Racism on site

[nara]

318 posts does anyone know what the outcome is? was it really worth all this just for a few so called racist posts? like what has been said before if you don't like the joke or the op, then hit the ignore button don't spoil it for other people who have a sense of humour. I still say sticky should start his own jokes thread and put what he thinks is offensive in there. That way you the member get to choose whether you look at it or not. One thing I will say in this entire post not once did it get out of hand it was taken in good humour but that's just my opinion.

It depends what you mean by 'outcome' miggy, it's not a contest.

As for 'was it worth it?', of course it was. The OP was concerned about some of the vile filth that was being posted as 'humour' and voiced his concern. Those that agreed with him supported him, those that disagreed, didn't. Forums are for debate, not arse-licking.

I wouldn't entirely agree with you about not getting out of hand. A couple of the usual suspects went off topic by trying to get personal, but generally it's been well-behaved.

It's just a pity that it's descended into trivial nonsense over the last few pages.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin.]

Opinions as always will vary.
It's in the eye of the beholder, make of it what you will.

 

[morilihochili]

Noun 1.
racist - a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others racist - a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others
racialist
bigot - a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own
Adj. 1. racist - based on racial intolerance; "racist remarks"
racial - of or characteristic of race or races or arising from differences among groups; "racial differences"; "racial discrimination"
2. racist - discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion racist - discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion
anti-semite, anti black
discriminatory, prejudiced - being biased or having a belief or attitude formed beforehand; "a prejudiced judge"
© 2003-2011 Princeton University,

 

[miggy]

It depends what you mean by 'outcome' miggy, it's not a contest.

As for 'was it worth it?', of course it was. The OP was concerned about some of the vile filth that was being posted as 'humour' and voiced his concern. Those that agreed with him supported him, those that disagreed, didn't. Forums are for debate, not arse-licking.

I wouldn't entirely agree with you about not getting out of hand. A couple of the usual suspects went off topic by trying to get personal, but generally it's been well-behaved.

It's just a pity that it's descended into trivial nonsense over the last few pages.

I didn't say it was a contest, all I want to know is what has all this achieved??? what is being done about it? or do we carry on as if it didn't happen and wait until the next debate.???????????

 

[little_pob]

318 posts does anyone know what the outcome is? was it really worth all this just for a few so called racist posts? like what has been said before if you don't like the joke or the op, then hit the ignore button don't spoil it for other people who have a sense of humour. I still say sticky should start his own jokes thread and put what he thinks is offensive in there. That way you the member get to choose whether you look at it or not. One thing I will say in this entire post not once did it get out of hand it was taken in good humour but that's just my opinion.

The outcome was that jokes that mock people's race, gender or sexual orientation are a bit like marmite (what jokes aren't?). It's not so much about getting the joke or being able to laugh at the ironic or the taboo. It seems to boil down to whether you find stereotypes, and in some cases abusive jokes, funny. For example I don't like his Pub Landlord act, but in general I find Al Murray quite funny.

The other point raised by Digi is that racism isn't just white on non-white, much like sectarianism isn't just found in Christianity. However, I've never seen nara, hamba or IANB suggest that this was the case. Certainly my silence on the point should have been viewed as me conceding this point.

 

[nara]

The other point raised by Digi is that racism isn't just white on non-white, much like sectarianism isn't just found in Christianity. However, I've never seen nara, hamba or IANB suggest that this was the case. Certainly my silence on the point should have been viewed as me conceding this point.

Agreed.

The problem with the digi line of argument(not specifically digi, I just use it as an example), is that it tries to define racism by language.

That's a massive cop-out. Racism isn't about words, it's about intent.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin.]

And if you have no intent to be racist, just trying to be funny with some crappy joke there you go you have your answer.

 

[nara]

I didn't say it was a contest, all I want to know is what has all this achieved??? what is being done about it? or do we carry on as if it didn't happen and wait until the next debate.???????????

Achieved? Well, people have talked about it and voiced their opinions. Not a bad thing.

What's being done about it? Hopefully the worst stuff will never be seen on open forum. It gives the place a bad name.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin.]

Next thread title..............
Is bullying allowed on open forum, or should it be in a bully only section away from open forum?
Over to you Nara love.

 

[nara]

And if you have no intent to be racist, just trying to be funny with some crappy joke there you go you have your answer.

That depends. Were some of those "jokes" written by the person who posted them? I hope not.

Over to you Nara love.

Thanks, but a strange question. Bullying should never be "allowed".

On the other hand, if it was a rhetorical question you should have done some research before asking it.

 

[digidude]

Noun 1.
racist - a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others racist - a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others
racialist
bigot - a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own
Adj. 1. racist - based on racial intolerance; "racist remarks"
racial - of or characteristic of race or races or arising from differences among groups; "racial differences"; "racial discrimination"
2. racist - discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion racist - discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion
anti-semite, anti black
discriminatory, prejudiced - being biased or having a belief or attitude formed beforehand; "a prejudiced judge"
© 2003-2011 Princeton University,

ive stumbled upon something that has me fascinated. over the last 2 days, ive spoken to people from india, iran, albania, sri lanka (dont know where that is myself lol) and pakistan

and going by the definitions of racism above, the middle eastern lot are racist as fook, i thought the american rednecks were bad, but feck me, i am honestly shocked (which aint an easy thing to do)

i thought the english were given a hard time by 'their neighbours' but some of the things ive heard, i just stared in disbelief.

before screaming 'RACIST' at the next person who says the word 'paki' ,ask yourself what it actually means to YOU, and WHY

its actually quite disturbing that people who use the words 'youre racist' when they hear the word 'paki' associate so much 'feeling' with the word, generally in a negative way TOWARDS pakistanis that they in no way want to be seen as one

incidently, the ONE actual pakistani i spoke to, once he said he was an actual pakistani, i asked him what he would say if someone called him an indian, he said hed tell them 'im a proper paki, actually from pakistan'

i wonder if any sort of study has ever been done for 'racism between middle easterners in western society' as form what ive heard in 2 days, theres a lot more to worry about than someone telling a few jokes, a fukin HELL of a lot more

 

[Him Her]

Sadly, racism is massively skewed by people who take offence when they have no idea what racism really is...

...they take offence at something that they believe someone MIGHT/SHOULD take offence at.

Bit like so-called feminists insisting every woman should have a career - erm, scuse me but some women might not want one - they have no choice then???

 

[ellie1998]

<<noun>
bigot - a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own
<snip>

As far as i'm concerned this includes the people that try to push their morality onto me. I feel the stuff is not racist.
by the above definition anybody that trys to tell me different is obviously intolerant of my opinions so to me is a bigot.

This also makes me a bigot as I am intolerant of their opinions.

I love semantics.

(don't get excited emerald I said semantics not semetics)

 

[Him Her]

I have given your opinion due consideration and find it invalid...

 

[hawkish]

IN MY OPINION

Little Pob hit the nail on the head a while back, the context of the "joke" is the issue for me not the descriptors in particular but the whole thing as a statement. For every joke about a thick paddy or a tight jock there is two about "pakis" being assaulted or being told to feck off home or whatever. The point is if you think that some crappy line about beating up a "paki" with a baseball bat qualifies as a joke because you find the notion humerous there is two things to consider. If the joke isnt funny then a bit of racist commentry wont save it and people reading it will clearly see your intolerance and cowardice for expressing yourself like and then hiding behind the farce that its all in good humour.

I dont mind the use of percieved racist words in jokes but the minimum I expect is at the very least a formulated clever funny joke, you know a hook, feed and punchline. however it seems that any old shit will do these days.

If its only a joke then why do the jokers get so uppity about defending themselves. You posted it - you get judged for it, if you dont like it then its not about other members ignoring you as this is a community. Stop threatening to stop posting your jokes and just do it if you cant take it.

