Do hyphenated-Americans contribute to racism?

[Mac1958]

Would you address, say, your female co-worker as "hey c**t"? If not -- why not? Just a word, right?

If she's a ****, I will.

Are you saying the very color black is derogatory in nature? That's the root of bigotry, right there. True acceptance of a person means the color of their skin is irrelevant to their character and/or worth, not that it doesn't exist.

Unless a motherfucker is from Africa, he/she ain't African-ANYTHING.

The first thing a member of the PC Police notices is the color of a person's skin.

All of their subsequent behavior relating to that person is predicated on that determination.

Character is irrelevant.

It doesn't have anything to do with color or character. It has to do with empathy.

Well, that's very sweet and all, but I'd rather see you folks stop "caring" about American blacks quite so much, because your version of "caring" has caused them generations of damage, and they deserve much better.

.

 

[Pogo]

Would you address, say, your female co-worker as "hey c**t"? If not -- why not? Just a word, right?

If she's a ****, I will.

Are you saying the very color black is derogatory in nature? That's the root of bigotry, right there. True acceptance of a person means the color of their skin is irrelevant to their character and/or worth, not that it doesn't exist.

Unless a motherfucker is from Africa, he/she ain't African-ANYTHING.

The first thing a member of the PC Police notices is the color of a person's skin.

All of their subsequent behavior relating to that person is predicated on that determination.

Character is irrelevant.

It doesn't have anything to do with color or character. It has to do with empathy.

Well, that's very sweet and all, but I'd rather see you folks stop "caring" about American blacks quite so much, because your version of "caring" has caused them generations of damage, and they deserve much better.

"You folks"? Who might that be?
And what do we mean by "your version of caring? The point here is etymology. What's your alternative to the question of the term's derivation?

Does this tangent, wherever it's going, mean you concede the actual point then?

 

[Mac1958]

Would you address, say, your female co-worker as "hey c**t"? If not -- why not? Just a word, right?

If she's a ****, I will.

Are you saying the very color black is derogatory in nature? That's the root of bigotry, right there. True acceptance of a person means the color of their skin is irrelevant to their character and/or worth, not that it doesn't exist.

Unless a motherfucker is from Africa, he/she ain't African-ANYTHING.

The first thing a member of the PC Police notices is the color of a person's skin.

All of their subsequent behavior relating to that person is predicated on that determination.

Character is irrelevant.

It doesn't have anything to do with color or character. It has to do with empathy.

Well, that's very sweet and all, but I'd rather see you folks stop "caring" about American blacks quite so much, because your version of "caring" has caused them generations of damage, and they deserve much better.

"You folks"? Who might that be?
And what do we mean by "your version of caring?
Does this tangent mean you concede the actual point then?

"You folks" - Primarily the American Left. The PC Police. Liberals who are animated by their emotions.

"Your version of caring" - Isolating American blacks from rest of American society by lowering standards for them, making excuses for them, calling anyone who dares to criticize them "racists", and refusing to hold them accountable for pretty much anything.

Do I concede the actual point? Yes, I do. All you care about is "empathy", and you're not thinking about the ramifications of your actions (as long as you maintain political advantage). I'm more concerned with seeing them improve their quality of life, crazy me, you're more concerned with "caring" and keeping them steeped in victimhood.

Easiest questions I'll get all day.

Anything else?

.

 

[Pogo]

Then you're ignoring the context of experience and infusing an egocentrism i.e. assuming your experience is everyone's experience.

Words and terms don't exist in free space on their own. They have histories. And calling up a word heavily charged with one conjures that history.

If words DO exist without context, then you have no complaint about "African American". Can't have it both ways; either they have context, or they do not.

Examples:
"bitch"
"c**t"
"Dago"/"Wop"
"Gook"

-- you get the idea. Note that even this site itself won't print the second one.

Sorry but black isn't on the same level as wop or dago. When I talk among friends, nobody ever says African-American. Ever. They all say black. And no, it's not a Stormfront get together, lol.

Isn't it?
How many of these friends are black?

Would you address, say, your female co-worker as "hey c**t"? If not -- why not? Just a word, right?

