People who get pissed off about cracker are usually frustrated white people who want to use racial epithets themselves but hesitate because people look at them funny when they try.
Cracker is about as non-insulting as it gets. Same with honky. I don't know how any self-respecting white person could keep themselves from cracking up if someone called them one. They're simply incomparable to other racial epithets. If white Americans, for instance, had the same woebegone cultural history of lynch mobbing and spotty civil rights as black Americans, then I could see someone legitimately taking offense.
i talk to black members on this forum in reasoned and positive discourse. just like black friends and acquaintances in my every day life. i never connected roc being immature and not listening with him being black. because i've never used the term 'n'''''r' to try and denote that archaic 18th century figure. roc is just as dumb and immature as any other 4chan fodder, regardless of skin colour. i used it to prove a rhetorical point that he was engaging in hate-speech, just as much as that word signifies hate-speech. simple. is this complicated for you? would you like a flow-chart? i understand polisci students often need graphics.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-07-15 08:12:41)
People were hating on hipsters before it was cool. Self-defeating.
Black members? Roc is the only black around here. Great track record.
Also I can't really see the significant connect between hating on hipsters and hating on black people...
You know what the worst part of bf2s is?
WHITE
PEOPLE
WHITE
PEOPLE
hating on people because of the way they look or dress, with no knowledge of them as people. making assumptions based on a surface appearance. okay. yes, no similarities between feeling intimidated by black people, or hating them for their saggy-pants and alien culture. not the same logic of dismissive discrimination and bigotry at all. nope.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Also I can't really see the significant connect between hating on hipsters and hating on black people...
Well when the KKK or some other radical group begins to hunt people for wearing glasses as an affectation or doing other things that fall in line with hipster fashion, I might take it a bit more seriously. Until then, hipster douches should be made fun of for being douches.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
hating on people because of the way they look or dress, with no knowledge of them as people. making assumptions based on a surface appearance. okay. yes, no similarities between feeling intimidated by black people, or hating them for their saggy-pants and alien culture. not the same logic of dismissive discrimination and bigotry at all. nope.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Also I can't really see the significant connect between hating on hipsters and hating on black people...
right, so people are douches just because they dress a certain way? or listen to certain music? or hang out at certain bars? that makes them 'douches'? see the value judgement is already being made as a tacit assumption. why is someone a douche because of their fashion choices? that's quite troubling.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Well when the KKK or some other radical group begins to hunt people for wearing glasses as an affectation or doing other things that fall in line with hipster fashion, I might take it a bit more seriously. Until then, hipster douches should be made fun of for being douches.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
hating on people because of the way they look or dress, with no knowledge of them as people. making assumptions based on a surface appearance. okay. yes, no similarities between feeling intimidated by black people, or hating them for their saggy-pants and alien culture. not the same logic of dismissive discrimination and bigotry at all. nope.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Also I can't really see the significant connect between hating on hipsters and hating on black people...
it's a short leap from all the foamy-mouthed hatred spoken about hipsters on the internet to someone taking a real gun to williamsburg. only a matter of time. i fear for the well-educated good-people of brooklyn. they are doing no one any harm. hate crimes should be suffered by nobody.
Wrong, I said hipster douches should be made fun of for being douches.
what does someone being a douche have to be with them being a hipster? why only target hipster douches, if douche-ness is the intrinsic quality you take offense to? that's like syntactically associating 'lazy blacks'. someone can be lazy without being black. someone can be a douche without being a hipster. please refrain from your hate speech.
I didn't say hipsters were douches. I said hipster douches should be made fun of for being douches.
at which point the way they dress surely becomes as irrelevant as the colour of their hair. hate douches for being douches: okay. the rest is extraneous. please refrain from your casual lapses into hate ideology.
Uzique's just mad cause I hit close to home with my hipster bashing.
like i said, i don't dress like a hipster or hang out with them. but sure, you can debate that, that's your opinion. you being black is irrefutable. the hate speech obviously sticks to you more than it does to me.
When you make fun of a hipster douche, you can incorporate his hipsterness into your mockery. And if the hipster takes exception to it, there's a good chance that he is indeed a douche. I know plenty who are fine with being satirized.
If you're making fun of a black douche, incorporating his blackness into it would also make you a douche for obvious cultural reasons. And if you're doing it just to make a point, it can raise several red flags and should have been avoided in the first place.
It's like saying "it's wrong of you to break my favorite mug so I'm going to demonstrate my point by smashing your car windows and lights." Or shooting someone in the back for stealing your TV. The two simply aren't comparable. Unless you think contemporary hipsters are being persecuted as much as older counterculture, like hippies. But even then, I couldn't compare anti-hippies with anti-black racists and keep a straight face.
