Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As like many nouns it's usage has changed over the years, and in Britain, imo, it is racist regardless of who is using the word. You should be equally as outraged hearing the term blind as you are to discovering it's being used by a Black man. Same applies to all derogatory terms.

Oh I don't know... perhaps the debate is not without merit.


To settle it once and for all, perhaps the OP should try using it frequently throughout various parts of south London over the next few weeks. Post back in a month's time to let us know how it's going.

Localgirl - I am sure that the OP can speak for himself, but I think the title of this thread was an invitation to a wider debate - as OP says: "time to take stock about what is and what isn't racist". He tends to go for headline grabbing thread titles, but his contribution to substantive debate has been interesting in the past, so don't judge too harshly!
(Hello again vinceayre!) I have some sympathy with that point - there are more sophisticated ways of starting the racism debate and to many people (myself included) it's offensive to even read/hear that word. I was just trying to explain the OP's MO, in case anyone thought he was just being provocative for the sake of it.

legalbeagle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> (there are more sophisticated ways of

> starting the racism debate and to many people

> (myself included) it's offensive to even read/hear

> that word.


Agreed. This thread is offensive as hell,overtly racist and a total disgrace.

To add to the disgusting, racist tone of this thread the OP has written "nigger" when he could easily have just used "the N-word." To be honest, my immediate take on this is that we have a white racist getting off on being able to use the N-word and claiming it is all in the interests of intellectual debate.


As I am sure we all know, when black Americans use the word in an informal way it is always "nigga" and not "nigger."


I know plenty of women who are friends, who might say to one another, in a playful, irreverant way: "how are you you old slag" or "bitch, what are you up to?" That does not mean it would be OK for some male to go up to a woman and randomly say, "What's up, bitch?"


The sentiment is the same with the N-word and you know this very well.


As I've already said, this thread is absolutely disgusting.

I agree it's a stupid thread title , phrased offensively and with suspect intent


But since then, every poster has told the original poster pretty much that, I would say the thread as a whole is an example of inclusivetey rather than being racist? I understand why you might be upset localgirlwithdreads but do you not draw any comfort from pretty much every reply you have seen? Or do you think they are racist as well?

I see that the majority (though not all) of the posters are not really supporting the OP's actions and words. Thank God for that!


SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I agree it's a stupid thread title , phrased

> offensively and with suspect intent

>

> But since then, every poster has told the original

> poster pretty much that, I would say the thread as

> a whole is an example of inclusivetey rather than

> being racist? I understand why you might be upset

> localgirlwithdreads but do you not draw any

> comfort from pretty much every reply you have

> seen? Or do you think they are racist as well?

well exactly LGWD! (if I may shorten your name to that)


I'm not sure how Matthew can compare the centuries of slavery and oppression with a defective eye - there isn't a whole musical genre based upon the oppression of blind people


"woke up this morning....

can't see too well but at least my boss isn't forcing me to work in a field for 20 hours a day"


It just wouldn't work

I understand some people have been offended by the title of this thread but the intention was to provoke discussion as to what is or isn't racism in the light of the accusions being banded about on the TLS/BBW thread.


Hands up all those who watched 'The Wire' for example. Great series. In each episode the word 'nigger' must have been used at least two or three times. Let's say 50 million people have viewed a least one episode and heard the word used. Should the series have been banned because people find the word offensive?


Should great literature which uses the word because the word was in common parlance at the time the book was written be censored and the word now removed because a modern audience finds it offensive. Or should the book be read with the original text and the reader sensible enough the acknowledge the conceptual and cultural mores of the time?


Is the word non-offensive if used by a black person? Surely it can be used by black people to offend but how many white people would take them to task for it? What if there's a history of ethnic rivalry between black people and one uses it against another eg, a black flemish speaker against a black walloon speaker in Belgium; someone from the Cameroon against say a West Indian?


I think Sean summed it up for me when he said it depends who says it and why.


Leaving the word aside, how about inverted racism? What do you make of the following situation I witnessed outside the edt this summer?


A young white woman and her white boyfriend were sitting on the benches outside the edt. A white middle aged man came out of the pub and stood by her and lit and started to smoke a cigarette. She made shoo-ing away gestures to waft away the smoke and told him to move (no please, just move). When he pointed out he was standing there becuase the cigarette extinguisher was on the wall and she was sitting right under it she gave him a mouthful of abuse. Okay, nothing wrong with that you might say, disgusting habit and she shouldn't be made to breathe his smoke (even though she was sitting under the extinguisher on the wall). About two minutes after he went back into the pub a black man came out, stood in the same place by the extinguisher, lit a fag and started smoking it. Yes, you've guessed it, she said nothing to him.