I'm living in Canada right now, we have no AAs here, nor do we have such a thing as African-Canadian, they're simply called black people.

Nor did Canada have anything resembling the racism/slavery/civil rights history the US had.
That's the entire point here.

Where are you in Canada?

Btw when a nest starts to get this big it's time to do the responsible thing and start pruning it back. If you don't do that, nobody's gonna read your post. I did it this time.

 

[Pogo]

Would you address, say, your female co-worker as "hey c**t"? If not -- why not? Just a word, right?

If she's a ****, I will.

Are you saying the very color black is derogatory in nature? That's the root of bigotry, right there. True acceptance of a person means the color of their skin is irrelevant to their character and/or worth, not that it doesn't exist.

Unless a motherfucker is from Africa, he/she ain't African-ANYTHING.

The first thing a member of the PC Police notices is the color of a person's skin.

All of their subsequent behavior relating to that person is predicated on that determination.

Character is irrelevant.

It doesn't have anything to do with color or character. It has to do with empathy.

Well, that's very sweet and all, but I'd rather see you folks stop "caring" about American blacks quite so much, because your version of "caring" has caused them generations of damage, and they deserve much better.

"You folks"? Who might that be?
And what do we mean by "your version of caring?
Does this tangent mean you concede the actual point then?

"You folks" - Primarily the American Left. The PC Police. Liberals who are animated by their emotions.

"Your version of caring" - Isolating American blacks from rest of American society by lowering standards for them, making excuses for them, calling anyone who dares to criticize them "racists", and refusing to hold them accountable for pretty much anything.

Do I concede the actual point? Yes, I do. All you care about is "empathy", and you're not thinking about the ramifications of your actions (as long as you maintain political advantage). I'm more concerned with seeing them improve their quality of life, crazy me, you're more concerned with "caring" and keeping them steeped in victimhood.

Easiest questions I'll get all day.

Anything else?

You're completely off the topic. This is why I just mentioned context. This discussion is about the etymology of the term "African American".

But feel free, as long as you're spewing blanket generalizations and have conceded that point, where I've posted anything of "you folks"'s agenda. Show me where I've "called anyone who dares to criticize them 'racists'" or where I've "refused to hold them accountable" or where I've "lowered standards". Bring it on, right here.

Long as your intent on derailing the train you might as well pick a destination, right?

 

[Mac1958]

You're completely off the topic. This is why I just mentioned context. This discussion is about the etymology of the term "African American".

But feel free, as long as you're spewing blanket generalizations and have conceded that point, where I've posted anything of "you folks"'s agenda. Show me where I've "called anyone who dares to criticize them 'racists'" or where I've "refused to hold them accountable" or where I've "lowered standards". Bring it on, right here.

Long as your intent on derailing the train you might as well pick a destination, right?

Uh, YOU responded to MY post, and then you complain that I responded to your response.

Sure, okay.

I'm tempted to provide any number examples of my points, but why bother? If you truly can't come up with any examples of lowered standards, of people critical of a black person being called a racist, or of liberals not holding blacks accountable, you're so deep into your ideological cocoon that no amount of proof would matter.

You could even Google it. But you will not.

.

 

[House]

If words DO exist without context, then you have no complaint about "African American". Can't have it both ways; either they have context, or they do not.

"African-American" is not an accurate description of black people. 99% of black people in the US have no more connection to Africa than I do. Oh and besides that, there are white people in Africa too, so there's a ton of reasons the word is just PC bullshit.

"Black" is an accurate description - well, unless you want to split hairs and make the argument that black people are brown. Still a hell of a lot more accurate than African-American.

So no, there doesn't need to be context to object to the ridiculous term, "African-American".

Frankly, when some pretentious prick says "African-American", I hear, "jungle bunny". When people say, "black (man, woman, person, etc)", I think Tyrese, Lawanda, Sam, Paulette, Edward, Lamonte, etc.

 

[House]

Nor did Canada have anything resembling the racism/slavery/civil rights history the US had.
That's the entire point here.

