• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are some words inherently offensive or is context important?

Are some words inherently offensive?

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 30.8%
  • No

    Votes: 18 69.2%

  • Total voters
    26
Because of the way you present that, I would never dream of using the "d" word in front of you.

I have had to live in my own skin. I have had to become comfortable in me. I am gentle with others and carefully select words because i remember when I was that 12 year old girl weeping on her bed.

I thank you for the thoughtfulness about the D word. It is something that means much. It takes a lot to overcome when Like I was the different one in society. I couldn't back in 1959 expect society to play nice nice with me. I had o get tough.

I am happy that many people do not have to suffer the slings and arrows of words anymore. i do wonder if I am this tough old bird now because i did suffer through it.
 
I have had to live in my own skin. I have had to become comfortable in me. I am gentle with others and carefully select words because i remember when I was that 12 year old girl weeping on her bed.

I thank you for the thoughtfulness about the D word. It is something that means much. It takes a lot to overcome when Like I was the different one in society. I couldn't back in 1959 expect society to play nice nice with me. I had o get tough.

I am happy that many people do not have to suffer the slings and arrows of words anymore. i do wonder if I am this tough old bird now because i did suffer through it.

It's funny you say that because I get so disgusted with homos that cry foul against society like they have it sooooo bad. I, for one, have never really suffered any discrimination in my life for being gay. I have to wonder what some of these people who think life is so hard for a gay person now would have thought about being gay 30 or 40 years ago. I also wonder if, for all their bluster today, they would have had half the balls to back up a tenth of their conviction if they lived prior to the Stonewall Riots...
 
Thank you, and I agree.

Now, I'm going to start this by saying that in no way shape or form am I painting this in anyway near the kind of thing that homosexuals or minorities or even people with disabilities have to put up with (as the godfather of a down syndrome baby you'd be amazed how many homosexual and minority people I hear going "that's retarded" often. Hell, there's a song where that's the main chorus line, but I digress). Its not, no where near it. However, the action was similar and I have the utmost respect for Inferno for doing what she did. I was a bit of a mid drifter when I was younger, never wanting to fully go off with the outcasts and friends with some of the more popular kids but neither fitting in fully with either. I liked video games, I played role playing games and things like magic the gathering, and was on occasion known to read comic books. I generally liked school and did well. In 4th grade I got told I had to wear glasses, so on the big specs came. I was shy, played in the band, and had a slight issue pronouncing R's correctly which I still have issues at times (always run when your last name begins with an R). I was routinely picked on by the more popular kids that weren't exactly happy with me hanging around as a geek, a nerd, etc. As I stated earlier, I'm not in any way shape or form trying to say this was even a 1/10th of the kind of ridicule that homosexuals or minorities face. However, as a kid, these things did hurt me and actually changed my attitude and caused me to change how I was, even causing me to be rather mean to some of my friends at one point which I later came to regret.

As I got older and started realizing more things about emotions and the power people had over me I started calling myself a geek, actually liking the word and happily being labeled as such. I do so now because I realize that yeah, I have the tendancy to enjoy things that are "geeky" and to hell with people that dislike it, and I also know I have a tendancy to do things completely contrary to the typical "geeky" stereotype. Essentially, I no longer allowed it to be a word that I thought was bad but took it as a badge of simply what I enjoy and who I am.

This is a miniscule example, and Inferno's is far greater, but they're cut from the same cloth (albiet mine's the size of a postage stamp and hers is the size of a blanket). In both cases, we were allowing other people control over us through words and in both cases we said "no" and stopped allowing those words to control us but instead just made them the same as anything else.....a word.

Pretty similar to my own experience growing up. It was about junior year that embraced my inner geek and said to hell with anyone who doesn't like it. One of the best decisions of my life really, because I learned just how irrelevant the opinions of ignorant and obnoxious people really are. I know so many people that today as adults worry "what people will think". My honest response has been for some time now, I don't give a damn what they think.
 
It's funny you say that because I get so disgusted with homos that cry foul against society like they have it sooooo bad. I, for one, have never really suffered any discrimination in my life for being gay. I have to wonder what some of these people who think life is so hard for a gay person now would have thought about being gay 30 or 40 years ago. I also wonder if, for all their bluster today, they would have had half the balls to back up a tenth of their conviction if they lived prior to the Stonewall Riots...

