in the first place?

Or perhaps they are BOTH issues worthy of discussion?  The importance of one doesn't necessarily disqualify the importance of the other.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: vtgrad on June 01, 2018, 02:28:19 PM
We're just meant to absorb it into our culture and argue about who should be fired and who shouldn't... when that's not really the issue.  Maybe the issue is why do we try to hurt each other in the first place?

Or perhaps they are BOTH issues worthy of discussion?  The importance of one doesn't necessarily disqualify the importance of the other.

That's an equitable point.  Maybe a better way for me to phrase it would be for us (the collective society) to try and tackle the issue of the root-cause (hurting each other in the first place) with as much fervor and energy with which we attack the symptoms of that root-cause.  Again, I'm not speaking specifically of DTF, I'm speaking of our society in general (the collective I mentioned earlier).
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on June 01, 2018, 02:57:04 PM
Oh, I know.  And I agree with you.  I'm just not sure what we do about it, other than each of us individually trying to be the best version of ourselves that we can.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: KevShmev on June 03, 2018, 09:00:46 PM
My 13-year old nephew recently said to me how he finds a bit how confusing how the n-word is supposed to be so wrong, yet a bunch of black kids at his school say it.  One black kid and he are friendly and the kid occasionally refers to my nephew as "my n-word" (with the -a at the end, not -er) in a friendly way.  I said to him, "Don't ever say that back to him or think it is okay to say that word to anyone."  He asked why it was okay for some to say it and not okay for others, and I said, "I don't have a good answer for that, but just never say it."  He said he wouldn't and I believe him.  He is a great kid.  :coolio
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Chino on June 04, 2018, 06:15:37 AM
My 13-year old nephew recently said to me how he finds a bit how confusing how the n-word is supposed to be so wrong, yet a bunch of black kids at his school say it.  One black kid and he are friendly and the kid occasionally refers to my nephew as "my n-word" (with the -a at the end, not -er) in a friendly way.  I said to him, "Don't ever say that back to him or think it is okay to say that word to anyone."  He asked why it was okay for some to say it and not okay for others, and I said, "I don't have a good answer for that, but just never say it."  He said he wouldn't and I believe him.  He is a great kid.  :coolio

(https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohhwJAYFO4u2LRLA4/source.gif)
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on June 04, 2018, 07:56:33 AM
One, I've been saying this - about "hurting others" for a while now.   It's baffling to me how so many see these shootings and latch onto guns; I may say it more kindly in person, but I make no bones about the fact that I think the people that see these shootings and immediately jump to "gun control" are either opportunists at worst, or misguided and simply not doing the homework at best.    For me, the real point in all that is how we've cultivated a group of kids - human beings that supposedly are learning OUR morals and OUR values - that have such ease in KILLING - in cold blood - their friends, classmates and peers.   We talk a lot about how "easy" it is kill with a gun, but frankly, I don't see how it's "easy" to kill at all.  Whether it's a close-up knife to the throat or a bullet at 10 yards (school shootings are not exactly long-range target contests; that last kid used a shotgun which is useless beyond say 40 yards with someone who knows what they're doing, perhaps 20 if you don't) you still have to look at these people in the eye and watch them suffer.  I cry when I hit a squirrel in the street.  I can't imagine watching the life flow out of someone I've perhaps known for 10 or more years.   

Observation:  if the "intent" matters, as so many say it does (and I don't believe at this point) why does "-a" and "-er" make a difference?   Why is that somehow a magic bullet that allows (some) to use the word and others not?
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: vtgrad on June 04, 2018, 01:24:14 PM
Oh, I know.  And I agree with you.  I'm just not sure what we do about it, other than each of us individually trying to be the best version of ourselves that we can.

Other than what you just wrote, I don't know of any other way.   I don't know what to do about it less a fundamental change at the root of all of us.

My 13-year old nephew recently said to me how he finds a bit how confusing how the n-word is supposed to be so wrong, yet a bunch of black kids at his school say it.  One black kid and he are friendly and the kid occasionally refers to my nephew as "my n-word" (with the -a at the end, not -er) in a friendly way. 

I didn't grow up rough at all, but I hung out with some very good friends who did (friends that I still have to this day); they were of differing races all but we bonded over basketball and then 6 of us became very, very close friends... as in going to family funerals close.  Not sure that happens much these days with the early and mid teens (don't know because I'm not a father).

Anyway, the three gentlemen of our group that are black always called all of us "my n-with an a"... and one of those men still to this day will call me that when I see him.  It's a term of love and respect between us all... and growing up I did see a distinction between "n with an a" and "n with an er".

Playing ball in a rough neighborhood (where the best games always were anyway) on one fine August afternoon, I personally was approached by an older guy (mid 20s probably; I was 14) who accused me of exposing myself to his sister (which of course I did NOT do)... he wasn't having my denials and was starting to try and grab me.  To my amazement (still amazing when I think about it), all 9 of the guys on the court with me had my back and proceeded to beat this guy to a pulp.  He didn't really help himself any during the beat-down by calling all of the guys "n with an er".... seemed to make everyone a bit more upset.

Two older men come out of the apartment complex and break up the fight (more amazing still that we didn't get in trouble with the law) and one of my black friends told the men that "I had to take up for my n-with an a"; mid-20s that got his a$$ handed to him didn't understand why it was OK for my friend to refer to me with that word as it was one of the reasons given to the older men for the beat-down in the first place (dude was screaming it at the top of his lungs... he's honestly lucky that one of those two men didn't finish the job my friends started).  My friend said "I'm using it with love, you're using it with hate".  It's all in the context I guess.

Honestly, it's nice to hear that about your nephew... that's nothing but a good thing in my eyes!  Though I think your advice was right.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 12, 2018, 07:40:07 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/papa-johns-founder-john-schnatter-resigns-as-chairman-of-companys-board-after-apologizing-for-racial-slur/ar-AAzW6Kd?ocid=ientp

Well, I think we've answered our question:  there is NO acceptable use of the "n-word" by white Americans.    Schnatter - admittedly not the brightest bulb on the tree to start with and already in racial hot water - apparently didn't call anyone a "n*****".   He was commenting on some of the PR struggles he and his company had faced, and lamented that "Colonel Sanders called black people 'n******'".   A factual (if true) statement about one man, not a commentary on a particular race.   And yet, he's out, the company is likely to lose a major endorsement (with Major League Baseball) and we all get to feel smug and useful that we "combatted racism!" like bosses. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: cramx3 on July 12, 2018, 07:45:44 AM
The statement alone isn't terrible, but the following line in the article:

Quote
The call was a role-playing exercise for Schnatter to prevent future public relations fumbles.

