"Chink" can refer to a small gap or slit. Unless your writing about something that may be associated with an asian where race isnt even the topic.
Great reasoning there.
herp
"Chink" can refer to a small gap or slit. Unless your writing about something that may be associated with an asian where race isnt even the topic.
Great reasoning there.
"Chink" can refer to a small gap or slit. Unless your writing about something that may be associated with an asian where race isnt even the topic.
Great reasoning there.
So you are trolling?
No one uses the word queer anymore except in fantasy books, or novels that take place before the 60s. Using the word 'queer' in any headline today will get you fired."Chink" in this context would be more analogous to "queer" in that it has multiple meanings. You can't see how the word queer might be totally innocuous until used as a pejorative?
Hulot: I freely admit that I'm white and from the Midwest, and I've heard "chink in the armor" used in real world contexts fairly often my whole life. If you'll knock me out for using an expression common to my background without racial intent, then that's your problem, not mine.
Edit: Or, to put it differently: to read race into something of MY linguistic background is insensitive to me, in its own way.
100% Mexican.
There goes your argument, huh?
100% Mexican.
There goes your argument, huh?
I wonder how you feel about this product then:
Amen. PC has gotten quite out of hand.Hell, if you're playing badly, then I'll describe you as a chink in a team's armor no matter what your race
No one uses the word queer anymore except in fantasy books, or novels that take place before the 60s. Using the word 'queer' in any headline today will get you fired.
Nope. Not offended. I've never found that word offensive. Same goes for "wetback".
Nope. Youre racist and you cant even see it.So you are trolling?
Nope. Youre racist and you cant even see it.
As an asian. I refuse to except that whites and blacks get exclusive rights to a common sports phrase.
Ben & Jerry have done the same thing for all sorts of people. I mean is the Maple Blonde flavor offensive because it refers to a white canadian girl? Gtfouttahere
What the hell does "wetback" even mean anyway?
Amen. PC has gotten quite out of hand.
I'm not talking about Ben & Jerry. I'm talking about the country on the whole and companies on the whole. People walk on egg shells right now because they are scared to death of offending a certain group of people. The next time you're watching television, take note of how all of the commercials feature a perfect rainbow of races. It's so calculated it's disgusting.
Since you seem to not understand the malleability of language (we have literature for a reason, think the difference between Hemingway and Joyce), let's put it in a more vulgar example: you grew up in an all-white community and people still walked around using the word "nigger" for black people (and yes, there are still people like this in 2012). You went to New York City and used your language and some black guy punched you out. Obviously you were not being "racist" since you, for you personally, "nigger" was just a neutral term synonymous with "black people". Is he being insensitive to your ignorance?
And in your Midwest, do you yourself have American friends of Asian descent?
Evidence of having crossed the Rio Grande.
Youve accepted that 'chink in the armor' is a unoffending phrase except when used with asians. Youve determined that asians should be treated differently from other races.Please explain to me how I am racist, if I can't see it.
Youve accepted that 'chink in the armor' is a unoffending phrase except when used with asians. Youve determined that asians should be treated differently from other races.
Thats racist.
I can only take so much bigotry sorry.You haven't read anything I've put in this thread.
Youve accepted that 'chink in the armor' is a unoffending phrase. But shouldnt be used with asians. Youve determined that asians should be treated differently from other races.
Thats racist.
Youve accepted that 'chink in the armor' is a unoffending phrase. Except when used with asians. Youve determined that asians should be treated differently from other races.
Thats racist.
One thing I don't understand is why is there a negative conatation associated with liking fried chicken. It's fucking delicious.
I can only take so much bigotry sorry.
Oh come on, dude is totally trolling.
Trolling implies an engineered attempt to get a rise out of people, but Loofy's posts don't show anywhere near that level of sophistication.
Did you have to put 'chink' in all caps?Loofy, the problem with your argument is that you're painting with the same broad strokes that some of the very people you're arguing against are.
If somebody were saying, "Man, that Jeremy Lin is a real CHINK in that team's armor, why would anybody ever hire an Asian to play basketball?" then the phrase takes on racist connotations, since the person is using the phrase because they specifically want to disparage him for being Asian.
There's a lot of nuance between, "Chink in the armor can never be racist," and "If the word will offend some people who read it out of context, then it's best to use another word."
Did you have to put 'chink' in all caps?
Sure if emphasis is put on chink then I can see how it could be racist. But as far as I know the phrase is being used thats common with every other team or player.
Asians cant have chinks in their armor guys. Thats what I got out of this thread.
Uh, since "chink in the armor" way predates chink as a slur for Chinese people, your analogy simply does not work. There's literally no other meaning to the word "nigger" than the racially derogatory one.
Yes, I understand the malleability of language, and I ask that you not condescend to me, by the way.
And yes, I have had American friends of Asian descent, and I would have no compunction about using the phrase "chink in the armor" with regard to the 'weak link' meaning around them, as I expect adults to have some sense for the context that I create and not treat language as a Pavlovian excuse to fly off the handle in situations where such is not called for. And why does "malleability of language" always go to the person taking offense? Why do people have this belief that somebody taking offense to something means that something was done wrong? Offense is like any other emotion: in some cases it will be justified, in others not. Taking offense to the term "chink in the armor" in a non-racial context is an example of unjustified taking of offense.
What does the order of the two terms have to do with anything? He (as well as I) come from a background where chink as a slur is more prevalent. You, obviously, come from a place where it is not. In the context of you talking to your friends and using the phrase 'chink in the armour', it is clear there is no racist intent, and people shouldn't be offended. In the case of the headline, the intent isn't so clear (as mentioned numerous times, sports headlines oftentimes employ the use of puns and double meanings). How is it unjustified for people who relate more to chink being used as slur to be offended? Just because it's not the link you would've made? As a person who's been the target of the word, it isn't a tenuous link to make. As a media outlet that reaches out to more people than white dudes in the midwest, ESPN should've known better.Uh, since "chink in the armor" way predates chink as a slur for Chinese people, your analogy simply does not work. There's literally no other meaning to the word "nigger" than the racially derogatory one.
Yes, I understand the malleability of language, and I ask that you not condescend to me, by the way.
And yes, I have had American friends of Asian descent, and I would have no compunction about using the phrase "chink in the armor" with regard to the 'weak link' meaning around them, as I expect adults to have some sense for the context that I create and not treat language as a Pavlovian excuse to fly off the handle in situations where such is not called for. And why does "malleability of language" always go to the person taking offense? Why do people have this belief that somebody taking offense to something means that something was done wrong? Offense is like any other emotion: in some cases it will be justified, in others not. Taking offense to the term "chink in the armor" in a non-racial context is an example of unjustified taking of offense.
Trolling implies an engineered attempt to get a rise out of people, but Loofy's posts don't show anywhere near that level of sophistication.
I replied to jim jams post.Loofy, can you please reply to Orayn's question about why you don't take issue with people not using the word "queer"? Because as far as I can see that's as much of a restriction on freedom as what we're discussing here. Probably more actually.
You can easily substitute "negro" for "nigger" in my example and it still stands, is the black fellow "insensitive" to you, the persecuted "white" man for calling him a negro, which after all means black?
But this is all just semantics. What you're really exemplifying is majority discourse: that the language you find inoffensive is inoffensive period. Your aggrandizement of your privilege allows you to be arbiter of our communal language. The fact that it offends someone of color means nothing to you because you don't find it offensive, so instead of introspection you accuse "them" of Pavlovian hysteria (also sinister in it's underlying dog metaphor) and of "flying off the handle", implying that "these people" are irrational. Is "PC people" just another euphemism these days?
And the crux of your argument really is that intention is all that matters. If that editor didn't intend to be racist or offensive then he "clearly" isn't. But it happened and people need to understand that there are other people in the world and that America especially is a country of immigrants. Instead of suppression, why can't there be discussion? Why can't you try to empathize with those who would be offended rather than falling to the easy gut reaction of calling it "PC bullshit"?
I replied to jim jams post.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=35495289&postcount=254
And it wouldnt even be the same anyways. When someone is called a queer the intent is obvious. Michael richards obvious.
I replied to jim jams post.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=35495289&postcount=254
And it wouldnt even be the same anyways. When someone is called a queer the intent behind his words is obvious. Michael richards obvious.
THATS CONTEXT.
I am jim-jam. Well, not really, but I am when I'm here anyway.
You still haven't actually answered the question though. Why is okay for the public at large to acknowledge that the word queer can be used as a pejorative and behave accordingly, but it's not okay in the case of chink?
You can tell when queer, faggot, or gay is being used in a disparaging way. 'Dont wear that it looks so gay.'I am jim-jam. Well, not really, but I am when I'm here anyway.
You still haven't actually answered the question though. Why is okay for the public at large to acknowledge that the word queer can be used as a pejorative and behave accordingly, but it's not okay in the case of chink?
You can tell when queer, faggot, or gay is being used in a disparaging way.
No one can tell me why 'Chink in the armor' commentary is racist. Apparently the only thing racist about it is that its describing and american whos also of asian decent.
Im talking about the actual commentary. Gimme specific excerpts of the article that give further proof that this is racial.It has been told to you, but you seem to have ignored it.
You can tell when queer, faggot, or gay is being used in a disparaging way. 'Dont wear that it looks so gay.'
No one can tell me why the 'Chink in the armor' commentary is racist. Do they make any other references to this personal culture or anything that doesnt have to do with the game of basketball? Apparently the only thing racist about it is that its describing an american whos also of asian decent.
Im talking about the actual commentary. Gimme specific excerpts of the article that give further proof that this is racial.
hahahaThe Pekin (Illinois) High School teams were officially known as the Pekin Chinks until 1980, when the school administration changed the mascot to the Pekin Dragons. The team mascot was a student dressed as a Chinese man wearing a coolie hat, who struck a gong when the team scored.
You can tell when queer, faggot, or gay is being used in a disparaging way. 'Dont wear that it looks so gay.'
No one can tell me why the 'Chink in the armor' commentary is racist. Do they make any other references to this personal culture or anything that doesnt have to do with the game of basketball? Apparently the only thing racist about it is that its describing an american whos also of asian decent.
hahaha
What I have discovered is that you'd clock me in the nose for using the phrase "chink in the armor" in a context where race didn't matter a whit to either my use of it or to the actual context of what's being said. Believe me when I say that I don't argue from intention. It's demonstrably provable whether or not "chink in the armor" might have racial context to it, and in the instance that I mentioned, it would not.
If anything, the PC reaction is more the gut reaction, since it's the one that paints the word "chink" in broad strokes and refuses to differentiate between its provenance in different rhetorical contexts. I'm arguing for logic and rationality in language and people not letting their emotions rule over their minds, especially if, like you, they would punch somebody they heard using a colloquialism unrelated to race. (I understand that you may have been using hyperbole, but I'm using what you said to make a point.)
I have no problem with the part of PC that says that maybe we should stop calling gay people faggots. I have a problem with the part of PC culture that privileges feelings and sensitivity over rational discourse and the free use of racially unmotivated colloquial language.
Edit: Or, to put it differently - I don't privilege either offense OR non-offense; I look at each instance individually, and if I think the issue in question justifies offense, then I say so. But if somebody were to get on my cast because I went to a film festival and wrote that some Asian director was a "chink in the festival's armor" because they made the worst film there, despite such not being a racial expression in context, I'll start to get annoyed.
And BTW, I've already backed down on the ESPN incident in question, though I'd still contend that it's probably just an unfortunate case of somebody using an innocuous title in a medium where people expect dumb puns and jokes, since I'd doubt that, in 2012, a person living in America could use the phrase "chink" to refer to an Asian person and not understand that they were disparaging that person.
The problem I have with this is that it's predicated on ignoring the fact that Lins is Asian-American, when as I said earlier there is nothing inherently wrong with acknowledging race/culture when discussing a public figure. In order to ignore the fact that "chink" can be used in a manner which is offensive to Asian-Americans you have to pretend that the person being discussed is not in fact Asian-American.
So... you're the most racist person in this thread.