Your point is pointless, as "black" was not a term used during that era. Do I need to list the ones that were?

If you're offended by the word black, you really don't want to say yes to my question.

 

[Pogo]

You're completely off the topic. This is why I just mentioned context. This discussion is about the etymology of the term "African American".

But feel free, as long as you're spewing blanket generalizations and have conceded that point, where I've posted anything of "you folks"'s agenda. Show me where I've "called anyone who dares to criticize them 'racists'" or where I've "refused to hold them accountable" or where I've "lowered standards". Bring it on, right here.

Long as your intent on derailing the train you might as well pick a destination, right?

Uh, YOU responded to MY post, and then you complain that I responded to your response.

Sure, okay.

I'm tempted to provide any number examples of my points, but why bother? If you truly can't come up with any examples of lowered standards, of people critical of a black person being called a racist, or of liberals not holding blacks accountable, you're so deep into your ideological cocoon that no amount of proof would matter.

You could even Google it. But you will not.

I don't need to Google myself; I already know what I've posted. What I'm asking is --- do you?
Apparently not, yet you're all ready to board me on your crazy train.

You won't "bother" to cite these examples because you don't have any. Because you fucked up. But you won't admit it. Right? So --- deflection denied.

I used to Google myself. I had to quit when it gave me hairy palms. But it's interesting when you find your own works being used by people out there you never heard of.

 

[House]

"Persons of color" is getting pretty popular among the PC crowd, and that term is a hell of a lot closer to a segregation-era term ("colored / colored people") than "black people" ever was.

 

[Mac1958]

You're completely off the topic. This is why I just mentioned context. This discussion is about the etymology of the term "African American".

But feel free, as long as you're spewing blanket generalizations and have conceded that point, where I've posted anything of "you folks"'s agenda. Show me where I've "called anyone who dares to criticize them 'racists'" or where I've "refused to hold them accountable" or where I've "lowered standards". Bring it on, right here.

Long as your intent on derailing the train you might as well pick a destination, right?

Uh, YOU responded to MY post, and then you complain that I responded to your response.

Sure, okay.

I'm tempted to provide any number examples of my points, but why bother? If you truly can't come up with any examples of lowered standards, of people critical of a black person being called a racist, or of liberals not holding blacks accountable, you're so deep into your ideological cocoon that no amount of proof would matter.

You could even Google it. But you will not.

I don't need to Google myself; I already know what I've posted. What I'm asking is --- do you?
Apparently not, yet you're all ready to board me on your crazy train.

You won't "bother" to cite these examples because you don't have any. Because you fucked up. But you won't admit it. Right? So --- deflection denied.

I used to Google myself. I had to quit when it gave me hairy palms. But it's interesting when you find your own works being used by people out there you never heard of.

Wow, you've really got me here.

As an intellectually honest, open-minded, curious individual, you've never seen examples of the PC Police lowering standards for blacks, calling people who are critical of blacks racist, or not holding blacks accountable.

That's really quite amazing, maybe none of that happens, huh? Because I'm sure a left-winger like you would jump right up and admit it if it were true.

And no, I'm not going to wade through your post history to find examples, sorry.

One of the standard techniques of partisan ideologues is denial, and that's why it's not worth the effort.

.

 

[Pogo]

If words DO exist without context, then you have no complaint about "African American". Can't have it both ways; either they have context, or they do not.

"African-American" is not an accurate description of black people. 99% of black people in the US have no more connection to Africa than I do. Oh and besides that, there are white people in Africa too, so there's a ton of reasons the word is just PC bullshit.

"Black" is an accurate description - well, unless you want to split hairs and make the argument that black people are brown. Still a hell of a lot more accurate than African-American.

So no, there doesn't need to be context to object to the ridiculous term, "African-American".

Frankly, when some pretentious prick says "African-American", I hear, "jungle bunny". When people say, "black (man, woman, person, etc)", I think Tyrese, Lawanda, Sam, Paulette, Edward, Lamonte, etc.

"Accuracy" has never the point; if you'll read my context you'll see the entire reasoning was to avoid that direct accuracy. "Accuracy" is not the one and only function of words; their meanings, especially terms of social class, are deeper than what can fit in a dictionary entry . If technical accuracy were the only point, we would have no need to speak or use body language or intonation. So your premise is inoperative in this. You're looking entirely left-brain. That's how you miss context.

I can't even address the last paragraph -- don't know what it means. P

 

[Pogo]

You're completely off the topic. This is why I just mentioned context. This discussion is about the etymology of the term "African American".

But feel free, as long as you're spewing blanket generalizations and have conceded that point, where I've posted anything of "you folks"'s agenda. Show me where I've "called anyone who dares to criticize them 'racists'" or where I've "refused to hold them accountable" or where I've "lowered standards". Bring it on, right here.

Long as your intent on derailing the train you might as well pick a destination, right?

Uh, YOU responded to MY post, and then you complain that I responded to your response.

Sure, okay.

I'm tempted to provide any number examples of my points, but why bother? If you truly can't come up with any examples of lowered standards, of people critical of a black person being called a racist, or of liberals not holding blacks accountable, you're so deep into your ideological cocoon that no amount of proof would matter.

You could even Google it. But you will not.

I don't need to Google myself; I already know what I've posted. What I'm asking is --- do you?
Apparently not, yet you're all ready to board me on your crazy train.

You won't "bother" to cite these examples because you don't have any. Because you fucked up. But you won't admit it. Right? So --- deflection denied.

I used to Google myself. I had to quit when it gave me hairy palms. But it's interesting when you find your own works being used by people out there you never heard of.

Wow, you've really got me here.

As an intellectually honest, open-minded, curious individual, you've never seen examples of the PC Police lowering standards for blacks, calling people who are critical of blacks racist, or not holding blacks accountable.

That's really quite amazing, maybe none of that happens, huh? Because I'm sure a left-winger like you would jump right up and admit it if it were true.

And no, I'm not going to wade through your post history to find examples, sorry.

One of the standard techniques of partisan ideologues is denial, and that's why it's not worth the effort.

.

You're completely off the topic. This is why I just mentioned context. This discussion is about the etymology of the term "African American".

But feel free, as long as you're spewing blanket generalizations and have conceded that point, where I've posted anything of "you folks"'s agenda. Show me where I've "called anyone who dares to criticize them 'racists'" or where I've "refused to hold them accountable" or where I've "lowered standards". Bring it on, right here.

Long as your intent on derailing the train you might as well pick a destination, right?

Uh, YOU responded to MY post, and then you complain that I responded to your response.

Sure, okay.

I'm tempted to provide any number examples of my points, but why bother? If you truly can't come up with any examples of lowered standards, of people critical of a black person being called a racist, or of liberals not holding blacks accountable, you're so deep into your ideological cocoon that no amount of proof would matter.

You could even Google it. But you will not.

I don't need to Google myself; I already know what I've posted. What I'm asking is --- do you?
Apparently not, yet you're all ready to board me on your crazy train.

You won't "bother" to cite these examples because you don't have any. Because you fucked up. But you won't admit it. Right? So --- deflection denied.

I used to Google myself. I had to quit when it gave me hairy palms. But it's interesting when you find your own works being used by people out there you never heard of.

Wow, you've really got me here.

As an intellectually honest, open-minded, curious individual, you've never seen examples of the PC Police lowering standards for blacks, calling people who are critical of blacks racist, or not holding blacks accountable.

That's really quite amazing, maybe none of that happens, huh? Because I'm sure a left-winger like you would jump right up and admit it if it were true.

And no, I'm not going to wade through your post history to find examples, sorry.

One of the standard techniques of partisan ideologues is denial, and that's why it's not worth the effort.

You posted -- and I quote:

Well, that's very sweet and all, but I'd rather see you folks stop "caring" about American blacks quite so much, because your version of "caring" has caused them generations of damage, and they deserve much better.

-- which now you're trying to run away from by expanding to "PC Police" and "the left" to evade your faux pas. And now you're whining about how you're "not going to wade through my posts to find examples" -- because you can't defend it. It's "not worth the effort" because you dug yourself into a hole, can't get out of it, and now all you can do is fling ad hominem poo.

