Question: Indians or Native Americans

[CrAz3D]

Even thought yall only know me the intertubes, yall know I'm not exactly PC. I'll joke about race/sex/nationality so long as the joke is funny.

Anyhow, I say indian, my gf says indian (but corrects herself to native american).

So which is it?

(1) Indians are from the country India.
(2) Native Americans aren't native, but their ancestors came across the Bering Straight, and are, therefore, not "native" in the sense that their blood line originated in the Americas.

I assert that neither term is politically or technically correct. "Native Americans" = MORE politically correct because...who knows, but it isn't technically correct. Further, while I acknowledge white people slaughtered indians, I reference history to show that tribes killed tribes. In other words, what "we" did is not any worse than what "they" did to each other.

Summarized Q: what do yall think of the history and terminology of american indians?

[iago]

I use the term 'aboriginals' or, on occasion, 'natives'. The term 'indian' has negative consequences for the native folks, and is normally confusing, so I avoid it.

[Joe]

Aboriginal is mostly only used in Canada and Australia/New Zealand.

Native American is the most politically correct, even if it's incorrect. It's like how you call any black guy an African American without caring where he came from, but if a white guy holds a dual citizenship and calls himself African/American, you can expect a shitstorm.

Indian is just plain incorrect.

Most of them who I've met have referred to themselves as "natives". In Wisconsin Dells there's a large population of them (the school's team name is Wisconsin Dells Chiefs) and they all say "natives" to refer to their collective, of sorts.

[CrAz3D]

iago, "native" is also technically incorrect, so why use it?

joe, I have black friends that (a) dont care, but (b) take offense to "african" american because they are puerto rican. Further, why is "indian" plan wrong? I agree that technically indian is wrong (i.e., those people arent from india), but they also are not NATIVE to america. Therefore, both terms are incorrect. I feel that if one wants to be PC/TC (i.e., technically correct), one should refer to the group of people by tribal membership.

Further, I know many "natives" that are from tribes/puebos (huge difference) in NM that are not from NM. And again, the ancestry precedes ANYONE from being in NM/the Americas. So what is the best to use? NA is the PC term to use, but again, it's actually WRONG.

When a person confronts me about my terminology I'll accept the person's assertion/correction so long as it is technically correct. However, Native American is technically wrong, so I cannot accept that. Either I'll be un-PC, or use a technically correct term (which I have no heard of).

[iago]

iago, "native" is also technically incorrect, so why use it?

"European" is technically incorrect, too - we all come from Africa (or Eden )

They've been here longer than anybody else, so it makes sense.

"Aboriginal" is the preferred term here.

Why don't you ask *them* what *they* want to be called? Declaring names better or worse should be their job, not yours.

[CrAz3D]

I agree with asking "them" what "they" want to be called. That said, I wont know until I ask them, SO I must refer to "them" as whateverthehell I feel like, I think.

[dark_drake]

"European" is technically incorrect, too - we all come from Africa (or Eden )

Oh please! Eden was in America. Probably Texas.

[Sidoh]

"European" is technically incorrect, too - we all come from Africa (or Eden )

Oh please! Eden was in America. Probably Texas.

Missouri, actually.

iago, "native" is also technically incorrect, so why use it?

"European" is technically incorrect, too - we all come from Africa (or Eden )

They've been here longer than anybody else, so it makes sense.

"Aboriginal" is the preferred term here.

Why don't you ask *them* what *they* want to be called? Declaring names better or worse should be their job, not yours.

I agree with asking "them" what "they" want to be called. That said, I wont know until I ask them, SO I must refer to "them" as whateverthehell I feel like, I think.

That's all well and good, but considering there are dozens of distinct peoples that only relate to each other because we have lumped them into the same group, you'll probably find no satisfaction in seeking a single unifying term.

[MyndFyre]

I have the solution.

Dot or feather?

[deadly7]

I have the solution.

Dot or feather?

lawls

As an Indian I dislike having Columbus' fail geography be the sole reason that people are called Indian. Then again, because of globalization, cultural lines are extremely blurred to the point where it makes little sense to still be differentiating. If we have to call them something though, I would opt with "native american" or "native".

[CrAz3D]

I have the solution.

Dot or feather?

Apparently that is also offensive. WTF?

/joking, kinda

I've met feather-indians and dot-indians that also ask/are amused by the question. However, gf in "multicultural bullshit" class has informed me that question is offensive.

