DescentBB

Phoenix Red wrote:Communication is not something you do to someone, it's something you do WITH someone.

Exactly.

Roid might like to theorize an ideal world where people can leave their baggage behind... and it would be nice if they could... but that world doesn't exist. In this world, you will encounter people who find the word "★■◆●" offensive, and when you encounter such a person, you should not use the word. It doesn't matter whose country or culture you happen to be physically located in at the time -- if you want to communicate, you have to be willing to adjust to the other person's culture. If it offends them to be called a "★■◆●", don't call them that, and don't go thinking they're weak or stupid because of it.

I know a lot of women who have been abused in one way or another, and often, there are terms that really offend them. Sometimes even a normally innocuous word can trigger an emotional response -- for example, maybe calling a particular girl "sweetie" triggers memories of abuse by someone who called her that. So, in the interests of maintaining the relationship, I don't use the offensive term around that person -- even though the word itself is not offensive to me or to the culture at large. If I decided to insult her and call her narrow-minded because she can't get over her "cultural baggage", that would make me a pretty serious jerk / a**hole / d***head. It's not that I should treat her with kid gloves -- just that I should treat her as a person who, like everyone else in this world, has some hurt in her life. I should respect the fact that some things hurt her, and not bring unnecessary pain.

i've thought of some further points to either clarify things more, or expand the position.

what you guys are saying about it being insensitive, i agree with this. it is insensitive. i actually am more sensative to these kinds of things than i'm letting on, i have been somewhat feigning a position for the purposes of discussion (it helped i was tipsy to start with). another way to say it is "playing devil's advocate", although from my perspective that expression is too dramatised to give an accurate representation - it's not quite that bad.

i would instinctively respect personal or cultural scarring, as you guys are suggesting i do.

i've often been in loud fun rowdy situations where various form of politeness and social convention are tossed out the window - if for a moment. and i find it interesting how spirits are kept high, and teh whole process is even felt as a significant RELEASE for all involved. building trust and bringing the group closer together.

the theory i'm bouncing around is that it has to do with respect. these kinds of rowdy social situations develop as the group gets more and more comfortable with eachother, trusting eachother more. trusting that when someone reveals something intimite - others will not attack - or if they do it is quite lighthearted. once ppl see that others respect them, and everyone in the group is on a similar level of respect, that's when these bonding sessions can break out - re/affirming or testing everyone's equality and the respect they all show for one another with social games as they play amongst themselves with the concept of respect - sometimes calling eachother names, attacking eachother, it may seem malicious to an outsider looking in.

this kindof thing is only partaken in people who trust eachother, good friends if you will.

if people just automatically respect eachother - as fellow human beings - then this changes the dynamics. this may the unspoken heart of be what i've been trying to explain. when you meet someone, you'd have to be an a**hole to attack them personally straight off the bat - "hi, i hate you" .
when we are meeting new people we try to guage them, test them out, compare them to ourselves perhaps. and most importantly - we are testing to see how much respect they will give us (as much as we are perhaps summing them up to see how much respect we will give THEM). we all have our own guages, our values, that we sum people up with: inteligence, competence, money, beauty, aspects of their personality, how much affection they show us, etc. it's all relatively relevant to how much respect we will show them.

in america, most of us will no doubt loose A LOT of respect for someone who uses racial slurs. we automatically see it as showing someone who has a completely fucked up value system compared to our own. if someone would not respect someone just because of the colour of their skin and their heritage, it's just wrong, shallow, and offensive.

in america, this is what it means. if you use certain racial words - it is safe to assume that you will be a racist biggot and an ★■◆●. or is it? these days you can't deny the possability that whoever is using the slur is just an MTV watcher, perhaps ignorant, or perhaps trying to help erase stigma from the word. not nessesarily racist in the slightest. so these days it is NOT so safe to label people as racist. i'd even go as far as to say that you are being insensative to your own evolving culture if you believe that these words are SOLELY racist slurs anymore, you may even be a biggot yourself - refusing to give up your hateful views in the face of a changing environment.

so perhaps when someone says "wassup ★■◆●", thesedays you should be thinking less that "this person is a racist". because is he really?
leave your country, and the chances are pretty high that someone saying "wassup ★■◆●" is not a racist. you're not going to change the culture of the world, wiggers are everywhere, it will take some getting used to. eventually when people get more used to it, and stop getting the knee jerk "you ★■◆●ing racist!" reaction to hearing certain words, i imagine we'll also stop the labeling of these perhaps nieve kids as "wiggers". it may start with nieveity, but it may end up completely disarming a previously hateful word. you can feel the resistance.

