[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Pyramidologist)
.

I've already told you why many women straighten their hair:

• Considerably more styling options.
• Easier to manage.

In respect to men, short hair looks more professional than long hair and again, ease of management plays a major role. Having to comb through matted, frizzy hair every morning or spending hours styling it into plaits or canerows, for example, is painful and time-consuming, respectively.

In respect to skin lightening, what about tanning? The only place where paleness is admired is in the East, where it is associated with high status because it means the person has not been working outside. What about lip augmentation? Breast enlargement? Buttock augmentation? All you're doing is making a very facile association fallacy and generalisation:

1. Premise A is a B
2. Premise A is also a C
3. Therefore, all Bs are Cs.

Applied:

1. Some 'black' people (B) straighten their hair (A)
2. Some 'white' people (C) have straight hair (A)
3. Therefore, all (I don't even know how you arrived at this quantifier from 'some') 'black' people (B) are trying to look like 'white' people (C)

I also find it odd that you attribute straight hair to 'white' people when East Asians also have straight hair.

[SubAtomic]

(Original post by Ice Constricter)
I don't give a **** about what you say or don't say with your friends. Thats beside the point. With your friends you all know each others boundaries. Hell I regularly call my Muslim friend a terrorist piece of **** and no offence is taken cause we're friends and he knows I'm just messing.

But with strangers you aren't sure when you push boundaries because no line has been drawn since they're a total stranger, making you unaware when you cross that line. Hell some people are so highly strung you can just smile at them and it'll end up back firing on you because they think you're taking the piss.

So basically all I'm saying is that most people will interpret it as racist. I mean there are so many insults you could throw at someone, why bring their race into it. Even if you aren't racist it'll definitely seem as if you are.

Ok I see what you are getting at, yes, it would only be uttered amongst friends really. I would never say it to a stranger, don't know why you thought that is what I was saying, doubtful I would even say it to a friend, bit cringe for me are insults like that, might call em a f^&*£"g c^%t but that'd be all. Certainly wouldn't call any of my friends terrorists.

Like I said things can get said in the heat of the moment and I might utter it myself if someone epically pissed me off, but knowing me if I did utter something like that I would probably feel bad when I'd calmed. Not really in my nature. When someone black is telling you that alleged Terry slur on Ferdinand is observation not racist then you must understand how everyone has a different opinion.

But still, calm down, because I don't care what you say and do with your friends either.

[cl_steele]

(Original post by TRS-T)
I think it is pretty dumb how white people have to say 'the N word'

They should be allowed to say '******' as long as they aren't saying it in a derogatory way.

You don't hear grown adults saying 'the F word' and 'the S word'

yes you do?:s

[DalePie]

(Original post by Skill)
But I'm going to use another example. Emmanuel Frimpong of Arsenal posted 'scum yid' to a Spurs supporter sometime this week. This is a racist term. I heard a Jew say that it is the equivalent of saying 'Nig army'. This isn't even to do with white people so no slavery excuses this time.

Double standards, some (Making sure that you know I am not talking in general) black people are very aware of pushing an anti black race agenda yet are some of the most homophobic/sexist people going. They are also just as likely to be racist to another minority group.

To be fair though, it's not just black people who do this. Black, white, muslim, christian, gay, lesbian whatever. There are examples of double standards everywhere when it comes to equality. It's a bit sad .

(Original post by Skill)
I don't get why no black footballers are appauled at that comment? They always throw out racism accusations but when one of their own give it out it'll just be ignored.

See above comment for reason.

Note: I think your being a little over the top with the idea that "All these black players are making accusations". There is a particular problem with football and if you watched the BBC documentary this week you will have noticed that no black players where willing to speak out. Football is definately racist and whole heartedly homophobic even in the modern era.

(Original post by Skill)
You can't say that Frimpong has a right to say yid as Spurs supporters openly use that term. I mean, Jay Z and Kanye West just released a song called '****** in paris'. Does that mean anyone who isn't black is allowed to call black people *******?

Kinda, in the same way I call some of my gay friends faggots lol! If you are one then you can use that term! IT'S DA RULEZ!

(Original post by Skill)
If that doesn't provide you with the search results put 'black people' in the search engine. They have groups like 'black professionals' 'black singles' 'black entreprenuers' 'black women'.

If your in a minority group, you will tend to seek out those like you. Hence why we have LGBT societies, Black societies and others minority rep groups at university.

