Racism

[Meg 368]

This discussion is an offshoot of the American Politics thread.   The issues involving racism are valid and worth discussing but expanding the racism discussion in the politics thread was becoming unwieldy.    The two topics do intertwine so separating them can be difficult but let's try to keep racism issues over here and other political issues over there.

 

Racism can be a sensitive topic to discuss, however, one of the problems is that it is a semi-taboo topic that people do not talk about.    I believe that this community contains people who have a broad range of insights and viewpoints and I believe we can discuss them intelligently.

Please note that the rules of this site prohibit:

Discrimination against the age, race, gender, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or sexual orientation of another member.   quote>

 

We currently have interesting, useful discussions regarding other subjects on this list, most notably religion and sexual orientation.    I believe we can have the same kind of respectful conversation about race.

The purpose of this thread is discuss racism.  It is not a venue for people to spout off bigoted views.   That can be a fine line to walk but I believe that many here can handle that challenge.   Those who can not will be ejected from the thread and, if necessary, from the site. 

The next few posts are ones that have been moved from the American Politics thread.

  

[DocRorlach 25]

Originally posted by: kibblewitbit I would say that I have seen much racism in Europe than in America, Racism obviously still exists but it doesn't play much of a role in American politics any more, regardless of the endless media cycle of "Is America ready for a black president?" and "The Bradley Effect" etc. Evidence of this is that Barack Obama won former confederate states such as Virginia and North Carolina. I can tell you now that it will be a very long time before any European country elects someone that is not of the majority ethnic group (don't even think about muslim ancestry) as their leader and until then they shouldn't say anything about racism in America without acknoledging it in their countries.

quote>

 

There are several problems with this statement: while I agree that Europe has nothing to shout about when i comes to problems between cultures and races in modern times, their roots, causes, and effects are utterly different from what I saw and experienced in the USA during my six-year stay. 

To begin with, Europes racial problems are almost entirely rooted in immigration. As a result of the rebuilting and reconstruction boom in western & northern Europ during first three post-war decases, most countries, notably Holland and Germany, had a badly formulated open door policy and actively "imported" what they thought of as migratory workers to fill the gap in manpower. Britain, France, and to a point Belgium never really shut their doors, either, which had been wedged open because of their failed colonization and imperial policies. And the Schengen accord, which did away with the effect border controls did the rest. hus Europe today has been flooded with immigrants from largely Islamic countries. The espansion of the EU added another groundswell of eastern Europeans to that. And left-overs of neo-nazism did the rest.

Since I can easily be mistaken for either a light-skinned African-American or an Oriental from the Middle East, growing up in post-war Germany, I got my share of the continuing rise in xenophobia. Still, seeing how inhabitants of  some towns here in Holland suddenly find themselves a minority in heir own backyard, I can understand the immediate, albeit stupid reaction.

Opposite to that, racism - as I experienced and saw it - in the US seems to have almost come full circle: I found it almost only among African-Americans: agains whites, Jews, Hispanics, Muslims, Asians - you name the ethnicity, African-Americans seemed to be against them. On the other hand I cannot recall a single incident during my time travelling and working throught 44 of the 50 states, where I was subjected to racsim from Caucasians Hispanics, or Asians. Seen from that, rather personal and thus limited perspective, the coming inauguration of a black president does not appear as a particularly good idea.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: DocRorlach

Opposite to that, racism - as I experienced and saw it - in the US seems to have almost come full circle: I found it almost only among African-Americans: agains whites, Jews, Hispanics, Muslims, Asians - you name the ethnicity, African-Americans seemed to be against them. On the other hand I cannot recall a single incident during my time travelling and working throught 44 of the 50 states, where I was subjected to racsim from Caucasians Hispanics, or Asians. Seen from that, rather personal and thus limited perspective, the coming inauguration of a black president does not appear as a particularly good idea.quote>

 

It does not appear to be a particularly good idea because he is African-American and, in your experience, most racism in America comes from African-Americans? 

Just trying to see if I understand what you are saying.

 

---

On related, and rather controversial note, Obama is one of the "other" African-Americans.   There is a book or two on this subject, which have not received a particularly warm reception.

The basic theory is that most African-Americans come from families that have been here for generations, covering a couple of hundred years, so they have the psychic and cultural baggage that comes from the remnants of slavery.

