|
Sjayne,
No argument there.
But it does bring me back to my main point: If I refer to someone in a discussion about terrorists as "ragheads", I am referring to the terrorists, their armies, and anyone associated with them. Yes, as a group. The same way I referred to the Iraqi Army in Desert Storm as "ragheads" rather than "the opposing forces of Iraqi descent". That is ridiculous. Peole can preach until the end of time about political correctness, but "nicknames" will forever be assigned. It's simply reality.
People have always assigned monikers to other people. It provides some anger ventilation (anger, of course, being referenced based upon the situation example) while simultaneously identifying the subject of conversation. It in no way conveys sentiments of racism. It's all about context.
If I were to use the same terms in a different situation, such as a shopping mall, I very LIKELY would be considered racist. Because it's OUT of context. Should that person in the shopping mall be offended by it? Well, maybe. Sadly, due to language constraints and human nuance, each person ASSUMES different meanings and implications for different things. Very likely that person could be classified as racist, because all intelligent people understand there is a time and place for certain language.
I don't swear around kids because it's not appropriate. NOT because the situation wasn't appropriate, but because as a child they are unable to distinguish the difference. And the same should be applied to "terms of endearment" if you will.
[This message has been edited by Amputate Your Head (edited 09-13-2001).]
|