283 réponses à ce sujet

[syllogi]

EntropicAngel wrote...

syllogi wrote...

You are not an animal with a pedigree.  You are multi-racial, and I don't care if you think it sounds cooler, or you think you're being edgy and "un-PC" by using the term "half-breed" for anyone with mixed heritage...if you want to be taken seriously, stop trying to be offensive on purpose.

There are plenty of "white" people who have very diverse ethnic backgrounds, but you don't call them a derogatory term that stems from animal breeding, right?  So quit it.

I am not trying to be edgy: my opinions are "edgy" enough. I'm not trying to be offensive. Why do you take offense at the term?

It's not that it sounds cooler or anything. I simply find it quite accurate.

I will agree that I'm being non-PC. But, as I've pointed out before, non-PC and offensive are two different things. I'm hoping to get people to see that.

First off, historically, it's inaccurate.  Half-breed has only been used to describe Native-Americans mixed with European heritage.  You appear to be talking about anyone who is called "black" but has mixed heritage.  Secondly, as I already said, it's an animal breeding term.  Are you, in fact, a schnoodle?  No?  Then why aren't you offended by the idea that anyone with any drop of African DNA should be labeled in the same way as animals? 

[Xilizhra]

It's funny that you mention animal breeding, because the reason I use it is because of genetics. There are certain features that, to my knowledge (and someone, please, prove me wrong if I am wrong), don't occur in pure blacks--like smooth hair. I use half-breed because genetically, we really can't be considered black, or white, or whatever. We have features distinct to more than one race.

"Colored" is also technically accurate, but also not used due to historically offensive connotations. This is similar. I'm uncertain why you can't quite get this.

[Xilizhra]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

"Colored" is also technically accurate, but also not used due to historically offensive connotations. This is similar. I'm uncertain why you can't quite get this.

Not really, since black is the absence of color. It's kind of a backwards term.

Though I will agree about it being historically offensive. Though it really isn't all that offensive--the point of view that causes one to use the word might be considered more offensive than the word itself (an important distinction--some words like curse words are known as offensive for what they are, not because of the mindset of those that use them).

Pigmentationally speaking, white is the absence of color. Black is the absence of light.

And I believe this is one where its offensiveness is determined by whether a group is offended by it. Which it appears to be.

[David Gaider]

Sorry, but we're not really talking about DA anymore, are we? The thread has apparently devolved into a discussion of semantics-- time to take it elsewhere, please.