UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-05-2013, 10:12 PM   #1
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Political Correctness

I'm a member of a baseball blog and I'm about to get "heckbanned" under the three strikes rule, if you violate their TOS three times you get kicked out, after a warning and two bans of increasing length.

The comments I'm being banned for (edited slightly to block Google search)-

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger
I want some more black guys on the [team]. [California] is a really diverse [state], and we have a history of featuring some of the most famous black guys in the game. The current team isn't even representative of [the city], half of the guys are white and from the South, while a good chunk of the rest hail from Venezuela.
4 Flags, reviewed by mod and warning. (April 2013)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger
Those Latin guys should start up a band and call it "showboat".
3 Flags, reviewed by mod 1 week ban. (September 2013)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger
There's no reason a Japanese pitcher would want to play for us. The team has no history with the Japanese, no famous players who starred in Japan and continued that success over in the United States, by contrast to the other big market teams who dared to take a risk on those guys and reap the success. You can bring up cultural diversity as much as you want, but since when would a foreigner consider the cultural diversity of another country in picking out a team to play for? He's looking for money, prestige and comfort. There's nothing like endearing yourself to another country by DFAing the one Japanese player on the team, for no reason other than he was the 41st man on the roster.
3 Flags, reviewed by mod 1 month ban (November 2013).

...

Suffice to say, I am mad. I understand that California, and the Bay Area, are a lot more racially sensitive than other parts of the country (ironically despite the West Coast in general avoiding most of the events of the Civil Rights movement), but these comments seem pretty dang innocuous. And the community seems pretty dang intolerant. Which brings me to the debate topic.

Political correctness in the modern use seems like an application of poison to fight poison. In cases where people take racial tolerance for granted, racism springs up again. There's a recent example of a football player calling a struggling rookie a "half-nigger" as a form of hazing. But at the same time, situations like the personal experience I just posted seem almost infantile in how reactionary they are, almost like an overreaction to anything perceived as a racial slight.

My sins in the three examples were 1) implying the team was racist against blacks (lol), 2) grouping Cubans/Dominicans into the culturally demeaning, lazy term "Latin" and 3) implying the team kicked out the Japanese player for being Asian.

All three were things I did not intend to say! Is context irrelevant? I don't even see how you can see racism in those comments unless you were looking to twist any comment that brought up ethnicity. Yet, I got at least 3 flags on all three comments (meaning three different people were offended) and the mod agreed with them. Ridiculous.

...

Yeah, so, long story short. Is the current climate molded by political correctness preferred to the alternative? Before answering, consider that the racial atmosphere of the Civil Rights movement isn't around anymore. In that environment, whites had been enforcing racism against blacks for over a century, and integration was being done against the wills of many. Several generations have passed since then and people have grown up without the inherited hatred of their grandparents. But still, if we were to punish overly righteous political correctness, would "the alternative" be equivalent to something like the 1960's South, would it be slightly regressed from the status quo or preferable to the hypersensitive environment of today?
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 10:55 PM   #2
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Your first post isn't racist in the sense of racial hatred or intolerance but it is racist in this sense: you suggest that spicing things up racially is intrinsically good, i.e. that there is some merit to drafting players partially based on race rather than strictly based on non-racial factors. Your post essentially says (to some readers) "The team would do well to draft some black players." And not even because those black players would bring with them certain athletic competencies, no! You raise no such argument. You want black players on the team strictly because you want to feel good about the team having some black players on it. I think that to many modern youth and to many black Americans, such sentiments might sound like ... I don't know the proper term for it, but it's the whole "white people wanting to feel good about themselves and convincing themselves that they're not racist when really they are" thing. Like ... like a white guy who says "I'm not racist! I love black people!", lists off all the things he's done for black people in his community, but is doing it more to feel good about himself ("What a swell fellow am I. I am such a swell guy. I could not possibly be any more white." ) and less because of a bona fide concern about the welfare of underprivileged black Americans.

Here's the thing: your words, as applied to the major league teams of the 1920s and '30s, could have (and probably would have) had the 180° opposite sound to 99% of folks hearing them. In the context of an all-white or mostly-white baseball team that is not fielding talented black players because of racism, your post rings out like a gong for civil rights activists everywhere. But you don't actually say anywhere in the quoted text above "I believe that racism is preventing talented black players from joining the team" and so instead it comes out sounding like you're saying "The team may be doing fine, but I want us to field some black players because RACIAL STUFF THAT SHOULDN'T EVEN MATTER." Your post, to progressive readers of the 21st century, probably feels like the sort of writing that is keeping us from moving forward into a world that doesn't see race.