I hope, for your safety, you don't travel abroad roid.

Using a hateful word, with out regard to the context that created it, will not "disarm" the word.

You may, with certian close individuals, may use hateful words freely, but as a general rule is idiotic and ignorant.

The goal isn't to make these words more acceptable in general use, its expand understanding why its use is hateful in the first place.

A person using "wassip ★■◆●" as a greeting may be ignorant of the conotation behind it, but ignorance is never a excuse or justifcation.

Then again, if you don't use "★■◆●", or any other hateful term in general conversation, you'd have nothing to worry about.

No drunken philosophers?

Monty Python wrote:..Socrates himself was permanently pissed...

I never realized that Monty Python was a person.

So you think we should say '★■◆●' more so it'll become a neutral word? I personally am in no hurry to be able to say that word without offending anyone; I'd be perfectly happy to see it go away. I don't know many people who automatically associate someone who says it with being a racist. This might have been true in the 80s, but I think most people are smart enough to know how it's meant in the context it's offered.

Overall I don't think it's the issue that it used to be. In the rare instance that I come across a true racist they're usually too uneducated and useless to be heard with any interest, let alone be offended by.

As far as ignoring culture when you meet someone: If you went into an asian home, and they asked you to take off your shoes per custom, wouldn't you take them off? If you were visiting a Hindu household, and were told they were offended by you showing the bottoms of your feet, would you still do it? Culture is everything when relating to people, why ignore it to prove a point only you understand?

Your campaign as it were seems to be alot of huff and steam for a petty issue. You might choose your battles more carefully in the future.

i have already said how much respect i have for a culture i am entering. i had to restate this because people were misunderstanding. the revelant summary statements/paragraphs were in bold print. BOLD PRINT

even after clarification you are STILL misunderstanding?

i stated numerous times that this is concerning people who are traveling OUT of their OWN culture assuming that people will respect their culture.

"If you went into an asian home, and they asked you to take off your shoes per custom, wouldn't you take them off?"

ETC

YES. cannot you understand what i have written?

i had even bolded the text mate. now go back and read it. #@$%

this thread is a trainwreck of willfull misunderstanding. i have already spelled out relevant points that i am accused of violating.

BigSlideHimself wrote:So you think we should say '★■◆●' more so it'll become a neutral word? I personally am in no hurry to be able to say that word without offending anyone; I'd be perfectly happy to see it go away. I don't know many people who automatically associate someone who says it with being a racist. This might have been true in the 80s, but I think most people are smart enough to know how it's meant in the context it's offered.

that's a pleasant thought, i wish it were true. but i fear it's false. ppl are quick to take offence.

FlipTW wrote:I hope, for your safety, you don't travel abroad roid.

lol. you have no idea who i am.
i'd be insulted if i wasn't already loling.

edit: scratch that, i admit, i am actually hurt by your statement. but i take solace in the high probability that you have completely misjudged who i am - and therefore tell myself i don't care.

I actually read every word of your post, and though nonsensical at points I *think* I got the gist of what you meant. Now if you reread my post, I mentioned homes for a specific reason: they bring culture with them. There are Asian homes in the US, in Canada, even in Australia. Are they not entitled to respect for their culture just because they've entered yours?

roid wrote:
that's a pleasant thought, i wish it were true. but i fear it's false. ppl are quick to take offence.

I dunno, you said yourself that word means nothing where you're from, so if that's true why are you Aussies taking offense? Me, I'm from TX where we stereotypically are a few decades behind and a little retiscent to part ways with southern values. Even here people tend to know a racist when they see one.

