Yes, as I pointed out, the journalistic who, what,when, where , why, how. If someone calls me a whore (which has a lot of history and current negative undertones) I let it roll by,When I say "history" I'm not referring simply to the distant past. There are, in fact, racists TODAY who use words like 'chink' in racist manner. So to reiterate my original point, it's not sensitive to take that into account when determining whether or not it could be racist. This has nothing to do with "giving words power over us" or being "affected" by those words. It has to do with seeing a word and discerning the intent of the author who used it.
Some words have lost some of their power, for example, some people in this thread didn't even think that the headline could be offensive until it was pointed it out not because they are insensitive, but because they have been brought up in a world that is not accepting of slurs.I didn't say people should recognize racial undertones, I said that when people do recognize the racial undertones, they aren't automatically sensitive. That is fact. Recognizing reality does not make them sensitive, it makes them knowledgeable. Moreover, my comments had nothing to do with how people "feel" and they also had nothing to do with "meaning that we allow words to have". My comments were about the objective reality that the word "chink" has been and still is used by people in a racially charged or racist manner and that recognizing this does not make someone sensitive.
Why would anybody find that potentially offensive? Cinderella is not cited in American culture to refer to indentured servitude, it is cited to refer to "fairy tale" like stories.
As I see it there are 2 problems with this statement. First, there is a current movement to end the use of the word "retarded" as it offends many people. Second you don't acknowledge the stereotypical base your signature comes from: a video hide yo kids, hide yo wife, and hide yo husband 'cause they rapin' e'rybody out here. - YouTube of a stereotypical black man, this video is stereotypical, which is a component of racism. If you are going to find one slur offensive, you cannot be selective.If somebody finds my signature offensive, then they are retarded.
Yellow journalism.
Great, I never said that people shouldn't let things roll by.Yes, as I pointed out, the journalistic who, what,when, where , why, how. If someone calls me a whore (which has a lot of history and current negative undertones) I let it roll by,
Ignorance doesn't erase reality. My comment is about reality - the reality that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive.Some words have lost some of their power, for example, some people in this thread didn't even think that the headline could be offensive until it was pointed it out not because they are insensitive, but because they have been brought up in a world that is not accepting of slurs.
This is completely off topic from my original comment.If you have not heard of the criticisms of many Disney characters, especially the women are portrayed I suggest that you read A Two Tale Comparison :: essays papers "Fairy tales such as Cinderella have been found guilty of possessing subliminal socialization traits. Classifying genders as inferior and molding young girls into the female that society expects them to be. In Charles Perrault’s version, which is considered the most common, Cinderella is seen as passive, limited, dependent and inferior. As critics argue, these traits can hinder a child’s self esteem." Or find some other source. That is an example of how these fairy tales offend some people, who I also think need to think about their own sensitivities
I used the word retarded on purpose. Moreover, what you really don't seem to grasp is that my comment was not arguing that chink is offensive, it was arguing that people who acknowledge the racially charged meaning of "chink" are not necessarily sensitive. Get it yet?As I see it there are 2 problems with this statement. First, there is a current movement to end the use of the word "retarded" as it offends many people. Second you don't acknowledge the stereotypical base your signature comes from: a video hide yo kids, hide yo wife, and hide yo husband 'cause they rapin' e'rybody out here. - YouTube of a stereotypical black man, this video is stereotypical, which is a component of racism. If you are going to find one slur offensive, you cannot be selective.
As for the unfortunate firing, why would someone jeopardize such a cush job with ESPN?
Great, I never said that people shouldn't let things roll by.
Ignorance doesn't erase reality. My comment is about reality - the reality that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive.
This is completely off topic from my original comment.
I used the word retarded on purpose. Moreover, what you really don't seem to grasp is that my comment was not arguing that chink is offensive, it was arguing that people who acknowledge the racially charged meaning of "chink" are not necessarily sensitive. Get it yet?
They have the right to fire him for whatever they like.