Thaks for playin'. Give it some thought next time.

 

[Pogo]

"Persons of color" is getting pretty popular among the PC crowd, and that term is a hell of a lot closer to a segregation-era term ("colored / colored people") than "black people" ever was.

I've always found that one even clumsier. We're all persons of color. If we didn't have color we'd be transparent.

 

[House]

If words DO exist without context, then you have no complaint about "African American". Can't have it both ways; either they have context, or they do not.

"African-American" is not an accurate description of black people. 99% of black people in the US have no more connection to Africa than I do. Oh and besides that, there are white people in Africa too, so there's a ton of reasons the word is just PC bullshit.

"Black" is an accurate description - well, unless you want to split hairs and make the argument that black people are brown. Still a hell of a lot more accurate than African-American.

So no, there doesn't need to be context to object to the ridiculous term, "African-American".

Frankly, when some pretentious prick says "African-American", I hear, "jungle bunny". When people say, "black (man, woman, person, etc)", I think Tyrese, Lawanda, Sam, Paulette, Edward, Lamonte, etc.

"Accuracy" has never the point

Precisely the problem!

Libtard logic: "Better to call somebody something that isn't even vaguely descriptive of who they are, thereby creating a lie about them in order to create a false sense of offensiveness for previously used terms which are actually descriptive of them."

Let's apply your PC logic to you, Pogo.

You are no longer a man. Men are brutish boors. You are now a gecko. Geckos are cute and make wonderful car insurance commercials. You must now get offended when someone refers to your gender, as you no longer identify with your masculinity.

MAKES COMPLETE SENSE!

 

[Mac1958]

Thaks for playin'. Give it some thought next time.

You've successfully deflected to a place miles away from my original point, the damage being done to American blacks.

Miles.

Standard operating procedure for, "you folks".

"Playin'", indeed.

.

 

[Pogo]

Nor did Canada have anything resembling the racism/slavery/civil rights history the US had.
That's the entire point here.

Your point is pointless, as "black" was not a term used during that era. Do I need to list the ones that were?

If you're offended by the word black, you really don't want to say yes to my question.

Nothing in this thread is about what *I'm* offended about; my emotions are irrelevant and not a participant here. The question raised was the origin and function of the term "African American". I don't need to be invested in that personally to analyze a simple etymology. Do you get that? Because you're the one getting emotional and tossing value judgments. Mac already loaded me on a leftist crazy train. You people gotta come down to earth.

"Black" was a term used, maybe not as much, and I'm already familiar with the others so no we don't need to list them. We all know negro is the Spanish and Portuguese (neutral) word for the color black; gato negro means "black cat", a simple statement of fact, words uncharged. In the context of a cat owner who lives in Argentina, there's no historical background context with which to charge it.. Then we also know what the American English corruption ****** represents, which is far more complex. To pretend that context does not exist is just not honest.

{edit here: note that like the word "****", the word "******" --which I typed -- will not show up here. So the site owners and software designers are themselves aware that words have context)

Summa y'all can't have a simple disinterested discussion about etymologies and how social class histories affect them without going all soap opera.

 

[House]

Duck Dodger to the rescue!

 

[Pogo]

Thaks for playin'. Give it some thought next time.

You've successfully deflected to a place miles away from my original point, the damage being done to American blacks.

Miles.

Standard operating procedure for, "you folks".

"Playin'", indeed.

You didn't have a point. You jumped on mine and tried to hijack it using a blanket generalization.
Let me make it even simpler:
Don't do that.

 

[Mac1958]

Thaks for playin'. Give it some thought next time.

You've successfully deflected to a place miles away from my original point, the damage being done to American blacks.

Miles.

Standard operating procedure for, "you folks".

"Playin'", indeed.

You didn't have a point. You jumped on mine and tried to hijack it using a blanket generalization.
Let me make it even simpler:
Don't do that.

I don't really know what you're talking about, but I realize you don't want to defend the "caring" and the "empathy" you're inflicting on blacks, so we can drop it.

.