Is "black hole" a racially insensitive term?

BPSCG said:
Well, I would argue that he hasn't been a national laughingstock until this week. But then we'd be arguing simply over a matter of degree, not kind.
Click to expand...

True. He's kind of like our own regional Jackson or Sharpton. Much hay has been made in the local media of his "Wiley" monicker since so many of his plans blow up in his face ala Mr. W. E. Coyote. Rasankey's actions during the Boy Scout bathouse bruhaha - ironically during a point where we were really worried about mosquito bourne West Nile Virus - put the "bat" in ◊◊◊◊◊◊* crazy IMO.

Sad.. I moved her after folks like J. Erik Jonsson had stepped down from public service. :)
 
Radrook said:
How about black magic vs white magic? Blackmail? Blackened reputation? Black Widow Spider! Black sheep? Black death? Blackball? Black comedy? Black market? Even black Africans raised on that continent tend to use the term "black" when referring to negative things. So are they being racist?
Click to expand...


I vote that we just stop calling people "black." That would eliminate the "it's racist to call negative things black because we also refer to some people as black" arguments. Plus, then we'd only have to change one term ("black people") instead of fretting over the possible racial connotations of hundreds of terms ("black magic," "black market," etc.

See, I'm all about efficiency.
 
ARubberChickenWithAPulley said:
I vote that we just stop calling people "black." That would eliminate the "it's racist to call negative things black because we also refer to some people as black" arguments. Plus, then we'd only have to change one term ("black people") instead of fretting over the possible racial connotations of hundreds of terms ("black magic," "black market," etc.

See, I'm all about efficiency.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't, I had an awkward few minutes doing just that once...

I have never referred to myself as white, favoring from childhood the more descriptive "pinkish-grey" as a term. This seems to annoy people, especially on forms. What caused the real problem however was my suggestion our Black Students Association could be called "very dark brown to coffee coloured with some olive and a variety of other beautiful and interesting shades" Students Association. This had me denounced as a racist, albeit for only a few minutes before the students in question burst out laughing and bought me a few drinks. THey seemed genuinely ok about it, and rather amused, but only because osme of them knew me well and knew I was completely in to the group, just the name bothered me.

The suggestion "Coloured" did not help - I'm coloured as well, coloured kind of pinkish as I pointed out.

I loathe racism - but VERY few people approximate black or white. And as to black holes, well they marked by are an absence of light escaping, which is black surely?

I'm really good at offending people, not least by my utter indifference to peoples pigmentation. Be proud of your culture or race or ancestry if you want, as they are real things, and celebrate them definitely - but why would your pigmentation bother me any more than the colour you paint your living room?

I just don't get it.
cj x
 
cj.23 said:
....but why would your pigmentation bother me any more than the colour you paint your living room?

I just don't get it.
cj x
Click to expand...

If indeed it were merely about skin pigmentation then it would certainly be puzzling. But it unfortunately involves much more than mere skin pigmentation. In the USA, skin pigmentation is simply a means to conveniently identify individuals as being or not being members of certain groups which have acquired certain real or imagined reputations and are to be either accepted, tolerated or avoided.

In order to make this niching process simple, a descriptive term is chosen and all within certain preconceived parameters are identified as such. Take Hispanics for example. We all know that Latinos are not a race but are composed of Blacks, whites, Native Americans, and all the variations in between. Yet Obama unabashedly refers to them as Browns. This course excludes tens of millions of Latinos who simply don't fit that description and are unable to identify with it. Does it matter? Of course not. As long as the term functions as an identifier in order to nich and treat accordingly then it is useful to the user and accuracy or even the feelings of the nitched become conveniently irrelevant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=white+hispanics&go=Go

http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/06-3NRfall/p64-0603-etzioni.html
 
Last edited:
Sure, and as I said, ethnicity, culture, nationality, history, all are legitimate ways for people to self identify if they so desire, and all worthy of celebration. Baseball fans self identify by their team, wargamers by their hobby, etc, etc.

