posted
I have just had a run in with our new moderator over the use of the word Negro. She has taken a dislike to the word and deleted an entire post asking her to explain when and how the word Negro came to be regarded as offensive and when and where such a consensus has been established, ie if it actually has.
quote:I asked who the Black people were who decided that the word Negro was an offensive word, and what authority they had to decide that for other black people and you deleted the whole post on the ground that the word Negro was not acceptable.
Why didn't you simply answer the question? The question is a simple one and it matters to people involved in any kind of African studies. Who were the people who decided that the word Negro was a disparaging word, what authority did they have, and when did a social consensus arise that it was indeed so?
Have ever considered asking the United Negro College Fund to change their name, considering that they probably fund the education of negroes just as much if not more so than any other organization? Are you meaning to say that the people whose education is funded by the UNCF dislike being funded by an organization which has the word Negro in its name and would rather not receive funding from an organization which such a name?
Show me the evidence of social consensus among Black people worldwide that the word Negro is to be regarded as an offensive word.
The question to forum members is: Since when has the word Negro come to be regarded as an offensive word? When and where was such a consensus established (assuming that is has) what is/was the reasoning and evidence behind it? References please.
-------------------- The Habsburg Agenda - Defending Western Christian civilization Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Careless people - like Sammy: often make the mistake of giving the pliant power, feeling that guarantees loyalty. But the pliant are pliant because they lack the foundation of intelligent minds.
Therefore they easily fall into abuse of power traps consistent with people who for all intents and purposes are used to nothingness, then suddenly find themselves with power. Albeit in a meaningless venue.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
From what I've read, negro(Spanish) means black(English). So I don't think it's offensive, but I don't want to speak for everyone. In South Africa we were called "swart/swarty" by the Dutch and sometimes even "moere/muure". There is also "kaffir/kaffer"(comes from Arabic meaning nonreligious) that whites use to insult Africans.
-------------------- “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.” Posts: 195 | From: Southern Africa(Azania) | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Ah, my first Black SA. I have wondered since I was a child listening to my fathers accounts of life in SA.
Why did you people take so long to free yourselves? Did you like oppression, or was it the Zulu sabotaging your efforts?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Words have implicit and explicit meanings.They are not just letters strung together.
For example, it's OK to refer to a British person as a "Brit" but it's regarded as offensive to say "Jap" when talking about a Japanese person. You can say Frenchman or Englishman but not Chinaman. Also not totally acceptable to say Red Indian or Redman. Similarly, Jewess and Negress are seen as not seen as acceptable.
The problem with "negro" is that it was used in a context when Africans were without agency and reduced practically to objects. When Africans were being transported to the Americas, their subjective identities as Wolof, Peul, Yoruba, Maninka, etc. were erased only to be replaced by the Spanish adjective "negro".
Similarly, the people of East Asia are not referred to as "yellows". The term "white" is accepted for the people of Europe because it was THEY who defined themselves as such, as an expression of biological superiority.
Ideally, people should be referred to in terms of their origins--nationality, ethnicity, continental origins, etc. rather than adjectives of color.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most if these ideas are simply cultural Marxists appropriating minorities' issues as a means of propagating their own cultural agenda, and many Black people fall for this malign agenda. Those attitudes are based on the notion which is itself a racist notion that White people don't have the right to use their own forms of speech even when there is no disparaging intent in the use of words.
It is based on the notion that "since you are white you have no right to use your own words to describe me". My response to that is - idiot - it is their language you are speaking, and if there is no disparaging intent then you should be able to respect it. If as the subject of the word you don't approve of it you should explain why it is in appropriate and offer an alternative.
I will give you an example. I once attended a course when one of the lecturers, a white man, mentioned an occasion when he approached some Black women and addressed them with the word ladies.The women were offended because he addressed them as ladies. Really? What would they have preferred? womyn?hoes?bitches?
In everyday English the polite manner to address a woman is to use the word lady.
Ooooh no.
As a white person being polite you have to be a racist with a superior, condescending manner.
This is the stupidity which Marxists have filled the minds of many Black people with not knowing that it is underpinned by an agenda which isn't meant to help Black people in any way. The problem is that many Black people have no social cultural understanding of their own, so the only culture they wind up having is what some white leftists and Jewish media producers plant in their mind as our culture aka street culture, hood culture. A good example of this silliness is when I watch some Muslim female vloggers introduce themselves, and one of the very first things they say is "I am a Muslim". Young lady - the fact that you are in hijab makes it pretty obvious. Why do you have to mention it as the very first thing?
Take the word "Paki" for instance. It is a short form for the word "Pakistani" which is a long word and is really too many syllables for the common phenomenon it describes. In the past many English used the word "Paki" without any evil intention and also used the term to describe Indians because they are all Indians in the sense of their geographical region, not the state. Of course some people would use the insult "Paki bastard" in an altercation and in racial harassment. But does that make the abbreviation inherently racist? No it does not. Many Africans in the UK use the abbreviation to describe Indians and Pakistanis and there is no racist intention that. Common people use abbreviations for the sake of economy, but oh no these cultural Marxists can't accept that.
Getting back to the word Negro. Will Lioness kindly write a letter to the United Negro College Fund and the School of Oriental and African Studies informing them that the words Negro and Oriental are derogatory and they should stop using them. I think that is way more important than throwing her puny weight around this piddling corner of the universe renamed Deshret trying to show who is boss.
My other question has not been answered. Where and when has some group of people who (claim to) represent the opinions of Black people made a public appeal in the media demanding that the use of the word Negro should be abolished and the reasons for doing so?
These people are imps of Satan who are always looking for some way to inject their influence and presence in the way everyday people relate to each other and Lioness either foolishly or wittingly has made herself one of them.
-------------------- The Habsburg Agenda - Defending Western Christian civilization Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
The UNCF was founded in 1944 so they might argue they have a historical reason for using this obsolete word "Negro" but members of this forum don't have such an excuse. Calling people "Negroes" etc., is not allowed in the forum. The word doesn't have to be offensive as a word because if the group of people in question does not formerly call themselves by such a name in 2017 then it is not permitted to call people such a word. So if they don't call themselves "apples", "apple" may not be an offensive word, such a word will not be banned in all contexts, but it is disrespectful to call people names that they do not call themselves so there will be consequences for doing so. I will not speak on this further in some philosophical way or discuss obscure possible exceptions.
posted
You still haven't explained when Negroes decided to stop calling themselves Negroes or made an appeal for such, and when the word become obsolete.
Is this some weird attempt to protect whites from being called Albinos if it turns out blacks to be called Negroes? You're so pathetically transparent.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The UNCF was founded in 1944 so they might argue they have a historical reason for using this obsolete word "Negro" but members of this forum don't have such an excuse. Calling people "Negroes" etc., is not allowed in the forum. The word doesn't have to be offensive as a word because if the group of people in question does not formerly call themselves by such a name in 2017 then it is not permitted to call people such a word. So if they don't call themselves "apples", "apple" may not be an offensive word, such a word will not be banned in all contexts, but it is disrespectful to call people names that they do not call themselves so there will be consequences for doing so. I will not speak on this further in some philosophical way or discuss obscure possible exceptions.
-------------------- The Habsburg Agenda - Defending Western Christian civilization Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
19friggin60
This study focuses on the exploitive nature of the word ''Negro." Tracing its origins to the African slave trade, he shows how the label "Negro" was used to separate African descendents and to confirm their supposed inferiority. 1960, 1992. 108 pp. Paper
posted
This is the problem I have with guys look Tukuler who are full of pretentious intellectual nonsense. So long as Black people invest the word with honour and dignity there is no negativity in it. The article makes it clear, just as the word Black was invested with a positive meaning, so was the word Negro. Tukuler also never emphasised the fact that the author of the book considereed word Black problematic.
You are asking black people to base their decisions on some obscure book which nobody heard of. The book is placed behind a paywall where it can't be freely read. Let's see the difference between the Bible and that book. The Bible is given out freely and you know the consequent result, Christianity is spread every where. This dude publishes a book which is supposedly monumental to the well being of Black people and yet instead of making it freely available to all Black people to read, the inheritors of his estate decide to place it behind a paywall with hardly any recommendations and they are depending on Tukuler's snarky intellectual pretentiousness on Egyptsearch to promote it.
Do you see what the problem is? Consider this - early Christians considered the cross as a sign of shame because it showed how awfully their leader died, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/billykangas/2012/01/the-shame-of-the-cross.html and only later it a symbol of positivity because Christians invested it with that sentiment.
This is about Black people shaping their image themselves. Instead of fixating on the positivity they themselves invest the word with, they are more concerned with the negativity white people attached to it. Apparently we are supposed to believe that the spirit of negativity outsiders attach the word must be stronger than the spirit of positivity black people themselves can attach to it. Are Black people themselves that weak-spirited, unable to give things in their life a positive blessing themselves?
This snarkiness has no place among people who claim to be the ones guiding black people to the light.
Let us see:
Negro - Spanish word for Black - negative meaning attached
Black - negative meaning attached - apparently not all Afro-Americans are Black in complexion. Tukuler seems to have a problem with so called negroid features and describes them as caricature features.
Afro/African-American - not very truthful - no cultural or spiritual ties to African cultures. So called African Americans take more pride in studying European languages and the East African creole spread by Arab slave traders called Swahili, instead of pure African languages from Central and West Africa.
??? - What?
-------------------- The Habsburg Agenda - Defending Western Christian civilization Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
This all comes down to undermining the linguistic foundations Black people use to maintain their self-image. As soon as one word acquires a positive meaning for them, someone, usually a Black person prompted by contact with malign ideologies promulgated by white people, comes in to undermine the positive meaning to the word, and as that word is attached to psychic being, the psyches get undermined.
Question to Tukuler and Lioness: if Black, Negro and African American are all words with their own flaws - what new word(s) do you suggest?
-------------------- The Habsburg Agenda - Defending Western Christian civilization Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by A Habsburg Agenda: Tukuler who are full of pretentious intellectual nonsense.
Let's see the difference between the Bible and that book.
Tukuler's snarky intellectual pretentiousness
?
Afro/African-American - not very truthful - no cultural or spiritual ties to African cultures.
?
Immediate with the ad homena, eh? Yes, fellow you are a negro, no argument from me
quote: ... the disorganized, disenchanted, denuded, and dehumanized "AFRICAN BODY WITH A EUROPEAN MENTALITY." Such a "BODY" is otherwise called "NEGRO"
Doc Ben -- Africa: Mother of Western Civilization p116 1971
You would make a joke out of our physical liberation struggle of 400 years ending with the overthrow of apartheid. The struggle continues with national civil rights and against new forms of colonization.
Ok I'm done with you, negro, before it devolves to
MAN: See that wise student arguing with that unlearned fool? WOMAN: Which is which?
In the end dogs and slaves are named by their master. Free men name themselves.
where the one defending negro usage in an above post to this thread to butter you up defaults to using the word the way Middle Passage Survivors use it, derogatory.
quote:Afro/African-American - not very truthful - no cultural or spiritual ties to African cultures. So called African Americans take more pride in studying European languages and the East African creole spread by Arab slave traders called Swahili, instead of pure African languages from Central and West Africa. Afro/African-American - not very truthful - no cultural or spiritual ties to African cultures. So called African Americans take more pride in studying European languages and the East African creole spread by Arab slave traders called Swahili, instead of pure African languages from Central and West Africa.
posted
Just didn't get the reply in. Error. Here goes now.
Swahili is a bona fide African language with a few Arabic loan words. An Arab from Arabia will not understand Swahili at all.
The same for African languages like Wolof, Hausa, Mandinka and Peul. This has occurred because those ethnicities are predominantly Muslim.
Note that English and French have loan words from both languages--yet that does not fracture the grammatical and syntactical structure of both languages. Similarly New York English has a number of Yiddish words but the English language is not in any way compromised.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
where the one defending negro usage in an above post to this thread to butter you up defaults to using the word the way Middle Passage Survivors use it, derogatory.
Yes some Asians aka Orientals went all the way to the Supreme Court to be able to use Slant in their band's name. Why, because they don't think that white liberals, marxists and leftists have a right to make decisions about what words they can use for themselves, that white people cannot attach a derogatory meaning to a fundamentally neutral word which describes them quite accurately, then turn around to ban them and others from using it because it is considered a slur.
They went out and fought for it unlike some negroes like Tukuler, Mike and Lioness who think the word negro which is Spanish and Portuguese for the English equivalent black (which they are quite happy to use) is a derogatory word. They are very much like this oriental woman, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-bans-oriental-negro_us_5665e990e4b08e945ff06366, Grace Meng, who sponsored a bill to ban those words from government documents.
Now let me attend to Tukuler and Mike who thought fit to use the word negro to address me in a disparaging manner.
First of all let us attend to your so called Pan African outlook, which I assume you are. Consider this scenario. You are with some Spanish or Portuguese speaking blacks, and they realize that you use the word for black in their native language in a disparaging manner towards other blacks.
What do you think they would think of you, giving that you are treating the word for their race as an insult? Who do you think they would regard with pity and sadness as being a victim of European mental colonization, assuming that they were not offended by your use of the word in such a manner?
And perhaps you should consider the converse, how you would think of them if they used your own English word black as derogatory term to another Portuguese or Spanish speaking black?
