@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:That was all spin and no example or substance.
Just read the thread. I made one post quoting Carla Sims of the NAACP. She was of the opinion (as of 2006, anyway) that "colored" is neither derogatory nor offensive.
I made no editorial comment of any kind, yet within minutes the post was voted down to a "-2" (it appears others have since brought it back up to a neutral 1).
The posters expressing their displeasure simply did not want to hear anything that conflicted with their pronouncement that "colored" is inherently offensive.
Ms. Sims is presumably a black women, and, given her position with the NAACP, she appears to speak on behalf of the whole organization.
But did those posters who voted her statement down care about that at all? Apparently not.
My basic point here has been that the guy being vilified obviously did NOT intend to demean or degrade blacks in any way. And, beyond that, that each person is entitled to their own view on whether the term is offensive. But dictators will tolerate no "dissent" or disagreement. Their fiats must prevail, at whatever cost.
I can think of no other explanation for why they would get so upset about a difference in opinion.
I think it's fair to assume that most, if not all, of the posters here who undertake to pontificate about what blacks find offensive are themselves lily-white. Their pose strikes me as condescending and demeaning to blacks, and, of course, mainly self-aggrandizing in nature.