This Latino thing utterly confuses me (see previous posts). I find the idea of grouping people by something that nebulous really odd, but if people want to self identify as that, good for them, and I hope they find it useful and a proud source of identity. I'm just unsure about how useful that is, as I think you are, if utilized by a government or corporation, and resent the idea of imposing such category descriptions on people.

cj x
 
cj.23 said:
I wouldn't, I had an awkward few minutes doing just that once...

I have never referred to myself as white, favoring from childhood the more descriptive "pinkish-grey" as a term. This seems to annoy people, especially on forms. What caused the real problem however was my suggestion our Black Students Association could be called "very dark brown to coffee coloured with some olive and a variety of other beautiful and interesting shades" Students Association. This had me denounced as a racist, albeit for only a few minutes before the students in question burst out laughing and bought me a few drinks. THey seemed genuinely ok about it, and rather amused, but only because osme of them knew me well and knew I was completely in to the group, just the name bothered me.

The suggestion "Coloured" did not help - I'm coloured as well, coloured kind of pinkish as I pointed out.

I loathe racism - but VERY few people approximate black or white. And as to black holes, well they marked by are an absence of light escaping, which is black surely?

I'm really good at offending people, not least by my utter indifference to peoples pigmentation. Be proud of your culture or race or ancestry if you want, as they are real things, and celebrate them definitely - but why would your pigmentation bother me any more than the colour you paint your living room?

I just don't get it.
cj x
Click to expand...
I keep thinking of the George Wallace (the comedian, not the politician) stuff:
(Paraphrased, from memory):"You get up in the morning-You're pink. You stay in the sun or get mad-You're red. You get scared-you turn white.
I get up in the morning, I'm black. I get mad-I'm black. I stay in the sun-I'm black. I get scared-I'm black.
And you call ME Colored?"
Or something like that

ETA: A classified program is known as a "Black Hole". Probably a misnomer, since in them, information goes in and doesn't come out ( :-D )
Blacksmith refers to the color of the metal they work. Whitesmiths work in light-colored metals. Goldsmiths--self explanatory
Has nothing to do with anything, but what the hell...
 
Last edited:
Differentiating people based on one of the things they can have no control over at all is the most simplistic activity ever thought of.
Color, instead of intent, or likeability, or abiility.. takes no brains at all to stop seeing the person under the skin and group anyone with "them".
I likes all the many shades we humans come in.
Vive la difference!
 
OK, I figured the worst that could happen was I would get punched on the nose, possibly deservedly. I went and asked a friend, who is of Ethiopian descent, and more "black" than "brown". He really is very dark.

He was mildly amused, and suggested I was just being dumb. To summarize, pigmentation matters, because people react to it as a visible sign of difference. He hardly ever gets any hassle or racism he says, though being nearly seven foot tall helps, but he is defined as "Black" and "Other" by society. So he takes pride in it, and other non-pinkish people can relate to it, simply because they face the same crap from the pinkish majority in these parts- prejudice, playground taunts, and people stereotyping on the basis of pigmentation. So in that sense it DOES matter.

That is roughly what he said. What he actually said was less printable, but hell he was not at all offended, and seemed to think that it was important to discuss it.

cj x
 
It doesn't matter whether you're black, or white, or brown, or green. Just as long as we're all the same religion.
 
TragicMonkey said:
It doesn't matter whether you're black, or white, or brown, or green. Just as long as we're all the same religion.
Click to expand...
.
Amen, I say AMEN! to you brother!
Aesir and Bunyil and Eros and Gogamog and Izanagi and Jornar and Loki and Maui and Orpheus and Quetzalcoatl and Ra and Tangalos, Wotan, Yggdrasil and Zeus all send their regards.
 
I Ratant said:
.
Amen, I say AMEN! to you brother!
Aesir and Bunyil and Eros and Gogamog and Izanagi and Jornar and Loki and Maui and Orpheus and Quetzalcoatl and Ra and Tangalos, Wotan, Yggdrasil and Zeus all send their regards.
Click to expand...

I hope you spotted that one of those people is actually supposed to be a tree.
 
cj.23 said:
Sure, and as I said, ethnicity, culture, nationality, history, all are legitimate ways for people to self identify if they so desire, and all worthy of celebration. Baseball fans self identify by their team, wargamers by their hobby, etc, etc.

