Is calling someone African American racist?

[Maurepas]

Only half-black. Try again.

I suppose we could, however, Youll find yourself hard pressed to find someone who is not in the United States....

Black, White, or otherwise...

[Katganistan]

Also, this should be brought up too. People of Mixed descent, I'll stick with black-white mixed descent since it's more obvious.

Even being black myself, I never know what's the right way to refer to someone of mixed descent. Saying "Oh he's mixed." Sounds extremely offensive to me, almost like calling someone a mutt, but I'm not mixed so I really wouldn't know.

And another issue that presents itself is that many white people don't accept a mixed person as white and many black people don't consider a mixed person black. Course you could argue some mixed people appear very white, and claim white, and a white people generally don't notice but black people sometimes can figure them out. And I reason I believe there's such an issue there is because of the rather hostile relationship white people and black people share.

I'm a mutt and proud of it. American first, but my heritage is from mainland Italy, Sicily, and Puerto Rico. In my extended family we've got people of German and English extraction, Filipinos, Maltese... we're most shades from coffee to cream.

[Der Teutoniker]

snip

So, basically, you are ignoring mine, and Bluth's arguments, and debating similar, but different points, and pretending you are arguing our points. Fine.

Though, before you use it incorrectly again, you may want to look up the word "inherent" before you use it incorrectly as per it's current usage, rather than it's inherent meaning.

Nice try.

Does "inherent" have a meaning or not?

If not, end of conversation. No words have meaning. We can't communicate.

If so, why doesn't "nigger"?

If on the third hand, you are claiming you and Bluth are merely making a distinction a word's definition and its "inherent" meaning because definitions can change, I have three questions: (1) how is that fucking relevant?; (2) isn't that point a little petty and niggling?; and (3) how do you square that minor point with Bluth's "the meaning is in the intent of the user" argument?

Again, the bait & switch you pulled with Bluth.

I never said words don't have meaning. I never said any such thing. I said words don't have inherent meaning. This is because meanings can change. But you're probably right, no word ever means anything different than it ever has.

[The Cat-Tribe]

2. If words have no inherent meanings, again, how do we know what they mean?

Through mutual agreement--not through anything inherent to the word itself. If our understanding of the meaning attached to the word differs, then we are simply unable to communicate effectively.

The message that is sent by a speaker is the substance he intended.

Actually, your two statements contradict each other. The message intended by the speaker is the one he intends to send. The message sent by the speaker depends, based on your own admission, on mutual agreement. Otherwise there is no communication.

Regardless, "nigger" by general agreement is a racist prejorative. That is what it means to the average user, the dictionary ... almost everyone with the possible exception of theoretically ignorant.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Also, this should be brought up too. People of Mixed descent, I'll stick with black-white mixed descent since it's more obvious.

Even being black myself, I never know what's the right way to refer to someone of mixed descent. Saying "Oh he's mixed." Sounds extremely offensive to me, almost like calling someone a mutt, but I'm not mixed so I really wouldn't know.

And another issue that presents itself is that many white people don't accept a mixed person as white and many black people don't consider a mixed person black. Course you could argue some mixed people appear very white, and claim white, and a white people generally don't notice but black people sometimes can figure them out. And I reason I believe there's such an issue there is because of the rather hostile relationship white people and black people share.

I'm a mutt and proud of it. American first, but my heritage is from mainland Italy, Sicily, and Puerto Rico. In my extended family we've got people of German and English extraction, Filipinos, Maltese... we're most shades from coffee to cream.

Same here. We should start a Mutt Supremacy Movement. *nod*

[The Cat-Tribe]

So, basically, you are ignoring mine, and Bluth's arguments, and debating similar, but different points, and pretending you are arguing our points. Fine.

Though, before you use it incorrectly again, you may want to look up the word "inherent" before you use it incorrectly as per it's current usage, rather than it's inherent meaning.

Nice try.

Does "inherent" have a meaning or not?

If not, end of conversation. No words have meaning. We can't communicate.

If so, why doesn't "nigger"?

If on the third hand, you are claiming you and Bluth are merely making a distinction [between] a word's definition and its "inherent" meaning because definitions can change, I have three questions: (1) how is that fucking relevant?; (2) isn't that point a little petty and niggling?; and (3) how do you square that minor point with Bluth's "the meaning is in the intent of the user" argument?

Again, the bait & switch you pulled with Bluth.

I never said words don't have meaning. I never said any such thing. I said words don't have inherent meaning. This is because meanings can change. But you're probably right, no word ever means anything different than it ever has.

I repeat my prior questions:
(1) how is that fucking relevant?
(2) isn't that point a little petty and niggling?
(3) how do you square that minor point with Bluth's "the meaning is in the intent of the user" argument?

