The cancel culture is getting out of control

[ClearwaterVol]

As a nation, we have lost the ability to judge intent. Words are just words. It is the intent behind them that gives them the racist bite.

 

[AM64]

As a nation, we have lost the ability to judge intent. Words are just words. It is the intent behind them that gives them the racist bite.

People seem to forget that the N words (one proper and one "evolved") come directly from the Spanish word ("negro" masculine form and "negra" feminine form) for black, and it was coined centuries ago by Portuguese and Spanish explorers. Apparently language can be racist since "black" seems to be an acceptable term, but the Spanish variant is considered racist.

 

[n_huffhines]

People seem to forget that the N words (one proper and one "evolved") come directly from the Spanish word ("negro" masculine form and "negra" feminine form) for black, and it was coined centuries ago by Portuguese and Spanish explorers. Apparently language can be racist since "black" seems to be an acceptable term, but the Spanish variant is considered racist.

If you said it in Spanish, then it wouldn't be taken the same way, but saying it in English gives it a different connotation.

A quick Google indicates that people are moving away from saying "negro" in Spanish, opting for "de color", "moreno" (which is what most people say in my experience), or "negrito" (which sounds the most condescending to me, LOL).

Word origins are super interesting but what they mean now is what matters.

One theory that's especially compelling is that Gook is derived from "miguk" which is the Korean word for America. So Americans heard Koreans saying "America" and started calling Koreans Gook because they thought they were saying "I'm gook." It's totally miscommunication and harmless, but then over the years was corrupted because people used the term hatefully.

 

[AM64]

If you said it in Spanish, then it wouldn't be taken the same way, but saying it in English gives it a different connotation.

A quick Google indicates that people are moving away from saying "negro" in Spanish, opting for "de color", "moreno" (which is what most people say in my experience), or "negrito" (which sounds the most condescending to me, LOL).

Word origins are super interesting but what they mean now is what matters.

One theory that's especially compelling is that Gook is derived from "miguk" which is the Korean word for America. So Americans heard Koreans saying "America" and started calling Koreans Gook because they thought they were saying "I'm gook." It's totally miscommunication and harmless, but then over the years was corrupted because people used the term hatefully.

Is it really hatefully or just another term like "redneck" that may or may not be derogatory? Some of us intend the word "yankee" as derogatory, but plenty of others see it as even patriotic. If people commonly use a word to specify people of another group, it doesn't necessarily mean it's intended as a slur. While I would avoid using "gook" and did while stationed in Asia, many guys did with no malice of forethought. Guys were so used to seeing Asian women they referred to others as "round eyes", and that wasn't a slur. It's easy to find offense when it is your intent to go looking for it.

 

[n_huffhines]

Is it really hatefully or just another term like "redneck" that may or may not be derogatory? Some of us intend the word "yankee" as derogatory, but plenty of others see it as even patriotic. If people commonly use a word to specify people of another group, it doesn't necessarily mean it's intended as a slur. While I would avoid using "gook" and did while stationed in Asia, many guys did with no malice of forethought. Guys were so used to seeing Asian women they referred to others as "found eyes", and that wasn't a slur. It's easy to find offense when it is your intent to go looking for it.

It doesn't really matter if people use words and symbols with good intent if others use them with bad intent. It will get corrupted by the people who use them with bad intent, especially if it's a majority vs. minority situation.

Like for example, so many people used the Confederate flag simply to recognize states rights, but so many people have used it as a symbol of racism (specifically the KKK and neo-nazis) that whatever states rights branding was leftover got completely ruined. My Dad had a tiny little Confederate flag music box that played Dixie at work back in the 90's and they asked him to take it home. He is/was pro-Union. It was literally just cool memorabilia to him. Fast forward 20+ years and his granddaughters saw it on his dresser and had trouble processing it. You can't risk the association, so you just move away from the words and symbols that others ruined, which furthers the process until the word/symbol only means the negative thing.

I'm not saying it's right. I'm just saying that's the way it is.

 

[AM64]

It doesn't really matter if people use words and symbols with good intent if others use them with bad intent. It will get corrupted by the people who use them with bad intent, especially if it's a majority vs. minority situation.

Like for example, so many people used the Confederate flag simply to recognize states rights, but so many people have used it as a symbol of racism (specifically the KKK and neo-nazis) that whatever states rights branding was leftover got completely ruined. My Dad had a tiny little Confederate flag music box that played Dixie at work back in the 90's and they asked him to take it home. He is/was pro-Union. It was literally just cool memorabilia to him. Fast forward 20+ years and his granddaughters saw it on his dresser and had trouble processing it. You can't risk the association, so you just move away from the words and symbols that others ruined, which furthers the process until the word/symbol only means the negative thing.

