Jump to content

African-______, Black or Negro


BondTrader

Recommended Posts

Doc Rikowski
The human beings are not divided into races. You clearly have no clue about the subject.

the human being is divided into races, and its a fact. like the dogs are divided into races, or like the cows or sheeps.

 

my english sucks, but i will try to make me understand.

 

you think that a "German shepherd" and "labrador" are the same.. no, because they are diferent races, and the principal diference between this two races are physical.

 

and with the human being is the same, why do you think that black athletes are faster than whites or asian athletes? thats a muscular diference, and thats only an example.

 

i dont want to make a discussion, its what i think. and i dont care what the media or hollywood movies says

You don't want a discussion but you are posting completely fake and incorrect information which will only help to spread racism.

Research a bit please, the human beings ARE NOT divided into races.

It is a SCIENTIFIC FACT.

 

Dogs have races, humans don't.

And I won't even talk about the athletes example cause that's plain stupid and without a doubt far from reality.

Medias and Hollywood have nothing to do with modern science.

 

But clearly, no offence, you do ignore a lot of basic things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't want a discussion but you are posting completely fake and incorrect information which will only help to spread racism.

Research a bit please, the human beings ARE NOT divided into races.

It is a SCIENTIFIC FACT.

 

Dogs have races, humans don't.

And I won't even talk about the athletes example cause that's plain stupid and without a doubt far from reality.

Medias and Hollywood have nothing to do with modern science.

 

But clearly, no offence, you do ignore a lot of basic things.

yes you are right, i was posting fake information.

the dogs have races but humans dont, and i ignore a lot of basic things about genetic that you know but i dont. icon14.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just gonna go ahead and answer the first post, not respond to all of the arguments about racism that have inevitably sprung up from this.

My personal opinion has been skewed, due to the oversensitive/joking nature of my high school peers that are of a different ethnicity to myself. If you so much as mention that somebody is black, then they will instantly label you as a racist.

However, I still believe that the most appropriate way, at least in my home country of England, is to call someone of that ethnicity simply as "black".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doc Rikowski
You don't want a discussion but you are posting completely fake and incorrect information which will only help to spread racism.

Research a bit please, the human beings ARE NOT divided into races.

It is a SCIENTIFIC FACT.

 

Dogs have races, humans don't.

And I won't even talk about the athletes example cause that's plain stupid and without a doubt far from reality.

Medias and Hollywood have nothing to do with modern science.

 

But clearly, no offence, you do ignore a lot of basic things.

yes you are right, i was posting fake information.

the dogs have races but humans dont, and i ignore a lot of basic things about genetic that you know but i dont. icon14.gif

Good for you. First step towards learning what's bs and what's not. icon14.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clem Fandango
...I call them people.

This.

 

It's funny how people need to identify other people by the color of their skin.

Looks like we're still stuck in useless categorizing.

What worries me though is that a lot of people in here still thinks that human beings are actually divided into races.

There's no such thing as a caucasian, african or asian race.

 

 

While biological scientists sometimes use the concept of race to make practical distinctions among fuzzy sets of traits, others in the scientific community suggest that the idea of race is often used by the general public in a naive or simplistic way.

Among humans, race has no taxonomic significance; all people belong to the same hominid subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens.

Social conceptions and groupings of races vary over time, involving folk taxonomies that define essential types of individuals based on perceived sets of traits. Scientists consider biological essentialism obsolete, and generally discourage racial explanations for collective differentiation in both physical and behavioral traits.

As people define and put about different conceptions of race, they actively create contrasting social realities through which racial categorization is achieved in varied ways. In this sense, races are said to be social constructs.

 

Basically human races do not exist hence no need to call people balck, white, yellow etc.

 

As a great man said we won't have peace nor real progress

"until the colour of a man's skin

Is of no more significance than the colour of his eyes"

I suppose it could be argued that, in the modern world, the distinctions are cultural ones rather than biological ones. Like, if you identify as "black" you identify with a certain identity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Melchior - i agree. culture is as much or more of a factor than just skin color. skin color is just an easy label. also <3 chappelle show

 

human beings have been adapting to environments for a very long time. the sun has been known to darken skin... fact. generations living in colder regions will create a lighter skin color over time as well. certain demographics have been isolating themselves creating different cultures and social systems. most prejudices arise from the levels of society (rich to poor) and self created hierarchies (& elitism). in essence we're all the same genetic makeup but with some very minor changes... therefore the argument for racism is bollocks imo.

 

but in that same regard the sensitivities of are the real issue (something comedians such as chapelle have been getting at). it's always a matter of context (how you put out the message, as opposed to the literal sense). the intent of the use.

 

here in new york there is plenty of "racial weariness" but that's partly due to economic & cultural differences integrating (globalization). integrating cultures causes friction because it alters both culture's way of life.

 

forgive my post if it appears i'm not addressing the issue/talking out my bloody arse. i just see people as people but with obvious cultural differences, circumstances, & upbringings. differences i look to embrace if they are for the common good of humanity. smile.gif

 

great thread btw icon14.gif

 

short answers:

african american/etc - used to address level of respect of the african culture into one's own (we cool bro)

negro - traditionally looked at negatively (old folks who haven't adapted to change)

black - simple yet ambiguous as to context intent (what do you mean... those people?)