Seems like he failed that.  That's a really poor example to use in a conference call even if it wasn't him using the word at someone.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Kattelox on July 12, 2018, 07:47:02 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/papa-johns-founder-john-schnatter-resigns-as-chairman-of-companys-board-after-apologizing-for-racial-slur/ar-AAzW6Kd?ocid=ientp

Well, I think we've answered our question:  there is NO acceptable use of the "n-word" by white Americans.    Schnatter - admittedly not the brightest bulb on the tree to start with and already in racial hot water - apparently didn't call anyone a "n*****".   He was commenting on some of the PR struggles he and his company had faced, and lamented that "Colonel Sanders called black people 'n******'".   A factual (if true) statement about one man, not a commentary on a particular race.   And yet, he's out, the company is likely to lose a major endorsement (with Major League Baseball) and we all get to feel smug and useful that we "combatted racism!" like bosses.

I posted about this at the other place but I don't see any reason why Schnatter had to say that. I don't think there was any reason for him to use it in the context of business or a conference call, there were a thousand other ways for him to make his point. He already caused damage to the company with his statements about NFL protest kneeling, he did it again by dropping the freaking N word in a business setting. I agree the context of his usage is far from the worst thing, but there really wasn't any good reason he should've said that. That + the recent controversy over the NFL does not exactly paint the man in a good light with respect to racial conversation topics. Just because it's true doesn't mean it's sensible to say. People should use their heads.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Chino on July 12, 2018, 07:54:03 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/papa-johns-founder-john-schnatter-resigns-as-chairman-of-companys-board-after-apologizing-for-racial-slur/ar-AAzW6Kd?ocid=ientp

Well, I think we've answered our question:  there is NO acceptable use of the "n-word" by white Americans.    Schnatter - admittedly not the brightest bulb on the tree to start with and already in racial hot water - apparently didn't call anyone a "n*****".   He was commenting on some of the PR struggles he and his company had faced, and lamented that "Colonel Sanders called black people 'n******'".   A factual (if true) statement about one man, not a commentary on a particular race.   And yet, he's out, the company is likely to lose a major endorsement (with Major League Baseball) and we all get to feel smug and useful that we "combatted racism!" like bosses.

I'm in agreement with you on this. There's plenty to on hate Papa John about, but this isn't one of them. If I were to say in conversation "One time my roommate in college called a black dude a n***** to his face and got the shit kicked out of him", does that make me a racist? 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 12, 2018, 07:57:58 AM
All fair points, but sort of off the main one, and that is, whether there are 1 or 1000 other ways to have said it, the fact is that TODAY, he can't - not "SHOULDN'T" but "CAN'T" - say that one.   So we've gotten to the point that the very USE of the word is "offensive" and problematic, and not the intent behind it.   I find that to be disturbing. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 12, 2018, 07:59:22 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/papa-johns-founder-john-schnatter-resigns-as-chairman-of-companys-board-after-apologizing-for-racial-slur/ar-AAzW6Kd?ocid=ientp

Well, I think we've answered our question:  there is NO acceptable use of the "n-word" by white Americans.    Schnatter - admittedly not the brightest bulb on the tree to start with and already in racial hot water - apparently didn't call anyone a "n*****".   He was commenting on some of the PR struggles he and his company had faced, and lamented that "Colonel Sanders called black people 'n******'".   A factual (if true) statement about one man, not a commentary on a particular race.   And yet, he's out, the company is likely to lose a major endorsement (with Major League Baseball) and we all get to feel smug and useful that we "combatted racism!" like bosses.

I'm in agreement with you on this. There's plenty to on hate Papa John about, but this isn't one of them. If I were to say in conversation "One time my roommate in college called a black dude a n***** to his face and got the shit kicked out of him", does that make me a racist?

According to the scenario above, yes it does. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on July 12, 2018, 08:13:33 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/papa-johns-founder-john-schnatter-resigns-as-chairman-of-companys-board-after-apologizing-for-racial-slur/ar-AAzW6Kd?ocid=ientp

Well, I think we've answered our question:  there is NO acceptable use of the "n-word" by white Americans.    Schnatter - admittedly not the brightest bulb on the tree to start with and already in racial hot water - apparently didn't call anyone a "n*****".   He was commenting on some of the PR struggles he and his company had faced, and lamented that "Colonel Sanders called black people 'n******'".   A factual (if true) statement about one man, not a commentary on a particular race.   And yet, he's out, the company is likely to lose a major endorsement (with Major League Baseball) and we all get to feel smug and useful that we "combatted racism!" like bosses.

I posted about this at the other place but I don't see any reason why Schnatter had to say that. I don't think there was any reason for him to use it in the context of business or a conference call, there were a thousand other ways for him to make his point. He already caused damage to the company with his statements about NFL protest kneeling, he did it again by dropping the freaking N word in a business setting. I agree the context of his usage is far from the worst thing, but there really wasn't any good reason he should've said that. That + the recent controversy over the NFL does not exactly paint the man in a good light with respect to racial conversation topics. Just because it's true doesn't mean it's sensible to say. People should use their heads.

We can argue all day long about whether or not he should have said it, or whether there were 1,000 or 1,000,000 better examples he could have used.  But it really doesn't matter.  What he said was completely benign.  People need to get a grip on the concept of context.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 08:17:41 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/papa-johns-founder-john-schnatter-resigns-as-chairman-of-companys-board-after-apologizing-for-racial-slur/ar-AAzW6Kd?ocid=ientp

Well, I think we've answered our question:  there is NO acceptable use of the "n-word" by white Americans.    Schnatter - admittedly not the brightest bulb on the tree to start with and already in racial hot water - apparently didn't call anyone a "n*****".   He was commenting on some of the PR struggles he and his company had faced, and lamented that "Colonel Sanders called black people 'n******'".   A factual (if true) statement about one man, not a commentary on a particular race.   And yet, he's out, the company is likely to lose a major endorsement (with Major League Baseball) and we all get to feel smug and useful that we "combatted racism!" like bosses.

I'm in agreement with you on this. There's plenty to on hate Papa John about, but this isn't one of them. If I were to say in conversation "One time my roommate in college called a black dude a n***** to his face and got the shit kicked out of him", does that make me a racist?

According to the scenario above, yes it does.

No it does not.  What it does say is that Papa John has very bad judgement on what he says, and when he says it.  As Chairman, on a conference call, he used extremely poor judgement in his comments.  He is being forced to resign because he is STUPID.  He may be a racist or he may not be......this incident only proves he is stupid.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on July 12, 2018, 08:27:08 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/papa-johns-founder-john-schnatter-resigns-as-chairman-of-companys-board-after-apologizing-for-racial-slur/ar-AAzW6Kd?ocid=ientp

Well, I think we've answered our question:  there is NO acceptable use of the "n-word" by white Americans.    Schnatter - admittedly not the brightest bulb on the tree to start with and already in racial hot water - apparently didn't call anyone a "n*****".   He was commenting on some of the PR struggles he and his company had faced, and lamented that "Colonel Sanders called black people 'n******'".   A factual (if true) statement about one man, not a commentary on a particular race.   And yet, he's out, the company is likely to lose a major endorsement (with Major League Baseball) and we all get to feel smug and useful that we "combatted racism!" like bosses.