To which I will add the following: do you admit the "meaning" of nigger is a racist prejorative?

[Hairless Kitten II]

To paraphrase D.L. Hughley: blacks would be happy to trade -- you can call them nigger or whatever you want and they get to run the world.

I hate myself for this....But, I think we've met our end of the bargain:

Who's that man?

[Almajoya]

Also, this should be brought up too. People of Mixed descent, I'll stick with black-white mixed descent since it's more obvious.

Even being black myself, I never know what's the right way to refer to someone of mixed descent. Saying "Oh he's mixed." Sounds extremely offensive to me, almost like calling someone a mutt, but I'm not mixed so I really wouldn't know.

And another issue that presents itself is that many white people don't accept a mixed person as white and many black people don't consider a mixed person black. Course you could argue some mixed people appear very white, and claim white, and a white people generally don't notice but black people sometimes can figure them out. And I reason I believe there's such an issue there is because of the rather hostile relationship white people and black people share.

I'm a mutt and proud of it. American first, but my heritage is from mainland Italy, Sicily, and Puerto Rico. In my extended family we've got people of German and English extraction, Filipinos, Maltese... we're most shades from coffee to cream.

Same here. We should start a Mutt Supremacy Movement. *nod*

I'm wit' it.

[The Cat-Tribe]

To paraphrase D.L. Hughley: blacks would be happy to trade -- you can call them nigger or whatever you want and they get to run the world.

I hate myself for this....But, I think we've met our end of the bargain:

Who's that man?

Some nigger.

[Maurepas]

Who's that man?

President Barack Obama, also known as, "The Leader of the Free World"

[Bluth Corporation]

Actually, your two statements contradict each other. The message intended by the speaker is the one he intends to send. The message sent by the speaker depends, based on your own admission, on mutual agreement.

And if there's no mutual agreement, then there is no communication, because the listener is interpreting a message other than the one that was actually sent.

Regardless, "nigger" by general agreement is a racist prejorative. That is what it means to the average user, the dictionary ... almost everyone with the possible exception of theoretically ignorant.

And when those people use the word "nigger," there is no racist meaning.

[Katganistan]

Its not racist and it should be used to refer to recent immigrants to the country in question. A couple of generations back.

Also 'white americans' founded the country and made up the vast majority of the population up to the 1930's so should be considered regular americans.

Well, let's see then.

Native Americans were here before the first European set foot on these shores.. I guess they don't count as regular Americans -- even though they literally built skyscrapers in cities like NY.

Blacks were used as a means of production for donkey's years. Yeah, that makes them less American than the Europeans who came later, who are, according to you, "regular" Americans.

Asians have been here since 1750 or so -- forgetting history? Look up "transcontinental railroad" and the gold rush.


The selective sense of history is astounding.

[Hairless Kitten II]

Who's that man?

President Barack Obama, also known as, "The Leader of the Free World"

There's a sex bar around the corner that's called 'The Free World', so he's the CEO of that joint?

[Maurepas]

Some nigger.

Lol, although I posted that under the premise of meeting Hughley's deal...

I dont think Ill be using my newly earned ability...I find I have too much respect for the President than that...

[Maurepas]

Who's that man?

President Barack Obama, also known as, "The Leader of the Free World"

There's a sex bar around the corner that's called 'The Free World', so he's the CEO of that joint?

When they get around to needing a Bailout, of course,

[The Cat-Tribe]

Actually, your two statements contradict each other. The message intended by the speaker is the one he intends to send. The message sent by the speaker depends, based on your own admission, on mutual agreement.

And if there's no mutual agreement, then there is no communication, because the listener is interpreting a message other than the one that was actually sent.

Regardless, "nigger" by general agreement is a racist prejorative. That is what it means to the average user, the dictionary ... almost everyone with the possible exception of theoretically ignorant.

And when those people use the word "nigger," there is no racist meaning.

I'm done arguing with your suppositions about the alleged meaning of a term contrary to its definition as it is used by an imaginary person in a purely theoretical situation that defies reality.

[Hairless Kitten II]

A black friend of me sometimes shouts to other black ones, which he doesn't know, 'nigger!'.

At first, they turn around and look angry, when they see that a black one shouted the word they start laughing.

Weird people

[Katganistan]

There are caucasian African Americans....

Like Charlize Theron.

[The Cat-Tribe]

A black friend of me sometimes shouts to other black ones, which he doesn't know, 'nigger!'.

At first, they turn around and look angry, when they see that a black one shouted the word they start laughing.

Weird people

A close friend of mine is an African-American who uses the term "nigger" copiously -- and usually as a racial prejorative. I object to her doing so as well.

[The Cat-Tribe]

There are caucasian African Americans....

