Should we censor/avoid offensive words?

[AeryFairy]

Why on Earth would any group being excluded from use of word(s) that other group(s) are allowed to use see that as positive?

What 'moral' consistency is there in wanting a right (to do/say/think) for self or same that you wouldn't want to be a right for all?

That wasn't what I asked - I asked where the negative effect was. The positive effect for the oppressed group is obvious - they are not subjected to words which have been historically used to dismiss and dehumanise them, by people belonging to the groups doing the oppressing and dehumanising. Obviously, there is an argument for 'nobody gets to say the word', but in my book, if the oppressed group wants to reclaim the word for themselves then that is their call. They earned that much.

Just because there is no real positive effect (beyond not causing offence and perpetuating cultural bigotry) for the group of people who shouldn't use the word, that is not automatically a negative effect.

 

[Clueless Git]

This, with no offence to either of us, in going around in circles Aery.

I don't think my reasons for opposing racial discrimination, full stop, no exceptions, will ever be understood by the vast majority of people.

I just have a bee in my bonnet over that which we want to die a death we should not keep alive.

You debate courteously and take the time and effort to explain your reasoning, though. You have my respect for that

 

[Mischief]

In a way... This is certainly true of family members; a large chunk of mine hold some bigoted views, and I still interact with them. I've also had some very heated debates on these topics in lectures over the years, and interacted with the people taking the opposing view. Friends are a little different; I'm far more likely to get along with someone who shares similar views as me. If someone is outwardly racist, sexist, homophobic, or so on (rather than being a little misguided but otherwise well meaning), then I probably would not interact with them on a personal level. It's fairly impossible to be friends with someone who sees you as a lesser person than them.

As for whether this counts as negative social discrimination (is this what you were getting at?), I don't think it does - not having my friendship/not interacting with me socially doesn't really count as a negative effect on that person. If we are really that incompatible in terms of our views, they probably don't want to be friends with me either.

I had some family members who held fairly bigoted views. (They have since died off.) They gave up on expressing those views around me, because I never let them stand. Family members, especially close family members belong in that group where one ends up having to interact, regardless of their views. People one works with would be another category where one has limited opportunity to simply avoid bigots.

My aversion to having bigots as friends has nothing to do with being considered to be a lesser person than they. I just find their attitudes to others to be harmful and offensive, not just to the objects of their bigotry, but to society as a whole. I would not hire a bigot, or rent to a bigot, go into partnership with a bigot or have anything to do with a bigot more than absolutely necessary, just as I exclude malicious liars and thieves and people who otherwise find it acceptable to harm others. It's definitely a moral judgment, and I think it fits within your definition of negative discrimination. I just think that negative discrimination is a perfectly acceptable way for society to reinforce the message that harming others is not acceptable. (And IMO, bigotry harms society, even if the only action that is taken is the expression of that bigotry.)

 

[FortyTwo]

I'm so not sure where to even start on this one that I'll just say this: whatever posts I like, I agree with, and carry the sentiments expressed within them.

There are so many majorly screwed up things being said in this thread that to try to reply to them all would be an exercise in stress and futility.

 

[cornsail]

I'm so not sure where to even start on this one that I'll just say this: whatever posts I like, I agree with, and carry the sentiments expressed within them.

The opposite holds true for me.

 

[Clueless Git]

Problem with aguing with bigots is that their primary line of defence is to call "bigot" on any one with whom they disagree.

Few bigots have bad intent, in my personal experience, though.

Amusingly, well intentioned bigots tend to pride themselves as champions of tolerance by measure of how fiercely they will not tolerate intolerance.

 

[Mischief]

Thanks for the laugh, Clueless!

 

[das_nut]

That's why your co-worker might think that every woman who works in the office should come to work naked and suck his dick and that's not going to be actionable. However, once he starts expressing that opinion, that creates a hostile work environment, and that will likely result in him losing his job.

The "suck my dick" example is clearly wrong. But what about a coworker who may express his opinion, only outside of company time, that homosexual couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples? Clearly, as a society, at least in the US, we're not to this point yet. His views aren't mainstream. Should this coworker face consequences from the company?

There is a bit of the "all cows are animals so all animals must be cows" logic behind the white priveledge argument I think.

Crazy to deny that an improportionate % of those born with priveledge are white.

Quite insane to extend that into the belief that all whites are priveledged though.

IMO, being white is a privilege. But as a privilege, it does not necessarily outweigh other possible negative factors in one's life.

Yes, all other things being equal, being white gives you an advantage. But it's rarely the case that all things are equal. Sure, as a general rule, a white person will have more advantages than a non-white person, but there are so many exceptions that you can't use it as rule of thumb.

But facing discrimination is not the same as facing oppression.

Could you further explain how discrimination is not oppression?

 

[das_nut]

Here's something I learned today - the term "white trash" was originally used by slaves as a form of contempt for poor whites:

The term White trash first came into common use in the 1830s as a pejorative used by house slaves against poor whites. In 1833 Fanny Kemble, an English actress visiting Georgia, noted in her journal: "The slaves themselves entertain the very highest contempt for white servants, whom they designate as 'poor white trash'"