I'm in agreement with you on this. There's plenty to on hate Papa John about, but this isn't one of them. If I were to say in conversation "One time my roommate in college called a black dude a n***** to his face and got the shit kicked out of him", does that make me a racist?

According to the scenario above, yes it does.

No it does not.  What it does say is that Papa John has very bad judgement on what he says, and when he says it.  As Chairman, on a conference call, he used extremely poor judgement in his comments.  He is being forced to resign because he is STUPID.  He may be a racist or he may not be......this incident only proves he is stupid.
The uproar wasn't because he was a nitwit or lacked sound judgement. The uproar was because he--gasp--said the N-word! If he'd said he wanted to add smoldering turds as a topping, or offer free pies to every third customer wearing a green tie on odd numbered days during even numbered hours, the whole thing wouldn't have blown up. Chino is correct and context is obsolete in modern America.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 08:36:37 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/papa-johns-founder-john-schnatter-resigns-as-chairman-of-companys-board-after-apologizing-for-racial-slur/ar-AAzW6Kd?ocid=ientp

Well, I think we've answered our question:  there is NO acceptable use of the "n-word" by white Americans.    Schnatter - admittedly not the brightest bulb on the tree to start with and already in racial hot water - apparently didn't call anyone a "n*****".   He was commenting on some of the PR struggles he and his company had faced, and lamented that "Colonel Sanders called black people 'n******'".   A factual (if true) statement about one man, not a commentary on a particular race.   And yet, he's out, the company is likely to lose a major endorsement (with Major League Baseball) and we all get to feel smug and useful that we "combatted racism!" like bosses.

I'm in agreement with you on this. There's plenty to on hate Papa John about, but this isn't one of them. If I were to say in conversation "One time my roommate in college called a black dude a n***** to his face and got the shit kicked out of him", does that make me a racist?

According to the scenario above, yes it does.

No it does not.  What it does say is that Papa John has very bad judgement on what he says, and when he says it.  As Chairman, on a conference call, he used extremely poor judgement in his comments.  He is being forced to resign because he is STUPID.  He may be a racist or he may not be......this incident only proves he is stupid.
The uproar wasn't because he was a nitwit or lacked sound judgement. The uproar was because he--gasp--said the N-word! If he'd said he wanted to add smoldering turds as a topping, or offer free pies to every third customer wearing a green tie on odd numbered days during even numbered hours, the whole thing wouldn't have blown up. Chino is correct and context is obsolete in modern America.

I respectfully disagree.  Context is exactly why he is resigning.  Due to what happened previously with his comments, coupled with his very public position with the company, he should have exercised better judgement on a public conference call.  It was clear to any intelligent person that his use of that word, regardless of context, would be toxic.  Also, there is some reasonable play in the interpretation in how he used it as well.  I am not intimately familiar with the call, but it seems that it could have been interpreted as excusing or rationalizing his previous use of the word?  Either way, context here IS important.  Is what he said "racist" in a vacuum?  Probably not.  But by using it to, even in a tiny way, to explain/rationalize/excuse the previous use of the word, is VERY poor judgement.  Coupled with the fact that he should have known better in his position....I just see it as him being fired for being STUPID, not racist. 

Take out the word at use here....he would be gone if he used MANY other words, TWICE, as a representative of his brand and company........This would be the same story if he used the word Cunt.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Kattelox on July 12, 2018, 10:33:55 AM
There's no way to even think it's acceptable to use that in a business setting. In his home, in privacy? Go for it, say it all you want. But he did not have very good judgment using that word no matter how 'polite' he was trying to be with his point... it's very careless.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on July 12, 2018, 10:44:43 AM
There's no way to even think it's acceptable to use that in a business setting.

I respectfully disagree.  Unwise?  Sure.  Unacceptable?  No--at least in this context.  If he were indeed using it as a racial slur, then yes.  But he wasn't.  He was clearly using an example of another business using it that way, and using that story to basically have an example of conduct that EVERYONE could easily agree was wrong.  That is perfectly benign.  Again, I'm not saying it was smart.  But I cannot remotely say it was unacceptable.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Kattelox on July 12, 2018, 10:50:32 AM
There's no way to even think it's acceptable to use that in a business setting.

I respectfully disagree.  Unwise?  Sure.  Unacceptable?  No--at least in this context.  If he were indeed using it as a racial slur, then yes.  But he wasn't.  He was clearly using an example of another business using it that way, and using that story to basically have an example of conduct that EVERYONE could easily agree was wrong.  That is perfectly benign.  Again, I'm not saying it was smart.  But I cannot remotely say it was unacceptable.

The conference call was about sensitivity training, and he drops the N-word. So not only does he have poor judgment, he's tone deaf! He's surprised that a guy born in 1890 wasn't publicly lambasted for using the N word? None of this makes sense. Absolutely is unacceptable, doesn't matter that he wasn't using it as a racial slur, again, there's countless other ways for him to make his point. It's extremely poor judgment. But that's my two cents.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 11:07:20 AM
There's no way to even think it's acceptable to use that in a business setting.

I respectfully disagree.  Unwise?  Sure.  Unacceptable?  No--at least in this context.  If he were indeed using it as a racial slur, then yes.  But he wasn't.  He was clearly using an example of another business using it that way, and using that story to basically have an example of conduct that EVERYONE could easily agree was wrong.  That is perfectly benign.  Again, I'm not saying it was smart.  But I cannot remotely say it was unacceptable.

The conference call was about sensitivity training, and he drops the N-word. So not only does he have poor judgment, he's tone deaf! He's surprised that a guy born in 1890 wasn't publicly lambasted for using the N word? None of this makes sense. Absolutely is unacceptable, doesn't matter that he wasn't using it as a racial slur, again, there's countless other ways for him to make his point. It's extremely poor judgment. But that's my two cents.

And his reputation is directly tied to the success of the company.  He is not smart enough to realize what he is saying and the damage it causes.  If I were on the Board, I would want him out too.  Take the history of the word out of it....heck take the actual word out of it.  He exhibited behavior detrimental to the company and brand.....then does it again?  100% deserves to be separated from the company.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sylvan on July 12, 2018, 11:12:51 AM
Am I the only one who finds it funny that a PRIVATE meeting with a PUBLIC RELATIONS company regarding damage control has become a PUBLIC RELATIONS NIGHTMARE? All these people are so very professional...
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 11:15:54 AM
Am I the only one who finds it funny that a PRIVATE meeting with a PUBLIC RELATIONS company regarding damage control has become a PUBLIC RELATIONS NIGHTMARE? All these people are so very professional...

What makes you think this was a PRIVATE meeting, with any expectation of privacy?
They were on a conference call with a third party company.  If anyone thinks that saying anything on a conference call with ANYONE is sure to stay private, they should not be running a company.

"On the May call, Schnatter was asked how he would distance himself from racist groups online. He responded by downplaying the significance of his NFL statement. “Colonel Sanders called blacks n-----s,” Schnatter said, before complaining that Sanders never faced public backlash."