The "other" African-Americans, however, come from families that have arrived here more recently and didn't go through all of that garbage, therefore they act more like other immigrant families than they do like other African-Americans.

I can see how the two groups might have different viewpoints on things.  There is no reason to expect all African-Americans to see everything the same way.

I can also see how it is rather insulting for it to be assumed that a person would act, or think, a certain way based on when their ancestors arrived here.  To put that in personal terms, I would not take it kindly if if someone came up with the theory that my actions and beliefs were somehow dictated by the fact that my earliest immigrant ancestors were fleeing the Irish potato famine.

I bring it up only because it is one theory (not saying it's correct) as to why Obama might see things differently than many of the people you met while you were here.  I do believe, though, that this theory is one reason why some people say that Obama is "not black enough" or "not really black" and so forth. 

[DocRorlach 25]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek On related, and rather controversial note, Obama is one of the "other" African-Americans.   There is a book or two on this subject, which have not received a particularly warm reception.

The basic theory is that most African-Americans come from families that have been here for generations, covering a couple of hundred years, so they have the psychic and cultural baggage that comes from the remnants of slavery.

The "other" African-Americans, however, come from families that have arrived here more recently and didn't go through all of that garbage, therefore they act more like other immigrant families than they do like other African-Americans.quote>

 

In modern politics what you are is often less important than what you seem, or what you are seen as. Obama may well be one of the "other African-Americans"; in fact his family history suggests a closer "relation" to my personal family roots (we missed out on the Irish, but got just about every other nation in the immediate tree), than that of your average AA.

But black America has and will embrace him as one of their own and will want to see their persistant demands for restitution (for slave trade, for example, there's an actual case before the Supreme Court) and - often - retribution met by the new president. Failure of satisfying this core group could easily lead to new civil unrest a la Birmingham. Since the African-American minority is - in general public view - also seen as the most underprivileged class, such unrest will lead to a new polarization between ethnic groups. Although I view the American public politically far more lethargic than, say, the French (climbing barricades comes natural to them), the inner cities in the US would fear far worse than Paris if such unrest were to occur. And in Obama's rise to to power I see a very precise danger that such may occur. The expectations of "his" minority only heightens that chance.

Furthermore, the ruling elite (self-proclaimed, naturally) also eeyes him as a Black President - never mind who voted for him - and thus treat him as such.

[Meg 368]

Note:  this post was split.   Part was left in the American Politics thread.  This part was moved here.

Originally posted by: manticorefan

Originally posted by: DocRorlach But black America has and will embrace him as one of their own and will want to see their persistant demands for restitution (for slave trade, for example, there's an actual case before the Supreme Court) and - often - retribution met by the new president. quote>

(color and shading for point emphasis)

The second they start giving away my tax money to people for things I didn't do (or approve of, or support), or even my grandparents didn't do, and that didn't happen to them or even their grandparents, it's time for a revolution. A real, OMG-get-outta-town-type-revolution. It's so far beyond the pail of fairness and common sense that the Federal Gov't has forfeit its authority IMHO, were it to come to pass. quote>

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[DocRorlach 25]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa Conversely, I have known several African-Americans who have absolutely no bad opinions of native Africans, although I have seen some disregard for them, and a lack of empathy to African problems.  I cannot explain this, and I suspect that this simple disregard may be a root cause of the negativity I see from the Africans.  Perhaps this is something along the lines of  "many African-Americans wear our clothes and spout our culture, they claim to be black but they are something else".  I don't know, but I find this to be a captivatingly complex topic, not fit for this thread, but something that I thought I would mention.quote>

 

My point exactly. Working with African-Americans during my six years in the US has shown me that their linkage to Africa is in name only. What bothers me about this is that in that they learned all too well from their white surroundings, albeit for different reasons. Unlike the other minorities, especially the Hispanics, they remain apolitical to a fault. While they do turn out for elections, it rarerly has anything to do with the issues at hand. Thus the success of Master Obama is one of utter mix. However, once the "honeymoon" is over, the segment of the population he is supposed to belong to will come along with the biggest claims: there day seems to have come. And not getting it may turn things ugly.

[panthersimcity4 162]

The most important thing people should realize about racism is that every ethnicity has practiced it in some way. Therefore there is not a whole race of people that is innocent of racism.

