Jump to content

Ketanji Brown Jackson to be first Black woman to sit on Supreme Court - Jordan Peterson has something to say - is he right or is he in the wrong?


koti
 Share

Recommended Posts

Peterkin has all the facts, but can't seem to draw the proper conclusion from them.

3 hours ago, Peterkin said:

In post-abolition US terminology, 'colored' was anyone of African descent, no matter how diluted by white um... interaction. It did not refer to the spectrum of light, but of race.

That is correct.
And especially in the Southern US, the term 'colored' was associated with black people, and eventually came to be seen as a racisl slur.
This is all explained in INow link, if you are so interested.

 

3 hours ago, Peterkin said:

In Canada, the situation was different, as was the history and public policy - very colourful, but too complicated to go into here - and so was the terminology.

That is also correct.
But in Canada the term still refers to People of Color, or anyone who is visibly not a white Caucasian.
It does not refer only to Black Canadians, and I suspect, the situation is similar in other parts of the World that don't share US southern history.

The conclusion he draws, that the border is 'porous', and we slowly embrace American characteristics, is false.
I don't own a gun, even though every American TV show depicts gun use.
We don't project power ( and attitude ) around the world, mostly because we have no equipment for our Armed Forces, but we do watch a lot of American war movies.
Almost half of us don't think D Trump's Presidency was the 'second coming', and almost all of us Canadians think he's an idiot, even though Fox News is available in Canada.
And even our Prime Minister, who likes to 'signal virtue', ( but then wears black face make-up ) has used the term 'coloured' ( notice the Canadian spelling ).

Are you trying to 'out-signal' Justin, Peterkin ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

You do know they speak different languages and use the same units of measurement?

Yes, I'm well aware. But if you needed to ask me the question, then I don't feel respected by you at all. Yes I know. I'm European. Speak to me like I'm stupid again, and it will be the last I speak with you. Not got the time to put up with crap like that. 

My point; is that differences in language are just as important as differences in dialect. To speak nothing of the reactionary cost of language policing with people in the same country as you, what about the reactionary cost when they aren't even in the same country?

My point with the Spanish portion, was that to most English speakers, saying "negro" is wrong. Yet it is just how you say Black in Spanish. If it sounds ridiculous to come down on a Spanish person for using a word in their own language, that has a different connotation somewhere else, then it's similarly ridiculous to come down on a Canadian for using a word in their dialect that also does not have a negative connotation to it.

I'm sorry; this chat is starting to come across more like an ultimatum of The New American way, as dictated by the loudest of young people who haven't sat in either an ethics or linguistics classroom, or you're just a racist. The irony of which should not be lost on anybody. 

3 hours ago, Peterkin said:

I think that's been done a number of times. Some people don't get it, some simply reject it. As to the colour thing, I'll try one more approach. 

In post-abolition US terminology, 'colored' was anyone of African descent, no matter how diluted by white um... interaction. It did not refer to the spectrum of light, but of race. Resources, civil rights, housing, access to government services, property, credit, legal recourse and employment, everything was allocated on the basis of one's designation of 'white' or 'colored'. I did not find it surprising when African-Americans repudiated the term.

In Canada, the situation was different, as was the history and public policy - very colourful, but too complicated to go into here - and so was the terminology. However, as that border is extremely porous, especially to movies and television broadcasting, Canadians of at least four generations have had access to the relevant information. 

It's not about skin pigmentation. People who identify as Black may be any shade from ebony to ivory, with spread into the ocher, copper and spice range. It is an ethno-political identity. And that is why, by convention if not grammar, we capitalize the word in that context. 

If someone buys  a black car, or refers to black ops or invites you to a black-tie dinner, or fears black helicopters or imposes a news blackout on a sequestered jury or blackballs an applicant to their club or takes their orange pekoe tea black, they are talking about quite different things.    

Even Canadians of a certain age know this.

Access to the relevant information of what Americans want them to learn in order to be linguistically acceptable in the USA? Where is this forum exactly? Why do Americans get to push the Agenda of their college students onto the rest of the world so pedanticly? Also why do you or iNow get to speak for all Americans? 

My wife is also American; yet she doesn't believe that language policing beyond borders is acceptable either. She doesn't use the term "coloured" and uses the PC terms here in the USA. Doesn't mean she is going to visit my family in the UK and call someone homophobic because they ask her for a cigarette but say "You got a spare fag on you?".