I have a close family member who came out a little over 30 years ago. I got to watch what it was like from close quarters back then. Today is nothing in comparison. That does not mean that the things that happens to gays today cannot be extremely painful though. People 100 years ago lived on far less than I have today, but today, I am working part time while hoping to someday get called back to my auto industry job, just trying to get by. The fact that things where worse for people 100 years ago does not mean that my situation does not suck for me.

Does that make sense?
 
* Ahh, the wonders of Irony.



No, you singled EVERYONE out. Your words, once more:

"Notice its always underachieving "white males" that always go off on AA."

Now, perhaps I'm confused, but I always thought always meant every time. It seems pretty clear you're stating that the people "always" complain about AA are "underachieving white males". Did you not?

Also, a note about preface. The definition of preface:

1. a preliminary statement in a book by the book's author or editor, setting forth its purpose and scope, expressing acknowledgment of assistance from others, etc.
2. an introductory part, as of a speech.
3. something preliminary or introductory

Hmm, that would seem to imply for you to have "prefaced" it by stating "if the shoe fits" it would've had to come BEFORE your original statement, yet that comment I quoted was the FIRST Thing you said.

Furthermore, I looked through your entire post. Not a single time during the entire thing of it did you at all say "if the shoe fits". You can't just make **** up and expect people to believe it when we can go back and read for ourselves.

Considering your comment, which frankly is a stereotyping generalization that you back up with zero information and I have no doubt in my mind if someone made it the opposite way you'd be waving the bigot flag around, about intelligence in your post I'd assume you'd show some yourself by not stating you prefaced something when you didn't and that you prefaced it with something you didn't even say.



No, talk about Irony and using sarcasm to show your own BLATANT hypocracy. Someone said the n-word while talking about a news event and you suggested he was insensitive and borderline implied he was a racist.

Meanwhile, you CLEARLY and fully classify ANYONE that speaks ill about Afrimative Action as an "underachieving white male".

The blindness you have to your own hatred and bigotry while parading yourself around as some kind of king of tolerance that people should be ashamed to not live up to while you condemn people for stating FACTUAL things in casual conversation is what I was pointing out there.



So once again we have an example of Aaron stating something and therefore it must be so. Fine then, only race baiters would be offended by the n-word. If you're not one, ignore it. I stated it, just like Aaron stated it, so it MUST be true.



I have an issue with Afirmative Action, not because it has ever victomzied me, I don't believe it has, but because I believe at this point in time it is a detriminet to society both to minorities and to whites and because I do not believe that the government should be imposing such measures.

Also, please find me any post where I'm talking about the "victem mentality".

I'm sorry you dislike a mirror being held up to your face, but I'm not surprised you dislike it and choose it ignore it and instead shatter it so you can go on denying.

Since you summarily dismissed anything that I said as irrelevant, or maligned, or suspect, do not feel so rained upon if I return the favor.
Never before have I witnessed such hypocrisy (with a "s", and an "i" not an "a" and a "c").
My caveat was made posts prior...and I did not feel I had to preface every subsequent post, seeing that you have been on the opposing side from outset.
And you choose to play games with semantics.
A equals B, discounting that C also equals B, and perhaps even D equals B....
"It's always "underachieving white males" that go off on AA. Does not mean that some achieving white males, equally "go off on AA". You aligned with that that obviously is not true about yourself? Why? Did you feel that was the only option to raise your hand for? You choose to play the victim, while I do not.
I'm forced to accept the racism and bigotry, which is germane to some, as "benign" and "sweet-smelling". Why? Because you and others say it is? More do as I say, not as I do. I don't play that. Sorry.
I am not a racist or a bigot for calling others on their bigotry and racism. That was the tack that was being bandied about over at PF. It wasn't true there, and it's not true here. In fact, it is not true anywhere. It's denial on your parts, and failure to acknowledge that you benefit from "white privilege", and are intent on keeping it the status quo. You saying that the moon is made of green cheese, doesn't make it so. It's what you choose to believe, and insist that I believe. However we are free to believe whatever we choose...and I choose to believe you are deluded. In fact, your own words underscore the fact.
It, apparently, isn't funny when the rabbit has the gun. The hunter is indignant that the rabbit would even attempt to touch the gun, much less handle it, pointing the barrel directly at the hunter. Who would have thunk?
I have too many white friends and acquaintances and clients, in fact, that think I am the cat's meow, even if you don't. I don't need your validation. Thanks for offering it, though.
 
