ChatterBank1 min ago
Racist words
32 Answers
Prompted by an earlier thread: It is sometimes said that 'black' is merely descriptive, as 'ginger' would be. But 'black' is offensive, runs the counter argument,because of the history of everything from slavery to segregation, and lodgings advertised or treated as 'no blacks', which it brings to memory.
But how much is that true of young blacks? They have no memory of the extreme racism which existed in the past, and which their grandparents or great-grandparents suffered in 'no blacks need apply' society. If a 16 year -old was called a "black "can't" by his mate, or an opponent, on the Hackney Marshes, would he really be hurt by the word 'black',any more than an American or fair person would be by 'American ' or 'blonde' ? Depending on context, it's the four- letter word that's insulting.
But how much is that true of young blacks? They have no memory of the extreme racism which existed in the past, and which their grandparents or great-grandparents suffered in 'no blacks need apply' society. If a 16 year -old was called a "black "can't" by his mate, or an opponent, on the Hackney Marshes, would he really be hurt by the word 'black',any more than an American or fair person would be by 'American ' or 'blonde' ? Depending on context, it's the four- letter word that's insulting.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by FredPuli43. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
adding a physical descriptor such as black, fat, ginger, disabled etc etc to a 4 letter insult tends to multiply the level of how offensive it is.
There is a certain hiearchy in offensiveness that is unwritten but known throughout society. for example anything anti-semitic is seen as more offensive than an insult to an asian; possibly due to the holocaust, persecution throughout the last 2000 years.
You probably wouldnt want to tag someones disability to an insult - because they are less fortunate than you. We often take a more sensitive approach to hardship.
There is a certain hiearchy in offensiveness that is unwritten but known throughout society. for example anything anti-semitic is seen as more offensive than an insult to an asian; possibly due to the holocaust, persecution throughout the last 2000 years.
You probably wouldnt want to tag someones disability to an insult - because they are less fortunate than you. We often take a more sensitive approach to hardship.
I believe that if the victims of offensive words were just to ignore them, and show that they aren't in the least bit bothered, these words would soon lose their impact over the years.
Insults have most likely been in use for centuries and their aim is to try and upset the recipient as much as possible, but if they fail to do so then they lose all their impact,and they will then be redirected at someone else who is less able to absorb them.
But bringing out laws that only protect certain groups, tend to give these groups a certain hold over those that are not so protected, so then these groups tend to make use of the laws of abuse at any given opportunity so as to further their own ends.
Insults have most likely been in use for centuries and their aim is to try and upset the recipient as much as possible, but if they fail to do so then they lose all their impact,and they will then be redirected at someone else who is less able to absorb them.
But bringing out laws that only protect certain groups, tend to give these groups a certain hold over those that are not so protected, so then these groups tend to make use of the laws of abuse at any given opportunity so as to further their own ends.
FredPuli43
I assure you, the word 'black' as a descriptor is absolutely and definitely not racist in itself, but when inserted its suffixes by a perforative or insulting term, it then becomes part of the overall insert.
For instance...the word 'blonde' is not itself insulting, but when used in the phrase 'stupid blonde c***', it becomes part of the overall insult.
People don't tend to separate out the components of an insult - they take the whole, rather than the parts.
I suppose it's the way the brain processes information.
I assure you, the word 'black' as a descriptor is absolutely and definitely not racist in itself, but when inserted its suffixes by a perforative or insulting term, it then becomes part of the overall insert.
For instance...the word 'blonde' is not itself insulting, but when used in the phrase 'stupid blonde c***', it becomes part of the overall insult.
People don't tend to separate out the components of an insult - they take the whole, rather than the parts.
I suppose it's the way the brain processes information.
AOG...I question the veracity of your last statement.
"these groups tend to make use of the laws of abuse at any given opportunity so as to further their own ends."
Perhaps this is a perspective thing, but it seems a bit of a generalisation to say that 'these groups' use the anti-discrimination laws willy nilly.
And what 'ends' do you mean? To be treated equally under the law?
"these groups tend to make use of the laws of abuse at any given opportunity so as to further their own ends."
Perhaps this is a perspective thing, but it seems a bit of a generalisation to say that 'these groups' use the anti-discrimination laws willy nilly.
And what 'ends' do you mean? To be treated equally under the law?
sp1814
/// And what 'ends' do you mean? To be treated equally under the law? ///
No, because they are not, in fact they have protection given by the law that others do not enjoy.
Take your Blonde analogy;
[i]For instance...the word 'blonde' is not itself insulting, but when used in the phrase 'stupid blonde c***', it becomes part of the overall insult[i]
Is a typical example even if one used the insult 'stupid blonde c***' that would not be deemed unlawful, but by simply changing the word 'Blonde' to 'Black' then that is an entirely different 'kettle of fish' where the law is concerned,.
/// And what 'ends' do you mean? To be treated equally under the law? ///
No, because they are not, in fact they have protection given by the law that others do not enjoy.
Take your Blonde analogy;
[i]For instance...the word 'blonde' is not itself insulting, but when used in the phrase 'stupid blonde c***', it becomes part of the overall insult[i]
Is a typical example even if one used the insult 'stupid blonde c***' that would not be deemed unlawful, but by simply changing the word 'Blonde' to 'Black' then that is an entirely different 'kettle of fish' where the law is concerned,.