What do we make of that story? She realised she was sitting in the wrong place or didn't want to challenge a black person?

Read this (see link) and do try to keep up. (td)


for those who claim not to understand


The following paragraph, in particular, explains precisely what is going on with the N-word in The Wire. But then you already knew this and you're just trying to stir up sh*t


"Some African-Americans express considerable offense when referred to as a nigga by Caucasian people, but not if they are called the same by other African-Americans, or by some other minority, as a term of endearment.[5] In this case, the term may be seen either as a symbol of brotherhood,[9] similar to the usage of the words dude and bro, and its use outside a defined social group an unwelcome cultural appropriation. Critics have derided this as a double standard.[3]


Arhotic English-speakers such as British pronounce "nigger" and "nigga" identically routinely."


silverfox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I understand some people have been offended by the

> title of this thread but the intention was to

> provoke discussion as to what is or isn't racism

> in the light of the accusions being banded about

> on the TLS/BBW thread.

>

> Hands up all those who watched 'The Wire' for

> example. Great series. In each episode the word

> 'nigger' must have been used at least two or three

> times. Let's say 50 million people have viewed a

> least one episode and heard the word used. Should

> the series have been banned because people find

> the word offensive?

>

> Should great literature which uses the word

> because the word was in common parlance at the

> time the book was written be censored and the word

> now removed because a modern audience finds it

> offensive. Or should the book be read with the

> original text and the reader sensible enough the

> acknowledge the conceptual and cultural mores of

> the time?

>

> Is the word non-offensive if used by a black

> person? Surely it can be used by black people to

> offend but how many white people would take them

> to task for it? What if there's a history of

> ethnic rivalry between black people and one uses

> it against another eg, a black flemish speaker

> against a black walloon speaker in Belgium;

> someone from the Cameroon against say a West

> Indian?

>

> I think Sean summed it up for me when he said it

> depends who says it and why.

>

> Leaving the word aside, how about inverted racism?

> What do you make of the following situation I

> witnessed outside the edt this summer?

>

> A young white woman and her white boyfriend were

> sitting on the benches outside the edt. A white

> middle aged man came out of the pub and stood by

> her and lit and started to smoke a cigarette. She

> made shoo-ing away gestures to waft away the smoke

> and told him to move (no please, just move). When

> he pointed out he was standing there becuase the

> cigarette extinguisher was on the wall and she was

> sitting right under it she gave him a mouthful of

> abuse. Okay, nothing wrong with that you might

> say, disgusting habit and she shouldn't be made to

> breathe his smoke (even though she was sitting

> under the extinguisher on the wall). About two

> minutes after he went back into the pub a black

> man came out, stood in the same place by the

> extinguisher, lit a fag and started smoking it.

> Yes, you've guessed it, she said nothing to him.

>

> What do we make of that story? She realised she

> was sitting in the wrong place or didn't want to

> challenge a black person?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • They plan to close the Mount Pleasant Office, absolute and utter madnesss
    • We are sadly saddled with the three stooges till July 2029 because they have such a far reaching majority, that is the problem when you give a party that level of support.  The ship was being turned around by the last Administration and given all their faults, errors, misdemeanours its not surprising that that got and probably deservedly so out of Office.  But if what has just happened over the past 100+ days since the new Administration took power, we are in for a very bumpy ride and peoples lives will ALL be affected. They say they champion the poor, well all they've done so far by taking away the winter fuel allowance (not eligible for it) and increasing employers national insurance, as sure as eggs is eggs, prices will increase and that hits everyone in the pocket, including the poorest in society. You can only shake the money tree so often, after which time it's Empty. What that means is the cost of providing benefits increases, where does the money then come from.  To then take on the farmers who feed part of the economy is utter madness, because if they blockade food supplies then people will go hungry, not necessarily starve. You don't shoot the hand that feeds you.  Their is enough written about the three stooges, Starmer, Reeves and Rayner, I have no idea if they are supposed "communists", but what I have seen is that free speech is being eroded, that can never be good for a democracy, where people are scared to speak out.  How does all this change, the people will eventually have had enough and rise up against the Govt. It has to happen eventually. Even is Starmer went you are left with Reeves and Rayner. Personally O don't trust either, it will be more of "do as I say, not as I do".  
    • Thanks for the invite, although most people will be at work or at school. It's a Monday morning...
    • Budgens on Half Moon Lane
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...