Last edited:
I have a close family member who came out a little over 30 years ago. I got to watch what it was like from close quarters back then. Today is nothing in comparison. That does not mean that the things that happens to gays today cannot be extremely painful though. People 100 years ago lived on far less than I have today, but today, I am working part time while hoping to someday get called back to my auto industry job, just trying to get by. The fact that things where worse for people 100 years ago does not mean that my situation does not suck for me.

Does that make sense?

It makes all the sense in the world, Redress. But what gets me about other gays, especially, is that they seem to have lost all perspective in terms of what they go through in their life. There's no appreciation or even understanding, most of the time, of what brought us this far and I doubt they even understand how far we've come. And what ends up happening is we have gays that become "activists" but end up using primitive means of activism that we are well beyond at this stage of the game. There's no need for attack politics and shock value demonstration. Those that came before us already did that and brought us to having a voice and legitimate access to proper forums for the enactment of change from here on. Their means of advancing the cause are outdated and only become a hindrance rather than a help. You just want to smack them and tell them, "If you really want to help, sit down and STFU!"
 
It makes perfect sense, Jallman.

I equate it to a kid that throws a hissy fit because he can't sit at the adult table. The kid finally gets his way and gets a seat at the big table and continues to throw a hissy fit. All it does is give ammo to the people that said the kid shouldn't be at the table in the first place and turn off the people who may have been ambivilent to the idea.
 
Lets just cut to the quick and get straight to why this thread was started since you want to claim that people are essentially forcing you to accept racism and bigotry as benign and sweet smiling.

All those saying that words hurt, that words are awful, and all this stuff, I ask you this, is the following statement "Racism and Bigotry"

"And your comparison of Michael Richards "nigger" rant to Wanda Sykes joke is a prime example of how people like you prefer to debate. "

To give you context, the person posting it was condemning someone trying to say they were on the same scale, implying that Michael Richards rant was far worse than the things Wanda Sykes said.

This is the only point at any time people have been essentially telling you specifically "You're wrong", in the fact you got AMAZINGLY upset and outrageously angry over that comment.

So inferno and others possibly sensitive to this situation, I would love to know, was the above statement a "bigoted and racist" statement? Are people that are telling Aaron that he overreacted by his over the top implication and innuendo that the person that stated it was somehow trying to intentionally be offensive or even racist attempting to make him "accept bigotry and racism as something benign" or is it people asking him to not completely and utterly flip out because someone described something factual that happened with the factual word used and while doing so is describing it as a NEGATIVE thing.
 
I have a close family member who came out a little over 30 years ago. I got to watch what it was like from close quarters back then. Today is nothing in comparison. That does not mean that the things that happens to gays today cannot be extremely painful though. People 100 years ago lived on far less than I have today, but today, I am working part time while hoping to someday get called back to my auto industry job, just trying to get by. The fact that things where worse for people 100 years ago does not mean that my situation does not suck for me.

Does that make sense?

It makes great sense, however, at the same time you have to understand the relative nature of it. If you said "My situation right now sucks" would not be something I'd argue by the sounds of it. However, if you said "My situation suck as bad as those that were down trodden 100 years ago" I'd probably roll my eyes and think you're over melodramatic.

Likewise, I have no doubt that its still a difficult life for many black people in this country to varying degrees. At the same time, comparative to 50 years ago let alone 100 their life is much better off. If they act, or exclaim, that somehow it is just as bad now as it ever has been then that's not only insulting to the intelligence of those they're trying to peddle their melodrama to but its insulting to everyone that lived during that time that they're attempting to manipulate for leverage and insulting to everyone that had given their blood, sweat, tears, and times in allowing for that individual to have a better world and life now than they had.

Acknowledge that you have some hard times at times, but acknowledge the strides that have been made and the way things have improved as well. If all you do is focus on the negative and continually go "we/I need more, more, more" while never seeming to show thanks or happiness or even acknowledgment of progress then it makes all those around you wonder how much you truly appreciate or even recognize the progress and how much you are just perhaps conditioned now to say "more more more". This can go as much for spoiled brat rich kids as it can go for down trodden gay males.
 
Last edited:
It makes perfect sense, Jallman.

