[quote]vroom wrote:
What a retard!
You keep saying you understand and agree with the base concepts here, but you keep on breezing by them as if they didn’t exist.
The meaning of the words is not the only issue under discussion here, though it is the one you focus on. You can’t easily just take a dictionary and apply it to social processes.
For example, the word “boy” has a historical problem in racial matters, but it didn’t start out as anything other than a simple innocent word.
Word use is subjective. So, you admit racism and racial bias are alive and well, but you refuse to accept that some words have the potential to be used subjectively within the context of a racial bias.
It’s obvious you don’t recognize how and why “articulate” would be an insulting term, but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t. Luckily for the rest of the world you aren’t the arbiter of what is or isn’t.
Yes, I know, tell me again how it can be out of one side of your mouth while explaining that it isn’t out of the other side of your mouth.[/quote]
Vroom, if you were sharp - which you are not - I was specifically addressing how Professor X made the case for the word ‘articulate’. He is the one explaining that the basis for his claim is that ‘articulate’ is racist because of the base usage and meaning of the word. I am merely refuting his argument.
Let’s also highlight something you said to show how awful you are:
You can’t easily just take a dictionary and apply it to social processes.
Which, had you read, you would know that both Pookie and me have supplied not only dictionary meanings, but also social usage - including vast usage of the word by people of all races, professional journalists who get paid to use words for a living, and even venomous race-mongers like Al Sharpton, who like Professor X, go into every situation looking for racism.
We have done exactly what you keep whining that we haven’t done - we have shown over and over that Professor X’s claims about the social usage of the word ‘articulate’ have been completely debunked through the most basic of research and understandings.
So, I beg you - do some thinking for yourself. This was dirt simple. Prof. X’s claim was based on his claims of what ‘articulate’ meant, we countered by showing his claim was worthless by use of both the dictionary and social usage.
So you want us to apply words to social processes? We did - so now that that angle is a dead end for your sniveling, what next?
Here, I will do your next post for you, as you, to save you the time so you can concentrate on getting some laundry done among your other important tasks:
“Some people think and feel differently from than you, and if only you would recognize that the world is a lot bigger than our narrow, inexperienced worldviews’ suggest, you may actually being to learn that minorities don’t have it as easy as you do. Their culture is different, and you can’t pretend to know what they think - therefore, if they make a claim related to race issues, regardless of the individual, their word must be taken to be truth. What matters is a black man said it, and you have no reason to consider the individual making the claim. By virtue of skin color alone, you have no right to challenge them on such issues. If only you could expand your thinking beyond this provincial bigotry and assume whatever a minority says to be true, no matter how ludicrous it sounds under the standard of rational thinking, we would have a more tolerant world. I am amazed you guys just don’t get the subtleties involved in this complex issue.”
There. Just copy and post my above Vroomism, and use it as a reply to this and any other post. That way, you can save yourself the typing, and we still get the privilege of your vacuous nonsense.
