The Use of Racial Slurs in CA

[lazarus]

The problem that Redwood is such an outsider [to the Spanish-speaking community]. But God still loves him.

The United States is big enough for everyone, not just one race.

I have no further questions, your honor.

[Taylor]

Redwood says:

I suppose the N word is fine also . Blacks call themselves that frequently. So ... we can add that word to the list of approved words. They use it also as a term of endearment.

Nope...there is a huge difference here. For a white person to call an african american a "N" word would be a complete slam. However, for a hispanic to call a white person a "G" word is endearment. It isn't a slam.

It is hard for me to imagine why an african american would ever use the "N" word as indearment because I have usually heard it used as a racial slur. However, I don't have to understand their reasons. If they view it as endearment, then that is fine, I suppose.

However, for me, as a white person, to use it would never be interpreted as anything other than a slur so I would never use it.

But that is where the difference comes in. I have had some of my dearest friends (as well as complete strangers) call me the "G" word but it has never been said with any malice or meaness and does not in any way have the same conotation as the "N" word.

However, having said that, Redwood, I have no bone to pick with you, nor do I think any less of you, and I would consider you a friend no matter what color, race, gender, or religion you are.

[Taylor]

The "g" word of course being "Gringo"

hahaha does this look redundant or what? The "g" word isn't coming out on the website any more. Sorry I wasn't trying to be redundant, just explain what I was saying in case someone had read the previous posts.

[Taylor]

The "g" word of course being "Gringo"

hahaha does this look redundant or what? The "g" word isn't coming out on the website any more. Sorry I wasn't trying to be redundant, just explain what I was saying in case someone had read the previous posts.

[Amelia]

I have watched many westerns over my years and have to shake my head. In early days the censors were very heavy handed on words that are commonplace today. You couldn't even say the word "pregnant". If the {g} word were any kind of slur it would have been axed asap; but it was not. So apparently is was a perfectly fine word for people of all ages to hear.

During my high school years is was popular for blacks to call whites "honkey". This word also made it to TV without censorship. It was always used as a slur but never carried any painful weight for whites, that I was aware of. In other areas of the country the term "cracker" is used for white people. Again, I feel this word doesn't carry any weight. At least if someone called me a "cracker" I would probably just shrug.

BUT the {N} and {B}, (just to focus on those two) words carry the painful weight of times past and should never be used.

[Woody]

Quote:

This is the first time I have ever seen "[theG-word]" equated with the "n" word.

In propper context it is more comparable to the modern use of the word yankee. It can be used in an offensive way but rarely is. Most often it is used in an endearing way. When I was an elder for a hispanic church they called me their gringo.

You can say you were trying to endear me all you want ... I do not feel endeared by your comment. I do not claim that you were malicious but I do consider your use of the word to be ignorant.

I do not feel that you needed to call attention to my race or heritage especially since you do not know the heritage of my father. I have not disclosed it to any one here on CA.

However ... I do not consider you to be a racist. I do feel that you called me a racial slur as evidenced by many dictionary definitions.

But the bottom line is that good minds and good Christians can differ. I don't expect to be able to change you. I am sure you will continue to call people Gring o. But I do not consider it appropriate for this forum.

I would hope that as Christians we can feel bad when we hurt someones feeling even if the hurt was not intentional. It has been evident from the beginning that you were not about to make things right . You were determined to knock me for feeling hurt by your name calling.

Sometimes name calling is dangerous because the name may not really apply. And I think this is the case. Perhaps just refraining from name calling would have been a better choice.

[John317]

I have watched many westerns over my years and have to shake my head. In early days the censors were very heavy handed on words that are commonplace today. You couldn't even say the word "pregnant". If the {g} word were any kind of slur it would have been axed asap; but it was not. So apparently is was a perfectly fine word for people of all ages to hear.

During my high school years is was popular for blacks to call whites "honkey". This word also made it to TV without censorship. It was always used as a slur but never carried any painful weight for whites, that I was aware of. In other areas of the country the term "cracker" is used for white people. Again, I feel this word doesn't carry any weight. At least if someone called me a "cracker" I would probably just shrug.

BUT the {N} and {B}, (just to focus on those two) words carry the painful weight of times past and should never be used.

