You know that terms is considered racist as ****, right?
Should a business be allowed to discrimate on the basis of a customer's sexual orientation?
- Thread starter The Thriller
- Start date
You know that terms is considered racist as ****, right?
If that's the case how did Jim crow survive as long as it did, and why did it need to be legislated out.
Sent from the JazzFanz app
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
Eh...I don't think of it as a racist term. It's a term of description, just like black. Next you're gonna be telling me that saying somebody is black is racist too.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
Jim Crow laws were about public use, not private enterprise.
From a restaurant perspective, some owners are disallowing families with children to dine in their establishments. Do you think that should be legislated against, as well?
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Even that is wrong. It was laws telling private enterprise that they had to discriminate whether they wanted to or not:
Alabama: It shall be unlawful to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided.
It was also about private enterprise. Not all Jim Crow was just law forcing segregation by the way of law. For example in Ohio there were no Jim Crow laws on the books involving restaurants yet restaurants there could choose to not serve to blacks. All that nonsense was stopped with the civil rights act in 64.
But even with the law the principle and question still remains the same. Where was the outcry, and why didn't the populace there change things themselves? There wasn't one because the people there wanted the laws how they were, and when you are a majority it's easy to oppress a minority. It's why policy should rarely be based on majority rule, especially on matters that involve the rights of others.
And yes, I think age discrimination should be illegal as well, as much as I hate crying kids at restaurants.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
Currently, there ARE no laws, which is kind of the point. Legislating how one conduct's his/her business just sounds wrong to me. I wonder where the demarcation line is. Would hosting a elks meeting be discriminatory since women wouldn't be served? Is having high prices discriminatory against low income people? Is the phrase you see on most businesses "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" fully discriminatory?
I don't think there needs to be a law either way in this case. I'm not against something worded where discrimination can't be an official policy I suppose, but the law you would propose strikes me as "you, the business owner, MUST provide your services as we see fit, not the way you do."
This idealistic version is indeed more aimed at smaller businesses. Large businesses with discriminatory practices definitely strikes me as more dangerous.
I doesn't matter what you think. That term was used to describe slaves in the 1800's, and commonly used by racists in the south. It is widely considered derogatory by most Africa Americans.
Call some of your black friends "colored" to their face. Although, my guess is you don't have any.
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
I wasn't using it to refer to black people actually...I was using it to describe anybody that wasn't white. Seemed easier than describing every single race that we have. Otherwise I would have just said "black".
My bad if you took it offensively, I didn't mean it that way.
And I realize this is cliche, but yes, I actually do have some black friends.
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
Question for you:
Isn't referring to all black people as African-Americans slightly racist, or ignorant?
1) They're probably not from Africa, they were born here. I don't call myself a European-American, I call myself white. (Or a crakka)
2) How do I know they're not from Jamaica or some ****? Just blindly calling black people African-Americans seems ignorant to me, personally.
Again, call your black friends colored. Then call them African-American. See which one works out best for you. As for the rest of the ******** you posted, I don't care what is ignorant to you, personally.
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
Dawg, I think we just had a misunderstanding.
I wasn't referring to black people as 'coloreds', I was referring to all non-white people as 'coloreds' because it was easier. Like I said, if you found it offensive, I apologize and it won't happen again.
All I'm trying to say in my 2nd post is that I don't see how African-American can be an acceptable label for all black people. Just doesn't make sense to me. Ya feel me?
No, I don't feel you. And thats ok.
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
Care to explain why?
Why do people think we should call all black people African-Americans? What if they're not from Africa? What if they're from Jamaica? Isn't calling a black person an African-American just assuming something based on the color of their skin? I thought we were trying to get away from stereotypes after all.
I think I may start to ask people to call me a European-American. Makes sense, right?
Hantlers buddy,
Your use of the word "colored" when describing people is stupid. It comes off as racist and ignorant. Regardless of your intentions in using them.
Having said that I agree on the African American thing. Only should be used if a person has dual citizen ship Such as a person (regardless of color) from South Africa that becomes an American. It is using a nationalistic descrtiption in place of race. Not only is it inaccurate it is misused. That should be used in place of Honduran, American, Russian or some other foreign nationality, not color.
Your use of the word "colored" when describing people is stupid. It comes off as racist and ignorant. Regardless of your intentions in using them.
Having said that I agree on the African American thing. Only should be used if a person has dual citizen ship Such as a person (regardless of color) from South Africa that becomes an American. It is using a nationalistic descrtiption in place of race. Not only is it inaccurate it is misused. That should be used in place of Honduran, American, Russian or some other foreign nationality, not color.
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I get that now. I screwed up, and apologized. Won't happen again.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and was just ringing in as a 3rd party. I also edited the original post.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Why do we think that we have to reinvent the wheel here?
Other countries have had to deal with these issues, right? What are Western European countries doing? Canada? Australia?
Other countries have had to deal with these issues, right? What are Western European countries doing? Canada? Australia?
JimLes
Well-Known Member
You call people what they want to be called. It's just basic courtesy. No need to pontificate about how accurate the term is or whatever else. Just call them what they want to be called. Why is that so hard?