[deadly7]

Apparently that is also offensive. WTF?

/joking, kinda

I've met feather-indians and dot-indians that also ask/are amused by the question. However, gf in "multicultural bullshit" class has informed me that question is offensive.

I love when white people try to convince me something should offend me.

[CrAz3D]

Someone suggested that "American Indian" is probably the best "anglo" general term to use. I guess that makes sense (except there people that refer to themselves as Indian-America . . . just like Mexican-Americans).

[iago]

Next can we talk about whether it's okay to say 'gay', 'fag', 'queer', etc etc?

[CrAz3D]

I use the term homosexual or gay (but gay "offends" me because ... something about calling someone "happy").

That said, yeah, I do lol when people get offended when a 3rd person says "that's gay" in a negative tone.

[iago]

I use the term homosexual or gay (but gay "offends" me because ... something about calling someone "happy").

That said, yeah, I do lol when people get offended when a 3rd person says "that's gay" in a negative tone.

I find it confusing when somebody uses "gay" negativelyh


I use whichever word fits the situation best, though, which occasionally is "fag". But I always mean it in the nicest (and usually most ironic) way possible.

[Joe]

I don't think "gay" is offensive. I use it in a derogatory meaning (which I'm trying not to), but when you use it to describe a dude who likes dudes, I don't think it's offensive.

For example, my girlfriend and I have a mutual friend Jim. I saw a guy writing on his Facebook wall and calling him "babe", and I said to her "I think Jim is gay."

I think the difference between "gay" and "homosexual" is like the difference between "shit" and "feces". One is totally proper and has only one meaning, and the other one has multiple meanings but is pretty understood and more commonly used.
</thesis-paper>

[Hitmen]

I use whichever word fits the situation best, though, which occasionally is "fag". But I always mean it in the nicest (and usually most ironic) way possible.

I think louis ck has the best answer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IFloXOuLgA

[CrAz3D]

Joe, it's gay used in negative context that offends. Like..."that is unfortunate/that is gay" kinda thing.

[Blaze]

In my head, there's two categories of derogatory words: ones that you can say in public conversation that almost everybody won't care about, and ones that people are more likely to care about.  Ones that you can include things like 'stupid', 'lame' or 'gyp', while others are things like 'nigger' or 'jew'.

I'm unsure where I'd place 'gay' or 'faggot' in here, but I'm leaning towards gay being a less hostile word than faggot, but still possibly offensive (depending on usage) to go into second category.  With that said, I use it all the time, and very rarely am I meaning it in a derogatory fashion.

Both of these are offensive to some people, but the former have been dissociated with their offensive meanings and are used more generally to represent negative things in general.  When you say something is lame, you're obviously not actively attacking the crippled, but the opposite is considered for the other category.

I think what it comes down to is people are stupid and only dislike negativity if it's trendy to do so, or if it affects them.

Bonus points if you got the joke in the last sentence.

[while1]

That said, yeah, I do lol when people get offended when a 3rd person says "that's gay" in a negative tone.

lol, yeah, I find it amusing when Ender gets uptight over me using it to describe something negatively.

[Joe]

I'm unsure where I'd place 'gay' or 'faggot' in here, but I'm leaning towards gay being a less hostile word than faggot,

Yeah, that struck me as kind of odd. iago, why would you prefer to be called a fag over being called gay? It seems like the more offensive word to me. In my experience it has always been a derogatory term for a homosexual, or a bundle of sticks (usually intending to make a pun off gay people). *shrug*

EDIT -
Oh, I read it wrong. I thought he meant he preferred it, not that it's sometimes most appropriate.

[iago]

I'm unsure where I'd place 'gay' or 'faggot' in here, but I'm leaning towards gay being a less hostile word than faggot,

Yeah, that struck me as kind of odd. iago, why would you prefer to be called a fag over being called gay? It seems like the more offensive word to me. In my experience it has always been a derogatory term for a homosexual, or a bundle of sticks (usually intending to make a pun off gay people). *shrug*

EDIT -
Oh, I read it wrong. I thought he meant he preferred it, not that it's sometimes most appropriate.

Yeah, it's sometimes funnier is all.

[CrAz3D]

What about queer? I've notice that when straight people say it, it's offensive, but when homosexual people say it, it's fine. Sorta like nigga/nigger and white people v. black people. Wut up wit dat?