It's a bit like those people who argue why there is no "Straight Pride Day". What you have to remember is EVERYDAY is stright pride day. Do you understand what I'm getting at? Being white is a relatively easy thing, being black, gay, muslim or whatever minority you want will throw up issues with the way you and society interact.

Hope that makes sense

[SubAtomic]

(Original post by DalePie)
If you are one then you can use that term!

Kinda diffuses the offensiveness. But some would still be a bit cringe if they overheard negative words that are used against their group. Like some people don't like the c**t word even though it doesn't really apply to a group, other than c**ts of course.

[Pyramidologist]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
I've already told you why many women straighten their hair:

• Considerably more styling options.
• Easier to manage.

In respect to men, short hair looks more professional than long hair and again, ease of management plays a major role. Having to comb through matted, frizzy hair every morning or spending hours styling it into plaits or canerows, for example, is painful and time-consuming, respectively.

In respect to skin lightening, what about tanning? The only place where paleness is admired is in the East, where it is associated with high status because it means the person has not been working outside. What about lip augmentation? Breast enlargement? Buttock augmentation? All you're doing is making a very facile association fallacy and generalisation:

1. Premise A is a B
2. Premise A is also a C
3. Therefore, all Bs are Cs.

Applied:

1. Some 'black' people (B) straighten their hair (A)
2. Some 'white' people (C) have straight hair (A)
3. Therefore, all (I don't even know how you arrived at this quantifier from 'some') 'black' people (B) are trying to look like 'white' people (C)

I also find it odd that you attribute straight hair to 'white' people when East Asians also have straight hair.

My post was about aesthetics. If you look at studies you will see there is an underlying aesthetic 'norm' or idealized phenotype among all races despite different in-group racial preferences. This aesthetic 'norm' among all races is a thin nose and straight hair. This puts Negroids (''Blacks'') always at the bottom, as they are wide nosed and nappy (afro) haired. This is why the ''Black'' community has a self-hatred crisis over their natural hair texture. In ebonics, ''good hair'' means the hair white women have and ''Blacks'' crave.

Watch the documentary Good Hair by Chris Rock.

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Pyramidologist)
My post was about aesthetics. If you look at studies you will see there is an underlying aesthetic 'norm' or idealized phenotype among all races despite different in-group racial preferences. This aesthetic 'norm' among all races is a thin nose and straight hair. This puts Negroids (''Blacks'') always at the bottom, as they are wide nosed and nappy (afro) haired. This is why the ''Black'' community has a self-hatred crisis over their natural hair texture. In ebonics, ''good hair'' means the hair white women have and ''Blacks'' crave.

Evidence?

I fail to see the value of homogenising billions of people despite the individualised nature of aesthetic preferences. Do the Himba people desire pale skin and thin noses?

As I said, this is an association fallacy.

Watch the documentary Good Hair by Chris Rock.

Says a lot when you acquire your information from a comedian—very scientific, globally representative and accurate.

[Pyramidologist]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
Evidence?

I fail to see the value of homogenising billions of people despite the individualised nature of aesthetic preferences. Do the Himba people desire pale skin and thin noses?

As I said, this is an association fallacy. Says a lot when you acquire your information from a comedian—very scientific, globally representative and accurate.

Aesthetic preferences are not individual. If you look at that documentary you would realise the following -

Rock delves into the $9 billion black hair industry, and visits such places as beauty salons, barbershops, hair styling conventions and scientific laboratories

Can you explain why there is a $9 billion dollar industry among ''Blacks'' in America to artificially straighten their hair? Its because ''Blacks'' know straight hair is an aesthetic norm and they are trying to modify their natural racial phenotype into the idealized aesthetic - which is the polar opposite of the Negroid or ''Black'' physiognomy. The true Negroid phenotype is universally looked down upon, even ''Blacks'' themselves despise their natural features like nappy hair. Such self-hatred is not manifested in any other race.

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Pyramidologist)
Aesthetic preferences are not individual. If you look at that documentary you would realise the following -

Are you under the impression that:

• every 'black' individual straightens their hair, and
• not a single person desires natural hair?

Can you explain why there is a $9 billion dollar industry among ''Blacks'' in America to artificially straighten their hair? Its because ''Blacks'' know straight hair is an aesthetic norm and they are trying to modify their natural racial phenotype into the idealized aesthetic - which is the polar opposite of the Negroid or ''Black'' physiognomy. The true Negroid phenotype is universally looked down upon, even ''Blacks'' themselves despise their natural features like nappy hair. Such self-hatred is not manifested in any other race.

...I don't understand how you've missed my explanation on two occasions:

• Considerably more styling options.
• Easier to manage.

But even for the individuals who do aspire to emulate the localised (don't forget this—the Himba people, for example, do not associate pale skin or thin noses with beauty) archetype of beauty, it's not particularly unreasonable to expect that having these 'standards' of beauty portrayed everywhere will create a degree of self-consciousness amongst its viewers. This is why the plastic surgery and tanning industries are so prodigious.

So very thin lips are seen as beautiful? People aspire to have small breasts and an inconspicuous bottom? Everyone wants to be as pale as possible?

Stop making the association fallacy and let's not forget this is an unscientific documentary made by a comedian who interviewed a very limited and unrepresentative portion of the global 'black' population.

[Pankeu]

(Original post by pedmond)
Just pointing someone out in a crowd (although I can't imagine why that would be needed) Could be used by paramedics and police to describe victims or suspects to positive i.d them but now its called IC Codes to get past that. Every race has a code. That's the only reason I cant give for that one. It seemed like a more reasonable argument in my head.

"You black bastard," - is that the context you're trying to argue with? Let's not get carried away here. Using his race in an insult, context wise, is racist.

[pedmond]

(Original post by Pankeu)
"You black bastard," - is that the context you're trying to argue with? Let's not get carried away here. Using his race in an insult, context wise, is racist.

It wasn't no and I dont quite get how we went from being identified by the authorities to blatant insulting.

Its a fact that asian and black men in certain age groups have a much higher risk of getting diabetes. This information would be of great value to a specialist doctor providing advice from a report or on the phone to the patients doctor. Using black here is simply to describe the person, that's where I hate stigma over using the term black because someone is scared they could be accused of being "racist"

But well done you are right saying "You Black Bastard" is pretty offensive. Congrats

[Pankeu]

(Original post by pedmond)
It wasn't no and I dont quite get how we went from being identified by the authorities to blatant insulting.

Its a fact that asian and black men in certain age groups have a much higher risk of getting diabetes. This information would be of great value to a specialist doctor providing advice from a report or on the phone to the patients doctor. Using black here is simply to describe the person, that's where I hate stigma over using the term black because someone is scared they could be accused of being "racist"

But well done you are right saying "You Black Bastard" is pretty offensive. Congrats

Well, the whole thread is about racism in football/John Terry, so I don't know how that's irrelevant.

Well, yes, if that kind of stuff is scientifically backed up, then cool. Like fair skinned people get sunburn easily than a dark skinned person because of melanin and something to do with UV rays, I forget. xD

But the point stands; it's always context dependent, whether the person meant it as an insult or not and other contributing factors, etc.

[pedmond]

(Original post by Pankeu)
Well, the whole thread is about racism in football/John Terry, so I don't know how that's irrelevant.

Its irrelevant because what I said in the post you quoted mentioned absolutely nothing about insulting someone in that way. I gave an example of when it would be useful.

But yes always in context. I took this for granted when I originally posted.

[Pankeu]

(Original post by pedmond)
Its irrelevant because what I said in the post you quoted mentioned absolutely nothing about insulting someone in that way. I gave an example of when it would be useful.

But yes always in context. I took this for granted when I originally posted.

Glad that we agree on something. ^^

[Menefrego88]

(Original post by lawsonfan)
That was because of Martin Luther King, Little Rock High School, little Linda brown etc. All of these events contributed towards the ending of the Jim Crow Laws. Martin Luther King is noted for essentially gaining the Civil Rights Act & Voting Rights Act for black Americans. The Birmingham riots in 1965 led after the police attacked peaceful marchers led by Martin resulted in city officials de-segregating the city a few days later after meeting with Martin. The 1963 Washington March & march in Selma, Alabama also resulted in the acts of 1964 and 1965. While it was White Americans in powerful positions who brought down the laws it was only initiated after continuous fights of struggle from black Americans.

Please stop generalising black people too. As for affirmative action, I feel as if some people use that as an excuse. How do you know that a black person simply succeeded because they did well academically, why must it always be due to affirmative action? It is as if you are suggesting that it is implausible for a black person to actually have perfect requirements for the job or a great academic record.

Black people have more oppurtunities in the world now than anyone else. O I wait for you to bring up the slave trade and about evil whiteman.