I'm not saying it's right. I'm just saying that's the way it is.

I agree with that, and that's the crux of "counter culture". The real point is whether as a whole something is derogatory or just whether another group is claiming it is. Which group do you believe, and where is the right in forcing one group's opinion on the other? The Confederate flag was not necessarily a symbol of hate when I grew up, and I certainly never heard the song "Dixie" use as a "weapon". Yet a vocal minority turned what so many saw as simple history into a display of something offensive. I turned 77 a couple of days ago and largely grew up in the South (a very few years outside the South as a military brat); in all those years I can't say I ever met a KKK member or a neo-Nazi, and I doubt that younger people can honestly claim they have either.

 

[creekdipper]

So is the current favored wording "The United N-Word College Fund?"

And can we have a Redneck Doodle Dandy?

 

[creekdipper]

If the N...o word is now considered to be racist (as opposed to racial), then it would be difficult to justify studying Martin King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech that is included in many history and literature textbooks. I showed video of the entire speech and introductory proceedings (and awarding of the Nobel Prize) to public school students dozens of times over many years. That video included multiple instances of Dr. King repeating the word as a self-descriptor multiple times.

What to do, what to do....

 

[Orangeburst]

I agree with that, and that's the crux of "counter culture". The real point is whether as a whole something is derogatory or just whether another group is claiming it is. Which group do you believe, and where is the right in forcing one group's opinion on the other? The Confederate flag was not necessarily a symbol of hate when I grew up, and I certainly never heard the song "Dixie" use as a "weapon". Yet a vocal minority turned what so many saw as simple history into a display of something offensive. I turned 77 a couple of days ago and largely grew up in the South (a very few years outside the South as a military brat); in all those years I can't say I ever met a KKK member or a neo-Nazi, and I doubt that younger people can honestly claim they have either.

Being derogatory is just like any term..Anyone can be offended by it. That is more healthy than the definers.

 

[n_huffhines]

If the N...o word is now considered to be racist (as opposed to racial), then it would be difficult to justify studying Martin King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech that is included in many history and literature textbooks. I showed video of the entire speech and introductory proceedings (and awarding of the Nobel Prize) to public school students dozens of times over many years. That video included multiple instances of Dr. King repeating the word as a self-descriptor multiple times.

What to do, what to do....

What do you think the problem is here? You think people are going to ban his speech because we don't use the word anymore? Nobody is doing that.

 

[creekdipper]

Just now seeing a replay of Vice-President Harris repeating her public lie that some public officials are trying to teach that "slaves benefited from slavery." Too bad ABC edited out the response of William Allen, one of the authors of the "offensive sentence," in which he stated emphatically what should have been evident about the message being clearly conveyed and in which he implied that Harris and other critics either hadn't actually read the passage or didn't have the reading comprehension skills to understand it.

Now hearing the current racist POTUS repeating his lies about people "banning books" ("and I'm not joking!").

Suckers and blind partisans out there lapping this stuff up.

And...he finishes his remarks in his creepy whisper mode.

Business as usual in D.C.

 

[creekdipper]

What do you think the problem is here? You think people are going to ban his speech because we don't use the word anymore? Nobody is doing that.

How would you explain to your students why Dr. King repeatedly refers to himself and his people by a racist term? Did he not realize that it was racist?

 

[allvol123]

Just now seeing a replay of Vice-President Harris repeating her public lie that some public officials are trying to teach that "slaves benefited from slavery." Too bad ABC edited out the response of William Allen, one of the authors of the "offensive sentence," in which he stated emphatically what should have been evident about the message being clearly conveyed and in which he implied that Harris and other critics either hadn't actually read the passage or didn't have the reading comprehension skills to understand it.

Now hearing the current racist POTUS repeating his lies about people "banning books" ("and I'm not joking!").

Suckers and blind partisans out there lapping this stuff up.

And...he finishes his remarks in his creepy whisper mode.

Business as usual in D.C.

Yea, the clip from Allen said she got it completely incorrect. But why let the facts get in the way. Maybe this is where we need some @lawgator1 Truth Department.

 

[n_huffhines]

How would you explain to your students why Dr. King repeatedly refers to himself and his people by a racist term? Did he not realize that it was racist?

WTF are you talking about? It was an acceptable term at the time. Things change over time. It's not very complicated. I think a kid in K-12 would understand.

 

[n_huffhines]

Just now seeing a replay of Vice-President Harris repeating her public lie that some public officials are trying to teach that "slaves benefited from slavery." Too bad ABC edited out the response of William Allen, one of the authors of the "offensive sentence," in which he stated emphatically what should have been evident about the message being clearly conveyed and in which he implied that Harris and other critics either hadn't actually read the passage or didn't have the reading comprehension skills to understand it.

Now hearing the current racist POTUS repeating his lies about people "banning books" ("and I'm not joking!").

Suckers and blind partisans out there lapping this stuff up.

And...he finishes his remarks in his creepy whisper mode.

Business as usual in D.C.

Yes, there are books that have been banned in schools. Maybe use Google before you go too far with your opposition to the truth.

https://pen.org/report/banned-in-the-usa-state-laws-supercharge-book-suppression-in-schools/

 

[C-south]

WTF are you talking about? It was an acceptable term at the time. Things change over time. It's not very complicated. I think a kid in K-12 would understand.

You seem to make up the rules so I’m not sure anyone else could possibly understand.

 

[n_huffhines]

You seem to make up the rules so I’m not sure anyone else could possibly understand.

What rules? People used to use the word. Now they don't. Are you refuting that? Is that complicated?

 

[C-south]

What rules? People used to use the word. Now they don't. Are you refuting that? Is that complicated?

It’s used constantly. My god.

 

[creekdipper]

What rules? People used to use the word. Now they don't. Are you refuting that? Is that complicated?

And perhaps you could explain exactly what changed re: the usage and why a term that was acceptable to a civil rights icon is now unacceptable. Or are you just saying that people don't use it today because it's old-fashioned?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the United Negro College Fund still use the term?

 

[n_huffhines]

And perhaps you could explain exactly what changed re: the usage and why a term that was acceptable to a civil rights icon is now unacceptable. Or are you just saying that people don't use it today because it's old-fashioned?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't tge United Negro College Fund still use the term?

What is your point? I don't know what happened, and who cares really? It doesn't matter

 

[CobbVol]

And perhaps you could explain exactly what changed re: the usage and why a term that was acceptable to a civil rights icon is now unacceptable. Or are you just saying that people don't use it today because it's old-fashioned?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't tge United Negro College Fund still use the term?

In addition, the NAACP is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "Colored People" is not accepted now but "People of Color" is OK. Why? To me, it looks like it is a control thing by somebody behind a green curtain getting all to follow by rules a select few made up behind closed doors.

 

[n_huffhines]

It’s used constantly. My god.

Where besides in organizational names that are older than me?

 

[creekdipper]

Yes, there are books that have been banned in schools. Maybe use Google before you go too far with your opposition to the truth.

https://pen.org/report/banned-in-the-usa-state-laws-supercharge-book-suppression-in-schools/

Sigh.

I taught in public schools for thirty years and served on textbook selection committees several times. I was also keenly aware that there were certain books, stories, poems, songs, videos, etc. that either were or might be inappropriate for my students or might offend community standards. When in doubt, I would run it by administrators first.

The myth that school libraries are (or should be) collections of every topic and presentation ever devised is, in a word, absurd. Books are selected and rejected constantly for a variety of reasons. By today's insane "logic," any book that isn't on the shelves has been "banned." Well, guess what? There are hundreds of thousands of books that have been "banned" by that silly definition.

Any title that has allededly been "banned" can easily be obtained on the internet at the customer's expense. The taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for every whim of every student or parent. Let the parents host a book club in their homes where they can serve milk and cookies while their progeny discuss the joys of acting out sado-masochistic fantasies depicted in The Story of O.

The real world doesn't operate the way some liberals seem to think it should. That's why school libraries don't stock...er, "ban"....Mandingo and The Protocols of Zion. Or should students also have access to those in the school or classroom libraries?

 

[creekdipper]

Where besides in organizational names that are older than me?

Please answer the question. Is it wrong or racist to use the terms, or simply dated?

If the former, why don't those organizations change their names?

 

[n_huffhines]

Sigh.

I taught in public schools for thirty years and served on textbook selection committees several times. I was also keenly aware that there were certain books, stories, poems, songs, videos, etc. that either were or might be inappropriate for my students or might offend community standards. When in doubt, I would run it by administrators first.

The myth that school libraries are (or should be) collections of every topic and presentation ever devised is, in a word, absurd. Books are selected and rejected constantly for a variety of reasons. By today's insane "logic," any book that isn't on the shelves has been "banned." Well, guess what? There are hundreds of thousands of books that have been "banned" by that silly definition.

Any title that has allededly been "banned" can easily be obtained on the internet at the customer's expense. The taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for every whim of every student or parent. Let the parents host a book club in their homes where they can serve milk and cookies while their progeny discuss the joys of acting out sado-masochistic fantasies depicted in The Story of O.

The real world doesn't operate the way some liberals seem to think it should. That's why school libraries don't stock...er, "ban"....Mandingo and The Protocols of Zion. Or should students also have access to those in the school or classroom libraries?

That's a long way of saying books are indeed banned