I equate it to a kid that throws a hissy fit because he can't sit at the adult table. The kid finally gets his way and gets a seat at the big table and continues to throw a hissy fit. All it does is give ammo to the people that said the kid shouldn't be at the table in the first place and turn off the people who may have been ambivilent to the idea.

That is a perfect example. Flawless illustration.
 
Lets just cut to the quick and get straight to why this thread was started since you want to claim that people are essentially forcing you to accept racism and bigotry as benign and sweet smiling.

All those saying that words hurt, that words are awful, and all this stuff, I ask you this, is the following statement "Racism and Bigotry"

"And your comparison of Michael Richards "nigger" rant to Wanda Sykes joke is a prime example of how people like you prefer to debate. "

To give you context, the person posting it was condemning someone trying to say they were on the same scale, implying that Michael Richards rant was far worse than the things Wanda Sykes said.

This is the only point at any time people have been essentially telling you specifically "You're wrong", in the fact you got AMAZINGLY upset and outrageously angry over that comment.

So inferno and others possibly sensitive to this situation, I would love to know, was the above statement a "bigoted and racist" statement? Are people that are telling Aaron that he overreacted by his over the top implication and innuendo that the person that stated it was somehow trying to intentionally be offensive or even racist attempting to make him "accept bigotry and racism as something benign" or is it people asking him to not completely and utterly flip out because someone described something factual that happened with the factual word used and while doing so is describing it as a NEGATIVE thing.

Someone using the word "nigger" (oops now I'm a racist too I guess) in that context is absolutely not a racist. The word was being used to refer to an event, not to insult anyone. In fact the person was refering to the event because he was arguing that going on a "nigger" rant (oops, there goes my racist rants again) is far more offensive than cracking a few lame jokes at the expense of right wing pundits.

Any attempt to claim that word was used with racist intent is dishonest and illogical.

And Zyphlin, seriously, don't say nigger, you racist. Don't ever say nigger again. Never ever say nigger.

DISCLAIMER: All use of the dreaded n-word was facetious and in no way an expression of racial hate or bigotry. Any attempt to smear this poster with the racist label based on this post will be scoffed at and mocked mercilessly.
 
Lets just cut to the quick and get straight to why this thread was started since you want to claim that people are essentially forcing you to accept racism and bigotry as benign and sweet smiling.

All those saying that words hurt, that words are awful, and all this stuff, I ask you this, is the following statement "Racism and Bigotry"

"And your comparison of Michael Richards "nigger" rant to Wanda Sykes joke is a prime example of how people like you prefer to debate. "

To give you context, the person posting it was condemning someone trying to say they were on the same scale, implying that Michael Richards rant was far worse than the things Wanda Sykes said.

This is the only point at any time people have been essentially telling you specifically "You're wrong", in the fact you got AMAZINGLY upset and outrageously angry over that comment.

So inferno and others possibly sensitive to this situation, I would love to know, was the above statement a "bigoted and racist" statement? Are people that are telling Aaron that he overreacted by his over the top implication and innuendo that the person that stated it was somehow trying to intentionally be offensive or even racist attempting to make him "accept bigotry and racism as something benign" or is it people asking him to not completely and utterly flip out because someone described something factual that happened with the factual word used and while doing so is describing it as a NEGATIVE thing.

Why are you having to ask? I thought you already knew the answer. Now, you're doubting yourself? I call that progress. It didn't feel right, because it wasn't right. Your gut instinct was the right one. You second-guessing yourself, gives me hope. At least, for you.
I am sick and tired of some folks using the line, "black folks say it about themselves....why can't we use it, even in jest?"
I, personally, don't have anything to do with any black folks who use the term. I don't listen to rap music, because of all the misogyny, and "n-word this" and "n-word that". The black community is not monolithic. Not all black men wear saggy pants, and not all black women are prostitutes, to be hyperbolic. The fact that some believe it to be so, does not make it so.
And it ain't alright to use that word, in any context, with many of us. Anyone thinking otherwise is confused. In fact, I can think of no other word that is so vile, pervasive, or carries such weight. Reclaiming the word has been a failure....that someone should feel this way, should give some pause. But now I know better. It's all projection, if you get my meaning.
 
Last edited:
Ahh, there you go again Aaron, deciding something is so and thus it must be so.

