Am i in the wrong? (Racism debate)

[Nick]

6 minutes ago, Benguin said:

like what?

Disproportionate sentencing between black and white offenders and stop and search policies? That kinda thing.

[Carl the Llama]

Just now, Benguin said:

But I am not offended. I was just hoping you were going to back up or your comments and if you were just trolling or trying to offend then read my response "fvck off"

Ok I'll pretend you weren't upset if you want me to.  I mean I'm always cursing at people to show how I'm entirely unaffected by their words.

 

But being serious for a minute you really need to take a step back and have another look at this whole 'fight against racism has been won' stance because it emphatically hasn't from all angles unfortunately.

[MPH]

10 minutes ago, Benguin said:

I'll agree that there isn't. I think you and several other people on here have misunderstood what I am saying. I do not think everyone should go around saying whatever they want and I am not saying that using racial slurs is a perfectly fine thing to do. What I am saying is that placing so much stock in words dilutes what actual racism is. I am saying that when we stop getting offended by everything people won't have a reason to offend. It's quite simple really but the world always tries to make these issues complex.

 

 

1. no one is getting offended by everything. That is of course a huge exaggeration.

 

2. You are assuming ofending someone is all done willfully and not out of ignorance. I think if people stop getting offended and do not share their reason why then this will allow ignorance to grow.  When so many people were offended by slavery, do you think if they had kept quiet Slavery would of just solved its own problem? Do you think if people were not offended by apartheid, that it would of just dissapered by itself? Do you think if  people were not not offended by segregated buses there would still be this problem?

 

Yes some people are easily offended. But its not really for me to decide what would offend a Hispanic or black person That in itself is marginal ignorance.

[Benguin]

1 minute ago, Swan Lesta said:

Disproportionate sentencing between black and white offenders and stop and search policies? That kinda thing.

That has already been explored. Watch Gowdy, he's an excellent authority on this.

 

[Benguin]

1 minute ago, MPH said:

 

 

1. no one is getting offended by everything. That is of course a huge exaggeration.

 

2. You are assuming offense is all done willfully and not out of ignorance. I think if people stop getting offended and do not share their reason why then this will allow ignorance to grow.  When so many people were offended by slavery, do you think if they had kept quiet Slavery would of just solved its own problem? Do you think if people were not offended by apartheid, that it would of just dissapered by itself? Do you think if  people were not not offended by segregated buses there would still be this problem?

 

Yes some people are easily offended. But its not really for me to decide what would offend a Hispanic or black person That in itself is marginal ignorance.

Yeah because keeping slaves is a word. I'm talking about words here, like "boy" or "jap"

[MPH]

Just now, Benguin said:

Yeah because keeping slaves is a word. I'm talking about words here, like "boy" or "jap"

ok then racist jokes if you want to think its just about words....

[Benguin]

8 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Ok I'll pretend you weren't upset if you want me to.  I mean I'm always cursing at people to show how I'm entirely unaffected by their words.

 

But being serious for a minute you really need to take a step back and have another look at this whole 'fight against racism has been won' stance because it emphatically hasn't from all angles unfortunately.

Wow. Have you even looked at a history book?

[Benguin]

Just now, MPH said:

ok then racist jokes if you want to think its just about words....

I'm not sure what you mean? My moot point is that putting stock into words like "jap" and "boy" dilutes and trivialises racism. Lack of rule of law in places outside the western world, violent racially motivated crimes are real racism issues that should be our concern, not whether it's okay to say "boy."

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, MPH said:

ok then racist jokes if you want to think its just about words....

 

But, tbf, we're very selective about that.

 

No one seems to have a problem with Irish jokes (We've had a fair few on here), and words like Kraut are so mainstream that they appear on the front of our newspapers.

[MPH]

2 minutes ago, Benguin said:

I'm not sure what you mean? My moot point is that putting stock into words like "jap" and "boy" dilutes and trivialises racism. Lack of rule of law in places outside the western world, violent racially motivated crimes are real racism issues that should be our concern, not whether it's okay to say "boy."

every heard the phrase the tip of the iceburg? Most of the iceburg is indeed under the water...

 

 

 

Quite often the words and phrases we use are often seen as just a little bit of evidence of  whats really going on under the surface,,,,

[Carl the Llama]

Just now, Benguin said:

Wow. Have you even looked at a history book?

No need to be condescending.  All I was trying to prove with those remarks was that your point about getting offended was a bit of a silly one and you probably get offended more than you realise or admit to yourself.   I'm done now though so you can exercise those powers to choose to stop feeling offended now if you don't mind.

 

To answer your question: Yes, I went to schools with history on the curriculum like everyone else on here and I'm not really sure what your point is.

 

[MPH]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

But, tbf, we're very selective about that.

 

No one seems to have a problem with Irish jokes (We've had a fair few on here), and words like Kraut are so mainstream that they appear on the front of our newspapers.

 

 

I dont use the word Kraut personally.... But i havnt actually asked if they find it offensive or not...

[Benguin]

1 minute ago, Carl the Llama said:

No need to be condescending.  All I was trying to prove with those remarks was that your point about getting offended was a bit of a silly one and you probably get offended more than you realise or admit to yourself.   I'm done now though so you can exercise those powers to choose to stop feeling offended now if you don't mind.