This Latino thing utterly confuses me (see previous posts). I find the idea of grouping people by something that nebulous really odd, but if people want to self identify as that, good for them, and I hope they find it useful and a proud source of identity. I'm just unsure about how useful that is, as I think you are, if utilized by a government or corporation, and resent the idea of imposing such category descriptions on people.

cj x
Click to expand...

Latinos have far more in common culturally than they do racially. So the term "Latino" in reference to this group is far more accurate than totally inexistent skin color uniformity suggested by the term "brown." Jose Ferrer the emperor in Dune was Latino, as is Cameron Diaz and many others like them. Check out the wiki link I posted.

To suggest that they are all uniformly brown is ridiculous and based on American wishful thinking which plasters everyone they feel they must consider personas non grata into imaginary molds.
 
Last edited:
Radrook said:
Latinos have far more in common culturally than they do racially. So the term "Latino" in reference to this group is far more accurate than totally inexistent skin color uniformity suggested by the term "brown". Jose Ferrer the emperor in Dune was Latino, as is Cameron Diaz and many others like them. Check out the wiki link I posted.
Click to expand...

I admit I gave up on the new Dune books after reading just one and finding it awful, but I find it difficult to believe Cameron Diaz was ever the Emperor.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I admit I gave up on the new Dune books after reading just one and finding it awful, but I find it difficult to believe Cameron Diaz was ever the Emperor.
Click to expand...

Jose Ferrer played the part. Is English your native tongue?
 
Last edited:
parky76 said:
no
Click to expand...



Jose Ferrer, the emperor in Dune, was Latino, as is Cameron Diaz and many others like them. [who are also Latinos]


Which part of this sentence is causing you trouble? If it's the grammar, just where are you claiming is the flaw. And if you understood even though you think it has a flaw, why not simply ignore it since this thread is not a correct-grammar-test thread. In any case, there is no flaw and if you see a flaw it's based on your inadequate knowledge of English sentence-structure; or else on a need to express your disagreement with what was said via mindless heckling and jeckling.

BTW

Latin culture focuses more on hair texture and facial features than on skin color to determine racial identity. You can be as white as a sheet and if your hair or features say otherwise then you aren't white. So you see, your USA criteria is not universally respected. Shocked?

A recent Oprah Winfrey show which featured black women who had married white men and the trials they had to endure is a case in point. Two of the couples used as examples were clearly interacial marriages. The third, however, was obviously a light- skinned Negro trying to pass as white. A Latino audience would have laughed him off the stage. The American audience, including Oprah, went along with the charade very willingly.
 
Last edited:
OK, so the article makes it clear this isn't a PC thing, but I'm thinking... really, wouldn't that be better?

Scenario A: There are adults who are offended by the word "black" appearing in the same sentence as something bad.
Scenario B: There are adults - adults - who don't know about black holes.

How, in the year of 2008, can there be people in the USA, which carries out 1/2 of the world's research, who are scientifically illiterate enough to not know about black holes? I mean, denying their existence is one thing, but not having heard of them? This is like that chick in that talk show who said she'd never considered whether the Earth was round or flat.
 
ravdin said:
According to some, it is:

http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/07/dallas-county-meeting-turns-ra.html

Comments from a science blogger on why it would be bad for a white hole to appear near Dallas:

http://blogs.chron.com/sciguy/archives/2008/07/is_black_hole_a.html
Click to expand...


Is the film titled "White Men Can't Jump" insensitive? If you substitute the color white with black and change the subject a little then would it be insensitive? If indeed there is sensitivity by a group who shows disregard for the sensitivity of other groups, does that group have a right to complain? African American standup comedians were in the habit of making degrading statements about Latino groups and the Afro-American-audience response was always exceedingly strong sustained laughter.

Suddenly Mencia, a Latino comedian, begins telling Afro-American oriented jokes and it's suddenly a serious sensitivity issue. In other words, its OK for us, but it's not OK for you. That's what I find problematic about this sensitivity subject. The persistent and pervasive double standards which the suppposed victims uphold and practice.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom