"of nigs, chinks, japs, goras, pakis and poofs"

[malakpetmasala]

why do we discriminate so much on the basis of race and origin and creed, cast and sexual preferences? a few posts ago, i saw a post by SS calling an african woman nigga, not that she meant it, but it is in our heads that they are black and so niggar, just like a few of my friends say "woh chinky maka** ke saath kay baath karra re?" wen i go for a couple of drinks with an asian friend of mine. But why is this? Even with dumpster, who 'proclaimed' he was homosexual, he got a mixed response from the house. is it that we are not open to new ways of life or that we dont accept something new?

is it just the relay of the caste system from india, or the race hate we had between north indians and the dravidians( which is still very much practiced at every possiblity)

will we ever change?

[Mayavi Morpheus]

Is chinki, Jap or paki considered derogatory and racist?

IMO calling a chinese 'chinki' or a japanese 'jap' isnt derogatory. Yellow people is.

Similarly, 'paki' may be a derogatory word for south asians in UK, but outside UK its not derogatory. Paki is short form of Pakistani and aint nuthing wrong in calling a paki a paki or an Indian a yindoo.

Andhraites are called gultis, maharashtrians ghatis, and the tamilians sambar, aint nothing wrong bro.



Ps: Nigga is a derogatory term if used by anyone other than 'bros' , but not many Indians know that its derogatory.

[Alexis]

According to Webster, Discriminate: to mark or perceive the distinguishing or peculiar features



What wrong with that? Its a way we express our views or descriptions. I mean, like when Im talking to my sister about this lady I saw at the gas station who probably made a scene, I'd say, "There was this chunky black woman with really wack hairdo acting out at Exxon".

Its the way of the world, MM. We all do it. But not everyone talks like that with intentions to insult or make fun of someone different.

The topic of homosexuality is taboo anyway, you cant really expect everyone to accept it without reservations and concern. Religious ideals and ethics come into play when this subject comes up.

[DQ]

According to Webster, Discriminate: to mark or perceive the distinguishing or peculiar features

What wrong with that? Its a way we express our views or descriptions. I mean, like when Im talking to my sister about this lady I saw at the gas station who probably made a scene, I'd say, "There was this chunky black woman with really wack hairdo acting out at Exxon".
Its the way of the world, MM. We all do it. But not everyone talks like that with intentions to insult or make fun of someone different.
The topic of homosexuality is taboo anyway, you cant really expect everyone to accept it without reservations and concern. Religious ideals and ethics come into play when this subject comes up.

Agreeing with Alexis, though extending a a bit.



1. Look describing someone unknown to you is ok. Where you are trying to draw a picture.



2. Delibrate branding of people, or calling names during argumentation is unacceptable.



Racist comments are passed all around the globe, not just India. And is one of the major sources of conflicts too.



Be it a small boy playing in the gullys of India calling a muslim "Ja be Paki"



Or branding Indians "Third World" or "Banana culture" while discussing BPO.



If branding is to describe someone you cannot identify by name is ok.

but if it is out of prejudice then Prejudice and discrimination are negative manifestations of integrative power. Instead of bringing or holding people together, prejudice and discrimination push them apart.



Why look far, read most of the posts here and see people getting personal in most of the arguments and trying to discriminate.

[Sharjeel]

You forget that only the people who are different (japs, nigas, etc) get discriminted. If you were to go to Germany for ex., you would also be given a name, which may or may not be derogatory.



It is in our nature to discriminate, just that some people take things too far. And this issue is more pevalent in uneducated people, and people who do not go out of their homes.



A very good friend calls me 'Saale Mulle' (since I generally am the only Muslim in any group there) whenever she is annoyed with me, so should I think that she is a racist? No!



The point here is that like MM said, people (generally) dont give names to put others down. It is just like a tag for peeps who look and act different.