I really wish people would pick their battles better and take the time to critically think about how to figure out the ways and means of real moral progress instead of assuming that good intent is enough. We are far more than the sum of our intentions, iNows language policing might be well intended, but it comes at a cost and is a good example of the ends not justifying the means. 

7 minutes ago, MigL said:

The conclusion he draws, that the border is 'porous', and we slowly embrace American characteristics, is false.

Yeah this was how I interpreted that too. Projecting American problems and their solutions onto other places is a nono for me. I've never once heard of Canada having a widespread lynching problem in its South. 

I don't get why the border has to be porous in the Americans favour either? Because TV and movies? Please, I wasn't born yesterday. 

If they could actually reach an intellectual consensus with each other I'd be more inclined to listen. But it's extremism on both sides here in the USA and the centrists in the middle are just part of the "fuck both your factions" faction.

4 hours ago, iNow said:

No thanks. Far too much time and bandwidth has already been wasted on this ridiculousness. 

Oh so everyone else has to explain themselves to you, but not the other way around? You started this ridiculousness by trying to push someone from a different country as you, to accept your verdict, delivered rudely, that they were wrong to use language the way they did because "American way better". 

Oh and before you go "where was I being rude?" The "1963 called" line was pretty rude. This whole thread revolves around protected characteristics, something which I see as something we have a duty to protect. But you don't get to pick and choose which ones are more worthy of your protection. They are all worthy of it. That's why they are called protected. Ethnicity, Gender AND age. It irks me just as much when the old disrespect the young as when the young disrespect the old. 

8 hours ago, iNow said:

If they don't know and are simply unaware, then that's one thing, but if upon being informed they choose to persist anyway, then the brush spreads its tar quite appropriately IMO. 

Oh stop with the self-righteousness. You informed us of nothing but your own preferences and willingness to get right down into the dirt with those you perceive to already be slinging it. Even when they weren't. 

This is one of those situations where, even though someone is arguing for views similar to your own, you just want them to shut up because they are harming the cause in the long run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, MSC said:

Speak to me like I'm stupid again, and it will be the last I speak with you.

I am duly chastened. (I would never be sarcastic to someone I consider stupid.) I thought your reference to French and German was inappropriate and, no, I do not agree that the analogy holds. Spelling, pronunciation and vernacular differences are no excuse to remain oblivious to a dominant close neighbour's internal conflicts.

 

57 minutes ago, MSC said:

My point with the Spanish portion, was that to most English speakers, saying "negro" is wrong. Yet it is just how you say Black in Spanish.

No doubt the Spanish use the same word, without the capital, for all those examples I mentioned, just as we use the word black for colour in various ways. I very much doubt he would borrow - as the English-speakers borrowed his word -  the word 'black' from English just for the racial designation - unless it was in the sense I have mentioned, as a people's name for their own shared identity.  Again, the analogy is poor.

 

57 minutes ago, MSC said:

o speak nothing of the reactionary cost of language policing with people in the same country as you, what about the reactionary cost when they aren't even in the same country?

I have no idea what that will turn out to be. Frankly, it's not my deepest concern regarding North America culture.

57 minutes ago, MSC said:

Access to the relevant information of what Americans want them to learn in order to be linguistically acceptable in the USA? Where is this forum exactly? Why do Americans get to push the Agenda of their college students onto the rest of the world so pedanticly? Also why do you or iNow get to speak for all Americans? 

None of the above pertain to my comments. It is simply this: we Canadians receive so much American news, television programming, magazine and movie content, as well as much personal contact among the citizenry, traveling back and forth for business, education and pleasure and have so many internal discussions of how events and economics in the US affect us, that it's near impossible for a Canadian who has not been in a religious retreat or coma for that least 60 years not to have some of idea of the factions, moods and conflicts which regularly and inevitably spill over the border.

 

57 minutes ago, MSC said:

I don't get why the border has to be porous in the Americans favour either?

You don't? I'm afraid to say, in case you feel disrespected.  They simply have more  - by a factor of 10 - of everything. And it's not a question of favour: Canada has always been a willing market for American culture, produce, processed foods, retail and restaurant franchises, cars, drugs, armaments, fashion and ideas. It's not very much like a European country in terms of national distinctiveness - can't be, given the colonial history. 