[Jemine1]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
Are you under the impression that:

• every 'black' individual straightens their hair, and
• not a single person desires natural hair?

...I don't understand how you've missed my explanation on two occasions:

• Considerably more styling options.
• Easier to manage.

But even for the individuals who do aspire to emulate the localised (don't forget this—the Himba people, for example, do not associate pale skin or thin noses with beauty) archetype of beauty, it's not particularly unreasonable to expect that having these 'standards' of beauty portrayed everywhere will create a degree of self-consciousness amongst its viewers. This is why the plastic surgery and tanning industries are so prodigious.

So very thin lips are seen as beautiful? People aspire to have small breasts and an inconspicuous bottom? Everyone wants to be as pale as possible?

Stop making the association fallacy and let's not forget this is an unscientific documentary made by a comedian who interviewed a very limited and unrepresentative portion of the global 'black' population.

Oh my goodness, this a million times over. Because some black people relax their hair, black people now hate their features and are desperate to look white? Is the tanning industry becoming so massive because white women are having an identity crisis and are desperate to "not look white"? Are the white women who get rhinoplasties, (because the majority of recipients of rhinoplasties, are white. Of course, there is the significant population difference, but nonetheless, there are white people changing their noses)doing so, to "erase" their whiteness?
I love how the poster kept talking about an "identity crisis", but then could only mention hair and wide noses, surveyed from black people in the Western World. If black people really had an innate self hatred, they would be trying to get rid of ALL "apparent" black features. Not just the two that the poster could find to mention.
The "aesthetic norm" among all races is straight hair and a thin nose? Even if that was the case (and it isn't. The poster has very limited knowledge regarding this) what about the white people with curly hair? Or the white people with thick noses? Where did the poster get this rubbish from? So the Western European aesthetic norm, now applies everywhere?

[Jemine1]

(Original post by Pyramidologist)
Aesthetic preferences are not individual. If you look at that documentary you would realise the following -



Can you explain why there is a $9 billion dollar industry among ''Blacks'' in America to artificially straighten their hair? Its because ''Blacks'' know straight hair is an aesthetic norm and they are trying to modify their natural racial phenotype into the idealized aesthetic - which is the polar opposite of the Negroid or ''Black'' physiognomy. The true Negroid phenotype is universally looked down upon, even ''Blacks'' themselves despise their natural features like nappy hair. Such self-hatred is not manifested in any other race.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...rocedures.html
Can you explain why 1 in 5 woman in South Korea has had plastic surgery, eyelid surgery being the most popular?
Who knows how many white women are now tanning?
In Britain alone, there is a £100 million breast implant industry. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...y-6283998.html
Every race has some people that want to change themselves. Each individual race can be accused of having their own "identity crisis" based on rubbish like that.

[Jadrian]

You will find that most black people keep their hair cropped short or straightened because it makes it easier to manage.
I don't like having to put a lot of products in my hair because they often makes it kinda greasy, but it can quite literally be a pain to comb through if I don't, so I keep it short. It's not because I hate my hair or that I'm ashamed of it.. You're making massive assumptions.
However, white standards of beauty saturate the media and I think it has an effect on a lot of cultures in general, so I guess I can see where you are coming from. (Look up asians using eye-glue to change the appearance of their eyelids.)

I could be daft an easily say tanning is white people hating themselves but I don't, because I'm not an idiot, interact with white people and feel I understand their actions somewhat.

[Skill]

(Original post by Ice Constricter)
And why does everyone still take this 'Skill' guy seriously? Essentially a racist guy who trolls on student forums pretending to be a girl while starting retarded threads like this!

be careful what you say ..

[UniOfLife]

On the question of whether "Yid" is offensive or not, the argument seems to boil down to "Spurs fans call themselves that". This is true. However, for those who watched the pre-Euros programme on racism in football (can't remember the name now but it wasn't the Panorama one), David Baddiel explained that the vast majority of Spurs fans are not Jewish. As such they don't really have the right to "reclaim" the offensive word.

Besides, even if it were true it could still be racist. I'm Jewish and not surprisingly I refer to myself as a Jew. But when I'm walking down a street and someone shouts "Jew" at me, it isn't not racist because they use the same word I use to describe myself.

On the other hand, because Spurs fans do (rightly or wrongly) refer to themselves as Yids, it is quite likely that many people simply aren't aware of the history of the word and think it is a simple harmless nickname for Spurs fans. In this case it is hardly racist to use the word.