Was Scalf Referring to Blacks in These Posts?

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't answer that question conclusively based on what he posted.

[/ QUOTE ]


You can't answer the question conclusively? Are you kidding me? How many questions in this life can be answered conclusively? What exactly is the point of making a series of posts bitching about a particular but unamed cultural group? You think Scalf just want to say he was a bigot but didn't want to reveal the object of his disdain?

[adios]

You're asking me about each post I presume. I'm saying the one I'm quoting isn't necessarily referring to blacks. Notice I haven't stated anything about the second post.

[adios]

Andy asked me to answer it conclusively did he not?

[andyfox]

"entitled" meaning "he titled it," not that he was entitled to post it.

"Was Scalf Referring to Blacks in These Posts? I maintain that in the post in question you can't conclusively state that he was."

Why do you think, then, that he won't answer my direct question about it? And what cultural group do you think he was referring to? Or do you think the post is too unclear to give a definitive answer?

How about in the second post where he talks about the same race? Is there another possible interpretation of what I take to be his references to the Reginald Denny and Rodney King incidents in L.A.? What race do you think he's referring to there, or again, is it not conclusively clear?

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But at the risk of getting flamed for being too p.c., may I say that referring to African Americans as "blacks" could be perceived as prejudiced.


[/ QUOTE ]

It could be so perceived by some, but that would be an erroneous perception.

"African-American" is a potentially erroneous term, as a considerable number of blacks are from, say, the Caribbean islands rather than Africa.

Also, "Asian" is less accurate than "Oriental", as many Asians are actually Caucasian, being from parts of Russia rather than from the Orient. Hence "Asian" may lead to confusion in meaning; it is overbroad.

In the endless quest to devise ever more non-offensive terms, less accurate terms have been devised. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

I'll even suggest that calling someone something incorrect may be inherently more insulting than using a term which the PC police have currently deemed "archaic" or "offensive" in their latest fad. Remember, "black" used to be the current PC term.

That said, I now generally use "Asian" although I think it's rather silly. However, I use "black" rather than "African-American". Maybe the guy is a "Haitian-American", no?

A decade from now, will we soon need to refer to people as "European-Americans"? Heh.

May the PC-police take a flying leap into an ice-cold lake, so as to wake up their brain cells, the next time they set out to devise even more "politically correct" terms.

[/ QUOTE ]

Accuracy is not really relevant. Are white people accurately called "white"? These names aren't devised by the PC police; they are devised by haters ("nigger"), or they are devised by the people themselves, and they deserve to be called what they want to be called.

Yes, it can be a bit silly at times, especially when a group of people keep changing their name (which isn't that often btw, "African American" has been around for over a decade). But it isn't silly to them. And it doesn't take much effort to change the way one refers to another. And that slight effort can make a world of difference in relationships.

-ptmusic

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
"entitled" meaning "he titled it," not that he was entitled to post it.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad, I interpreted "entitled" as he was justified, had a right to, whatever.

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think, then, that he won't answer my direct question about it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would guess that the answer isn't something to be proud of lets say.

[ QUOTE ]
And what cultural group do you think he was referring to?

[/ QUOTE ]

Given the name he used probably some group of blacks. Not sure if it's about the entire group or a sub group.

[ QUOTE ]
Or do you think the post is too unclear to give a definitive answer?

[/ QUOTE ]

Accepting Boris's numbers > 90% it's about some group of blacks. If he would have used the name Janet, I wouldn't be at all clear as to whom it was about.

[ QUOTE ]
How about in the second post where he talks about the same race?

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you about that one but it may be about a sub group of blacks. For instance it could be about blacks below the poverty line (I don't buy that blacks below the poverty line are predisposed to what he states though to make it clear).

[ QUOTE ]
Is there another possible interpretation of what I take to be his references to the Reginald Denny and Rodney King incidents in L.A.?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not in my mind but again it could be about a certain sub class.

[ QUOTE ]
What race do you think he's referring to there, or again, is it not conclusively clear?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's clear as far as some group of blacks. To make it clear being biased against a sub group by making broad generalizations is BS in my book.

I think in the first post that you wrote we ought to be careful in drawing the conclusions about racism directed at a certain group. The only give away is the name as Boris states but it doesn't rise to the standard that your question seems to address. IMO my viewpoint is a politically correct viewpoint. You can find some people of any cultural group that behaive in a similar manner that scalf stated in the first post you pointed out. In order to say that it's conclusively about blacks we need a little more to go on. Taken as a whole it makes the case stronger that the first post is about blacks but your poll asked about two posts only. I don't keep up on what scalf has posted. Again IMO making generalizations about cultural groups, races, ethnic groups what have you is ignorant and wrong headed.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought "black" and "African-American" came into vogue because of usage by the group themselves, that this is the term themselves preferred. Is this correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point/question, Andy, and you're probably right.

Anyway, I hate inaccuracy, and "Asian" instead of "Oriental" to differentiate races is poor terminolgy IMO because a Caucasian from Siberia is Asian too. "African-American" is also inaccurate and a poorer choice of terminology.

ACTUALLY, I think the much earlier terms of Caucasian, Negroid and Oriental are by far the most accurate if the goal of usage is to reference members of a particular race (setting aside the separate issue/question regarding validity of race as a concept in itself). I DON'T see why those terms should inherently have more objectionable connotations than any other differentiating designations of race. Of course it is probably too much to expect that language will evolve in a logical manner, so we can probably forget about the reinstatement of those terms in popular usage.

[MMMMMM]

I see your point but I think accurate use of language should not be considered offensive in the slightest. For instance "Negro" should not be considered offensive although "nigger" most certainly is offensive.

Also, "African American" might be considered to slight American Caribbean Islanders. Guess that wasn't thought of in the rush to devise a new PC term. Heh.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
If someone tells a bad joke about incest, and you laugh or are offended (or simply understand it!), are you one who believes that we should inbreed?

[/ QUOTE ]

If a freind cracks a joke about rabbi's do you think you will respond to it differently if your other freind(who happens to be a orthodox jew) happens to be present?

For some reason a man you have never met is coming to your house for dinner. You know nothing at all about this individual except his name is Mohammed. Porkchops were on the menu, are you going to change it or at least consider changing it? You might change it, and when you finally meet Mohammed you find out he is a christian who loves pork chops. If you had no understanding at all about muslims the thought of changing the menu would not even enter your mind.

Having an understanding of a belief is going to influence your decisions and thoughts. You may learn about Islam and reject it completely, but that knowledge is still going to influence you on some levels. Thats why we learn so we can make better decisions.

Andy and you are going to treat the Lekeshias of the world differently simply because you are aware of racial stereotypes. Lekeshia's behavior around white people will be influenced by her knowledge that some white people feel superior to blacks.

Does being influenced by beliefs you reject make you racist? I decided to look up the definitions of "racist" and "bigot" and concluded by those definations probably not. However it has been my experience that certain individuals want to be treated exactly the same without regard to race or religion. They consider to be treated otherwise as racist behavior. Given that understanding of racism I find it impossible for someone not to be racist.

Stu

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
I see your point but I think accurate use of language should not be considered offensive in the slightest. For instance "Negro" should not be considered offensive although "nigger" most certainly is offensive.

[/ QUOTE ]

In terms of dictionary definitions, you are right. But in practice, negro is only slightly less offensive because it was initially used as a better alternative to nigger. They are both certainly offensive today.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, "African American" might be considered to slight American Caribbean Islanders.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then those from the Caribbean have a right to speak up, and others should call them what they want to be called. I don't see the problem.

[ QUOTE ]
Guess that wasn't thought of in the rush to devise a new PC term. Heh.

[/ QUOTE ]

Those that came up with the term "African American" were trying to come up with a name for themselves, i.e. those whose ancestors came from Africa. The fact that the name doesn't accurately describe others doesn't mean the name they chose is a failure.

The bottom line is that it's their choice, not ours.

-ptmusic