4 ms·

> Racial slurs aren't acceptable anymore. They are, but their usage is limited to linguistic segregation. Nothing better to keep people in check than enforcing

> Racial slurs aren't acceptable anymore. They are, but their usage is limited to linguistic segregation. Nothing better to keep people in check than enforcing a correlation between the words they are allowed to use and the color of their skin.

hackinthebochs 13y ago
HN, more than most, is a global forum, and with that in mind people should really stop and think before offering their opinion on a subject where critical cultural context is almost surely missing from one's perspective.
- stefantalpalaru 13y ago
  Funny you should say that. In my culture beating around the bush with irrational accusations is considered a grave insult that can only be resolved with an old fashioned duel. Choose your assistant at your earliest convenience.
  - hackinthebochs 13y ago
    My statement was neither irrational nor unclear. Just more evidence that you simply do not have the proper context to make meaningful statements on this subject (language being sub-culture specific). It is interesting how race issues is one of only a few subjects where anyone that can form an opinion feels qualified to weigh in on it, no matter how far removed they are from the issue at hand.
Steko 13y ago
They aren't slurs when used in certain contexts. Here's the internets new favorite primer on linguistic context: My father’s name is William Paul Coates. I, like my six brothers and sisters, have always addressed him as Dad. Strangers often call him Mr. Coates. His friends call him Paul. If a stranger or one of my father’s friends called him Dad, my father might have a conversation. When I was a child, relatives of my paternal grandmother would call my father Billy. Were I to ever call my father Billy, we would probably have a different conversation. I have never called my father Billy. I understand, like most people, that words take on meaning within a context. It might be true that you refer to your spouse as Baby. But were I to take this as license to do the same, you would most likely protest. Right names depend on right relationships, a fact so basic to human speech that without it, human language might well collapse... http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/opinion/sunday/coates-in-defense-of-a-loaded-word.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/opinion/sunday/coates-in-d...
- stefantalpalaru 13y ago
  OK, I'll bite. In what linguistic context can a white person call a black person "nigger" in the country that once put free-speech at the center of its propaganda?
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    When the speaker isn't intending a racial insult, and the tone, circumstances, and relationship between the speaker, the subject, and any third-party listeners make that clear to all involved. Which are pretty much the exact same circumstances where a black person can do the same thing.
    - stefantalpalaru 13y ago
      Nigga, please!

hackinthebochs 13y ago

HN, more than most, is a global forum, and with that in mind people should really stop and think before offering their opinion on a subject where critical cultural context is almost surely missing from one's perspective.

stefantalpalaru 13y ago
Funny you should say that. In my culture beating around the bush with irrational accusations is considered a grave insult that can only be resolved with an old fashioned duel. Choose your assistant at your earliest convenience.
- hackinthebochs 13y ago
  My statement was neither irrational nor unclear. Just more evidence that you simply do not have the proper context to make meaningful statements on this subject (language being sub-culture specific). It is interesting how race issues is one of only a few subjects where anyone that can form an opinion feels qualified to weigh in on it, no matter how far removed they are from the issue at hand.

Steko 13y ago

They aren't slurs when used in certain contexts. Here's the internets new favorite primer on linguistic context: My father’s name is William Paul Coates. I, like my six brothers and sisters, have always addressed him as Dad. Strangers often call him Mr. Coates. His friends call him Paul. If a stranger or one of my father’s friends called him Dad, my father might have a conversation. When I was a child, relatives of my paternal grandmother would call my father Billy. Were I to ever call my father Billy, we would probably have a different conversation. I have never called my father Billy. I understand, like most people, that words take on meaning within a context. It might be true that you refer to your spouse as Baby. But were I to take this as license to do the same, you would most likely protest. Right names depend on right relationships, a fact so basic to human speech that without it, human language might well collapse... http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/opinion/sunday/coates-in-defense-of-a-loaded-word.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/opinion/sunday/coates-in-d...

stefantalpalaru 13y ago
OK, I'll bite. In what linguistic context can a white person call a black person "nigger" in the country that once put free-speech at the center of its propaganda?
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  When the speaker isn't intending a racial insult, and the tone, circumstances, and relationship between the speaker, the subject, and any third-party listeners make that clear to all involved. Which are pretty much the exact same circumstances where a black person can do the same thing.
  - stefantalpalaru 13y ago
    Nigga, please!