Putting it another way, would you argue that the team needs to scout more players with blond hair because right now there are too many with brown or black hair? Probably not. Likewise, your detractors feel that the only reason you want to see more blacks on the team is because of superficial thinking that closets a subconscious racism.

Long story short, I can see how the first post might have gotten you into trouble.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Your second post is a lot easier to address. Doppel: that was a pretty obvious racist snide remark you made. ^^; You try to play it off at the bottom of your post as though it was your use of the word "Latin" that got you into trouble. Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh no. No one's angry with you for using the word "Latin." What got you into trouble with that post -- and I think you know full well, but if you seriously don't, then I'll spell it out for you -- is the fact that you suggested "those Latin guys" (so you're just generically lumping all of the Latin players together on the basis of their race) should get together and "start up a band and call it 'showboat'." Show Boat is a musical which deals with racism, particularly with people of partial black ancestry who pass for full whites. So you're basically making a racist jab at the Latin players by saying something along the lines of "they could pass for white guys" or "they're Latinos who try and act white". Whether that's true or not and whether that was your intention or not, such comments really aren't necessary on a baseball forum, especially not if you've already been warned to drop it with the race-centric comments.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

But the third post ... this is where I feel it's pretty obvious that (unless you doctored the post to make yourself sound more sympathetic to us) you've become that community's pariah and they're pretty much out to get you. Because I really don't see any racism in that last post. I don't even see how there could be. Swap out "Japanese" for "English" or "French" or whatever and your post still stands 100% the same (provided we lived in an alternate universe where England or France produced great baseball players who dreamed of signing American contracts ). So yeah, with that post, I'd say you have two options:
  1. Contact that forum's Kuno and report his moderator to him. Explain that you believe this moderator has developed a vendetta against you and sees racism where there is none, built around some poor communication surrounding two earlier posts. Show him the most recent post (the one that got you banned) and ask him if he agrees with his mod that there was racist rhetoric in there worthy of a ban.
    • If he says he doesn't see any, ask him to have your ban nullified and ask him to talk to that mod.
    • If he sides with the mod, see below!
  2. Leave that community. By your own choice, too, and not theirs.
Honestly, if they're going to conflate broad, innocuous racism for acerbic racial intolerance or hatred, then they're probably a forum of children (or people who behave and think like children) and you probably don't want to post there anyway. If trying to say "I think our team is too white. I wish we had some more people from other ethnicities" is going to get you banned for being an intolerable racist, then the forum's not even worth your trouble.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 11:18 PM   #3
deh74
Noted homosexual
 
deh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,091
Some people actually think that the terms black and latin are racist themselves, so the moderation tram on that site might have some people who think that.

I don't think what you said was in any way racist though.

I think that political correctness is good in its simplest sense that it basically means not being a racist,, misogynistic prick but the definition had been stretched too far.
__________________




PASBL
The Whistling Sound of Impending Doom.

deh74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 11:19 PM   #4
Amras.MG
Not sure if gone...
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Or just lurking.
Posts: 2,709
Political correctness is a necessity in the current environment, but not an inherent good. This also goes for a craptonne of other stuff.
Amras.MG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 11:38 PM   #5
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Your first post isn't racist in the sense of racial hatred or intolerance but it is racist in this sense: you suggest that spicing things up racially is intrinsically good, i.e. that there is some merit to drafting players partially based on race rather than strictly based on non-racial factors. Your post essentially says (to some readers) "The team would do well to draft some black players." And not even because those black players would bring with them certain athletic competencies, no! You raise no such argument. You want black players on the team strictly because you want to feel good about the team having some black players on it. I think that to many modern youth and to many black Americans, such sentiments might sound like ... I don't know the proper term for it, but it's the whole "white people wanting to feel good about themselves and convincing themselves that they're not racist when really they are" thing. Like ... like a white guy who says "I'm not racist! I love black people!", lists off all the things he's done for black people in his community, but is doing it more to feel good about himself ("What a swell fellow am I. I am such a swell guy. I could not possibly be any more white." ) and less because of a bona fide concern about the welfare of underprivileged black Americans.
I don't see the problem with wanting more diversity on the team. I feel good about more diversity and I'm not really ashamed of that. It's not meant to be interpreted as white hate. I think if I'd said something along the lines of "I want black people because they're better at baseball than white people" that would be racist. But wanting diversity? Baseball wants to encourage the idea that it is an international sport to curry the favour of teams in other countries, and blacks on the whole are pursuing fewer avenues into baseball due to competition from scholarships in football and other popular sports. Diversity is going down due to economic factors, and that's something baseball officials have been trying to reverse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Your post, to progressive readers of the 21st century, probably feels like the sort of writing that is keeping us from moving forward into a world that doesn't see race.
That is absolutely ridiculous.