And he answered the question that way?  On a call designed as a role-playing exercise for Schnatter in an effort to prevent future public-relations snafus?  LOL.  No wonder he is gone.  How could he be trusted in the public....his reputation is directly tied to the company.  He was a risk, and rightfully let go. 
Racist?  I dont know or care.  Stupid with no self awareness?  Check.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Kattelox on July 12, 2018, 11:16:54 AM
There's no way to even think it's acceptable to use that in a business setting.

I respectfully disagree.  Unwise?  Sure.  Unacceptable?  No--at least in this context.  If he were indeed using it as a racial slur, then yes.  But he wasn't.  He was clearly using an example of another business using it that way, and using that story to basically have an example of conduct that EVERYONE could easily agree was wrong.  That is perfectly benign.  Again, I'm not saying it was smart.  But I cannot remotely say it was unacceptable.

The conference call was about sensitivity training, and he drops the N-word. So not only does he have poor judgment, he's tone deaf! He's surprised that a guy born in 1890 wasn't publicly lambasted for using the N word? None of this makes sense. Absolutely is unacceptable, doesn't matter that he wasn't using it as a racial slur, again, there's countless other ways for him to make his point. It's extremely poor judgment. But that's my two cents.

And his reputation is directly tied to the success of the company.  He is not smart enough to realize what he is saying and the damage it causes.  If I were on the Board, I would want him out too.  Take the history of the word out of it....heck take the actual word out of it.  He exhibited behavior detrimental to the company and brand.....then does it again?  100% deserves to be separated from the company.

Yeah, that's about where I'm at on this issue, too.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sylvan on July 12, 2018, 11:21:31 AM
Am I the only one who finds it funny that a PRIVATE meeting with a PUBLIC RELATIONS company regarding damage control has become a PUBLIC RELATIONS NIGHTMARE? All these people are so very professional...

What makes you think this was a PRIVATE meeting, with any expectation of privacy?
They were on a conference call with a third party company.  If anyone thinks that saying anything on a conference call with ANYONE is sure to stay private, they should not be running a company.

I suppose I may be naive to think that a public relations meeting regarding damage control for a major company wouldn't be in a public forum. I don't believe for one second that a journalist sitting in on this simply reported the "news". Which leads me to assume that this was "leaked" by someone on the inside, but just my assumption. And it's not like the company had an ethical or legal restriction of privacy, but it just seems like bad business practice for a public relations firm who works with other companies.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 11:26:05 AM
Am I the only one who finds it funny that a PRIVATE meeting with a PUBLIC RELATIONS company regarding damage control has become a PUBLIC RELATIONS NIGHTMARE? All these people are so very professional...

What makes you think this was a PRIVATE meeting, with any expectation of privacy?
They were on a conference call with a third party company.  If anyone thinks that saying anything on a conference call with ANYONE is sure to stay private, they should not be running a company.

I suppose I may be naive to think that a public relations meeting regarding damage control for a major company wouldn't be in a public forum. I don't believe for one second that a journalist sitting in on this simply reported the "news". Which leads me to assume that this was "leaked" by someone on the inside, but just my assumption. And it's not like the company had an ethical or legal restriction of privacy, but it just seems like bad business practice for a public relations firm who works with other companies.
Well I agree it wasn't PUBLIC, with a reporter on the line, and was indeed likely a leak....but I also I think it shouldn't be assumed it was the PR firm that leaked.  It could have been Papa Johns leak.  Could have been a lot of scenarios.
Could have been the final straw and proof to the Board that he is a liability.
The point is that no one at that level of business would believe that ANY conference call is 100% private. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: cramx3 on July 12, 2018, 11:33:19 AM
Well, I would think it should be private, but that's not really the issue, although that is kind of an issue today with leaks and whatnot.

However, if you are having a meeting with the CEO with the idea of making sure the CEO doesn't say anything stupid, since he has been known to do that before, and he actually does say something really dumb (not racist, but dumb) then I don't think it needs to be leaked or not for what he said, but he should probably be removed from his position since his actions cost his shareholders money.  I don't think this should give him the label as racist, but it should put him out of that position since he couldn't essentially pass this test.

Although the fact that he said the n word leaked has kind of cost him his reputation (I don't think that's fair, but we know the public will judge him) whereas they could have just let him step down and said they don't think he is fit to lead the company with out making what he said public.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 12, 2018, 12:51:31 PM
There's no way to even think it's acceptable to use that in a business setting.

I respectfully disagree.  Unwise?  Sure.  Unacceptable?  No--at least in this context.  If he were indeed using it as a racial slur, then yes.  But he wasn't.  He was clearly using an example of another business using it that way, and using that story to basically have an example of conduct that EVERYONE could easily agree was wrong.  That is perfectly benign.  Again, I'm not saying it was smart.  But I cannot remotely say it was unacceptable.

The conference call was about sensitivity training, and he drops the N-word. So not only does he have poor judgment, he's tone deaf! He's surprised that a guy born in 1890 wasn't publicly lambasted for using the N word? None of this makes sense. Absolutely is unacceptable, doesn't matter that he wasn't using it as a racial slur, again, there's countless other ways for him to make his point. It's extremely poor judgment. But that's my two cents.

That's the entire point, though.  He didn't just "drop the N-word".   We don't know EXACTLY what his point was, but as el Barto (rightly, in my view) pointed out, one of the interpretations was that times have changed, and you didn't actually HAVE to go to the "n-word" to get in trouble anymore.   It can fairly and objectively said that this was a "re-calibration" in order to do the right thing moving forward, and not a lament about times passed, or some way to get subversive racism back in the conversation.   

I'm with Bosk on this.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Kattelox on July 12, 2018, 12:56:29 PM
Gotta agree to disagree, personally. I just think it's incredibly poor judgment for someone on that level and a mistake someone at his level really shouldn't be making. He's not sitting at a bar with his buddies, it's business. Check yourself and be smart about business. I can't really say it's unfair (perhaps the effect on his reputation and the hyper liberal people calling for his head just because of this, yeah, that's unfair), but wow, what a dumb thing to do on his end, I am not surprised, particularly after throwing his hat into the NFL debacle just a few months earlier.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: cramx3 on July 12, 2018, 01:03:29 PM
He could have made the point a much better way though, I think that's really the point.  Also know your audience.  He missed that too.  Since his company is public, if I was a shareholder I'd vote to kick him out too.  His mouth is costing the company money and this instance wasn't the first time.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on July 12, 2018, 01:10:07 PM
Gotta agree to disagree, personally. I just think it's incredibly poor judgment for someone on that level and a mistake someone at his level really shouldn't be making. He's not sitting at a bar with his buddies, it's business. Check yourself and be smart about business. I can't really say it's unfair (perhaps the effect on his reputation and the hyper liberal people calling for his head just because of this, yeah, that's unfair), but wow, what a dumb thing to do on his end, I am not surprised, particularly after throwing his hat into the NFL debacle just a few months earlier.
I won't speak for Bosk and Stadler, but I suspect everybody agrees that it was poor judgement. For my part I don't think that's what the mob is upset about, nor do I think it speaks to his ability to run a pizza company.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 01:13:44 PM
Well I dont know what it speaks to in regards to running a company, but it clearly has ramifications to a public company's image, good-will, and bottom line.
I have also been noticing some interesting dichotomy in how this is viewed by some, and how Colin Kapernik is viewed.  I see some that think those who kneel during the anthem should be fired....but Papa Johns behavior is somehow ok.  Interesting.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on July 12, 2018, 01:17:46 PM
I dunno.  I'm kind of indifferent to any comparison.  I don't think the two situations are comparable.  So I don't think people who think Kap should be fired, but think this is ok are necessarily hypocrites.  However, a good many people who think that might very well be hypocrites, but for independent reasons.  If that makes sense.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 12, 2018, 01:22:17 PM
Gotta agree to disagree, personally. I just think it's incredibly poor judgment for someone on that level and a mistake someone at his level really shouldn't be making. He's not sitting at a bar with his buddies, it's business. Check yourself and be smart about business. I can't really say it's unfair (perhaps the effect on his reputation and the hyper liberal people calling for his head just because of this, yeah, that's unfair), but wow, what a dumb thing to do on his end, I am not surprised, particularly after throwing his hat into the NFL debacle just a few months earlier.
I won't speak for Bosk and Stadler, but I suspect everybody agrees that it was poor judgement. For my part I don't think that's what the mob is upset about, nor do I think it speaks to his ability to run a pizza company.