 

57 minutes ago, MSC said:

It irks me just as much when the old disrespect the young as when the young disrespect the old. 

I don't think either of those things happened.

Edited by Peterkin
keep leaving out pivotal words... senility?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, iNow said:

No thanks. Far too much time and bandwidth has already been wasted on this ridiculousness. 

While I agree with that, and since I have "some" disgreement with most everyone so far that has contributed, (part of that disgreement is that I believe that sometimes PC can be taken too far) I think the crux of the argument is the opportunistic, publicity seeking, controversy creator that jumped at this, is imo someone truly to be despised. Although one must admit, he is good at achieving the discontent and controversy he purposely sets out to achieve. Jordon Peterson his his name. A shame also of the hypocrisy shown by one or two contributers  in particular.

Biden made a decision based on qualifications, in the first instance, and to show that justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done in the second instance. His pre-announcment simply aligned with those two points. IMVHO of course!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MSC said:

Also why do you or iNow get to speak for all Americans? 

Calm down. All I said is 1963 called and wants their bad label back. I didn’t call MigLs wife a bad name or kick his dog. Let’s move on, please. 

4 hours ago, MSC said:

I really wish people would pick their battles better

Pot. Kettle. Black. 

4 hours ago, MSC said:

Oh stop with the self-righteousness

Happy to follow your lead once you do the same. 

4 hours ago, MSC said:

you just want them to shut up because they are harming the cause in the long run. 

Please stop arrogantly and inaccurately suggesting you have insights into my motivations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Peterkin said:

am duly chastened. (I would never be sarcastic to someone I consider stupid.) I thought your reference to French and German was inappropriate and, no, I do not agree that the analogy holds. Spelling, pronunciation and vernacular differences are no excuse to remain oblivious to a dominant close neighbour's internal conflicts.

Being knowledgeable of those conflicts and making those conflicts your own are two completely different things. I'd say the analogy holds quite well. On one side, you've got Canadians doing their own thing, on the other side you've got Americans trying to dictate to Canadians on what is and isn't okay to say. I imagine there was a time in France, where a French person could be shot by a German person for not capitulating to anti-semetici rhetoric. So yeah, the analogy holds pretty well. Both involve a bully pretending to be a victim because other countries won't put its issues first and foremost over their own.

2 hours ago, Peterkin said:

You don't? I'm afraid to say, in case you feel disrespected.  They simply have more  - by a factor of 10 - of everything.

More Nukes too, more cities blown up and wiped off the face of the earth too. So Americans get to dictate how others live and use their own dialects of English because they have more? How is that an argument. They have more school shooters and serial killers too. Is that a point in the Americans favour? Would you care to explain how we should all be keeping score of things so we know whom is king? How does that work exactly?

2 hours ago, Peterkin said:

don't think either of those things happened.

You're missing the point, I said that to illustrate that age discrimination is unacceptable whether you are young or old. One of those things did happen here, iNow made a rude comment toward MigL based on his age and has even went so far as to say all from a certain time, are hateful. I mentioned the other to make clear that I found both unacceptable. 

You and iNow have ignored too much of what I have said and seem to be suggesting that American English and it's history should be more important to Canadians than their own. In what world is that reasonable? iNow doesn't even deem it worthy of him responding or explaining his point of view to me, that alone should tell you something.

This has gone too off topic. I really can't be bothered with a new thread about language policing and respecting the context of another culture. I've said what I wanted to say on the matter. But I didn't realize I would be debating within an environment where only Americans get to have the final say on what is and isn't important within our collective moral discourse. 

Dyou know what is truly the worst extreme, practiced by both sides of the American political camps? Anti-intellectualism. This idea on each side that suggests to question the rhetoric, means you're either stupid or immoral. 

On the one hand, you've got people calling you stupid for saying we need to do more to help minority groups. On the other, you've got people for calling you stupid for thinking critically about language policing. Either way, being critical gets you judged. iNows entire attitude of "oh you'll just be ignorant or arrogant to disagree with me on whatever I say" is evidence of this. 

I even mentioned my wife's views on this, but I guess since she is a woman, that's not worth addressing to either of you? 

I told you once already, don't treat me like I am stupid. You've carried on, by expecting me to buy any of this knee jerk nonsense about Americans having a very vague "more everything". 

Left, right, I don't give a shit about that anymore. Because each side is where truth goes to die, just in a different way and both sides spend so much time being outraged at and suspicious of the other, that people are too busy being offended to think critically, solve problems, and minimize creating new ones. 

 

29 minutes ago, iNow said:

Calm down. All I said is 1963 called and wants their bad label back. I didn’t call MigLs wife a bad name or kick his dog. Let’s move on, please. 

Pot. Kettle. Black. 

Happy to follow your lead once you do the same. 

Please stop arrogantly and inaccurately suggesting you have insights into my motivations. 

I'm not talking about your motivations. Just the consequences of your actions. As for your motivations, I could care less but they aren't as mysterious as you seem to think they are. Oh yeah, holding you accountable isn't self righteous. Particularly when I'm defending someone else, not myself. But then what would you know about accountability? You can't even admit the 1963 bit wasn't rude.

I'll be back if you ever figure out how to substantively counter argue against anything I've said. But I won't hold my breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MSC said:

I said that to illustrate that age discrimination is unacceptable whether you are young or old. One of those things did happen here, iNow made a rude comment toward MigL based on his age and has even went so far as to say all from a certain time, are hateful.

If you’re not intentionally misrepresenting me, then I fear you’re suffering from some rather significant reading comprehension challenges. 

6 minutes ago, MSC said:

iNow have ignored too much of what I have said and seem to be suggesting that American English and it's history should be more important to Canadians than their own.

See above. Same applies here. 

7 minutes ago, MSC said:

iNow doesn't even deem it worthy of him responding or explaining his point of view to me, that alone should tell you something.

You’re approach to this discussion has turned me off. That’s what it should tell you. 

8 minutes ago, MSC said:

people are too busy being offended to think critically, solve problems, and minimize creating new ones. 

Pot. Kettle. Black. 

9 minutes ago, MSC said:

I didn't realize I would be debating within an environment where only Americans get to have the final say on what is and isn't important within our collective moral discourse

Is it possible you missed a nap today, or maybe have low blood sugar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, MSC said:

Being knowledgeable of those conflicts and making those conflicts your own are two completely different things.

They are our own! Slightly different forms, same mix of population, same prejudices, plenty of overflow. No excuse at all to be unaware of gaffes in labelling.

 

26 minutes ago, MSC said:

On one side, you've got Canadians doing their own thing, on the other side you've got Americans trying to dictate to Canadians on what is and isn't okay to say.

I don't know how you got hold of that idea, but it's incorrect. The same people, and similar groups of people, and for similar reason, are sensitive to certain language. We all know that in the same way that Americans all know it, but some of us just  don't care. Some of us, like some Americans, consider their own right to be disdainful and rude is worth the damage than they do. In most cases, they are allowed to do so. Sometimes, somebody tells them it's wrong - no repercussions, no loss of privilege, just a mild reprimand... and somebody else gets all mimosa'd up in their behalf. 

33 minutes ago, MSC said:

More Nukes too, more cities blown up and wiped off the face of the earth too

    Yeah. We and the Brits helped with some of that. A lot of that.

34 minutes ago, MSC said:

So Americans get to dictate how others live and use their own dialects of English because they have more? How is that an argument. They have more school shooters and serial killers too. Is that a point in the Americans favour? Would you care to explain how we should all be keeping score of things so we know whom is king? How does that work exactly?

You're barking up the wrong telephone pole. It's not about Americans or favours. It's about awareness that people - real ones, living among us right now, hate being called certain names, or regarded in certain ways, and that using those words is crass, insensitive and rude. 

42 minutes ago, MSC said:

I even mentioned my wife's views on this, but I guess since she is a woman, that's not worth addressing to either of you? 

I would be happy to address any of her concerns, but not through an intermediary. (How did gender suddenly come into it? Have you appointed yourself advocate for yet another underrepresented group?) 

 

44 minutes ago, MSC said:

I told you once already, don't treat me like I am stupid.