Literally, it sounds like someone looking for a reason to make an accusation of racism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Your second post is a lot easier to address. Doppel: that was a pretty obvious racist snide remark you made. ^^; You try to play it off at the bottom of your post as though it was your use of the word "Latin" that got you into trouble. Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh no. No one's angry with you for using the word "Latin." What got you into trouble with that post -- and I think you know full well, but if you seriously don't, then I'll spell it out for you -- is the fact that you suggested "those Latin guys" (so you're just generically lumping all of the Latin players together on the basis of their race) should get together and "start up a band and call it 'showboat'." Show Boat is a musical which deals with racism, particularly with people of partial black ancestry who pass for full whites. So you're basically making a racist jab at the Latin players by saying something along the lines of "they could pass for white guys" or "they're Latinos who try and act white". Whether that's true or not and whether that was your intention or not, such comments really aren't necessary on a baseball forum, especially not if you've already been warned to drop it with the race-centric comments.
"showboat" is a baseball term for theatrics players engage in after hitting a home run, meant to insult/belittle the other team or pitcher. It's widely seen as very disrespectful, and not commonly understood to be that musical at all.

I used "Latin guys" because the two guys who were doing the showboating were from different countries, Cuba and the Dominican Republic. That is literally the only thing I could imagine that would have gotten me in trouble, since as a general tendency, foreign players are encouraged to showboat in their native countries, while American players are discouraged. So there's a cultural clash once they all meet in MLB.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
But the third post ... this is where I feel it's pretty obvious that (unless you doctored the post to make yourself sound more sympathetic to us) you've become that community's pariah and they're pretty much out to get you. Because I really don't see any racism in that last post. I don't even see how there could be. Swap out "Japanese" for "English" or "French" or whatever and your post still stands 100% the same (provided we lived in an alternate universe where England or France produced great baseball players who dreamed of signing American contracts ).
It's true I'm not the blog's golden son...I tend to complain about the same thing over and over, and that's gotten on some guys nerves enough to personally troll me, but those are the minority and they weren't the same people as who flagged me up.

I think on the third comment, I think there needs to be some context. The team has been criticized for the reason I brought up in the first quote, but more along the lines of "the team doesn't scout in other countries". So they ended up signing the Japanese player to show that they scout in other countries. The team had no needs for this player, and he played well in the team's minor league affiliate before being called up to play out of position. But, despite his good production, he was released from the team at the end of the year for no reason.

My attitude was that the team brought him in without a serious intent to see what he could do, and didn't want to deal with him because of his age and the difficulties associated with translating for him. They interpreted that as me thinking the team got rid of him because they didn't want a Japanese on the roster. I can see how they can infer that, but it's not the same as what I said at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Leave that community. By your own choice, too, and not theirs. [/list]Honestly, if they're going to conflate broad, innocuous racism for acerbic racial intolerance or hatred, then they're probably a forum of children (or people who behave and think like children) and you probably don't want to post there anyway. If trying to say "I think our team is too white. I wish we had some more people from other ethnicities" is going to get you banned for being an intolerable racist, then the forum's not even worth your trouble.
I'm complaining here because I don't think I felt the bans were reasonable, and I didn't want to ask the mod because I didn't want to get into an esoteric fight about racism and potentially expose myself with something genuinely offensive in an effort to plead me case. Not to mention, those comments took all of maybe 5 seconds to make, why do I have to spend hours defending a 5 second comment? I have better things to do than that.

The community is huge and genuinely fun, save these incidents. I did keep a low profile after the week ban so I'm considering just dropping my account, then starting a new one. If you are banned, it's easy to sort banned accounts and trace the IP. The mod has no reason to trace IP for non-banned accounts (although, if they happened to trace my IP and saw that it matched my old, 3 strikes account, I could be banned for that).
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 11:50 PM   #6
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Baseball season's over for the year anyway. Why not just sit the ban out?

