Dr. Jeebus wrote:

username wrote: eh, i hate to label people as black, white, brown, etc etc. its all so archaic and pointless, and honestly, rather ignorant. This statement comes off as really arrogant. People ARE black, white, brown, etc. You can look at them and see that. Any stereotypes you associate with what they look like is your own fucking problem, but to refuse to refer to someone as black because you think it's ignorant to do so is ignorant in itself. Of course, maybe you can't separate the word from the stereotype, which would only further the point that your statement is ignorant. Let's say I was trying to point out my ex girlfriend from across the room. One of the first words I would say is "black", because it's a good visual identifier and, depending on where we were, would eliminate more than half the people I could be referring too. Labeling her as black (And I find your use of the word "label" odd here, because I'm not putting some sort of label on her, she IS black) doesn't say anything about who she is as a person, what she thinks, how she behaves, etc, it's just a useful description for identifying a person by appearance. You may as well say "eh, I hate to label people as tall, short, giant, etc etc. it's all so archaic and pointless, and honestly, rather ignorant." If that statement looks stupid to you, then congratulations: that's EXACTLY how your statement looks. Also, I hate the term African American. I never once referred to my ex as such (always just said "black" because it's shorter and more accurate, since, while her ancestors were from Africa, she personally had never even visited there, let alone lived there). I'm also 99% positive that I never heard her use that phrase either, with the possible exception of quotes and probable exception of sarcasm.

ok. i guess some clarification is required

first off, i wasnt trying to come off as arrogant. i hope that much was clear.

secondly, i dont like labels on people. i think they are limiting, and i personally dont like being limited to a certain category. unfortunately, these categories that people get placed under is what cause me to believe it is an ignorant practice.

unfortunately, when someone is described in very simple terms as that of black, or white, or republican, or democrat, or whatever, people automatically have a preconceived notion as to what that individual may be or may represent. i understand not everyone does this, but it happens more often than not. obviously human beings are more complex than just being 'a black guy' or 'a short mexican' so having someone being simplified in terms of their 'race' is rather unnecessary imho.

i understand your point in terms of you using black or brown or tall or white as an identifier. it would definitely make it easier to point out someone in that fashion, but i dont believe that you should use those descriptive terms as a quality of an individual.

unfortunately, im not as eloquent as others on the board, and i lack any creative writing skills, so i hope that made any sort of sense.

i agree, my original statement was rather RETARDED simply because i oversimplified it.

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

lordsathien wrote: I think Jeebus has four copies of Retard (French language version of the Magic card Delay) I only have 3, but I'd love a foil one to round out the set of them. username wrote: Dr. Jeebus wrote: username wrote: eh, i hate to label people as black, white, brown, etc etc. its all so archaic and pointless, and honestly, rather ignorant. This statement comes off as really arrogant. People ARE black, white, brown, etc. You can look at them and see that. Any stereotypes you associate with what they look like is your own fucking problem, but to refuse to refer to someone as black because you think it's ignorant to do so is ignorant in itself. Of course, maybe you can't separate the word from the stereotype, which would only further the point that your statement is ignorant. Let's say I was trying to point out my ex girlfriend from across the room. One of the first words I would say is "black", because it's a good visual identifier and, depending on where we were, would eliminate more than half the people I could be referring too. Labeling her as black (And I find your use of the word "label" odd here, because I'm not putting some sort of label on her, she IS black) doesn't say anything about who she is as a person, what she thinks, how she behaves, etc, it's just a useful description for identifying a person by appearance. You may as well say "eh, I hate to label people as tall, short, giant, etc etc. it's all so archaic and pointless, and honestly, rather ignorant." If that statement looks stupid to you, then congratulations: that's EXACTLY how your statement looks. Also, I hate the term African American. I never once referred to my ex as such (always just said "black" because it's shorter and more accurate, since, while her ancestors were from Africa, she personally had never even visited there, let alone lived there). I'm also 99% positive that I never heard her use that phrase either, with the possible exception of quotes and probable exception of sarcasm. ok. i guess some clarification is required first off, i wasnt trying to come off as arrogant. i hope that much was clear. secondly, i dont like labels on people. i think they are limiting, and i personally dont like being limited to a certain category. unfortunately, these categories that people get placed under is what cause me to believe it is an ignorant practice. unfortunately, when someone is described in very simple terms as that of black, or white, or republican, or democrat, or whatever, people automatically have a preconceived notion as to what that individual may be or may represent. i understand not everyone does this, but it happens more often than not. obviously human beings are more complex than just being 'a black guy' or 'a short mexican' so having someone being simplified in terms of their 'race' is rather unnecessary imho. i understand your point in terms of you using black or brown or tall or white as an identifier. it would definitely make it easier to point out someone in that fashion, but i dont believe that you should use those descriptive terms as a quality of an individual. unfortunately, im not as eloquent as others on the board, and i lack any creative writing skills, so i hope that made any sort of sense. i agree, my original statement was rather RETARDED simply because i oversimplified it. (Emphasis mine) No one said that we're using those words as describe the quality of an individual. In fact, I explicitly said that I don't do that. However, to not allow me to use descriptive words when describing a person is ridiculous. I may be describing them physically using words like tall, black, or blad, or I may be describing the quality of the individual such as generous, retarded, or arrogant. If I refer to someone as black, describing them physically, it is your own fucking fault for making assumptions about the quality of that person as an individual. Likewise, if I am describing the quality of an individual and refer to them as being stingy, it is your own fucking fault for picturing them as having an enormous, hook nose, a full beard, and a Yakima on their head.

ok. that makes sense. i dont disagree w/that.

like i mentioned, my original statement was super simplified, which is obvious why you believed it was ignorant & arrogant.