[iago]

What about queer? I've notice that when straight people say it, it's offensive, but when homosexual people say it, it's fine. Sorta like nigga/nigger and white people v. black people. Wut up wit dat?

It all depends on context. "Fucking queer!" vs "I'm a queer" - same goes for most terms for most homosexual (and other commonly taboo words)

In reality, though, the problem with the word 'queer' is that it's broad. It refers to any person who's gay/lesbian/bisexual/pansexual/transgender/assexual/heteroflexible/bi-curious/adventurous/kinky/etc.etc.etc. It doesn't even necessarily apply to homosexual preferences - if you're a heterosexual whose leather play bothers the kids upstairs, 'queer' could be used to describe you.

Anybody who doesn't fit into the strict 'straight' and 'vanilla' categories could be considered 'queer'. It's kind of a catch all.

[CrAz3D]

I've always taken queer to mean "not the norm," which would include any of the above examples.

What about "That person is (a?) queer." or "That person seems queer." <- how legit does that sound? It seems it'd be more "technically" correct because one would be expressing the observation of non-normalcy in a general enough way that it could be, as you said, a "catch all" phrase. hmm. Sort of like the indian situation, where you dont know what tribe, but need to make a more specific observation than "person."

People are interesting.

[iago]

I've always taken queer to mean "not the norm," which would include any of the above examples.

What about "That person is (a?) queer." or "That person seems queer." <- how legit does that sound? It seems it'd be more "technically" correct because one would be expressing the observation of non-normalcy in a general enough way that it could be, as you said, a "catch all" phrase. hmm. Sort of like the indian situation, where you dont know what tribe, but need to make a more specific observation than "person."

People are interesting.

I'd stick with 'weirdo'. Nobody gets offended by that.

(that's an inside joke that nobody here would 'get' - my friend got into a lot of trouble for using the word 'weirdo' in a talk )

[CrAz3D]

In a talk? A presentation?

[iago]

Yeah, a presentation.

"got in trouble" = somebody in the audience was offended and interrupted the talk for 5 minutes to argue about it.

[Blaze]

If someone got upset for the use of 'weirdo', they're just being stupidly oversensitive.  I would go out of my way to inject it into more sentences, if anything.

[CrAz3D]

If someone got upset for the use of 'weirdo', they're just being stupidly oversensitive.  I would go out of my way to inject it into more sentences, if anything.

I think it calls for mocking the person for the next 3 years.

[Hitmen]

If someone got upset for the use of 'weirdo', they're probably a complete fucking weirdo.

fixed

[MyndFyre]

So, did we get the dot or feather question answered that was originally asked, before iago hijacked the thread with his stupid gay-rights (note that I included the hyphen to preclude the notion that it was using one of his definitions)?

[iago]

So, did we get the dot or feather question answered that was originally asked, before iago hijacked the thread with his stupid gay-rights (note that I included the hyphen to preclude the notion that it was using one of his definitions)?

"gay-rights" in that context shouldn't be hyphenated!

Also, there's no answer to the original question, nor is there an answer to the gay question. The point is, it's different for everybody and normally about context.

[CrAz3D]

I dunno. I asked my gf once (she was referring to indian something, so I asked "dot or feather?"), and she said that was offensive. I guess in her line of work it'd be offensive (psychology...trying to make everyone feel un-judged and whatnot), but IRL, I think the question isnt all that offensive.

I have the solution.

Dot or feather?

Apparently that is also offensive. WTF?

/joking, kinda

I've met feather-indians and dot-indians that also ask/are amused by the question. However, gf in "multicultural bullshit" class has informed me that question is offensive.

[deadly7]

I dunno. I asked my gf once (she was referring to indian something, so I asked "dot or feather?"), and she said that was offensive. I guess in her line of work it'd be offensive (psychology...trying to make everyone feel un-judged and whatnot), but IRL, I think the question isnt all that offensive.

Tell your girlfriend:

I love when white people try to convince me something should offend me.

And then see how utterly indignant she gets as a white person. I guarantee mad luls will ensue.



Note: this may or may not have been based on previous experiences.

[CrAz3D]

deadly, forgive me, but are you indian? I dont generally know/recall what races/ethnicities (I dont know the difference) everyone here is, but I seem to recall dot-Indian.