It was without question poor judgment.   That was never my point.  I also don't object to his being removed; a company can do that for virtually any reason at any time, and frankly, I have zero interest in whether Schnatter has a job or not.   My point was only that all this was triggered not by his intent - the actual usage wasn't even part of the conversation - just that he said it.   We can point to 100's of CEOs that have exhibited poor judgment at times, including poor judgment that impacted the potential future earnings of their companies, and yet were not relieved of their duties or pressured to relieve themselves (speaking of using poor judgment...), and we can point to 100's of CEOs that were removed from their positions simply because the Board of Directors felt like it.   I'm only maintaining that a large part of the consequences (and the degree of those consequences) are specifically tied to that particular word, and nothing else.   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 01:27:23 PM
His usage and context were used and considered. 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Kattelox on July 12, 2018, 01:33:06 PM
There's no reason for him to have said it. Corporate culture is super sterile, or should be...
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on July 12, 2018, 01:46:48 PM
His usage and context were used and considered. 

My biggest problem is that it would appear that the usage and context were NOT considered at all.  They certainly weren't considered by most of the media, judging by the fact that the headlines in most of the articles seem to be implying that the term was used in some context that makes him a racist, rather than just clueless and lacking good judgment.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 12, 2018, 02:02:52 PM
There's no reason for him to have said it. Corporate culture is super sterile, or should be...

Assuming you're right - and I don't necessarily think you are, but that's immaterial, since this isn't at all about  who's right or wrong - nonetheless he said it, and in a benign context.   He resigned, as is his right.   No problems there.  It was poor judgment.  No problems there.   

But this - https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/two-louisville-players-want-name-on-papa-johns-cardinal-stadium-to-change/ - is not about John Schnatter's business judgment.   He's already been removed from the equation.

The fact remains, he  used the word in a non-racist way, and yet many have reacted as if there is no distinction.  It's that inexact response - the blunt edge of the mob rule - that I am commenting on.

Incidentally; I put on the news this afternoon to get the weather (I have to cut the lawn) and it bled into "Daily Mail Online", a sickening (to me) quasi-news show that basically is a slightly higher-brow, non-Harvey Levin-hosted TMZ, and they referenced Roseanne Barr.  In that piece they referred no less than four times to her "shocking racist Twitter rant" and/or her "shocking racist Tweets", simply assuming at this point that we all agree they were both "shocking" and "racist".  One of our own posted a compelling argument here that they may not actually have been racist, in the specific sense of the word, but merely insensitive and an example of poor judgment.  Over time, though, the edges have been worn off, and we get lazy, and anything that even hints at race is de facto "racist".  It's that kind of sloppy analysis that has fed into many of the things we rightfully rail against here, like "Fake News" and the partisan generalization of "the other side".   
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 12, 2018, 02:04:07 PM
His usage and context were used and considered. 

My biggest problem is that it would appear that the usage and context were NOT considered at all.  They certainly weren't considered by most of the media, judging by the fact that the headlines in most of the articles seem to be implying that the term was used in some context that makes him a racist, rather than just clueless and lacking good judgment.

I don't at all feel like "usage and context" were considered, except in the most basic and literal sense (i.e. that he used the word, period). 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: cramx3 on July 12, 2018, 02:06:11 PM
His usage and context were used and considered. 

My biggest problem is that it would appear that the usage and context were NOT considered at all.  They certainly weren't considered by most of the media, judging by the fact that the headlines in most of the articles seem to be implying that the term was used in some context that makes him a racist, rather than just clueless and lacking good judgment.

I don't at all feel like "usage and context" were considered, except in the most basic and literal sense (i.e. that he used the word, period). 

I think usage and context were considered in showing him the door, but I don't think they were considered when the public labelled him a racist.  I totally agree with you and Bosk and others who have pointed out that the rush to judgement and characterization of being a racist is wrong.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 02:14:45 PM
His usage and context were used and considered. 

My biggest problem is that it would appear that the usage and context were NOT considered at all.  They certainly weren't considered by most of the media, judging by the fact that the headlines in most of the articles seem to be implying that the term was used in some context that makes him a racist, rather than just clueless and lacking good judgment.

"On the May call, Schnatter was asked how he would distance himself from racist groups online. He responded by downplaying the significance of his NFL statement. “Colonel Sanders called blacks n-----s,” Schnatter said, before complaining that Sanders never faced public backlash."

There is the context.  First he used the actual word again (not smart), then uses an comparison example from what era?? (so not smart), and then complains about the difference in the treatment Sanders got???  (bigly not smart).

Not sure how much more context is needed.  Him being a racist or not has nothing to do with it.  He's fucking stupid and a liability.

The comparison to the football players is apt IMO.
The football players are kneeling, and are 100% clear about the purpose, meaning, and intent.  Lets take Papa Johns acts at face value, and assign no malicious or racist intent on his use of the word, twice.  Yet the media, the people, the whatever, all make the story about something else.  Disrespecting our troops and flag on one side, and Racism on the other.  Yet on its face both are about neither of those narratives.  Yet companies can, and should, make decisions about their employees, if those employees negatively affect their bottom line, image, etc.
I really do not see much of a difference in the two examples....yet I see people coming to two different conclusions on each.
If you think a kneeling football player should be fired, but not Papa John, I am interested in knowing specifically WHY?
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 12, 2018, 02:23:54 PM
His usage and context were used and considered. 

My biggest problem is that it would appear that the usage and context were NOT considered at all.  They certainly weren't considered by most of the media, judging by the fact that the headlines in most of the articles seem to be implying that the term was used in some context that makes him a racist, rather than just clueless and lacking good judgment.