Which law(s) that give rights do you mean , aog? We have laws to prevent women,black people, white people,homosexuals, Jews, Muslims and Christians, and others, being refused services simply because of their religion, gender, race, or sexual orientation. Do you see anything wrong in that? What do you see as wrong with any of our law relating to race or other characteristic?
If nothing,what do you mean by 'an opportunity to further their own ends'? Asking for a law, which you approve of, to be applied, cannot be wrong , can it? Would you define 'ends' for us ?
If nothing,what do you mean by 'an opportunity to further their own ends'? Asking for a law, which you approve of, to be applied, cannot be wrong , can it? Would you define 'ends' for us ?
Black, in it's turn, only became considered racist when someone decided it was. Prior to that it was fine. The cycle goes, find a non-offensive phrase, everyone is happy to use it; eventually some fusspot moans it's offensive, convinces others they are right, and the phrase gets dropped and a new one becomes the fashion. Maybe one day the circle will be broken and sanity reign, but probably not today.
FredPuli43
I was merely agreeing with your concerns, as regards name calling, so why do you start questioning me?
/// Which law(s) that give rights do you mean , aog? We have laws to prevent women,black people, white people,homosexuals, Jews, Muslims and Christians, and others, being refused services simply because of their religion, gender, race, or sexual orientation. Do you see anything wrong in that? ///
Of course I do not, and well you know it, the one-way laws I was referring too are the 'Name Calling' ones.
So perhaps in future it would be best not to enter a question when you do not want other posters to agree with you.
And then only when they do to turn things around so as to question others on what they have not suggested in the first place.
It is blatantly obvious that you just wish to make trouble.
I was merely agreeing with your concerns, as regards name calling, so why do you start questioning me?
/// Which law(s) that give rights do you mean , aog? We have laws to prevent women,black people, white people,homosexuals, Jews, Muslims and Christians, and others, being refused services simply because of their religion, gender, race, or sexual orientation. Do you see anything wrong in that? ///
Of course I do not, and well you know it, the one-way laws I was referring too are the 'Name Calling' ones.
So perhaps in future it would be best not to enter a question when you do not want other posters to agree with you.
And then only when they do to turn things around so as to question others on what they have not suggested in the first place.
It is blatantly obvious that you just wish to make trouble.
dave50
Couldn't you also argue that because we a so very tough on racism in the UK, that we've managed to make it as socially unacceptable as smoking?
Who would want to live in some of the Eastern European countries, who have proven recently that they are years behind us (at least, some of their football supporters are).
Couldn't you also argue that because we a so very tough on racism in the UK, that we've managed to make it as socially unacceptable as smoking?
Who would want to live in some of the Eastern European countries, who have proven recently that they are years behind us (at least, some of their football supporters are).
It's all in the context ultimately, Fred.
You can call your mates all manner of things and it's fun. But calling the same on someone who isn't your friend and in a way intended to upset them is racist. Or sexist / ageist etc depending on context.
Hate crime doesn't happen between people who like each other.
You can call your mates all manner of things and it's fun. But calling the same on someone who isn't your friend and in a way intended to upset them is racist. Or sexist / ageist etc depending on context.
Hate crime doesn't happen between people who like each other.
I read the other day in the US the KKK killed a black girl and I thought 'well that doesnt really happen in the UK' but it does - isolated incidents but over the last few years there have been killings linked to race.
even though i feel we are up there with the least racist countries in the world there are still people here who would kill over skin colour
even though i feel we are up there with the least racist countries in the world there are still people here who would kill over skin colour
Old_Geezer
But 'black' meaning 'of Afro-Carribean' descent has been an accepted term for about fifty years, and it has an equivalency to 'white' as a descriptor.
And you said that 'black' is considered racist.
It's not, and whoever told you it was, was pulling your leg. I guarantee if you asked 1000 black people whether they thought the term 'black' was racist, not a single one would.
Out of interest, what term would you use to describe a black person, if it were their ethnicity you were trying to summarise?
But 'black' meaning 'of Afro-Carribean' descent has been an accepted term for about fifty years, and it has an equivalency to 'white' as a descriptor.
And you said that 'black' is considered racist.
It's not, and whoever told you it was, was pulling your leg. I guarantee if you asked 1000 black people whether they thought the term 'black' was racist, not a single one would.
Out of interest, what term would you use to describe a black person, if it were their ethnicity you were trying to summarise?
Mosaic has made a good point.
A word can take on completely different meanings depending on context.
Say for instance, you're out with a group of male friends...no-one would bat an eyelid if you said' "I'm out with the boys tonight".
However, if you walked into a hotel with a load of bags, and you pointed to a middle-aged black porter and said, "Hey the boy, can you take my luggage up to room 107", suddenly the word 'boy' takes on a whole new meaning.
A word can take on completely different meanings depending on context.
Say for instance, you're out with a group of male friends...no-one would bat an eyelid if you said' "I'm out with the boys tonight".
However, if you walked into a hotel with a load of bags, and you pointed to a middle-aged black porter and said, "Hey the boy, can you take my luggage up to room 107", suddenly the word 'boy' takes on a whole new meaning.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Mass Job Losses In The Retail Sector...
News4 mins ago
Body & Soul4 mins ago