As for the showboat thing, if that's the case, then I'd say Post #2 isn't really racist either. It's the "Latin guys" in conjunction with Show Boat (the musical) that makes it a 1-2 punch of baby racism. Without the musical to back it up, I agree that the "Latin guys" thing just becomes a generic descriptor not selected for any racist reasons but simply because -- let's face it -- we human beings sort things by color very, very frequently and easily. (There's a reason that the Power Rangers have each got a different color and that children even refer to them as "the Red Ranger," "the Green Ranger", etc.)
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 06:53 AM   #7
Concept
Archbishop of Banterbury
 
Concept's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Nipple-Hunting with Elsie and Kairne
Posts: 7,030
Send a message via Skype™ to Concept
Quote:
Originally Posted by deh74 View Post
Some people actually think that the terms black and latin are racist themselves, so the moderation tram on that site might have some people who think that.
At yet somehow "African American" is fine. I've never understood that. I heard the term used in reference to Sol Campbell once, who turned around and pointed out that he's neither African nor American but British, thanks very much.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTerry
What can the harvest hope for, if not the care of the reaper man?
Concept is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 08:32 AM   #8
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
This doesn't seem to be an issue of PC; several of those posts of yours are clumsily worded. Clearly, banning you is ridiculous, but you could be more sensitive in how you phrase things.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 09:38 AM   #9
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
I'm going to have to sit the ban out, but since it's the "hot stove" offseason I was looking forward to it since the regular season sucked arse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Concept View Post
At yet somehow "African American" is fine. I've never understood that. I heard the term used in reference to Sol Campbell once, who turned around and pointed out that he's neither African nor American but British, thanks very much.
I once gave a speech for the NAACP and the members complimented me using the word "black" and not "African American". This year, for a QCR session in one of my classes many of the black students were offended that another student wrote "should blacks be allowed to...?" although I forgot the full nature of the topic. Suffice to say, they were offended he didn't use "African American".

There isn't a consensus, it seems, but "black" is almost never wrong. It's a physical description and not necessarily one of ethnicity. African American is insulting to say, black Britons (or so I've heard).
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 09:59 AM   #10
Concept
Archbishop of Banterbury
 
Concept's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Nipple-Hunting with Elsie and Kairne
Posts: 7,030
Send a message via Skype™ to Concept
The thing with African American is twofold; one, the vast majority of black people around the world aren't American, and yet it's not unusual to hear Americans using that as a default term. But the second is that if I started referring to white Americans as "European Americans" or "English Americans", people would look at me like I was crazy despite it being no less accurate a descriptor.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTerry
What can the harvest hope for, if not the care of the reaper man?
Concept is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 10:01 AM   #11
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
The problem with "African American" is that the term is used as a racial descriptor but it sounds like more of an ethnic descriptor or (even moreso) a label for people of African birth who have immigrated to America. For the same reason that we quickly abandoned the idea of calling them "Indian Americans" and moved to "Native Americans" because of confusion with Americans of ethnic Indian (i.e. of India) descent, I feel like "African Americans" is a poor choice of label for American blacks since it's the label we really ought to be reserving for Americans who have come to us directly from Nigeria, Zaire, South Africa, etc. If we are to even use it all.

Because worse still, even the quality of the label "African American" (as a descriptor for Americans who've come to us from Africa) is pretty poor. Indian Americans works since, by and large, India has a national culture with one national identity. It has many subcultures too, sure, but what nation doesn't. Likewise, Japanese Americans works even though there are various small cultural differences between Japanese from the various corners of the country. But "African American" ... you may as well be saying "Asian American" or "European American". For starters, anybody from a nation north of the central African jungle is automatically excluded from our thoughts as an "African American" since sub-Saharan Africa and Saharan Africa are worlds apart culturally, ethnically, and so on. But even if we stick to just sub-Saharan Africa, there's a world of difference between South Africans, Kenyans, Congolese, and Nigerians. But the label "African American" just lumps them all together into one label. So even as an ethnic descriptor, it's pretty poor. (And again: if we want to argue for its use as a racial descriptor, why not just use black? )

I remember in the early 1990s the term black was still in vogue. It was around 1995 that I remember the delicate social pressures to stop using "black" and to start using "African American". By the late 1990s, this was pretty much the norm all across the country. It's interesting to see in recent years this resurgence both amongst American blacks and amongst their non-black associates to begin using the term "black" again rather than "African American". I dunno: to me, it just feels like Word Pair A fits better for a world that is trying to not see in terms of race rather than Word Pair B does:
  1. white, black
  2. white, African American
A, you have words that are clearly in the exact same category on the exact same level. Both are basic color words. Both are incredibly simple and known to even the very youngest speakers of English. Neither is charged with any sort of political correctness, meanness, etc. You're putting both words on exactly the same playing field: and in so doing, you're not teaching children to see any difference between the two in terms of their social potential. But with B, on the other hand, you have this LOL-OBVIOUS contrast between the very simple, very non-PC "white" and the syllable-overloaded, incredibly PC "African American." Seven goddamn syllables versus just one. One is a basic color word and the other is this marriage of words which requires the child to have some understanding of what an Africa is and what an America is and to understand that (LOL) "African Americans are Americans with African ancestry but not Americans whose African ancestry can be traced back by fewer than three to four generations." The child calls some Nigerian American an "African American" and unwittingly invites a sermon about how the Nigerian is a true African American but is not a descendant of American slaves. I dunno, it just doesn't seem like a smart word pair to be shooting for if your goal is to raise a generation of children who don't see any more difference between LeVar Burton and Drew Carey than they do between Robin Williams and Brad Pitt. Yeah, you're obviously going to see a difference between their skin color. That's because you're a human being with two functioning eyes and a functioning brain. You can appreciate differences in color. But you're not going to lend that difference any more weight than you lend to differences of hair color, nose shape or size, and so on. It's just going to be one of many physical descriptors to you. But white and African American? I dunno, it just feels like the linguistic equivalent of the very Jim Crow segregation that civil rights leaders fought to tear down fifty years ago.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 10:01 AM   #12
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
There's a massive difference between "a black person" and "blacks", just like there's a difference between saying "he's gay" and "he's a gay." I think using those words as nouns comes off as almost dehumanizing.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 03:30 PM   #13
DaveTheFishGuy
Primordial Fishbeast
 
DaveTheFishGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,258
Send a message via Skype™ to DaveTheFishGuy
Honestly labels like Italian American and Irish American have always bothered me too. I don't get it really. It's not like my Grandfather's family describes ourselves as Prussian British.
DaveTheFishGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 03:57 PM   #14
Sneaze
Mrow?
 
Sneaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Camping the White Market
Posts: 6,934
If someone called me Italian American I would probably punch them. I am of Italian descent, this is true. I live in America, yes. Do not make it seem like I just rode the last fucking boat into the country yesterday by calling me Italian American. You may, however, call me white as much as you damn well please. I know I've clicked that check mark on more staffing applications than I care to count, so what is the big deal in calling a black man black as opposed to the much more rigid and far less accurate African American? Zero. There is zero difference. The only reason it is still done is, to put it bluntly, a sort of reverse racism that forces us to come up with a new "politically correct" term every time a single person screams loud enough that they are offended by the old one.

If you REALLY wanted to attach a geographic label to it, the simple term African would honestly work best. After all, we have Asian, European, Native American, Latino (don't get me started on this one, please), and even "Middle Eastern". Why do we have to force the idea that using their "homeland", for lack of better word, as the primary descriptor is a negative thing?
__________________

Daisy wins at life for making this Battle Cut
Sneaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2013, 08:07 PM   #15
swampert28
#009: Blastoise
 
swampert28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: here, there, everywhere...
Posts: 342
Some people in the world tend to think everyone is racist, I call my sister black, but that's because she is? I don't call her anything offensive, and treat her nicely(mostly). When people get mad at others because they have called them black, it makes no sense at all. I don't call her a Haitian-Canadian, because that would just be stupid. She lives in Canada at the moment, she is a legal citizen here, therefore she is a Canadian. BUT Doppleganger, there is a way that your comments could have been taken the wrong way. It is all in the head, and how people imagine someone saying your comments. Try saying your comment out loud in a deep ass-holeish way, and you'll see what I mean.
__________________
this(or that) is a link by the way.
swampert28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2013, 08:14 PM   #16
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
swampert everything is offensive when you say it in a deep-assholeish kinda way.

The only comment I would have considered offensive out of Dopple's was the showboat one, and that's only because I didn't have the prior knowledge before hand. The other two to me were perfectly fine. I got what he was going at with those two.

I don't like the term African-American either, because like Talon said, you can't group all of sub-saharan Africa under one roof. And at the same time, while Italian-American is heard of, other ones are generally considered offensive. People are Irish or Polish or Croatian, not Irish-American(I have heard this one, but rarely), Polish-American, or Croatian-American. It's odd. Black is a perfectly acceptable term, of course context included.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2013, 02:44 AM   #17
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
In reference to the Richie Incognito incident incident I posted earlier...
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2013, 04:03 PM   #18
Loki
The Path of Now & Forever
 
Loki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
Your first post comes off as a sarcastic affirmative action mocking racist post. I believe the term Talon was looking for was 'reverse racism.'

The second one comes off really racist without any context. Did they do a lot of showboating on the field or something?

I think your third ban is likely due to your other two bans. It has your bringing up the hiring of the Japanese player as affirmative action and then going on to say he's doing it for the money and prestige. Sorry to break it to you, but I'm 99% sure that all major league players are doing it for the money and prestige.
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:10 PM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.