I don't at all feel like "usage and context" were considered, except in the most basic and literal sense (i.e. that he used the word, period). 

I think usage and context were considered in showing him the door, but I don't think they were considered when the public labelled him a racist.  I totally agree with you and Bosk and others who have pointed out that the rush to judgement and characterization of being a racist is wrong.

But the showing of the door isn't the important part.   They can dismiss him because they don't like the hem of his pants, and that's their right.  I don't care about him being fired (point: he resigned, but still).   I care about tarring and feathering him as a racist.  "Being stupid" doesn't make you a racist (even if being a racist might actually make you stupid, depending on your point of view). 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 02:24:09 PM
His usage and context were used and considered. 

My biggest problem is that it would appear that the usage and context were NOT considered at all.  They certainly weren't considered by most of the media, judging by the fact that the headlines in most of the articles seem to be implying that the term was used in some context that makes him a racist, rather than just clueless and lacking good judgment.

I don't at all feel like "usage and context" were considered, except in the most basic and literal sense (i.e. that he used the word, period). 

I think usage and context were considered in showing him the door, but I don't think they were considered when the public labelled him a racist.  I totally agree with you and Bosk and others who have pointed out that the rush to judgement and characterization of being a racist is wrong.

I dont know if one should label him as a racist for this.  But the fact that he used Sanders example, and complained that Sanders never got flak?  That has to be factored in.  Proof or Racism?  Maybe not.  But it is proof that his word was not just benign, literal, and innocent.  That is why I think he was shown the door.

If he had said the N word like this:  "I am really sorry I used the word Nigger, I am very ashamed".  Do you think he gets fired?  Hell No.
But he COMPLAINS that fucking Colonel Sanders gets to use it without backlash, but he doesnt?  LOL.  Yeah bye.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on July 12, 2018, 02:26:04 PM
Well, if you think that is an accurate representation of the context of either example, all I can say is, people believe what they want to believe.  I don't have anything useful to add.  :dunno:
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: cramx3 on July 12, 2018, 02:31:17 PM
I don't know enough about him as a person to label him or anyone a racist really.  Unless you make it real clear that is (which is not the case here, from what I can tell).  But even just saying the word doesn't make someone a racist in my mind.  HIs example was poor, but the example does not make someone racist either. 

And if that's the real issue here, then I guess I've been arguing something that we all agree about all day  :lol
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 02:32:49 PM
all I can say is, people believe what they want to believe. 

I agree 100%.  Given the context and information at hand, I can see the case for both sides (in regards to racism) in moderation.
The narratives that he is a raging racist, along with the one that it was an innocent/sterile/literal/benign use of the word are simply not plausible from the information.  Truth is somewhere on the spectrum in between.

Maybe the truth is that he is a mix of racially insensitive....and losing self-awareness/judgement.  Not good as a Chairman/CEO/Brand Ambassador.

Regardless, his actions were 100% fucking idiotic, given his particular circumstances, and he has only himself to blame for being canned.  Like I said, take the N word out, and replace with another touchy word not related to racism.  Same results.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Kattelox on July 12, 2018, 02:35:46 PM
There's no reason for him to have said it. Corporate culture is super sterile, or should be...

Assuming you're right - and I don't necessarily think you are, but that's immaterial, since this isn't at all about  who's right or wrong - nonetheless he said it, and in a benign context.   He resigned, as is his right.   No problems there.  It was poor judgment.  No problems there.   

But this - https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/two-louisville-players-want-name-on-papa-johns-cardinal-stadium-to-change/ - is not about John Schnatter's business judgment.   He's already been removed from the equation.

That's a wholly separate topic, though, respectfully. For the record I think the knee jerk outrage and wanting that "change" is absurd and it pisses me off.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on July 12, 2018, 02:37:04 PM
If he had said the N word like this:  "I am really sorry I used the word Nigger, I am very ashamed".  Do you think he gets fired?  Hell No.

I definitely think he gets both shown the door, and tarred and feathered, as Stadler put it. But maybe that opens the door for him to do an interview with Oprah, get his image rehabilitated, so to speak.

Researching this led me to Jonathan Friedland, https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/jonathan-friedland-exits-netflix-1122675 Particularly:

Quote
For non-Black people, the word should not be spoken as there is almost no context in which it is appropriate or constructive (even when singing a song or reading a script).

So yeah, You can't use it, ever, unless you are black.

Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Kattelox on July 12, 2018, 02:42:57 PM
I think if it's in a song, screw it, say it. Anyone hear the recent story about Kendrick Lamar stopping a performance because he brought a white girl on stage to sing one of his songs, that had "nigga" in it? She said it, he stopped the show and lectured her about it. Ridiculous. If you don't want whitey saying it, don't put it in the damn song.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: cramx3 on July 12, 2018, 02:44:05 PM
Quote
For non-Black people, the word should not be spoken as there is almost no context in which it is appropriate or constructive (even when singing a song or reading a script).

So yeah, You can't use it, ever, unless you are black.

As much as I think this is terrible, in the sense that it's almost racist in and of itself to only allow one race to use a word, but the reality is that this is the truth of the world we live in.  There is no way I can use that word in public and not get pounced on, even in the most benign way.  Even if I think it's wrong, I have to be responsible and understand the reality, especially if you are a CEO of a public company and simply just never use the word.  It's not really the end of the world at the end of the day though, it's just a word and I have no real reason to use it, I can think of other words to use in it's place and in worst case just say "the n word". 
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sylvan on July 12, 2018, 02:44:44 PM
As far as I can find, he only said it once, and it was the reported time on the conference call. The call was about his remarks regarding the NFL protests, which did not include any racially insensitive words, just using them as a scape goat for poor numbers. He wasn't referencing Sanders in regards to ALSO being able to use the word without criticism. He was being a little cry baby bitch and using Sanders as an example of a MUCH GREATER infraction that didn't even draw as much negativity as his comments about the NFL. If anything, he even acknowledges with that the idea that using that word is BAD, and also worse than what he's already done. At the very least, I have a hard time finding this an "unacceptable" use. His being a little cry baby bitch is the common theme here, and that's bad for business.

Quote
For non-Black people, the word should not be spoken as there is almost no context in which it is appropriate or constructive (even when singing a song or reading a script).

So yeah, You can't use it, ever, unless you are black.

And they even use the word ALMOST when implying an absolute lol.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 12, 2018, 02:48:57 PM
If he had said the N word like this:  "I am really sorry I used the word Nigger, I am very ashamed".  Do you think he gets fired?  Hell No.

I definitely think he gets both shown the door, and tarred and feathered, as Stadler put it. But maybe that opens the door for him to do an interview with Oprah, get his image rehabilitated, so to speak.

Researching this led me to Jonathan Friedland, https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/jonathan-friedland-exits-netflix-1122675 Particularly:

Quote
For non-Black people, the word should not be spoken as there is almost no context in which it is appropriate or constructive (even when singing a song or reading a script).

So yeah, You can't use it, ever, unless you are black.