Stop acting like it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MSC said:

Being knowledgeable of those conflicts and making those conflicts your own are two completely different things. I'd say the analogy holds quite well. On one side, you've got Canadians doing their own thing, on the other side you've got Americans trying to dictate to Canadians on what is and isn't okay to say. I imagine there was a time in France, where a French person could be shot by a German person for not capitulating to anti-semetici rhetoric. So yeah, the analogy holds pretty well. Both involve a bully pretending to be a victim because other countries won't put its issues first and foremost over their own.

More Nukes too, more cities blown up and wiped off the face of the earth too. So Americans get to dictate how others live and use their own dialects of English because they have more? How is that an argument. They have more school shooters and serial killers too. Is that a point in the Americans favour? Would you care to explain how we should all be keeping score of things so we know whom is king? How does that work exactly?

You're missing the point, I said that to illustrate that age discrimination is unacceptable whether you are young or old. One of those things did happen here, iNow made a rude comment toward MigL based on his age and has even went so far as to say all from a certain time, are hateful. I mentioned the other to make clear that I found both unacceptable. 

You and iNow have ignored too much of what I have said and seem to be suggesting that American English and it's history should be more important to Canadians than their own. In what world is that reasonable? iNow doesn't even deem it worthy of him responding or explaining his point of view to me, that alone should tell you something.

This has gone too off topic. I really can't be bothered with a new thread about language policing and respecting the context of another culture. I've said what I wanted to say on the matter. But I didn't realize I would be debating within an environment where only Americans get to have the final say on what is and isn't important within our collective moral discourse. 

Dyou know what is truly the worst extreme, practiced by both sides of the American political camps? Anti-intellectualism. This idea on each side that suggests to question the rhetoric, means you're either stupid or immoral. 

On the one hand, you've got people calling you stupid for saying we need to do more to help minority groups. On the other, you've got people for calling you stupid for thinking critically about language policing. Either way, being critical gets you judged. iNows entire attitude of "oh you'll just be ignorant or arrogant to disagree with me on whatever I say" is evidence of this. 

I even mentioned my wife's views on this, but I guess since she is a woman, that's not worth addressing to either of you? 

I told you once already, don't treat me like I am stupid. You've carried on, by expecting me to buy any of this knee jerk nonsense about Americans having a very vague "more everything". 

Left, right, I don't give a shit about that anymore. Because each side is where truth goes to die, just in a different way and both sides spend so much time being outraged at and suspicious of the other, that people are too busy being offended to think critically, solve problems, and minimize creating new ones. 

 

I'm not talking about your motivations. Just the consequences of your actions. As for your motivations, I could care less but they aren't as mysterious as you seem to think they are. Oh yeah, holding you accountable isn't self righteous. Particularly when I'm defending someone else, not myself. But then what would you know about accountability? You can't even admit the 1963 bit wasn't rude.

I'll be back if you ever figure out how to substantively counter argue against anything I've said. But I won't hold my breath.

Jesus Fucking Christ. Feel better now that you've purged years worth of frustration from your system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MSC said:

You can't even admit the 1963 bit wasn't rude.

Is that what you've been on about? 1963 was the last year anyone in either country had an excuse to say "I didn't know any better." After MLK, Lenny Bruce and Selma, nobody in north America could possibly think it's fine to relegate people to 'colored' status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, zapatos said:

Jesus Fucking Christ. Feel better now that you've purged years worth of frustration from your system?

+1

Though I have found the "debate" interesting, I considered getting involved, but then thought better of it since I side mostly with MSC on this particular subject.

Maybe its just poor interpretation on our part, so apologies for that! No offense to our American friends but, it does often come across as - we know better and everyone else in the world should follow suit.   

Edited by Intoscience
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Maybe its just poor interpretation on our part, so apologies for that!

No worries. This is why I clarified my intention... twice... or was it thrice? I dunno. Whatever. No worries is my message here.

It's unfortunate my nap comment itself meant to lighten things up got a neg, but again... whatever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, iNow said:

No worries. This is why I clarified my intention... twice... or was it thrice? I dunno. Whatever. No worries is my message here.

It's unfortunate my nap comment itself meant to lighten things up got a neg, but again... whatever. 

When sarcasm is part of ones MO, the humour angle never shines through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I have repeatedly said the subject of the OP was not particularly upsetting to me.
Ultimately J Biden made a good choice in KBJ, but could have handled the preannounced selection criteria in a more politically correct fashion.

This has now gone completely off topic, with some telling me they are offended by my use of certain words which may ( depending on location ) offend a third party.
MSC then berates them because he is offended that they are offending me.
When did being offended for other people become a 'thing' ?

Well I am not offended, so can we all take a deep breath and calm down.
@MSC While I appreciate you sticking up for me, I assure you, it is not needed. INow and I are constantly tussling, and we both seem to enjoy it.

Also keep in mind that INow ( and Peterkin ) are probably older than I am.
( and not as good looking, intelligent, or modest 😄 )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MigL said:

Also keep in mind that INow ( and Peterkin ) are probably older than I am.
( and not as good looking, intelligent, or modest 😄 )

I think when you get over 40, I don't think age makes that much difference to any more perceived maturity... you are what you are passed that age.

Edited by StringJunky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this instance, only those who are too young to remember what-all went down in 60's and 70's have the excuse of not knowing what sounds bigoted. And all the innocent Europeans, of course, who are so eager to defend Canadian ignorance from American arrogance - whether we need defending or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, MigL said:

Also keep in mind that INow ( and Peterkin ) are probably older than I am.
( and not as good looking, intelligent, or modest 😄 )

Being better looking and more intelligent than you is a pretty low hurdle to jump… I mean, you don’t exactly set the bar very high. As for me, if I weren’t so humble, I’d be perfect!

 


 

Cin Cin   🥃 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, iNow said:

Being better looking and more intelligent than you is a pretty low hurdle to jump… I mean, you don’t exactly set the bar very high. As for me, if I weren’t so humble, I’d be perfect!

 


 

Cin Cin   🥃 

If you guys think you can bring up who's the most modest around here without mentioning me I humbly ask you to think again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 4/29/2022 at 5:19 PM, iNow said:

No worries. This is why I clarified my intention... twice... or was it thrice? I dunno. Whatever. No worries is my message here.

It's unfortunate my nap comment itself meant to lighten things up got a neg, but again... whatever. 

No problem, I enjoy a bit of sarcasm, I suppose you find on these types of forums the "joke" can sometimes be lost in interpretation.

On 4/30/2022 at 3:03 AM, StringJunky said:

I think when you get over 40, I don't think age makes that much difference to any more perceived maturity... you are what you are passed that age

I guess (and it is a guess) judging from the recent comments, being in my early 50's I'm probably in amongst the youngest in this discussion. As you can see from my avatar I'm still able to do some pretty tough off road motorcycling, though now in the vets class, and constantly suffering from joint pain these days!

My children consider me an old man!

I won't comment on my looks or intelligence on any particular level other than I consider myself  - all round average. 

On 4/30/2022 at 2:54 AM, MigL said:

For what it's worth, I have repeatedly said the subject of the OP was not particularly upsetting to me.
Ultimately J Biden made a good choice in KBJ, but could have handled the preannounced selection criteria in a more politically correct fashion.

 Getting back to the OP I share the same sentiment as MigL ^^^^^^^  +1

Edited by Intoscience
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2022 at 2:53 PM, MigL said:

and almost all of us Canadians think he's an idiot, even though Fox News is available in Canada.

Well, as it turns out there are "First amendment" folks in Canada, but I suspect it is the 20% rule. As in, get any group together and 20% of them are likely to be idiots. The trick is figuring out if you are one of them. 

I will also say that also in Canada folks are thinking about the issues and connotations with POCs and coloured folks. Mostly as in the past it all non-white were kind of merged and in part because there was some solidarity among those who are officially termed "visible minorities". But differences in experiences, trajectories and increasing desire for individual recognition have soured those terms, independently on whether folks are using it as a slur or not. It is just the way language works. A new generation sees things slightly different (or wants it to be) and one point or another it is reflected in language.

On 4/29/2022 at 7:54 PM, MigL said:

When did being offended for other people become a 'thing' ?

Social media. Not sure if it is true, but I am getting old and I increasingly want to blame someone. Can't blame immigrants, so social media it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2022 at 7:54 PM, MigL said:

When did being offended for other people become a 'thing' ?

I've done it all my life. Racist white people often make remarks around me, testing to see if I align with them, testing to see which minorities I blame for my problems. I've always felt comfortable telling them I don't think of any human that way, and they stop, almost as if they know what a shitty stance they've taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.