Donald Trump elected President of the United States - Deal with it, lmao
1,893 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Zyler;51344976]The historical and scientific consensus is that the term has always been used in a derogatory context in English.[/QUOTE]
Then what word did people who didn't want to refer to black people in a derogatory context use at the time?
[QUOTE=_Axel;51345024]Then what word did people who didn't want to refer to black people in a derogatory context use at the time?[/QUOTE]
They didn't.
Black people were considered inferior to white people. That's what I've been saying.
[QUOTE=killerteacup;51344968]The only difference between the two is the group they refer to and the relative age of those words. But I'd appreciate it if you could provide some reasons why you think they're different instead of insulting him and then saying the phrase 'rethink your logic' as if that means the sentence you just made was intellectually credible in any way[/QUOTE]
They're similar in the fact that they're derogatory linguistic deformation of preexisting words, and that's all they have in common.
Comparing the two is ignoring very important social and historical factors, the etymology of both words, their past and present value as non-insults (which is to say, were they ever used as non-insults and if so did it occur before or after they became insults), and it's drawing unnecessary shortcuts between two very different cases.
Not to mention that the censorship of the word nigger is criticized regularly for how it sacralizes the insulting nature of the term. Establishing a link between Tranny and Nigger also means that you're willing to build the same kind of impractical, idiotic and counter-productive sacred barrier around the word with all the issues it entices.
Put simply, it's completely counter-intuitive and counter-productive to compare these two words and will only cause harm rather than good. You don't have to compare the word Tranny to anything to be able to point out its insulting nature and trying to build these sorts of comparisons will only give way to more sterile semantic arguments and confusion on all sides.
[QUOTE=Zyler;51345029]They didn't.
Black people were considered inferior to white people. That's what I've been saying.[/QUOTE]
Absolutely nobody at the time ever referred to them in a positive manner?
You can't say a word has a certain meaning if there were exceptions to its uses and no better word to use for them.
[QUOTE=_Axel;51345041]Absolutely nobody at the time ever referred to them in a positive manner?[/QUOTE]
No. Everyone from scientists to teachers to priests to police to entertainers told everybody else that they were completely and totally inferior to white people.
[url]http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/nigger-word-brief-history[/url]
[QUOTE]The hierarchy was set up by an ideology that justified the use of deceit, exploitation, and intimidation to keep Blacks "in their place." Every major societal establishment offered legitimacy to the racial hierarchy. Ministers preached that God was White and had condemned Blacks to be servants. Scientists measured Black skulls, brains, faces, and genitalia, seeking to prove that Whites were genetically superior to Blacks. White teachers, teaching only White students, taught that Blacks were less evolved cognitively, psychologically, and socially. The entertainment media, from vaudeville to television and film, portrayed Blacks as docile servants, happy-go-lucky idiots, and dangerous thugs, and they still do this today. The criminal justice system sanctioned a double standard of justice, including its unspoken approval of mob violence against Blacks and there is still a similar double standard today. Both American slavery and the Jim Crow laws which followed were saturated by anti-Black laws and images. The negative portrayals of Blacks were both reflected in and shaped by everyday material objects: toys, postcards, ashtrays, detergent boxes, fishing lures, and children’s books. These items, and countless others, portrayed Blacks with bulging, darting eyes, fire-red oversized lips, jet-Black skin, and either naked or poorly clothed.[/QUOTE]
It would be very difficult to refer to black people in a way that wasn't derogatory if you lived in America in the 1800s, even if you wanted to. Everything from education, entertainment to the very language itself was set up in a way that made it easy to disparage black people.
[QUOTE=Zyler;51344976][url]http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/nigger-word-brief-history[/url]
The historical and scientific consensus is that the term has always been used in a derogatory context in English.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Zyler;51345048]No. Everyone from scientists to teachers to priests to police to entertainers told everybody else that they were completely and totally inferior to white people.
[url]http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/nigger-word-brief-history[/url][/QUOTE]
Extremely debatable seeing as these studies are met with industrial amounts of hindsight that are rarely taken into account.
What is now perceived as negative may have simply been the generally accepted status quo at the time, meaning something we now perceive as derogatory was likely just a piece of every day life for everyone then.
The word gained more and more traction as a pure insult until it reached an unambiguous use as such [I]much later[/I] in its existence among the English vocabulary. It didn't come out of nowhere as an insult from day one and there's no established breaking point by which people started to unanimously use it as an insult.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;51345035]They're similar in the fact that they're derogatory linguistic deformation of preexisting words, and that's all they have in common.
Comparing the two is ignoring very important social and historical factors, the etymology of both words, their past and present value as non-insults (which is to say, were they ever used as non-insults and if so did it occur before or after they became insults), and it's drawing unnecessary shortcuts between two very different cases.
Not to mention that the censorship of the word nigger is criticized regularly for how it sacralizes the insulting nature of the term. Establishing a link between Tranny and Nigger also means that you're willing to build the same kind of impractical, idiotic and counter-productive sacred barrier around the word with all the issues it entices.
Put simply, it's completely counter-intuitive and counter-productive to compare these two words and will only cause harm rather than good. You don't have to compare the word Tranny to anything to be able to point out its insulting nature and trying to build these sorts of comparisons will only give way to more sterile semantic arguments and confusion on all sides.[/QUOTE]
See I agree with not comparing the two words for those reasons, although I disagree with the idea that people are 'censoring' the word nigger or tranny and how that sacralizes the term itself. I think the issue is more about respect than censorship.
Tom Scott has a good video out.
[video=youtube;abwc7AAXn3A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abwc7AAXn3A[/video]
[QUOTE=Zyler;51345048]No. Everyone from scientists to teachers to priests to police to entertainers told everybody else that they were completely and totally inferior to white people.[/QUOTE]
But that has nothing to do with the word itself? If that's the only word that existed to refer to them at the time it didn't have any connotation.
The connotation only exists now that we have progressed socially. You can't say the word was offensive at the time when literally nobody got offended from being called like that.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;51345051]Extremely debatable seeing as these studies are met with industrial amounts of hindsight that are rarely taken into account.
What is now perceived as negative may have simply been the generally accepted status quo at the time, meaning something we now perceive as derogatory was likely just a piece of every day life for everyone then.
The word gained more and more traction as a pure insult until it reached an unambiguous use as such [I]much later[/I] in its existence among the English vocabulary. It didn't come out of nowhere as an insult from day one and there's no established breaking point by which people started to unanimously use it as an insult.[/QUOTE]
It wasn't considered derogatory by white people. It was considered derogatory by black people.
But they were slaves, nobody cared what they thought. That's the point.
[editline]10th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=_Axel;51345062]But that has nothing to do with the word itself? If that's the only word that existed to refer to them at the time it didn't have any connotation.
The connotation only exists now that we have progressed socially. You can't say the word was offensive at the time when literally nobody got offended from being called like that.[/QUOTE]
Again, only black people were upset by it at the time. The implication of the term is that blacks are inferior to whites. It's a term used solely to refer to black slaves in a disparaging manner because everything that referred to black slaves was done so in a disparaging manner.
It's only recently that white people have been offended by it because for a long time it was accepted that black people were "niggers", i.e. that they were inferior to white people and were supposed to be slaves.
It's a de facto negative term used to refer to black people because there was no positive way to refer to black people in the 1800s.
[QUOTE=killerteacup;51345055]See I agree with not comparing the two words for those reasons, although I disagree with the idea that people are 'censoring' the word nigger or tranny and how that sacralizes the term itself. I think the issue is more about respect than censorship.[/QUOTE]
The word Nigger is placed on such a pedestal in America that most people will only dare refer to it as "the N-Word".
It's not out of "respect" that people refuse to say the word, but because the status quo dictates that the vulgarity of the term is such that it should never be uttered, which is a vicious cycle - people consider it ultra-vulgar, leading to any public use of it being considered instant outrage, leading to people considering it ultra-vulgar.
[QUOTE=Zyler;51345063]It wasn't considered derogatory by white people. It was considered derogatory by black people.
But they were slaves, nobody cared what they thought. That's the point.[/QUOTE]
How was it considered derogatory by black people when that was the only word that existed? It was people's treatment of them that was derogatory, not the word they used.
[QUOTE=Zyler;51345063]It wasn't considered derogatory by white people. It was considered derogatory by black people.
But they were slaves, nobody cared what they thought. That's the point.[/QUOTE]
That's a huge shot in the dark you're taking there considering the relative lack of unanimous written account we have from these people at the time since a good chunk of them couldn't read or write or weren't allowed/given time to do so, especially not to write about how they dislike being called nigger.
For all we now, slaves at the time didn't give a fuck how they were called and were busier trying to not piss off the pale dudes telling them to pick cotton all day. The only reason we think they were so unsettled by the constant use of the word is because we have hindsight and we're projecting the current status quo on what could and likely was a very different status quo several hundred years back.
[QUOTE=_Axel;51345082]How was it considered derogatory by black people when that was the only word that existed? It was people's treatment of them that was derogatory, not the word they used.[/QUOTE]
The word itself only means something because people used the word in that manner. Where does the meaning of any word come from otherwise?
It was considered derogatory by black people because it was used by white people to refer to how black people were inferior to them, that was the meaning of the term.
[editline]10th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;51345090]That's a huge shot in the dark you're taking there considering the relative lack of unanimous written account we have from these people at the time considering a good chunk of theme couldn't read or write or weren't allowed/given time to do so, especially not to write about how they dislike being called nigger.
For all we now, slaves at the time didn't give a fuck how they were called and were busier trying to not piss off the pale dudes telling them to pick cotton all day. The only reason we think they were so unsettled by the constant use of the word is because we have hindsight and we're projecting the current status quo on what could and likely was a very different status quo several hundred years back.[/QUOTE]
We know how the term was used because historians have looked back at the time period and found this pattern of ideological thought used to disparage black people and keep them in their place. Language is just one aspect of it. We also had scientists, teachers, priests and many others contributing to the ideological framework.
[url]http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/nigger-word-brief-history[/url]
[QUOTE]The hierarchy was set up by an ideology that justified the use of deceit, exploitation, and intimidation to keep Blacks "in their place." Every major societal establishment offered legitimacy to the racial hierarchy. Ministers preached that God was White and had condemned Blacks to be servants. Scientists measured Black skulls, brains, faces, and genitalia, seeking to prove that Whites were genetically superior to Blacks. White teachers, teaching only White students, taught that Blacks were less evolved cognitively, psychologically, and socially. The entertainment media, from vaudeville to television and film, portrayed Blacks as docile servants, happy-go-lucky idiots, and dangerous thugs, and they still do this today. The criminal justice system sanctioned a double standard of justice, including its unspoken approval of mob violence against Blacks and there is still a similar double standard today. Both American slavery and the Jim Crow laws which followed were saturated by anti-Black laws and images. The negative portrayals of Blacks were both reflected in and shaped by everyday material objects: toys, postcards, ashtrays, detergent boxes, fishing lures, and children’s books. These items, and countless others, portrayed Blacks with bulging, darting eyes, fire-red oversized lips, jet-Black skin, and either naked or poorly clothed.[/QUOTE]
Basically, if you're asking if the term was always literally 'racist' then no it wasn't, because the idea of racism didn't exist back then. If you're asking if the term has always had a negative context, then yes it has, undeniably so, we can look at historical records and clearly see the various justifications for white superiority and black inferiority in many aspects of culture, science, anthropology and linguistics.
"nigger" didn't become a racist term because a bunch of easily offended liberals decided it would be because it's an old word, it has always had negative conotations and been used to refer to black people as slaves and inferior to white people. That's what the term means and has always meant, hence why people don't like it.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;51345075]The word Nigger is placed on such a pedestal in America that most people will only dare refer to it as "the N-Word".
It's not out of "respect" that people refuse to say the word, but because the status quo dictates that the vulgarity of the term is such that it should never be uttered, which is a vicious cycle - people consider it ultra-vulgar, leading to any public use of it being considered instant outrage, leading to people considering it ultra-vulgar.[/QUOTE]
I can see your point, but the circumstances leading up the n-word being a no no word were that of respect. It's an ultra vulgar word now because we understand just how offensive it is and want to avoid that
There's nothing wrong to me with the word being considered incredibly vulgar. It is incredibly vulgar.
[QUOTE=Zyler;51345094]The word itself only means something because people used the word in that manner. Where does the meaning of any word come from otherwise?[/QUOTE]
People used the word to refer to black people. At the time, the word "nigger" meant "black person". That's what the meaning was. I don't see why you need to get any more specific.
[QUOTE]It was considered derogatory by black people because it was used by white people to refer to how black people were inferior to them, that was the meaning of the term.[/QUOTE]
It was used by white people to refer to black people period.
Like, try to stop viewing the world from a 21st century point of view. You're a black slave in an alternate 18th century america. Everything is identical to actual 18th century america, except for the fact that instead of calling black people "niggers", people just refer to them as "black people".
Are you going to be offended by people who call you and other slaves "black people"? It's just the way everybody refer to you, what you're going to be outraged about is the disparaging treatment you're the victim of, not the way people call you.
[QUOTE=killerteacup;51345115]I can see your point, but the circumstances leading up the n-word being a no no word were that of respect. It's an ultra vulgar word now because we understand just how offensive it is and want to avoid that
There's nothing wrong to me with the word being considered incredibly vulgar. It is incredibly vulgar.[/QUOTE]
There's something wrong with how it's treated because it means the word will never progress from being extremely vulgar to just being mildly vulgar to just being another word in the language, which in turn will mean it'll fade from infamy which can only lead to the language improving from the death of one more horribly pejorative word.
Would you rather have it remain incredibly vulgar or would you rather improve the English language as a whole by making the word mean nothing anymore ? Isn't it better to just remove offensive words by completely sapping them of their offensive nature ?
[QUOTE=_Axel;51345129]People used the word to refer to black people. At the time, the word "nigger" meant "black person". That's what the meaning was. I don't see why you need to get any more specific.
It was used by white people to refer to black people period.
Like, try to stop viewing the world from a 21st century point of view. You're a black slave in an alternate 18th century america. Everything is identical to actual 18th century america, except for the fact that instead of calling black people "niggers", people just refer to them as "black people".
Are you going to be offended by people who call you and other slaves "black people"? It's just the way everybody refer to you, what you're going to be outraged about is the disparaging treatment you're the victim of, not the way people call you.[/QUOTE]
The meaning of a word is based on how the word is used. The use of a word with a specific meaning signifies intent.
If someone enslaved me and my entire family and forced all of us to work against my will, raped my mother and sisters, spent every single moment pontificating about how I'm beneath them and how they're superior to me in every way and then justified all of it simply by calling me an "oompa loompa", I'd be pretty pissed off if anybody called me an oompa loompa.
[QUOTE=Zyler;51345144]The meaning of a word is based on how the word is used. The use of a word with a specific meaning signifies intent.
If someone enslaved me and my entire family and forced all of us to work against my will, raped my mother and sisters, spent every single moment pontificating about how I'm beneath them and how they're superior to me in every way and then justified all of it simply by calling me an "oompa loompa", I'd be pretty pissed off if anybody called me an oompa loompa.[/QUOTE]
What would anybody call you other than oompa loompa?
God talking with my mom is literally like pulling teeth. She has a handful of minority friends (we even attended ones wedding this past Monday) and a few gay friends she invites over time to time.
She wanted to vote Trump but didn't because the line was too long and she's handicapped so she couldn't wait around and when I asked her why "I hate both of them but maybe he'll be for the best? I don't know."
Now I'm talking to her about how this will effect her friends and it's like a stone wall going "You don't know that, I watch a lot of TV so they'd never go after my friends. He hasn't actually done anything like that yet either so I think it's just fear mongering." and I just don't understand. Last night I was saying the same thing of give it a day at least to see what would happen but that days passed and it's fucking awful. I know a lot of people like to paint others as bigots or whatever for wanting Trump in office but a lot of it is just folks that are straight up stupid and didn't care either way I guess.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;51345131]There's something wrong with how it's treated because it means the word will never progress from being extremely vulgar to just being mildly vulgar to just being another word in the language, which in turn will mean it'll fade from infamy which can only lead to the language improving from the death of one more horribly pejorative word.
Would you rather have it remain incredibly vulgar or would you rather improve the English language as a whole by making the word mean nothing anymore ? Isn't it better to just remove offensive words by completely sapping them of their offensive nature ?[/QUOTE]
I think that as a white person, I don't have the right to say how I want the word to die. It's not my word and it's not a word that I have had to live through, and I don't know the experience of people who have had to live through that word.
