GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently December 7 19, 8:42 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 230 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: September 26 16, 1:28 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: August 24 10, 2:49 pm
Posts: 4524
Freed Roger wrote:
Interesting background. I think it does mean different thing in different places though.


I agree with you. A person from the UK, where a slang term for cigarette is the same term that is a perjorative for a homosexual man in the US, who theoretically had never heard that it's perjorative in the US, might come here on vacation and ask someone to 'bum us a [expletive]?' Innocent. But if it's then explained to him that he just offended someone or that such a phrase is verboten in the US, it's on that person, who now knows, to not use the phrase anymore.

Similarly, on an internet message board, if one has used phrases not knowing they are associated with racism and hate speech, and has it explained to them that there's historical precedent and sociological and political studies showing how loaded with racism these phrases are, then it's on that person not to get butt-hurt and act like the offended party but to learn something and not say that stuff again. That's how we grow and progress as a board, not by turning the argument against the people who point out the inherent racism in the unenlightened comments.

Wart: I understand that your personal experience drives your political stances, much like it does all of us. But I think you have to understand, from some of the posts in the last couple pages, that while a phrase like "welfare queen" might to you mean a white lady you experienced in your personal life, it has historical precedent as a race-baiting phrase that connotes to racism for most people. So if you were to come not just on GRB, but many internet and other outlets and refer to 'welfare queens' or 'lazy people who need to get off welfare' or similar then it's not safe to assume that people will understand the situation you referred to and are likely to think you're reciting the kind of race-baiting speech that these phrases most often are driven by.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 26 16, 1:32 pm 
Offline
Don't tone police me bro!
User avatar

Joined: July 1 06, 7:24 pm
Posts: 10516
Location: Lost in the Cloud
edit: wart's right, veering too off-topic


Last edited by Schlich on September 26 16, 1:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 26 16, 1:36 pm 
Offline
just can't quit you.
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 4:33 pm
Posts: 24841
Location: Lost
themiddle54 wrote:
Freed Roger wrote:
Interesting background. I think it does mean different thing in different places though.


I agree with you. A person from the UK, where a slang term for cigarette is the same term that is a perjorative for a homosexual man in the US, who theoretically had never heard that it's perjorative in the US, might come here on vacation and ask someone to 'bum us a [expletive]?' Innocent. But if it's then explained to him that he just offended someone or that such a phrase is verboten in the US, it's on that person, who now knows, to not use the phrase anymore.

Similarly, on an internet message board, if one has used phrases not knowing they are associated with racism and hate speech, and has it explained to them that there's historical precedent and sociological and political studies showing how loaded with racism these phrases are, then it's on that person not to get butt-hurt and act like the offended party but to learn something and not say that stuff again. That's how we grow and progress as a board, not by turning the argument against the people who point out the inherent racism in the unenlightened comments.

Wart: I understand that your personal experience drives your political stances, much like it does all of us. But I think you have to understand, from some of the posts in the last couple pages, that while a phrase like "welfare queen" might to you mean a white lady you experienced in your personal life, it has historical precedent as a race-baiting phrase that connotes to racism for most people. So if you were to come not just on GRB, but many internet and other outlets and refer to 'welfare queens' or 'lazy people who need to get off welfare' or similar then it's not safe to assume that people will understand the situation you referred to and are likely to think you're reciting the kind of race-baiting speech that these phrases most often are driven by.

All of this discussion should probably be cut out of this thread and put in it's own thread.
My point all along, is people rush to judgement all the time. I am not butt-hurt about the situation. I explained myself then and again now. Maybe we can all try to get the facts before we make our judgments though. I admit, I need to do that more often myself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 26 16, 1:37 pm 
Offline
just can't quit you.
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 4:33 pm
Posts: 24841
Location: Lost
Schlich wrote:
wart57 wrote:
Freed Roger wrote:
Schlich wrote:
The racism at the heart of the Reagan presidency
Lee Atwater wrote:
You start out in 1954 by saying, “N—, n—, n—.” [Editor’s note: The actual word used by Atwater has been replaced with “N—” for the purposes of this article.] By 1968 you can’t say “n—” — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut taxes and we want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “N—, n—.” So anyway you look at it, race is coming on the back burner.