My take on life is "fuck people." If I mean well and do well, but someone takes offense with something I innocently say, fuck 'em. She's finally realized that. She met a 50 yr old mexican dude I'm friends with that talks ALL SORTS of shit about wetbacks. It was actually pretty shocking to her.

For her multicultural class she had to go do something "outside of her comfort zone." Her friend went to a TTU College Republicans meeting. That's bullshit. My gf said she doesnt know of anything that'd make her feel uncomfortable, and then I reminded her of my "colored" (i.e., hispanic) friends that hate so much on "wetbacks."

Note: wetbacks are the illegals that are a drain on society (commit crimes, use food stamps, etc). They are very different than hispanic/mexican folks. (that is from my friends of mexican decent...1st generation decent, or crossed the border legally themselves).



My group of friends is rather strange. We're all "racist," but it's more about using racist terms to belittle people of a race that are shitty citizens (e.g., wetbacks, niggers, rednecks, etc). all offensive terms that are based on race, but we use those terms "against" the less-awesome people of that race. I like that my group of friends consists of white folks, black folks, mexican folks, and asian folks; but again, we're all "racist" against shitty people.

[iago]

By taking a segregated group of people and using a specific slur (or whatever you want to call it) to refer to them, you're making them even more segregated and making it even less likely that they'll eventually be integrated into society. That's why I'm against using certain slurs.

I will stand by the fact that "words don't matter, context does" - but when the context is to call out a group that you don't like, then it's a Bad Thing.

[Sidoh]

By taking a segregated group of people and using a specific slur (or whatever you want to call it) to refer to them, you're making them even more segregated and making it even less likely that they'll eventually be integrated into society. That's why I'm against using certain slurs.

I will stand by the fact that "words don't matter, context does" - but when the context is to call out a group that you don't like, then it's a Bad Thing.

I don't agree with your analysis.  I think it's the offense people take to a racial slur that's to blame, not the slur itself.

There's no intrinsic derogatory value in a word; its offensiveness is arbitrary.

People need to stop being so fucking sensitive.  I find it hilarious that the only people that seem to care about racial slurs are white people.  Asians crack asian jokes.  My girlfriend thought this T-shirt was absolutely hilarious and wanted to buy one:



It's stupid.  Stop getting offended for people.  It's their business, not yours.

[deadly7]

I don't agree with your analysis.  I think it's the offense people take to a racial slur that's to blame, not the slur itself.

There's no intrinsic derogatory value in a word; its offensiveness is arbitrary.

People need to stop being so fucking sensitive.  I find it hilarious that the only people that seem to care about racial slurs are white people.  Asians crack asian jokes.  My girlfriend thought this T-shirt was absolutely hilarious and wanted to buy one:

[img]http://guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/two_wongs_tshirt.jpg[/url]

It's stupid.  Stop getting offended for people.  It's their business, not yours.

I love when white people try to convince me something should offend me.

keke.

deadly, forgive me, but are you indian? I dont generally know/recall what races/ethnicities (I dont know the difference) everyone here is, but I seem to recall dot-Indian.

Yeah. I'm Tony Singh from Dell Tech Support. Perhaps you've called me? I try to minimize my accent; how am I doing?

[iago]

By taking a segregated group of people and using a specific slur (or whatever you want to call it) to refer to them, you're making them even more segregated and making it even less likely that they'll eventually be integrated into society. That's why I'm against using certain slurs.

I will stand by the fact that "words don't matter, context does" - but when the context is to call out a group that you don't like, then it's a Bad Thing.

I don't agree with your analysis.  I think it's the offense people take to a racial slur that's to blame, not the slur itself.

There's no intrinsic derogatory value in a word; its offensiveness is arbitrary.

People need to stop being so fucking sensitive.  I find it hilarious that the only people that seem to care about racial slurs are white people.  Asians crack asian jokes.  My girlfriend thought this T-shirt was absolutely hilarious and wanted to buy one:



It's stupid.  Stop getting offended for people.  It's their business, not yours.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the words intrinsically - that's what I've been more or less saying this whole thread - the problem is when you use a slur to describe a segregated demographic you don't like. Grouping them all together under "wetbacks" or "indians" or "fags" or whatever it happens to be just further segregates them and makes the integration more difficult. Even using words that aren't typically considered slurs ("natives" or "the gays") can have the same effect if used that way. It's not the words themselves, but the attitudes and how they're being used.