[malakpetmasala]

Is chinki, Jap or paki considered derogatory and racist?
IMO calling a chinese 'chinki' or a japanese 'jap' isnt derogatory. Yellow people is.
Similarly, 'paki' may be a derogatory word for south asians in UK, but outside UK its not derogatory. Paki is short form of Pakistani and aint nuthing wrong in calling a paki a paki or an Indian a yindoo.
Andhraites are called gultis, maharashtrians ghatis, and the tamilians sambar, aint nothing wrong bro.

Ps: Nigga is a derogatory term if used by anyone other than 'bros' , but not many Indians know that its derogatory.

gulti for telugu or sambar for tamil might not be derogatory, but calling asians chinks.... in any part of the world is very very derogatory, just like calling south asians 'Paki' or 'curry'. and about niggar being derogatory, well, not many indians know it is derogatory because we do not have many african people in India, but what about the global indians, who are very well aware of this?

[Alexis]

My brother is in the 8th grade. And at school, the trouble-makers call him 'Osama Bin Laden' or 'Saddam Hussein' just to be funny or whatever. We're not Middle-Eastern, but what do these fools know?



Thats discrimination too, even though its in jest. But we cant do anything about it.

[malaakpetmasala]

According to Webster, Discriminate: to mark or perceive the distinguishing or peculiar features

agreeing with Alexis, though extending a a bit.

1. Look describing someone unknown to you is ok. Where you are trying to draw a picture.

2. Delibrate branding of people, or calling names during argumentation is unacceptable.

Racist comments are passed all around the globe, not just India. And is one of the major sources of conflicts too.

Be it a small boy playing in the gullys of India calling a muslim "Ja be Paki"

Or branding Indians "Third World" or "Banana culture" while discussing BPO.

If branding is to describe someone you cannot identify by name is ok.
but if it is out of prejudice then Prejudice and discrimination are negative manifestations of integrative power. Instead of bringing or holding people together, prejudice and discrimination push them apart.

Why look far, read most of the posts here and see people getting personal in most of the arguments and trying to discriminate.

drawing a picture is alright, but u know that drawing this picture of a person/clan, which for ages been assumed derogatory is no good. does more haarm than aanything else. does nt it? i dont have aanything against it. like, if i dont like someone, have something against them personally, i would nt mind calling him/her a bitch/bastard, but hre it is just one person, and u are not generalising the whole community as such

[malaakpetmasala]

According to Webster, Discriminate: to mark or perceive the distinguishing or peculiar features

agreeing with Alexis, though extending a a bit.

1. Look describing someone unknown to you is ok. Where you are trying to draw a picture.

2. Delibrate branding of people, or calling names during argumentation is unacceptable.

Racist comments are passed all around the globe, not just India. And is one of the major sources of conflicts too.

Be it a small boy playing in the gullys of India calling a muslim "Ja be Paki"

Or branding Indians "Third World" or "Banana culture" while discussing BPO.

If branding is to describe someone you cannot identify by name is ok.
but if it is out of prejudice then Prejudice and discrimination are negative manifestations of integrative power. Instead of bringing or holding people together, prejudice and discrimination push them apart.

Why look far, read most of the posts here and see people getting personal in most of the arguments and trying to discriminate.

drawing a picture is alright, but u know that drawing this picture of a person/clan, which for ages been assumed derogatory is no good. does more haarm than aanything else. does nt it? i dont have aanything against it. like, if i dont like someone, have something against them personally, i would nt mind calling him/her a bitch/bastard, but hre it is just one person, and u are not generalising the whole community as such

[malakpetmasala]

My brother is in the 8th grade. And at school, the trouble-makers call him 'Osama Bin Laden' or 'Saddam Hussein' just to be funny or whatever. We're not Middle-Eastern, but what do these fools know?

Thats discrimination too, even though its in jest. But we cant do anything about it.

we cant do much about it, does nt mean that we do the same thing too. do we?

[malakpetmasala]

You forget that only the people who are different (japs, nigas, etc) get discriminted. If you were to go to Germany for ex., you would also be given a name, which may or may not be derogatory.

It is in our nature to discriminate, just that some people take things too far. And this issue is more pevalent in uneducated people, and people who do not go out of their homes.

A very good friend calls me 'Saale Mulle' (since I generally am the only Muslim in any group there) whenever she is annoyed with me, so should I think that she is a racist? No!

The point here is that like MM said, people (generally) dont give names to put others down. It is just like a tag for peeps who look and act different.

calling africans black people is alright.... i dont think it is discriminatory, but niggars, no way.... because, it is supposed to be derogatory. calling Indians desi is alright.... but curry is discriminative



i think there is a differnece there is a difference between differentiation and discrmination.

[malakpetmasala]

According to Webster, Discriminate: to mark or perceive the distinguishing or peculiar features

What wrong with that? Its a way we express our views or descriptions. I mean, like when Im talking to my sister about this lady I saw at the gas station who probably made a scene, I'd say, "There was this chunky black woman with really wack hairdo acting out at Exxon".
Its the way of the world, MM. We all do it. But not everyone talks like that with intentions to insult or make fun of someone different.
The topic of homosexuality is taboo anyway, you cant really expect everyone to accept it without reservations and concern. Religious ideals and ethics come into play when this subject comes up.

the topic of homosexuality might be a taboo to the society.... does give them the right to ostracise a homosexual?

[Kenny]

According to Webster, Discriminate: to mark or perceive the distinguishing or peculiar features

What wrong with that? Its a way we express our views or descriptions. I mean, like when Im talking to my sister about this lady I saw at the gas station who probably made a scene, I'd say, "There was this chunky black woman with really wack hairdo acting out at Exxon".
Its the way of the world, MM. We all do it. But not everyone talks like that with intentions to insult or make fun of someone different.
The topic of homosexuality is taboo anyway, you cant really expect everyone to accept it without reservations and concern. Religious ideals and ethics come into play when this subject comes up.

the topic of homosexuality might be a taboo to the society.... does give them the right to ostracise a homosexual?

no it doesn't..... but it's the easiest way to pick on them..... i mean, subconciously, people are just looking for something they do wrong.. and that is attributed to homosexuality



maybe not wrong... different is a better word



ppl can't help looking for what is different in their behaviour..... so whatever they do see is attributed to this.

[Kenny]

PS: I really didn't understand why SS was so vehement in her other post.



Is it that she really doesn't realise what she's saying (which I find hard to believe)..... or was she trying to be cool...... or what.....



SS??

subconciously

make that subconsciously

[malakpetmasala]

According to Webster, Discriminate: to mark or perceive the distinguishing or peculiar features


the topic of homosexuality might be a taboo to the society.... does give them the right to ostracise a homosexual?

no it doesn't..... but it's the easiest way to pick on them..... i mean, subconciously, people are just looking for something they do wrong.. and that is attributed to homosexuality

maybe not wrong... different is a better word

ppl can't help looking for what is different in their behaviour..... so whatever they do see is attributed to this.

but the question is.... will this ever change? will we see a new world. could we be so accepting? If we could accept and absorb new religions, new beliefs and new cultures into our culture, can we accept the isssue of homosexuality into our culture.

homosexuals are just like blind people.... its not their mistake that they are blind, but thats how they were born, or thats how nature wanted them to be.

[Alexis]

the topic of homosexuality might be a taboo to the society.... does give them the right to ostracise a homosexual?

People who are extremely idealistic, radical, orthodox, and traditional will definitely frown upon homosexuals. Yes, they will ostracise them.

But who is to say whats right and what wrong? Whats acceptable and whats not?

We all have our own POV's in accordance to our faith, learned and shared norms, standards, and ideals. Its a paradigmatic society with some members who will never bend any rules.

[malakpetmasala]

the topic of homosexuality might be a taboo to the society.... does give them the right to ostracise a homosexual?