BigSlideHimself wrote:I actually read every word of your post, and though nonsensical at points I *think* I got the gist of what you meant. Now if you reread my post, I mentioned homes for a specific reason: they bring culture with them. There are Asian homes in the US, in Canada, even in Australia. Are they not entitled to respect for their culture just because they've entered yours?

ah, well that would be entering another culture. even drawn international boundarys are relatively meaningless to culture, strong cultural boundarys can be as strong and simple as a front door, even simpler. entering someone's abode is as good as entering their culture. a home is sacred ground.
all of what i've been saying in my posts has been concerning people who are knowingly stepping outof their own cultures.

roid wrote:so i'm clear then? i have the utmost respect for the culture i'm a guest in, i don't want to offend anyone on my stay.

i hope it's clear.

what i've been referring to is Travelers. a traveler is not in her element, and should hopefully be experienced enough to be able to understand other's misconceptions about her culture.

BigSlideHimself wrote:

roid wrote:
that's a pleasant thought, i wish it were true. but i fear it's false. ppl are quick to take offence.

I dunno, you said yourself that word means nothing where you're from, so if that's true why are you Aussies taking offense? Me, I'm from TX where we stereotypically are a few decades behind and a little retiscent to part ways with southern values. Even here people tend to know a racist when they see one.

no here in australia we don't say it, the only reason we have to say it is when making an american cultural reference. so anyone who DOES say it is automatically considered to be joking around, what else would they be doing?
i was referring to americans taking offence (notably, black americans, since i imagined they should be the MOST familure with it's use and misuse), not australians.

much like how paraplegics are the most comfortable with paraplegic jokes - while everyone else thinks the jokes are offensive.

Yes, if you go abroad, you have to expect there to be certain things that you might hear because of misconceptions or whatever. However, after the misconception has been cleared up with the individual and they are asked to please not make that reference again, you're saying that said traveler should take no offense if the offending individual continues to say whatever the unintentionally-offensive statement was? Even after being enlightened as to their mistake and being politely asked to not repeat that mistake?

Just because someone's a visitor in your country, you have zero right to be offensive to them. If you inadvertantly say something "wrong" because you don't know better, that's one thing, but as soon as you're informed about what what you said means, you'd be a complete jerk if you kept right on. Or would you, roid, feel comfortable coming here to America, and have us rip you apart with things that would get us slugged in Australia? Just because, "Oh, I'm traveling, so I can't expect people to be courteous."

A foreigner in your country is a guest, and as a host, you should attempt to take into account the guest's culture at least somewhat. You don't need to go to the library and know every nuance of every culture on the planet, but if you run into someone from another place (even within your own country -- here in the US we've got many many different cultural boundaries), and they let you know certain things that are offensive, then as a good host, you should try to accomodate them. (Though usually, a bit of leeway is given from both side. But that's no excuse to be rude.)

(And no, not everyone goes by this, but it seems like common courtesy being extended to a fellow human to me.)

Plebeian wrote:Yes, if you go abroad, you have to expect there to be certain things that you might hear because of misconceptions or whatever. However, after the misconception has been cleared up with the individual and they are asked to please not make that reference again, you're saying that said traveler should take no offense if the offending individual continues to say whatever the unintentionally-offensive statement was? Even after being enlightened as to their mistake and being politely asked to not repeat that mistake?

no, what i'm saying is that it'd be a shame if they were offended and went quiet, or requested i not make the reference again coz it offended them. if they requested as such, i'd respect their wishes. but it'd be a bummer.

Just because someone's a visitor in your country, you have zero right to be offensive to them. If you inadvertantly say something "wrong" because you don't know better, that's one thing, but as soon as you're informed about what what you said means, you'd be a complete jerk if you kept right on. Or would you, roid, feel comfortable coming here to America, and have us rip you apart with things that would get us slugged in Australia? Just because, "Oh, I'm traveling, so I can't expect people to be courteous."