Does that bother you?  It does me.   We can't now fully analyze Lyndon Johnson's presidency or Agatha Christie's canon.   This wiki page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Little_Indians - is "inappropriate' and "not constructive". 

More importantly, it takes the easy way out.  I've written before that I believe (and there is some scholarly evidence that supports this; that's been documented in multiple places including the discussion about the Sarasota kid that didn't get to go to the prom) that forcing this stuff under the rug, artificially, doesn't snuff it out but in fact helps it thrive.   For those that are actually racist, forcing people to change their words doesn't encourage or incent them to change their thinking.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 02:53:32 PM
If he had said the N word like this:  "I am really sorry I used the word Nigger, I am very ashamed".  Do you think he gets fired?  Hell No.

I definitely think he gets both shown the door, and tarred and feathered, as Stadler put it. But maybe that opens the door for him to do an interview with Oprah, get his image rehabilitated, so to speak.

Researching this led me to Jonathan Friedland, https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/jonathan-friedland-exits-netflix-1122675 Particularly:

Quote
For non-Black people, the word should not be spoken as there is almost no context in which it is appropriate or constructive (even when singing a song or reading a script).

So yeah, You can't use it, ever, unless you are black.

Does that bother you?  It does me.   We can't now fully analyze Lyndon Johnson's presidency or Agatha Christie's canon.   This wiki page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Little_Indians - is "inappropriate' and "not constructive". 

More importantly, it takes the easy way out.  I've written before that I believe (and there is some scholarly evidence that supports this; that's been documented in multiple places including the discussion about the Sarasota kid that didn't get to go to the prom) that forcing this stuff under the rug, artificially, doesn't snuff it out but in fact helps it thrive.   For those that are actually racist, forcing people to change their words doesn't encourage or incent them to change their thinking.

It doesn't bother me for a couple reasons.  I don't work at Netflix lol.  I also know that this sentiment is an ultra low percentage of how most people feel, and is a reactionary statement protecting the brand.  Yes you have to be sensitive and aware.  No you should not eliminate it from the non-Black lexicon.  Making a big deal about this CEOs letter is, well, fear-mongering.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: jammindude on July 12, 2018, 03:12:33 PM
So.....I’m not allowed to even say the title of a Richard Pryor album....its title....the name of it...I can’t say it. I have to say “That Richard Pryor album”, “Well, which album?”, “The one with the name I can’t say.” (Which actually doesn’t narrow it down)

Is that what’s being said here?

So wait, if a theater company wanted to recreate the famous SNL skit with Chevy Chase and Richard Pryor (which I believe Richard Pryor wrote) we wouldn’t be able to perform it because the white guy says the N word??
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 03:15:13 PM
So.....I’m not allowed to even say the title of a Richard Pryor album....its title....the name of it...I can’t say it. I have to say “That Richard Pryor album”, “Well, which album?”, “The one with the name I can’t say.” (Which actually doesn’t narrow it down)

Is that what’s being said here?

So wait, if a theater company wanted to recreate the famous SNL skit with Chevy Chase and Richard Pryor (which I believe Richard Pryor wrote) we wouldn’t be able to perform it because the white guy says the N word??

For Fucks Sake NO.  That is not what you are, or are not allowed to do.
It is simply the opinion of the (misguided IMO) Netflix CEO.  Nothing more, nothing less.  An opinion of one fucking person.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: El Barto on July 12, 2018, 03:39:20 PM
I think Eric inadvertently hit on something important. He described Schnatter's remarks as perhaps racially insensitive. I don't really have a problem with that description. That's a far cry from racist, though, and we no longer seem to be able to discern between the two when reaching for our pitchforks. Is there no room to consider that maybe someone was being insensitive but not necessarily hateful, bigoted, or otherwise deserving of being set on fire? Insensitivity happens. It happens a lot. You explain to somebody why that might be a problem and you let them learn from it. Except in 21st century America, apparently, where you banish them from "civilized" society.

I suppose distinguishing between insensitive and bigoted requires a similar process as discerning the context of the remarks to begin with. That's too much work, and we've become far too intellectually lazy to bother with all of that nonsense.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: eric42434224 on July 12, 2018, 04:34:14 PM
I think Eric inadvertently hit on something important. He described Schnatter's remarks as perhaps racially insensitive. I don't really have a problem with that description. That's a far cry from racist, though, and we no longer seem to be able to discern between the two when reaching for our pitchforks. Is there no room to consider that maybe someone was being insensitive but not necessarily hateful, bigoted, or otherwise deserving of being set on fire? Insensitivity happens. It happens a lot. You explain to somebody why that might be a problem and you let them learn from it. Except in 21st century America, apparently, where you banish them from "civilized" society.

I suppose distinguishing between insensitive and bigoted requires a similar process as discerning the context of the remarks to begin with. That's too much work, and we've become far too intellectually lazy to bother with all of that nonsense.

Not inadvertently :)  That was exactly my point.  Somewhere between the full on RACIST and innocent benign ANGEL most people gravitate toward.

Also, yes insensitivity happens, and can be treated as a learning opportunity.....but if you are a problem child on a short leash and on notice, racial insensitivity might just be the straw that breaks the camels back.  Context and history matter.  I have a feeling Papa was more on the naughty list than the nice list with the Board, and was clearly on notice due to the nature of the call (I even heard he talked about times in his home state when they used to drag Blacks to death behind cars...just really poor judgement)....he just handed them a bunch of straw.  Its corporate America....dont give your enemies the ammo to shoot you.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Ben_Jamin on July 12, 2018, 06:24:41 PM
I think if it's in a song, screw it, say it. Anyone hear the recent story about Kendrick Lamar stopping a performance because he brought a white girl on stage to sing one of his songs, that had "nigga" in it? She said it, he stopped the show and lectured her about it. Ridiculous. If you don't want whitey saying it, don't put it in the damn song.

Or better yet, don't invite a non-black person to sing a song with the word in it. Thats entirely Kendricks fault, that girl only did it because he pulled her on stage to sing that part.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Chino on July 12, 2018, 08:52:50 PM
She should have said "wigger" instead.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 13, 2018, 09:43:21 AM
Rachel Dolezal just called; she said she's offended.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Stadler on July 13, 2018, 09:54:02 AM
I think Eric inadvertently hit on something important. He described Schnatter's remarks as perhaps racially insensitive. I don't really have a problem with that description. That's a far cry from racist, though, and we no longer seem to be able to discern between the two when reaching for our pitchforks. Is there no room to consider that maybe someone was being insensitive but not necessarily hateful, bigoted, or otherwise deserving of being set on fire? Insensitivity happens. It happens a lot. You explain to somebody why that might be a problem and you let them learn from it. Except in 21st century America, apparently, where you banish them from "civilized" society.

I suppose distinguishing between insensitive and bigoted requires a similar process as discerning the context of the remarks to begin with. That's too much work, and we've become far too intellectually lazy to bother with all of that nonsense.