People who are extremely idealistic, radical, orthodox, and traditional will definitely frown upon homosexuals. Yes, they will ostracise them.
But who is to say whats right and what wrong? Whats acceptable and whats not?
We all have our own POV's in accordance to our faith, learned and shared norms, standards, and ideals. Its a paradigmatic society with some members who will never bend any rules.

i guess we have to emphassis on the word "rules" here. because we are the ones who wrote the book of rules. well... its for sure that who ever wrote it wrote it in their favour... for example, back in the olden days, Brahmins were supposed to have written the rules and the world was ruled accordingly, in modern India, a person of a non brahmin origin penned the rules, which were accordingly favourable to the non upper classes of the community. ya, i guess, it has all got to do with rules and their interpretations.

i guess the society need more education, just to respect the other person for his preferences, be it religion, politics or sex

[Kenny]

the topic of homosexuality might be a taboo to the society.... does give them the right to ostracise a homosexual?

People who are extremely idealistic, radical, orthodox, and traditional will definitely frown upon homosexuals. Yes, they will ostracise them.
But who is to say whats right and what wrong? Whats acceptable and whats not?
We all have our own POV's in accordance to our faith, learned and shared norms, standards, and ideals. Its a paradigmatic society with some members who will never bend any rules.

i guess we have to emphassis on the word "rules" here. because we are the ones who wrote the book of rules. well... its for sure that who ever wrote it wrote it in their favour... for example, back in the olden days, Brahmins were supposed to have written the rules and the world was ruled accordingly, in modern India, a person of a non brahmin origin penned the rules, which were accordingly favourable to the non upper classes of the community. ya, i guess, it has all got to do with rules and their interpretations.
i guess the society need more education, just to respect the other person for his preferences, be it religion, politics or sex

The society has come a long way.. I guess given some time, it will learn to accept individual preferences.



However, ideally the very question of acceptance should not arise!! Ppl should be free to do what they want to!!!



But realistically, we can't really expect this of society, can we?



And anyway ... if the society expected everything without question, this would do more harm then good.



Confusing ain't it

[CtrlAltDel]

this is an interesting discussion.......and i am late as usual...



i believe most of the racist tags in this DB as well as outside are unintentional (like when SS said "nigger").



as far as intentional hate in this DB goes....i've seen it in Wizzy's hate for anything Jewish and many anti-gay comments....and of corz the contoversial "archana" and "her" anti-muslim comments.



abt gays....tho its a perfectly natural state...most religions frown upon this and this has led to anti-gay sentiments (one of the negatives of taking religion too seriously).



will post more later

[malakpetmasala]

I forgot to add "Starsigns" in the discriminatory groups. Man, 'zodiac signs' is the basis of new age raceism

[CtrlAltDel]

I forgot to add "Starsigns" in the discriminatory groups. Man, 'zodiac signs' is the basis of new age raceism

:? who discriminates on basis of star signs?

[malakpetmasala]

I forgot to add "Starsigns" in the discriminatory groups. Man, 'zodiac signs' is the basis of new age raceism

:? who discriminates on basis of star signs?

man, have nt u heard of this before? Chicks dont really wanna socialise with u cos u are of a particular star sign. well, there are a few chicks who stopped talking to me just cos i am a virgo

[malakpetmasala]

I forgot to add "Starsigns" in the discriminatory groups. Man, 'zodiac signs' is the basis of new age raceism

:? who discriminates on basis of star signs?

man, have nt u heard of this before? Chicks dont really wanna socialise with u cos u are of a particular star sign. well, there are a few chicks who stopped talking to me just cos i am a virgo

i cant really say stopped talking, but started ignoring me more, and also the liking of people of a particular star sign by few is a sign of starsignism too.

[CtrlAltDel]

there are a few chicks who stopped talking to me just cos i am a virgo

mebbe thats not the real reason...mebbe u disappointed them......and they use yr star sign as an excuse...

[malakpetmasala]

there are a few chicks who stopped talking to me just cos i am a virgo

mebbe thats not the real reason...mebbe u disappointed them......and they use yr star sign as an excuse...

they did nt really gimme a chance to disappoint them. i woulod nt mind if they gave me a chance to please them or disappoint them and then ignore me. I am pretty sad actually.