2 words:

Mobius - Sheep.

so yes, i would feel comfortable being slagged on.
however if i was feeling particularly sensative and couldn't take it in good fun i'd probabaly let you know about it - and you'd probabaly take that as a bit of a bummer.

roid wrote:no, what i'm saying is that it'd be a shame if they were offended and went quiet, or requested i not make the reference again coz it offended them. if they requested as such, i'd respect their wishes. but it'd be a bummer.

Yeah, it'd be a shame that someone would be offended by anything. Some people and cultures are just more sensitive to certain things than others. In more laid-back countries, it'd be hard to see people getting upset at such "small" things, but for their own reasons, it's offensive. I mean, there's even things like hand gestures that have vastly different meanings in different areas. (Though as those are part of the culture that the foreigned is in, it's not something that should necessarily be taken offense at, once they are made aware of what it means "here".)

Basically, the way I see it, we're all neighbors on this planet, and when interacting with someone from another culture, we should try to respect that person's cultural differences, no matter where we are right there. If this means not saying, "Wassup, nigga?" then so be it. (But there's certain things that are a part of one person's culture that may be offensive in someone else's. These don't necessarily need to be suppressed, but may need a quick explanation. There's a line where accomodation goes too far. Denying your own culture isn't appropriate, and the visitor would be expecting too much if they expected that.)

It's a grey area just how much each person should accomodate the other, but it's best if you can at least acknowledge your differences. If someone gets offended if you say "rainbow trout", then you might try to avoid saying it around them if they have a good reason for it (though it'd have to be really good, since it's just a fish -- unlike something like "★■◆●" or "Jap" which are bastardizations of legitimate words, and were almost exclusively used demeaningly).


Pretty much, it's within a person's right to be offended by something someone else says or does. In a different culture, usually travelers (at least the smart ones) won't immediately take offense, as the locals shouldn't be expected to know that they're being offensive. But our culture is a part of us, and we can never leave it behind, no matter where we go. So in the interest of not alienating anyone, everyone needs to try to accomodate visitors and hosts somewhat. Sure there's that leeway of "they don't know any better", but it still affects you, and if they're made aware of the "problem", then they should attempt to either avoid doing that around this person, or explain that it's normal in the culture and you'll have to expect it a lot.

Just my views, at least. Sure, it means that both you and they can't have free reign to do whatever you like, but it preserves amiable relations between the two of you. (Or just get piss-drunk and be offensive to your heart's content. Maybe they'll forgive you from the booze. )

Plebeian wrote:...(Or just get piss-drunk and be offensive to your heart's content. Maybe they'll forgive you from the booze. )

heh . yeah lets see if i can learn a lesson from this.

roid wrote:

Plebeian wrote:...(Or just get piss-drunk and be offensive to your heart's content. Maybe they'll forgive you from the booze. )

heh . yeah lets see if i can learn a lesson from this.

Lesson: Drinky drinky!

Monty Python wrote:..Socrates himself was permanently pissed...

And if you believe that, you'll believe anything.

You know, I think roid has a point here actually. It's time for Americans to get over their racist mentality... ALL Americans. African or Anglo or Latino or Laotian or Vietnamese or Pakistani or whatever.

Personally, I'm at as sick of racist whites as I am of racist blacks. Ignorance and stupidity are equally disgusting, but hypocrisy is inexcusable.

I think roid's fundamental point is valid: Just stop the hatred and be happy. RISE ABOVE IT!

Racism is stupid.

Considering that all humans are one race of creatures anyways, the word "racism" would apply to poor treatment of other animals more than other humans.

Thus, the word racism is being misused.

STOP IT!!!

This entire thread disserves monkey fingers .!.. ..!.

Stryker wrote:Considering that all humans are one race of creatures anyways, the word "racism" would apply to poor treatment of other animals more than other humans.

Thus, the word racism is being misused.

{sarcasm}Umm... you demonstrate a marked lack of understanding of the difference between 'species' and 'race'.

No wonder you don't believe in macro evolution. It's apparently well beyond your intellectual grasp.{/sarcasm}