Quote:
Reagan also trumpeted his racial appeals in blasts against welfare cheats. On the stump, Reagan repeatedly invoked a story of a “Chicago welfare queen” with “eighty names, thirty addresses, [and] twelve Social Security cards [who] is collecting veteran’s benefits on four non-existing deceased husbands. She’s got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names. Her tax-free cash income is over $150,000.” Often, Reagan placed his mythical welfare queen behind the wheel of a Cadillac, tooling around in flashy splendor. Beyond propagating the stereotypical image of a lazy, larcenous black woman ripping off society’s generosity without remorse, Reagan also implied

another stereotype, this one about whites: they were the workers, the tax payers, the persons playing by the rules and struggling to make ends meet while brazen minorities partied with their hard-earned tax dollars. More directly placing the white voter in the story, Reagan frequently elicited supportive outrage by criticizing the food stamp program as helping “some young fellow ahead of you to buy a T-bone steak” while “you were waiting in line to buy hamburger.” This was the toned-down version. When he first field-tested the message in the South, that “young fellow” was more particularly described as a “strapping young buck.” The epithet “buck” has long been used to conjure the threatening image of a physically powerful black man often one who defies white authority and who lusts for white women. When Reagan used the term “strapping young buck,” his whistle shifted dangerously toward the fully audible range. “Some young fellow” was less overtly racist and so carried less risk of censure, and worked just as well to provoke a sense of white victimization.

Interesting background. I think it does mean different thing in different places though.

Also interesting is how ingrained this has become in our thinking -myself included. When I read something akin to Reagan's phraseology my mind conjures up thoughts based on race. I concur with Haltz's post - we are all probably inherently racist to some degree.

Have to work to beat this back. FWIW, when I hear Welfare cheats, now my first thought is Donald Trump, the developer crook in North STL city, Scott Walker cronies, Stan Kroenke.


I find this fascinating.

I worked in grocery stores when I was in college. I saw first hand people buying steak and junk food and roasts with food stamps. The store I worked at had very few African Americans who shopped there so the people I saw paying with food stamps were white. I remember vividly some not very cleanly woman screaming at her kid how they could not afford to buy her child a candy bar, she then paid for her food with food stamps, and then dropped $30 cash on cigs and alcohol. My family was lucky to have enough money to buy hamburger helper and ground beef - in fact my mom always made hamburger helper with only 1/2 lb of beef instead of a pound. So my personal history was seeing white people eating better than my family was, and they paid with food stamps.


You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. But you should definitely still lead them to the water. It's too bad that your family couldn't get food assistance as well.

Poor parenting and poor resource allocation aren't justification for letting people starve. She still bought her food with food stamps, so they did their job.


Funny, I never said I wanted them to starve.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 26 16, 1:39 pm 
Offline
just can't quit you.
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 4:33 pm
Posts: 24841
Location: Lost
Schlich wrote:
edit: wart's right, veering too off-topic


See may later post..Mybe the mods need to move this discussion to another thread. It was never my intention to de-rail this important discussion. Bad wart.

:cool:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 26 16, 1:56 pm 
Offline
a bad penny always turns up
User avatar

Joined: April 17 06, 12:27 pm
Posts: 23439
Location: Hanging out with my redneck, white socks and Blue Ribbon beer.
Butt-hurt isn't a slur. Not at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 26 16, 2:29 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer

Joined: April 25 06, 6:43 pm
Posts: 11498
Location: Austin
wart57 wrote:
I worked in grocery stores when I was in college. I saw first hand people buying steak and junk food and roasts with food stamps. The store I worked at had very few African Americans who shopped there so the people I saw paying with food stamps were white. I remember vividly some not very cleanly woman screaming at her kid how they could not afford to buy her child a candy bar, she then paid for her food with food stamps, and then dropped $30 cash on cigs and alcohol. My family was lucky to have enough money to buy hamburger helper and ground beef - in fact my mom always made hamburger helper with only 1/2 lb of beef instead of a pound. So my personal history was seeing white people eating better than my family was, and they paid with food stamps.

It's definitely true that there are plenty of people using food stamps who are not making the best choices with their money/benefit dollars. Similarly, there are plenty of people who do not get food stamps who also make poor choices on how to use their limited resources. That said, you don't know that these people were actually eating better than your family. The monthly benefit is small (averages ~$127/person/month) meaning that if you spend it on candy and steak, while spending your cash on cigarettes and alcohol, you are probably going hungry or eating far worse at other times.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 26 16, 2:49 pm 
Offline
Don't tone police me bro!
User avatar

Joined: July 1 06, 7:24 pm
Posts: 10516
Location: Lost in the Cloud
Leroy wrote:
Butt-hurt isn't a slur. Not at all.


Thanks for pointing this out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 26 16, 2:51 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: August 24 10, 2:49 pm
Posts: 4524
Leroy wrote:
Thank you for your kind teaching.


You're welcome, sincerely. As I noted back in this thread, people have taught me too, usually via sensitivity classes at work, and I was always, like you, grateful and not at all sarcastic when someone with a more nuanced, refined, and progressive viewpoint was able to help me not stick my foot in my mouth.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 26 16, 2:53 pm 
Offline
Perennial All-Star
User avatar

Joined: August 24 10, 2:49 pm
Posts: 4524
Leroy wrote:
Butt-hurt isn't a slur. Not at all.


It's not. It refers to a child who is upset and has hurt feelings over being spanked.

As per my norm, I have a link to back that up instead of just bandying that opinion around.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 230 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group