Most importantly every racist joke endangers DW. Hosts all have a zero tollerance policy on racist content and can remove DW at will if they decide that there is a racist agenda. I would be gutted if DW fell because of these crap jokes that I know I could certainly live without.

 

[IANB]

IN MY OPINION

Little Pob hit the nail on the head a while back, the context of the "joke" is the issue for me not the descriptors in particular but the whole thing as a statement. For every joke about a thick paddy or a tight jock there is two about "pakis" being assaulted or being told to feck off home or whatever. The point is if you think that some crappy line about beating up a "paki" with a baseball bat qualifies as a joke because you find the notion humerous there is two things to consider. If the joke isnt funny then a bit of racist commentry wont save it and people reading it will clearly see your intolerance and cowardice for expressing yourself like and then hiding behind the farce that its all in good humour.

I dont mind the use of percieved racist words in jokes but the minimum I expect is at the very least a formulated clever funny joke, you know a hook, feed and punchline. however it seems that any old shit will do these days.

If its only a joke then why do the jokers get so uppity about defending themselves. You posted it - you get judged for it, if you dont like it then its not about other members ignoring you as this is a community. Stop threatening to stop posting your jokes and just do it if you cant take it.

Most importantly every racist joke endangers DW. Hosts all have a zero tollerance policy on racist content and can remove DW at will if they decide that there is a racist agenda. I would be gutted if DW fell because of these crap jokes that I know I could certainly live without.

Well its only took 34 pages for a sensible post that sums up the whole point. Well done Hawkish i doth my cap to you sir

 

[miggy]

That so called joker put the joke on here because he/she found it funny when they posted it.Once it was posted it was out of there hands.They do not ask for a judge and jury decision and off with there head. Just a plain and simple pass or ignore is quite sufficient.

 

[hamba]

Thanks for posting Hawkish - I very much agree with what you've said.

 

[hawkish]

That so called joker put the joke on here because he/she found it funny when they posted it.Once it was posted it was out of there hands.They do not ask for a judge and jury decision and off with there head. Just a plain and simple pass or ignore is quite sufficient.

Well that seems to be the general feeling to these issues however if this method were so simple the very existance of your reply somewhat contradicts your point

 

[Him Her]

IN MY OPINION

Little Pob hit the nail on the head a while back, the context of the "joke" is the issue for me not the descriptors in particular but the whole thing as a statement. For every joke about a thick paddy or a tight jock there is two about "pakis" being assaulted or being told to feck off home or whatever. The point is if you think that some crappy line about beating up a "paki" with a baseball bat qualifies as a joke because you find the notion humerous there is two things to consider. If the joke isnt funny then a bit of racist commentry wont save it and people reading it will clearly see your intolerance and cowardice for expressing yourself like and then hiding behind the farce that its all in good humour.

I dont mind the use of percieved racist words in jokes but the minimum I expect is at the very least a formulated clever funny joke, you know a hook, feed and punchline. however it seems that any old shit will do these days.

If its only a joke then why do the jokers get so uppity about defending themselves. You posted it - you get judged for it, if you dont like it then its not about other members ignoring you as this is a community. Stop threatening to stop posting your jokes and just do it if you cant take it.

Most importantly every racist joke endangers DW. Hosts all have a zero tollerance policy on racist content and can remove DW at will if they decide that there is a racist agenda. I would be gutted if DW fell because of these crap jokes that I know I could certainly live without.

Hmmm, the context IS the issue - convince me the OP condoned 'beating up a Paki' - would that be racist? Or would it be thuggery? If the joke isn't funny, why can't we just slag the teller off? Or ignore it?

How does it endanger DW? I have a lot worse on my servers and I don't get shut down????

Now, I can host whatever I like and you may not like it but I'll still host whatever I like - don't like it, don't read it. The Internet is about free speech...

...hoster got a problem? I'LL host DW for free, end of...