No, I don't doubt my answer at all. I know fully what I believe about it. I'm just curious to see if even those that seem to be on your side in the general case of things realizes that its idoitic to state that the person was making a bigoted and racist statement.
 
Ahh, there you go again Aaron, deciding something is so and thus it must be so.

No, I don't doubt my answer at all. I know fully what I believe about it. I'm just curious to see if even those that seem to be on your side in the general case of things realizes that its idoitic to state that the person was making a bigoted and racist statement.

A call of bigotry and racism is usually an attempt by a weaker mind to close the debate before they get pwned.
 
Ahh, there you go again Aaron, deciding something is so and thus it must be so.

No, I don't doubt my answer at all. I know fully what I believe about it. I'm just curious to see if even those that seem to be on your side in the general case of things realizes that its idoitic to state that the person was making a bigoted and racist statement.

Duh. Hello, somebody? It's my assertion, and no one else's, that using the word in any context is racist and unacceptable. That is what I believe. I don't need any clarification for what I believe. You do. You can disagree. But can't even justifiable tell me that I am wrong. Don't you get it? Evidently not. You can't pass judgment on someone's beliefs. An atheist cannot tell a Christian that he or she is wrong for believing that Jesus Christ is Savior, or that God is the author of the universe. Who then are you to tell me anything. The answer is no one. I don't need anyone on my side. I'm complete. Privilege has gone to your head, and the heads of many.
 
It makes all the sense in the world, Redress. But what gets me about other gays, especially, is that they seem to have lost all perspective in terms of what they go through in their life. There's no appreciation or even understanding, most of the time, of what brought us this far and I doubt they even understand how far we've come. And what ends up happening is we have gays that become "activists" but end up using primitive means of activism that we are well beyond at this stage of the game. There's no need for attack politics and shock value demonstration. Those that came before us already did that and brought us to having a voice and legitimate access to proper forums for the enactment of change from here on. Their means of advancing the cause are outdated and only become a hindrance rather than a help. You just want to smack them and tell them, "If you really want to help, sit down and STFU!"

Understand exactly what you are saying. This gay relative of mine that I am still close to, she says the biggest problem with gay rights today is gay people. Twenty years from now, gay people are just going to be people, unless gay people choose to be otherwise. By pushing so hard now, this instant, gay people are, in a perverse way, pushing strait people to make laws that will have to be undone down the road.

I would say though that I think that the thing that the older gay people, those who came out 30 or 40 years ago did that got us to this point was not the shock value stuff, or attack politics, but those gays who lived their lives with quiet dignity, and forced people to see that gay people are people first, gay second.
 
DISCLAIMER: All use of the dreaded n-word was facetious and in no way an expression of racial hate or bigotry. Any attempt to smear this poster with the racist label based on this post will be scoffed at and mocked mercilessly.
:rofl That was f-ilarious
 
Somebody tell jallman I have him on ignore.

No seriously...what privilege? Stop being a melodramatic drama queen and just answer the question. I'm really intrigued as to what privilege you would be referring to.

And we both know you can't have me on ignore so cut the act and stop being childish.
 
I would say though that I think that the thing that the older gay people, those who came out 30 or 40 years ago did that got us to this point was not the shock value stuff, or attack politics, but those gays who lived their lives with quiet dignity, and forced people to see that gay people are people first, gay second.
I agree completely.
 
No seriously...what privilege? Stop being a melodramatic drama queen and just answer the question. I'm really intrigued as to what privilege you would be referring to.

And we both know you can't have me on ignore so cut the act and stop being childish.


I am loving this ignore feature...ahh, peace and tranquility.
 
I would say though that I think that the thing that the older gay people, those who came out 30 or 40 years ago did that got us to this point was not the shock value stuff, or attack politics, but those gays who lived their lives with quiet dignity, and forced people to see that gay people are people first, gay second.

I agree with that to a point. There's a lot to be said about quiet dignity and advancing by example. However, I don't think for a minute that taking to the streets wasn't necessary at one point in time. It is for almost every oppressed group at some point.

I just think that time is long passed now and its time to advance our causes with reasoned debate, our purchasing power, and our votes.
 
I am loving this ignore feature...ahh, peace and tranquility.

OK, well it's obvious you are going descend into childish antics here just like you have on other boards. When you decide you want to discuss issues at the grown up table, let us all know.
 
Back
Top Bottom