 

To answer your question: Yes, I went to schools with history on the curriculum like everyone else on here and I'm not really sure what your point is.

 

You seem oblivious as to just how racist humans were compared to today.

[Benguin]

3 minutes ago, MPH said:

every heard the phrase the tip of the iceburg? Most of the iceburg is indeed under the water...

 

 

 

Quite often the words and phrases we use are often seen as just a little bit of evidence of  whats really going on under the surface,,,,

not buying that at all

[Buce]

1 minute ago, MPH said:

 

 

I dont use the word Kraut personally.... But i havnt actually asked if they find it offensive or not...

 

I don't recall anyone asking the Japanese if they found Jap offensive, but it didn't stop people jumping on JV.

[MPH]

4 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I don't recall anyone asking the Japanese if they found Jap offensive, but it didn't stop people jumping on JV.

 

 

I think its fairly well known it would be offensive surely?

 

 

I never stopped to ask someone from Pakistan/ Asia if the term Paki is offensive but i'm pretty sure it is dont ya think?

[Carl the Llama]

Just now, Benguin said:

You seem oblivious as to just how racist humans were compared to today.

 Why?  Because I suggested that racism is in fact still a thing?  You do realise that's a completely different argument to 'it's no longer a problem', right?

 

Then again I suppose that's good news in a way because back in the day people used to die before the age of 30 all the time:  Now that I know the Benguin law that 'an issue being relatively less widespread is equivalent to it being eradicated as a concern' it means I can safely spend the next few years playing in traffic, watching cars harmlessly bounce off of me.  Cheers Benguin.

[Benguin]

1 minute ago, Carl the Llama said:

 Why?  Because I suggested that racism is in fact still a thing?  You do realise that's a completely different argument to 'it's no longer a problem', right?

 

Then again I suppose that's good news in a way because back in the day people used to die before the age of 30 all the time:  Now that I know the Benguin law that 'an issue being relatively less widespread is equivalent to it being eradicated as a concern' it means I can safely spend the next few years playing in traffic, watching cars harmlessly bounce off of me.  Cheers Benguin.

You're pretty ignorant aren't you? I've said many times that racism is still a big problem, at what point have I said otherwise. I said institutional racism is no longer an issue in much of the western world. I am yet to see any proof of recent racism by the state that went unchallenged and punished.

[MPH]

3 minutes ago, Benguin said:

You're pretty ignorant aren't you? I've said many times that racism is still a big problem, at what point have I said otherwise. I said institutional racism is no longer an issue in much of the western world. I am yet to see any proof of recent racism by the state that went unchallenged and punished.

 

 

can you provide evidence that proves its no longer an issue? and i dont mean isolated, singular cases of course but proof that it has completely dissapered from the western world....

[Benguin]

Just now, MPH said:

 

 

can you provide evidence that proves its no longer an issue? and i dont mean isolated, singular cases of course but proof that it has completely dissapered from the western world....

You can't prove a none existence, it is for the person purporting something exists to prove it.

[Strokes]

It's not really the words that are offensive is it? It's the way they are delivered and the source from which they come. Young black people sling about the negro term amongst each other as I'm sure they may refer to each other as boy from time to time. 

I think it's a shame to let language hold a power over you but I guess we are all guilty of it to different degrees.

[MPH]

Just now, Benguin said:

You can't prove a none existence, it is for the person purporting something exists to prove it.

 

 

Then how do we know dinosaurs and dodos are extinct?

[Merging Cultures]

Some real ignorance in this thread.

 

Not necessarily OP. As someone else has said, unless you spend time really getting to know people of other races or cultures, you don't know. And it isn't always possible to really get to know others.

 

However, I am reading some wilful and deliberate ignorance on here.

 

Yes, "boy" is a loaded term in many parts of the US, and can be considered racist in many circumstances.

[Buce]

37 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

I think its fairly well known it would be offensive surely?

 

 

I never stopped to ask someone from Pakistan/ Asia if the term Paki is offensive but i'm pretty sure it is dont ya think?

 

I can't be bothered to dig up the Jap thread, but I definitely recall that plenty of posters were unaware that it was supposedly a racist term. Indeed, many (most?) argued that it wasn't. For those people who are unencumbered by political correctness, Jap is just a contraction of Japanese.

 

As for Paki, I suspect it would only be deemed offensive by British Pakistanis because of its historical use in pejorative terms by British racists.

 

[Benguin]

2 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

Then how do we know dinosaurs and dodos are extinct?

I can see where you are trying to go with this but your logic is wrong. Yes both dinosaurs and racism existed, there is evidence for that. In order to determine whether institutional racism still exists in western societies such as the UK, there would need to be some institutional racism occurring. Given that the state makes laws and enforces them, there would need to be laws that are discriminatory or the way laws are enforced would need to be discriminatory in order for us to claim the state is racist. Given that there are over 100,000 pieces of legislation and statutory instruments in force today it would be nigh on impossible for me to list them all and explain why each is not discriminatory therefore the burden is on he who proclaims the state is racist to provide the law to which backs this up.