If you're making fun of a black douche, incorporating his blackness into it would also make you a douche for obvious cultural reasons. And if you're doing it just to make a point, it can raise several red flags and should have been avoided in the first place.
It's like saying "it's wrong of you to break my favorite mug so I'm going to demonstrate my point by smashing your car windows and lights." Or shooting someone in the back for stealing your TV. The two simply aren't comparable. Unless you think contemporary hipsters are being persecuted as much as older counterculture, like hippies. But even then, I couldn't compare anti-hippies with anti-black racists and keep a straight face.
that is as much of a justification for mentioning someone's hipsterness as mentioning a black person's skin when he is acting stupid.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
When you make fun of a hipster douche, you can incorporate his hipsterness into your mockery. And if the hipster takes exception to it, there's a good chance that he is indeed a douche. I know plenty who are fine with being satirized.
You're seriously making satire of hipsters out to be as grave an issue as racism? I really hope not.
Maybe I'm in the wrong field. I could start a hipster anti-defamation league. Maybe I can get Robert Lanham to write the mission statement.
Maybe I'm in the wrong field. I could start a hipster anti-defamation league. Maybe I can get Robert Lanham to write the mission statement.
not as grave an issue, but the rationalisation is still the same. inveighing against someone's appearance with your discrimination and negative judgements. someone's douche-factor has nothing to do with how they choose to dress or style their hair. just like a person's laziness has no link to their skin colour. attributing moral judgements or behavioural traits to surface-appearances is a form of blanket-assumption and bigotry. they are unconnected. fashion sense does not determine behaviour. skin colour does not determine intelligence, or proclivity to violence. the syntactic association of "hipster douche" is the same leap across an illogical gulf as "lazy nigger".
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-07-15 09:15:48)
Except...it's not. At least by my line of reasoning. You don't choose to be black. But barring mitigating circumstances (like you were raised in it), joining a counterculture group is pretty voluntary.
No white guy sardonically says "nice skin, blacky" and gets away with it without sounding like a complete racist. But if a douche is acting like a douche and you want to say something about it, "nice hat, asshole" is perfectly acceptable. And if the douche turns around and says something racially derogatory in response to make a point about the hat comment, everyone else around him is going to see him as a racist douche. With a funny hat.
No white guy sardonically says "nice skin, blacky" and gets away with it without sounding like a complete racist. But if a douche is acting like a douche and you want to say something about it, "nice hat, asshole" is perfectly acceptable. And if the douche turns around and says something racially derogatory in response to make a point about the hat comment, everyone else around him is going to see him as a racist douche. With a funny hat.
a) hipsters are not counter-culture. they are bourgeois. middle-class. well-educated. they consume just like anyone else. hipsterism is a fashion-style or lifestyle choice, if anything, but it certainly is not 'counter-culture'. they're not anarchists living on a commune. occupy wall street was not a 'counter-culture', it was a protest by the established bourgeois middle-class against the ruling class. if anything, they are progressives and reformists, in the liberal bourgeois tradition.
b) calling someone a douche without having met them because of the way they look is exactly the same bias as hating a black person because he has black skin. whether or not you 'choose' it is irrelevant; the judgement is one made and performed on your behalf, not the object's. it reveals only your own prejudice. so when roc posts a bunch of images saying hateful things about hipsters, or calling them "stupid" or somesuch, just because of how they dress, i am merely reflecting the same line of thought about the way he looks. it's lazy and easy. never claimed it was smart, clever... or correct (it's far from correct). but i'm just mirroring his behaviour.
b) calling someone a douche without having met them because of the way they look is exactly the same bias as hating a black person because he has black skin. whether or not you 'choose' it is irrelevant; the judgement is one made and performed on your behalf, not the object's. it reveals only your own prejudice. so when roc posts a bunch of images saying hateful things about hipsters, or calling them "stupid" or somesuch, just because of how they dress, i am merely reflecting the same line of thought about the way he looks. it's lazy and easy. never claimed it was smart, clever... or correct (it's far from correct). but i'm just mirroring his behaviour.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-07-15 10:22:00)
I'm pretty sure Uzi puts on his Oxford sweater, hipster glasses, beats by dre head phones that are pumping in the shitty dub and dnb and screams "FUCK AMERICA" as he lays his head down to sleep every night.
top lelExtra Medium wrote:
I'm pretty sure Uzi puts on his Oxford sweater, hipster glasses, beats by dre head phones that are pumping in the shitty dub and dnb and screams "FUCK AMERICA" as he lays his head down to sleep every night.