Yes, times have changed a lot. Not very many years ago, editors would tell writers that it would be big mistake to send in a story or film script that had anything to do with certain illnesses or that showed people in wheel chairs, etc. Lots of things were taboo. Today many of those same things make the story or film a big hit.

On the word "cracker," it is used to mean that whites crack easily under pressure in certain situations. Black "children" where I work sometimes call whites this when they get angry. I never saw a white person get mad about being called that. It's like saying white guys can't jump. Who cares-- that's how I feel. (In my work, though, I am supposed to report it anyway even if I don't mind personally, because the "child" has to learn he can't disrespect.)

But it's important to realize why whites usually don't care about being called various names-- because none of those names ever made any difference in how whites live or in how they think of themselves. But if whites internalized those names and were made to feel inferior by their constant use by people with power over them, then whites would react much differently, I'm sure. As it is, whites don't usually feel threatened or intimidated or damaged in any way by them.

I have a very good friend, a highly educated, professional, who grew up in the deep South, and he sometimes refers to himself as "white trash," and says it's a label he takes real pride in. Being from Loma Linda, CA, I confess I don't totally understand this.

[D. Allan]

Redwood, I think you have been wronged. It is how a person, the target, perceives these terms that make them offensive. If you feel hurt, you deserve an apology. I'm sure ANYone would feel the same way if he perceived that he was the target of an insult to his race.

Personally, I do not like being called a Gringo either. It would insult me if it happened on this forum. I don't like being called, Whitey or Honky either. It has never happened but if it did...

Among some fellow workers from Mexico, I called myself 'Gringo'. I could tell by their smiles and snickers that it was unusual and something they didn't dare call me. We were good friends, but they NEVER called me that word. Its ok for a white guy to call himself a gringo, but never for some one who is not a white guy to do it.

C'est tout que je vais dire. Est-ce-qu je n'ai pas raison?

~d.allan

[Parade Orange]

Taylor has mentioned the other "G" word

[Dr. Shane]

When I served in Panama as a soldier, our black and asian soldiers were called gringos too. The term is associated with American or Canadian citizenship more than the color of skin.

Hispanics that are reluctant to call a black person a gringo may be reluctant because they actually think of black people as being less than that. There are many racist hispanics that look down on black people.

Often times we associate language with race. Most latinos speak Spanish or Portuguese but not all that speak these languages are latino. And not all latinos can speak one of these langages.

BTW: from the tone of this thread, one might think I am a latino somehow insulting a white guy. Let me be clear. I am white. I am irish. I have so little pigment in my skin I look pink. I am also a US citizen. So I am not sure how I could insult someone else for being either white or a US citizen.

[Stan]

I like the swahali name for 'whites'

Muzunga

Perhaps someone can spell it better..

[D. Allan]

Quote:

I am white. I am irish. I have so little pigment in my skin I look pink. I am also a US citizen. So I am not sure how I could insult someone else for being either white or a US citizen.

The source of the epithet does not affect its meaning, I would think. My Random House dictionary says: disparaging (among Spanish Americans) a foreigner, esp. one from the U.S.

The intent of the word seems to be to say: he's not one of us, he doesn't belong.

Even though one's intention may be innocent, another may yet be insulted.

[D. Allan]

Quote:

"Putting lipstick on the pig doesnt make it pretty." Loquatious Bubbles

Exactly! But we do it all the time, don't we?

[Woody]

Shane ... let me try this one on you in an effort to resolve things.

You have admitted that you used slang. Is it not possible that when you use slang you run the risk of being misunderstood? Slang name calling is high risk use of our language.

I would only ask that you understand that it is POSSIBLE that you have offended me by evidence of the dictionary and how others have testified that they also view it as an unfriendly name.

Is it simply possible that you made an innocent mistake in the use of this term? I would hope that in the future you would be more careful with name calling. And I would hope that you would allow me to feel hurt without further condemning me for feeling this way.

[David Koot]

Man, get a life! Two whole pages consumed for THIS?

[Woody]

David ... the topic of this thread is "The use of racial slurs in CA"

If you do not want to participate in this thread then I suggest that you do not post anything. If you don't like reading this topic then stay away from this topic. But please allow those that want to participate to do so without condemning us.