Do you see how ridiculous the two of you sound now? And you hang around this virtually empty bar with few 5 or 6 regular clientele preening yourselves on your Afrocentric erudition and intellects, and your right to for judgements about other negroes who don't share your views?
Perhaps I should finish this of with a quote from of the guys in the band
quote: But No. 2, it worked [as a name] because we could talk about our perspective — our slant on life, as people of color navigating the entertainment industry — and at the same time, pay homage to the Asian-American activists who had been using the term in a reappropriated, self-empowering way for about 30 years. We know that irony and wit can neutralize racial slurs, because it shifts the dynamics of power. It makes people check in and think, “Is this actually appropriate to use or not?” Prior to that, people just make assumptions.
Perhaps I should quote the part in bold again it shifts the dynamics of power.
This is the kind of power you are happy to cede to white liberals and marxists who have never done you any good and some black people who follow them, blindly because they are foolish and clueless as to what is going on, wittingly because they are the pimps of the white marxists educators aiming to preoccupy the minds of blacks with all kinds of silly irrelevant issues.
I have been busy which is why I haven't responded in a while. I will be back to give you guys a series of even more merciless chastisements. Interested parties should keep the popcorn close by.
-------------------- The Habsburg Agenda - Defending Western Christian civilization Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
AHA, a question to you before I give my own response.
Do you think the word ni**er can be invested with enough honor and dignity to wipe away its stain? Is it better if we say ni**a instead?
What purpose does using the word Negro accomplish that "black person" or "African American" does not?
I've already made it clear calling people albinos or hueless is not acceptable and calling people negros is no different. It being the proper name of old organizations like the UNCF (no different from the National Association for the Advancement of "Colored" People) doesn't take away from it being a mostly obsolete usage and offensive to numerous black people.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by A Habsburg Agenda: This is the problem I have with guys look Tukuler who are full of pretentious intellectual nonsense. So long as Black people invest the word with honour and dignity there is no negativity in it. The article makes it clear, just as the word Black was invested with a positive meaning, so was the word Negro. Tukuler also never emphasised the fact that the author of the book considereed word Black problematic.
You are asking black people to base their decisions on some obscure book which nobody heard of. The book is placed behind a paywall where it can't be freely read. Let's see the difference between the Bible and that book. The Bible is given out freely and you know the consequent result, Christianity is spread every where. This dude publishes a book which is supposedly monumental to the well being of Black people and yet instead of making it freely available to all Black people to read, the inheritors of his estate decide to place it behind a paywall with hardly any recommendations and they are depending on Tukuler's snarky intellectual pretentiousness on Egyptsearch to promote it.
Do you see what the problem is? Consider this - early Christians considered the cross as a sign of shame because it showed how awfully their leader died, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/billykangas/2012/01/the-shame-of-the-cross.html and only later it a symbol of positivity because Christians invested it with that sentiment.
This is about Black people shaping their image themselves. Instead of fixating on the positivity they themselves invest the word with, they are more concerned with the negativity white people attached to it. Apparently we are supposed to believe that the spirit of negativity outsiders attach the word must be stronger than the spirit of positivity black people themselves can attach to it. Are Black people themselves that weak-spirited, unable to give things in their life a positive blessing themselves?
This snarkiness has no place among people who claim to be the ones guiding black people to the light.
Let us see:
Negro - Spanish word for Black - negative meaning attached
Black - negative meaning attached - apparently not all Afro-Americans are Black in complexion. Tukuler seems to have a problem with so called negroid features and describes them as caricature features.
Afro/African-American - not very truthful - no cultural or spiritual ties to African cultures. So called African Americans take more pride in studying European languages and the East African creole spread by Arab slave traders called Swahili, instead of pure African languages from Central and West Africa.
??? - What?
This is what happens when you ignore your responsibility and instead delegate it to someone else, as blacks have allowed the hue-less to label, describe and stereotype them as well as everything associated with them.
Negro/African-American/Nigger are all labels the Hue-less have attached to Africans, and it was Africans who allowed, accepted and propagate these terms.
If only as an exercise, blacks should begin labeling the world from their own eyes and mouth. When we do, you see it upsets the Hue-less, as we are currently observing here on ES as we attempt to modernize and correct the broad European Hue-less developed; Caucasian, Negro, Mulatto, etc. If Europeans won't allow blacks to re-label Caucasian to the more appropriate OCA dominate huelessman, then blacks should at least seek to develop a term to describe themselves, if for no more then practice doing it. As exercise.
-------------------- Selenium gives real life and true reality Posts: 4693 | From: Saturn | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic