We've reached the point in the discourse where things breakdown into semantics.
Next we'll hear about that word niggardly again.
IT JUST MEANS CHEAP, MAN.
Random Politics & Religion #00
Random Politics & Religion #00
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Sometimes, when your friend does something strange, the only appropriate response is to call em a f*g.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=***
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/***
[+]
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »
We've reached the point in the discourse where things breakdown into semantics.
Next we'll hear about that word niggardly again.
IT JUST MEANS CHEAP, MAN.
Next we'll hear about that word niggardly again.
IT JUST MEANS CHEAP, MAN.
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
You don't have to stop calling anyone ***, Nausi. Actually, say it early and often ^^
After all, it isn't your fault if someone misinterprets what you say.
[+]
Context matters!
Jetackuu said: »
Context matters!
Naw man, just go around calling Jews kikes and then kindly explain you're a bastion of equality and that you're using the word to dilute it's potency.
[+]
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
You don't have to stop calling anyone ***, Nausi. Actually, say it early and often ^^
After all, it isn't your fault if someone misinterprets what you say.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Pleebo and genuine are like oil and water.
anyone else think of the R&B guy from the 90's?
[+]
Verda said: »
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
After all, it isn't your fault if someone misinterprets what you say.
Communication is a two way street. The side that makes the least effort to both understand and articulate meaning and intention is the bigger problem however and someone saying something akin to "you're an idiot and I'm right" is pretty much at effort level zero.
Again, context.
Standard conversation going on and then you happen to throw out and insulting word for a group of people (like orientals) is going to garner different reaction than a comedy show where the comedian calls a bunch of japanese people slant eyes. Because we all have accepted situations and definitions for words.
There are few scenarios where that term oriental is going to work without being degrading if not outright insulting to people. It's an antiquated term at best or a show of complete ignorance at it's worst.
There's a reason Kramer got in trouble all those years ago when he bombed. It wasn't because he said ***. It's because he meant the word as a derogatory slur. And he wasn't joking around. Everyone got that from the context of the situation. And rightfully made him feel like ***for it.
What are you talking about? We all understand your "context" now so go nuts.
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »
Again, context.
Standard conversation going on and then you happen to throw out and insulting word for a group of people (like orientals) is going to garner different reaction than a comedy show where the comedian calls a bunch of japanese people slant eyes. Because we all have accepted situations and definitions for words.
There are few scenarios where that term oriental is going to work without being degrading if not outright insulting to people. It's an antiquated term at best or a show of complete ignorance at it's worst.
There's a reason Kramer got in trouble all those years ago when he bombed. It wasn't because he said ***. It's because he meant the word as a derogatory slur. And he wasn't joking around. Everyone got that from the context of the situation. And rightfully made him feel like ***for it.
Standard conversation going on and then you happen to throw out and insulting word for a group of people (like orientals) is going to garner different reaction than a comedy show where the comedian calls a bunch of japanese people slant eyes. Because we all have accepted situations and definitions for words.
There are few scenarios where that term oriental is going to work without being degrading if not outright insulting to people. It's an antiquated term at best or a show of complete ignorance at it's worst.
There's a reason Kramer got in trouble all those years ago when he bombed. It wasn't because he said ***. It's because he meant the word as a derogatory slur. And he wasn't joking around. Everyone got that from the context of the situation. And rightfully made him feel like ***for it.
Just because I call you a child doesn't mean I'm being racist, no matter how much you are willing to twist it into a racial slur. It means that your understanding of reality is subpar to an adult (therefor, you have the mind of a child).
Ultimately you can only assume to know the someone's intent, unless they spell it out for you and you believe it.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
Seeing racism in my racist comments makes you the REAL racist. And why can't I drive around town with my truck decked out in a Confederate flag car wrap without getting mean looks? cryeyes
[+]
Verda said: »
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
After all, it isn't your fault if someone misinterprets what you say.
Communication is a two way street. The side that makes the least effort to both understand and articulate meaning and intention is the bigger problem however and someone saying something akin to "you're an idiot and I'm right" is pretty much at effort level zero.
What is acceptable is going to change from person to person, situation to situation.
That applies to *almost everything*. Does that make it a double standard? Possibly, except it is somewhat meaningless to classify all communications as double standards.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Ultimately you can only assume to know the someone's intent, unless they spell it out for you and you believe it.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
His racial rant was ultimately the result of frustration that boiled over resulting in insensitive remarks. Personally, I don't think he's a racist but when he started making those comments he knew exactly what he was drawing on and accepted those consequences.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Ultimately you can only assume to know the someone's intent, unless they spell it out for you and you believe it.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
Same principle applies.
[+]
Go ahead and use any word you want, but when someone takes you to HR or a big bear decides to knock your teeth in, you have nobody else to blame. Those words are considered hate speech, and aren't protected.
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Ultimately you can only assume to know the someone's intent, unless they spell it out for you and you believe it.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
His racial rant was ultimately the result of frustration that boiled over resulting in insensitive remarks. Personally, I don't think he's a racist but when he started making those comments he knew exactly what he was drawing on and accepted those consequences.
[+]
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
Ultimately you can only assume to know the someone's intent, unless they spell it out for you and you believe it.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
The Kramer thing is a good example. He unleashes a racially laced rant, then follows it up with shock that everyone now thinks he's racist.
Now, if you believe his shock the morning after, then he's not a racist, if you don't then he is. Ultimately though, he's the only one who knows for sure if he's racist.
Same principle applies.
Like that's even a choice?
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
Seeing racism in my racist comments makes you the REAL racist. And why can't I drive around town with my truck decked out in a Confederate flag car wrap without getting mean looks? cryeyes
FTFY
Maybe your interpretation of things isn't the only conclusion there is?
Maybe you should walk around with signage indicating your various triggers to the rest of us.
Verda said: »
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Use whatever words you want. Use whatever phrasings you want. It doesn't absolve you from the consequences of using words or phrasings.
What is acceptable is going to change from person to person, situation to situation.
What is acceptable is going to change from person to person, situation to situation.
However, it doesn't mean that you don't have to deal with the consequences.
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
You don't think he's a racist but you fully accept that he is labeled one? So does that mean you think however many million people jumped to the wrong conclusion?
I speak for myself. I don't think Michael Richards is a racist. I do think he got into a desperate place, used hate speech to vent the reality that he bombed and then did the usual apology circuit to save face.
I can see how some people would think a white guy throwing out those words in anger and making references to lynching would think that's he's a racist but from my analysis of the situation he seemed like a desperate comic looking to both get some shock humor and get back at hecklers.
Either way, he goofed.
[+]
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.