Edited by swooner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My way of seeing it is if you live in America your American, if you live in Germany your German, if you live in Iran your Iranian, ETC. I hate it when people go around saying their proud Mexicans, proud Japenese, ETC. race is a stupid divider that means NOTHING.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I call them ''my nigga''

 

But only if they're REALLY my nigga, nahmean?

 

As for Moammar: I agree to an extent. But when it comes to America, it really isn't much of an indicator of anything. American cities like New York have people that are so drastically different that it's foolish to refer to all of them as ''Americans''.

 

I used to just refer to myself as ''American'' until I started noticing just how different I was. I mean, sure, we saw the same movies and played the same games. We have mass media in common. But when it comes to family, what we eat, our practices, the norms within our societes; I've started to see some rather drastic differences.

 

I still consider myself American, but ''of Central American descent''.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GrandMaster Smith

I don't get why even if I were to feel offended by being called a cracker or whitey or any of those things it's okay, but as soon as someone spits the word ni**er they're a racist bastard determined to eternal torture in the lake of fire.

 

I see all these racial slurs for cockasians all the time on t.v. and it's all dandy and daisies until the N word slips. That's more racist than white people using the word imo, just because they were slaves years back that automatically gives them an immunity card? Why the hell do they call eachother niggas then? "Cause it doesn't have 'er' at the end?" ...

 

People are going to hate, people are going to come up with some new nasty word to try and hurt your feelings or label you into a group. Get the f*ck over it and live your life. It's a word, it cannot hurt you unless you let it..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't get why even if I were to feel offended by being called a cracker or whitey or any of those things it's okay, but as soon as someone spits the word ni**er they're a racist bastard determined to eternal torture in the lake of fire.

It's like a peasant calling the monarchy ''hufflepuffyduffy's'' or whatever make-believe derogatory term you can come up with.

 

It's not as offensive since its THE monarchy that is miles above what petty insults the peasantry can dole out. It's meant to offend, but akin to throwing an empty can at the monarchy's high walls.

 

Meanwhile, if the monarchy calls the peasantry ''ni**ers'', it differs since its more powerful due to actual social situations. Unlike a can against a wall, it's more like a spit to the face.

 

Just explaining why sh*t is the way it is; not saying you should take being called a ''cracker'' lightly whatsoever. An insult is an insult. But just as some words are bleeped out while others aren't, there are varying degrees.

 

 

Why the hell do they call eachother niggas then? "Cause it doesn't have 'er' at the end?" ...

 

because words change meaning over time. If Group A calls you X then eventually you will call each other X as a means of unification. Even if that unification isn't a nice phrase like ''nice people''. It can be done in a joking manner, but its still a way of unifying against the enemy that perceives you as such.

 

Kinda like how (and I know this mighty not be understood by some and others [vast majority] don't give a sh*t) people that frequent 4chan's /v/ board call each other ''/v/irgins''. They are all on the same level, and see it as a joking insult among allies. No one is looking down on anyone else since they are all on the same level.

 

If a hot girl were to call them that, though, it'd be different. She is of a different social standing, and intentions aren't clear. She can be one of ''those'' people constantly looking down on them. She is using it in a derogatory way. The down-trodden can unify together by what others perceive them to be. They can take solace in the unifying force, yet its still an insult when uttered by others.

 

Then there's the strange case of ''f*ck it they think we're X lets f*cking BE X WHERE ALL MY X'S AT X PRIDE'' cases.

 

Anyway, I'm a proponent of white people saying nigga.

Edited by E.A.B.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clem Fandango
I don't get why even if I were to feel offended by being called a cracker or whitey or any of those things it's okay, but as soon as someone spits the word ni**er they're a racist bastard determined to eternal torture in the lake of fire.

It's like a peasant calling the monarchy ''hufflepuffyduffy's'' or whatever make-believe derogatory term you can come up with.

 

It's not as offensive since its THE monarchy that is miles above what petty insults the peasantry can dole out. It's meant to offend, but akin to throwing an empty can at the monarchy's high walls.

 

Meanwhile, if the monarchy calls the peasantry ''ni**ers'', it differs since its more powerful due to actual social situations. Unlike a can against a wall, it's more like a spit to the face.

 

Just explaining why sh*t is the way it is; not saying you should take being called a ''cracker'' lightly whatsoever. An insult is an insult. But just as some words are bleeped out while others aren't, there are varying degrees.

 

Good post. I think a lot of people, while talking about reverse-discrimination don't stop to think that Europeans really have no reason to be offended as a) race isn't as big of an issue for the majority and b) nobody feels insecure about their white heritage. If you hurl a racial slur at a black person, you're bringing attention to something they're conscious of, where as if you do the same to a white person, it's just a little random and bizarre.

 

I love how people talk about "political correctness gone mad" and genuinely seem to oppose sensitivity while acting like they're the voice of reason, wondering why they can't joking say "nigga" but people can say "cracker". Maybe "cracker" isn't offensive because it has no historical connotations? Maybe you shouldn't draw attention to the fact that they're different? It's hard to type that without sounding like an overly-sensitive teacher, but remember, you might know that you don't put any importance on race, but the person you're talking to might. I think there's an assumption by people who've never faced discrimination that everyone is comfortable with their race or gender or sexuality except when in the presence of actual discrimination, and that is a baffling one considering that we all know Michael Jackson f*cking painted himself white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.