[David Koot]

Whether I participate on this thread or not will not affect the issue. During the past few weeks I have noticed a huge amount of space has been devoted to similar topics. Looks like the old 'chip on the shoulder' syndrome. Time to get on with life. Take a page from the Brits--do your duty, carry on and keep a stiff upper lip. Be a man.

[Woody]

I suggest that you do that David. Take care of your life and don't get involved in others lives. You are not the judge of what all of us should or should not talk about. To each his own. If you do not like this thread then do not come here.

[cricket]

OT:

David, I for one am thankful and grateful for your presence in my life. Thanks for sticking around.

[Bravus]

Redwood, you have asked:

Quote:

Is it simply possible that you made an innocent mistake in the use of this term? I would hope that in the future you would be more careful with name calling. And I would hope that you would allow me to feel hurt without further condemning me for feeling this way.

I think that's a fair enough question, and look forward to Shane's reply. In the same spirit though, I would like to ask you.

"Is it simply possible that Shane was not 'name calling' at all, but using a simple descriptive term, as he understands it in his context? He has said that is the case - he simply used the appropriate Spanish word, in a Spanish sentence, that described you."

[Dr. Shane]

Someone once called my a bloke and I thought they were calling me gay. I later found out that in Australia bloke just means guy.

The term I used was correct, no mistake was made. In AA we have sponsers that kind of are like mentors and help us see when we are wrong and when we should make ammends. My AA sponsor is also an Adventist. When I mentioned this situation to him (and of course he can log on here and read it all) he told me just to blow it off. He is a white, non-spanish speaker that lives in this area and told me he is called a gringo everyday. No offense is taken and no offence is intended.

[Woody]

Quote:

No offense is taken and no offence is intended.

This is where you are wrong Shane. Offense was taken. I am offended. You can try to deny it all you want. But what you said has offended me.

I am willing to say that you did not intend to offend on the basis of your word. But I do have my doubts. If you had intended to endear me as you claimed ... why did you put it in Spanish. It appeared to me that you were trying to impress your Spanish friends at my expense.

The bottom line is that you did offend me with your word used. As a Christian ... I am interested in knowing and offering apologizes even when I have not done something on purpose. If I accidently hurt someone I apologize . I don't belittle them for being offended. So ... this has really become the issue. Why would you ridicule me for being offended at a word that MANY find very offensive?

[Woody]

Redwood, you have asked:

Quote:

Is it simply possible that you made an innocent mistake in the use of this term? I would hope that in the future you would be more careful with name calling. And I would hope that you would allow me to feel hurt without further condemning me for feeling this way.

I think that's a fair enough question, and look forward to Shane's reply. In the same spirit though, I would like to ask you.

"Is it simply possible that Shane was not 'name calling' at all, but using a simple descriptive term, as he understands it in his context? He has said that is the case - he simply used the appropriate Spanish word, in a Spanish sentence, that described you."

First of all Bravus ... I want to sincerely thank you for a fair comment and attempt to help the situation come to resolution. I will try to answer your question to the best of my ability.

Yes ... it is possible that he was not name calling. Like I said he may have used it innocently although I have my doubts. I think what happened is that he used a word that is common place in HIS community that he associates with. I should note that others from his community have told me and us here at CA that the word he used was not innocent and was NOT friendly. There is a difference of opinions. But I will give him the benefit of the doubt.

The problem is that this word is described as being "hostile" and other mean terms in the dictionaries. And I personally take it to be hostile. So ... like I said ... it really doesn't mean we have to assign blame. I was offended and I would expect that in a Christian Forum with Christians interacting that I would have received better treatment than the defensivness that I have received from Shane. If I hurt someone by accident ... I would be quick to say I was sorry. And so I am very confused at the treatment I have received from Shane.

I would point out that Shane has admitted that it is slang. And when you use slang you take a certain risk at being offensive. He took the risk and is now not willing to admit what he did.

[Parade Orange]

D. Allen my pig is wearing lipstick right now!

[Bravus]

Fair enough, Redwood, and thanks for the thoughtful response.

For what it's worth I do think it would make sense for Shane to apologise. If I bump into someone in the street unintentionally I say 'sorry'. There was no intent to hurt them, in fact my intentions were all good, but if they got hurt then it's incumbent upon me to apologise. But this is jsut my opinion, and the final decision remains with Shane.

I won't be participating in this thread any further.