I find SB's reasoning as to why this probably wasn't a coincidence fairly convincing. I don't think it was. I think the guy is just an idiot.
While I am not personally very offended by this, and I don't think the guy is a racist, that was an incredibly poor judgment call on the part of the writer. Just jaw-droppingly stupid. Firing someone for jaw-dropping stupidity is understandable.
Yellow journalism.
Of course it is.
By the way, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
*Disclaimer: Asian country that is currently kicking our asses economically
You say "the reality that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive" why should the rest of the world have to censor themselves because some people take things out of context or are "sensitive" to words. If someone uses a word maliciously that is probably wrong, but what about when it is not, as is the case with your signature.
As for the Linderella issue, I was merely pointing out that people were not aware or "sensitive" to how offensive some people consider the story of Cinderella. My point was proven because you had no idea that some people thought it was offensive.
How can people just assume that the writer meant is in a racist manner? That is a huge leap. Perhaps if it was on a website known for racist remarks, then you can probably assume that it was meant to be racist, but come on, it's ESPN. Bad Headline, yes, but racist, doubt it.
I suspect that the # of people who think the cinderalla story is offensive is infinitesimal compared to those who know about the word "chink"
Not knowing the first makes you normal; Not knowing the latter makes you too ignorant to be a journalist for a major news provider
It was a dumb, racist, forced joke, but was it necessary to fire the guy? I dunno. I tend to think that the power of a racist epithet is directly tied to how oppressed the race was in question. The N word? Highly significant because black people were just about as oppressed as it gets (but they're only in second place since they weren't the target of actual, bona fide mother****ing genocide), but Asians? Aside from a few unfortunate missteps in our nation's history I'm not sure Asians are a terribly maligned race.* I'm not Asian and obviously can't speak for everyone.
*Disclaimer: Asian country that is currently kicking our asses economically will be looked upon in the national media with disgruntlement.
How can people assume that it was not racist? I guess it is a YMMV kind of thing. When it comes to hate and racism? I would rather err on the side of caution than to take someone at that their word that it was just a harmless joke or was taking out of context. Do you REALLY think they are gonna admit it if was racist? Of course not. Come on now.
People are way too sensitive. Everything isn't racist, in fact, very few things actually are. I'd like to smack people who scream racism at every turn with a shovel.
When did I say people have to censor themselves? I said, "the reality [is] that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive." That's my only point. I'm not talking about others having to censor themselves. Have you got this in your head yet? Why are you putting words in my mouth? Is it that difficult to address ONLY what was said and not project whatever baggage you brought into this thread all over my post?You say "the reality that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive" why should the rest of the world have to censor themselves because some people take things out of context or are "sensitive" to words. If someone uses a word maliciously that is probably wrong, but what about when it is not, as is the case with your signature.
Who ****ing cares about Cinderella?As for the Linderella issue, I was merely pointing out that people were not aware or "sensitive" to how offensive some people consider the story of Cinderella. My point was proven because you had no idea that some people thought it was offensive.
Or they could have just used the expression and not think about the racial implications. It's easy to miss stuff like this if your not thinking about race IMO.
It was a dumb, racist, forced joke, but was it necessary to fire the guy? I dunno. I tend to think that the power of a racist epithet is directly tied to how oppressed the race was in question. The N word? Highly significant because black people were just about as oppressed as it gets (but they're only in second place since they weren't the target of actual, bona fide mother****ing genocide), but Asians? Aside from a few unfortunate missteps in our nation's history I'm not sure Asians are a terribly maligned race.* I'm not Asian and obviously can't speak for everyone.
*Disclaimer: Asian country that is currently kicking our asses economically will be looked upon in the national media with disgruntlement.
You do know that they value their own currency and observe no human, labor or environmental rights, don't ya? How many people are dying per year of malnutrition and starvation in China? Healthcare? Haha. Justice? Haha. They got equal rights... no one gets any. It's like comparing apples and yellows.