This is where I am parked.    It's just lazy intellect and that's a dead end street.  that's what leads to "Free gas!" and "Build a wall!" and "Deplorable!" and "Tariffs!".   

It's not a crime to be "insensitive".  And I argue that even the "learning moment" is an option to be taken or not.   It's not my place - nor anyone else's - to FORCE people to be what is ultimately going to be arbitrarily "sensitive".  Is it "insensitive" to say "Jesus Christ!" when expressing frustration or anger with something?  Yes.   Is it "insensitive" to go on a date with someone and then "ghost" them the next day?   Yes.   Is it "insensitive" to stand there at a concert with your phone up and on "record" when there are people behind you?   Yes.  Is it insensitive to go into the men's room and relieve yourself of that Mexican lunch you just had and not courtesy flush?  Yes.  Is it "insensitive" to haul your groceries to your car and leave the cart where it was when you pulled your Cheerios out of it to put in your backseat?  Yes. 

But none of those are illegal, and, in my opinion, none of those should result in any consequences beyond the immediate, person-to-person reaction.   I should not be shaming el Barto because he didn't call that girl that gave him a handy after the Maiden show (I'm kidding, and if that actually happened, it's purely guesswork on my part).    That's his decision, and his conscience, and his issue to work out with the girl.   I've already said, I have no beef with Schnatter resigning, that's his call, and none of this is to say "he should have his job".  I don't care about that.  I care about the intellectual sloth that we're exhibiting around this issue, and, in many ways, forcing on others.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Ben_Jamin on July 13, 2018, 10:05:22 AM
I think Eric inadvertently hit on something important. He described Schnatter's remarks as perhaps racially insensitive. I don't really have a problem with that description. That's a far cry from racist, though, and we no longer seem to be able to discern between the two when reaching for our pitchforks. Is there no room to consider that maybe someone was being insensitive but not necessarily hateful, bigoted, or otherwise deserving of being set on fire? Insensitivity happens. It happens a lot. You explain to somebody why that might be a problem and you let them learn from it. Except in 21st century America, apparently, where you banish them from "civilized" society.

I suppose distinguishing between insensitive and bigoted requires a similar process as discerning the context of the remarks to begin with. That's too much work, and we've become far too intellectually lazy to bother with all of that nonsense.

This is where I am parked.    It's just lazy intellect and that's a dead end street.  that's what leads to "Free gas!" and "Build a wall!" and "Deplorable!" and "Tariffs!".   

It's not a crime to be "insensitive".  And I argue that even the "learning moment" is an option to be taken or not.   It's not my place - nor anyone else's - to FORCE people to be what is ultimately going to be arbitrarily "sensitive".  Is it "insensitive" to say "Jesus Christ!" when expressing frustration or anger with something?  Yes.   Is it "insensitive" to go on a date with someone and then "ghost" them the next day?   Yes.   Is it "insensitive" to stand there at a concert with your phone up and on "record" when there are people behind you?   Yes.  Is it insensitive to go into the men's room and relieve yourself of that Mexican lunch you just had and not courtesy flush?  Yes.  Is it "insensitive" to haul your groceries to your car and leave the cart where it was when you pulled your Cheerios out of it to put in your backseat?  Yes. 

But none of those are illegal, and, in my opinion, none of those should result in any consequences beyond the immediate, person-to-person reaction.   I should not be shaming el Barto because he didn't call that girl that gave him a handy after the Maiden show (I'm kidding, and if that actually happened, it's purely guesswork on my part).    That's his decision, and his conscience, and his issue to work out with the girl.   I've already said, I have no beef with Schnatter resigning, that's his call, and none of this is to say "he should have his job".  I don't care about that.  I care about the intellectual sloth that we're exhibiting around this issue, and, in many ways, forcing on others.

I agree with you here. The media are making it out to be racially motivated, because he said the word. Wheter it was used in a bigotry way doesn't matter, its the fact he said the word.

The context is him being dumb, by saying "If sanders said it without backlash, why can't I?" He didn't even have to say the word either for that statement to mean the same thing.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: sylvan on July 13, 2018, 10:18:07 AM
The context is him being dumb, by saying "If sanders said it without backlash, why can't I?" He didn't even have to say the word either for that statement to mean the same thing.

It was more like, "If Sanders can say THAT and not face any backlash, why am I getting all this shit for what I said about the NFL protests?"
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on July 13, 2018, 10:22:19 AM
The context is him being dumb, by saying "If sanders said it without backlash, why can't I?" He didn't even have to say the word either for that statement to mean the same thing.

Despite what Eric has said, that is NOT the context.  He wasn't saying "If sanders said it without backlash, why can't I?"  As I understood his point, he was showing how times have changed and how much progress we have made, with what Sanders said as being an obvious example of something that is unacceptable, but just wasn't recognized as such back then.  And then contrasting that with his comments about the NFL protests.

EDIT:  ninja'd by Sylvan
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Ben_Jamin on July 13, 2018, 10:30:03 AM
The context is him being dumb, by saying "If sanders said it without backlash, why can't I?" He didn't even have to say the word either for that statement to mean the same thing.

Despite what Eric has said, that is NOT the context.  He wasn't saying "If sanders said it without backlash, why can't I?"  As I understood his point, he was showing how times have changed and how much progress we have made, with what Sanders said as being an obvious example of something that is unacceptable, but just wasn't recognized as such back then.  And then contrasting that with his comments about the NFL protests.

EDIT:  ninja'd by Sylvan

Ahh...I get ya.

Still, the media are making this more than it really is. If he was smart and didn't use that word, this topic wouldnt be newsworthy. Unless, he thought that call was personal without a thought of it being leaked. If he knew that, he'd likely (only those who know him would really know) have not said that word.
Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: bosk1 on July 13, 2018, 10:46:13 AM
I'll re-cast it as a different and admittedly more benign issue.  It's like if he said something like:

"Remember when we had slavery?  We all know that was pretty messed up.  Can you believe the country thought that was okay?  But us paying our people minimum wage isn't 'slavery' and shouldn't be compared to something that messed up, so we are we getting flack for it?" 

Again, admittedly, the word he used is different.  But he was citing historical precedent and agreeing that it was something that was wrong and NOT to be condoned.  That isn't racist.  It isn't "wrong" in any real way.  It's just that it is such an emotionally charged word that people lose their minds to such a degree when they hear it that they apparently lose all ability to contextualize and figure out that what is actually being said is NOT somehow bigoted or offensive.  His mistake was in not having the judgment to recognize and/or acknowledge that fact.  Apparently, we are indeed at a place in society where you CAN'T say it, no matter the context, and he is being held accountable for that reality.

Title: Re: The n-word and its use
Post by: Cool Chris on July 13, 2018, 12:07:07 PM
Apparently, we are indeed at a place in society where you CAN'T say it, no matter the context,...

You meant people who aren't black can't say it.

This didn't take long.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/24088014/university-louisville-drops-papa-john-name-stadium

Interesting note: "The naming rights deal for the football stadium is unique because the school's deal is with Schnatter, not the Papa John's brand."