Like Charlize Theron.

Nice catch. I was going to jump on you for Cameron Diaz.

Of course, "caucasian" isn't much more useful that white, black, or African-American.

What do people think they are defining with these terms? Not any scientific race. Not skin color. Not necessarily place of birth.

[Maurepas]

There are caucasian African Americans....

Like Charlize Theron.

Nice catch. I was going to jump on you for Cameron Diaz.

Of course, "caucasian" isn't much more useful that white, black, or African-American.

What do people think they are defining with these terms? Not any scientific race. Not skin color. Not necessarily place of birth.

Ive always wondered why they even need to ask, wouldnt not asking race on applications, etc., go a long way towards healing racism in this country?

[Der Teutoniker]

how do you square that minor point with Bluth's "the meaning is in the intent of the user" argument?

To which I will add the following: do you admit the "meaning" of nigger is a racist prejorative?

Well, I'll try to clear it up, but let's wait and see you deliberately misconstrue my argument again to save face.

Meaning is entirely based on intent. English wouldn't exist as a language without words changing meaning. This happens for a variety of reasons, but the point is that the intended meaning changes. If words have inherent meaning, as you seem to somehow believe, then no words would ever change meaning, the meaning would be inherent. There would only be one language, because all words would have this phatnom inherent mening. My argument is, I believe, identical to Bluth's, so far as I am aware.

That is one meaning of the word "nigger" certainly. However, the fact that there are other meanings/usages proves that words do not have inherent meaning, and that an arbitrary vocal assignment for the point of conversation has no set meaning, good or bad.

Generally, of course the word "nigger" is seen as a racist pejortive, but no one has argued that (if you can contradict that, please do). However, this is still far from anything close to "inherent", or even universal, again, some black people call each other "niggers" in a non-pejorative sense, which by itself totally, and entirely defeats any point you tried, to make, however, you are free to ignore that evidence against you as you have been doing.

[Der Teutoniker]

Of course, "caucasian" isn't much more useful that white, black, or African-American.

What do people think they are defining with these terms? Not any scientific race. Not skin color. Not necessarily place of birth.

I heard that "caucasian" was a derivative of white Jews from the Caucasus Mountains, or some such. I've always taken that as the root, though I don't recall the source, and as I was pretty young at the time, I never questioned the validity of said source. Agreed, though, that it is pretty un-useful.

[The Cat-Tribe]

how do you square that minor point with Bluth's "the meaning is in the intent of the user" argument?

To which I will add the following: do you admit the "meaning" of nigger is a racist prejorative?

Well, I'll try to clear it up, but let's wait and see you deliberately misconstrue my argument again to save face.

Meaning is entirely based on intent. English wouldn't exist as a language without words changing meaning. This happens for a variety of reasons, but the point is that the intended meaning changes. If words have inherent meaning, as you seem to somehow believe, then no words would ever change meaning, the meaning would be inherent. There would only be one language, because all words would have this phatnom inherent mening. My argument is, I believe, identical to Bluth's, so far as I am aware.

That is one meaning of the word "nigger" certainly. However, the fact that there are other meanings/usages proves that words do not have inherent meaning, and that an arbitrary vocal assignment for the point of conversation has no set meaning, good or bad.

Generally, of course the word "nigger" is seen as a racist pejortive, but no one has argued that (if you can contradict that, please do). However, this is still far from anything close to "inherent", or even universal, again, some black people call each other "niggers" in a non-pejorative sense, which by itself totally, and entirely defeats any point you tried, to make, however, you are free to ignore that evidence against you as you have been doing.

*sigh*

You've correctly seized on my mistaken use of the word "inherent" when all I meant to convey was the idea that words do have meanings separate from the subjective intent of the user. Mea culpa.

But that to say words don't have unchanging or universal meanings, doesn't mean that words don't have definitions. The definition of "nigger" is a racist prejorative. That is all I have been trying to say. Others have said, "no, it's just a word. Only the speaker can be racist."

If this thing has all been a misunderstanding based on the definition of the word "inherent," I apologize to all. If, however, anyone wishes to contend that the meaning of "nigger" isn't racist, I stand by my argument that it is.

[Der Teutoniker]

You've correctly seized on my mistaken use of the word "inherent" when all I meant to convey was the idea that words do have meanings separate from the subjective intent of the user. Mea culpa.

Thank you. Your admission that words can be used incorrectly, or without proper knowledge proves Bluth point, that you argued at first, and which lead to this whole argument. Bluth stated something to the effect that it is possible for someone to use the word "nigger" in an 'incorrect' fashion, without any negative connotations, because said person did not fully understand the nuance of the word. In this same manner did you use the word "inherent" and your admission of incorrectness wins Bluth the debate.