I don't personally believe that it's better to remove offensive words by making them non-offensive because involves forcing a whole subset of people to just not be offended by a word which used to refer to them as slaves, potentially by the words overuse or similar. I don't think I have any right to tell them they just need to get over it and I don't think you or anyone else does either.
Ultimately I don't believe you can just 'make' a word mean nothing to people any more and even if that were the case, I don't think that using the word freely would necessarily lead to that outcome - I think that's a leap in logic.
[QUOTE=usaokay;51345351]My campus held a protest today
[t]http://i.imgur.com/h1cSpT6.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/0yNIO88.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/2UccH3K.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/0GvGAB0.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/VmXg0gw.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/bTLu3mC.jpg[/t]
Hmm[/QUOTE]
If Trump doesnt want them to protest he should probably make it clear that he doesn't intend to overturn gay marriage, ban access to women's health care/abortion, and/or implement a national stop-and-frisk policy.
if he still wants to do those things I say right on for those people to protest (peacefully)
Please if you're in America, and can protest, do so. Do it peacefully but if you feel so strongly and you are in a position to protest don't just confine your protest to some internet page
[QUOTE=killerteacup;51345416]Please if you're in America, and can protest, do so. Do it peacefully but if you feel so strongly and you are in a position to protest don't just confine your protest to some internet page[/QUOTE]
Believe me, we are not.
Look up the american news right now, there are protests in almost every major city, the biggest gathering is in New York around trump tower and it happend organically.
I was lurking on NeoGAF to see how they reacted (they were super pro-Hillary), and [URL="http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1311390"]I saw all this being posted:[/URL] :frown:
[B](Facebook video:)[/B] [I]"This happened today at Royal Oak Middle School in Royal Oak Michigan. It is so sad. Latino children were crying. The taunts, the "Build that Wall" with such bullying power and hate from children to children. Just Horrifying!"[/I]
[url]https://www.facebook.com/immigrationtalk.mexicanamerican/posts/1144505642253666[/url]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/0SBGRvu.jpg[/t][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw2OLfiWgAI6qEa.jpg[/t][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw3QxiqXEAEQQxG.jpg[/t][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw2iRoTXcAIlC85.jpg[/t]
[t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw2bC1vUUAAWxyd.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/LigzBWg.png[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/MEvTOQ2.png[/t]
...I didn't think it would get [I]this bad, this fast[/I], but [I][B]holy shit.[/B][/I]
I'm getting Tony Abott flashbacks with this whole gig. A truly shocking day in American history.
[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;51345420]I was lurking on NeoGAF to see how they reacted (they were super pro-Hillary), and [URL="http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1311390"]I saw all this being posted:[/URL] :frown:
[B](Facebook video:)[/B] [I]"This happened today at Royal Oak Middle School in Royal Oak Michigan. It is so sad. Latino children were crying. The taunts, the "Build that Wall" with such bullying power and hate from children to children. Just Horrifying!"[/I]
[url]https://www.facebook.com/immigrationtalk.mexicanamerican/posts/1144505642253666[/url]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/0SBGRvu.jpg[/t][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw2OLfiWgAI6qEa.jpg[/t][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw3QxiqXEAEQQxG.jpg[/t][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw2iRoTXcAIlC85.jpg[/t]
[t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cw2bC1vUUAAWxyd.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/LigzBWg.png[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/MEvTOQ2.png[/t]
...I didn't think it would get [I]this bad, this fast[/I], but [I][B]holy shit.[/B][/I][/QUOTE]
that black lives don't matter one and neither does your votes just makes me want to bawl my eyes out
[QUOTE=killerteacup;51345436]that black lives don't matter one and neither does your votes just makes me want to bawl my eyes out[/QUOTE]
Watch the Facebook video with middle school kids chanting "Build the Wall" if you haven't; it's worse.
god I'm so sorry you guys have to go through this
people seem to have such short memories and forget the absolute horror that fascism is
[QUOTE=killerteacup;51345450]god I'm so sorry you guys have to go through this
people seem to have such short memories and forget the absolute horror that fascism is[/QUOTE]
I'm just mad that Hillary's hubris fucked this up so bad for us. We could have had Bernie and prevented this.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.