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Of course, every race is guilty. It stems from a natural human instinct to stick with our own. I read some time ago that roughly 90% of black families with incomes over $100,000 per year still live in 'black neighborhoods'. You do indeed see many expensive cars in the ghetto, and obviously they don't all belong to criminals. People want to be surrounded with people  who look like themselves.

Jewish families are famous for insisting that their children only marry Jews, black women are the most offended when a black man marries a white woman, etc. This isn't a racist or conservative vs. liberal reaction, it is a human reaction. A Darwinist would likely agree that it is a hardwired reaction, for protection of the family genetic lineage.

Someone I've known for years was recently in the middle of a vaguely racist diatribe, and abruptly stopped and said to me, "Oh, that's right... you're not racist.". Good to know that I have that reputation, without giving it any thought.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa I want to digress for a moment and discuss some of the points that came up between DocRorlach and SkiGeek.  My comments are mere examples and I am not defending or degrading any view, only making known a few observations I have had in past.  Okay, that said:

In my life, I have known many African-Americans and "true" Africans.  One thing that has always been consistent is that Africans do not seem to like African-Americans.  Maybe they only say this to "the white guy" and I am either privy to special information or they think that is something I want to hear.  I don't know.  But the point stands that I have known Ethiopians, Somalians, Sudanese, Congoans (sic), Nigerians, South Africans, and various other African nation citizens.  The basic impressions they have conveyed to me is that African-Americans are petulant, conceited, and unnecessarily racist.  This always surprises me, since the African continent has seen more than it's fair share of colonialism, racism, and degradation by the whites.  This may be why I give their comments a lot of weight.  But, at the same time, I suspect they simply cannot relate to the trials that American blacks went through for several hundred years.

Conversely, I have known several African-Americans who have absolutely no bad opinions of native Africans, although I have seen some disregard for them, and a lack of empathy to African problems.  I cannot explain this, and I suspect that this simple disregard may be a root cause of the negativity I see from the Africans.  Perhaps this is something along the lines of  "many African-Americans wear our clothes and spout our culture, they claim to be black but they are something else".  I don't know, but I find this to be a captivatingly complex topic, not fit for this thread, but something that I thought I would mention.

I would point out, again, that I am not taking any sides and I only want to disseminate what I know.  I do not discourage this type of digression in the thread, but if it becomes unwieldy, then perhaps a new "Racism" thread should be started.

Barbarossa

Editorial note:

Yes, this is the new Racism thread.    These early posts are copied from the American Politics thread.   -Skiquote>

 

There maybe a difference in attitude between  Native Africans who live here then those who live  in Africa.

[duack 14]

Well from my experience, I've noticed that minorities are actually the most racist of all people. Im fortunate enough to have been born in Australia so I just say that to people whenever they ask me "where Im from" but my parents are  immigrants from crappy countries, and when they have conversations with other relatives, they always claim thjings that are untrue. For example, they always say that Australians are lazy and that they are just lucky to have inherited stuff from their parents when that is definantly not true. They also claim that Indians are "money scavangers" and that is definantly NOT TRUE and very hypocritical from my experience in retail. And also, when my uncle married an Indonesian, they claimed that she was just going to divorce him and take half his stuff after she gained citizenship to Australia, and of course they were once again wrong. Usually, Ive noticed that the smaller a minority group is, the better they seem to think they are

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[nazaguy 0]

Originally posted by: duack Well from my experience, I've noticed that minorities are actually the most racist of all people. Im fortunate enough to have been born in Australia so I just say that to people whenever they ask me "where Im from" but my parents are  immigrants from crappy countries, and when they have conversations with other relatives, they always claim thjings that are untrue. For example, they always say that Australians are lazy and that they are just lucky to have inherited stuff from their parents when that is definantly not true. They also claim that Indians are "money scavangers" and that is definantly NOT TRUE and very hypocritical from my experience in retail. And also, when my uncle married an Indonesian, they claimed that she was just going to divorce him and take half his stuff after she gained citizenship to Australia, and of course they were once again wrong. Usually, Ive noticed that the smaller a minority group is, the better they seem to think they arequote>

Well, my experience of racism is nearly always white against (insert ethnicity here). I myself have been the victim of racism, dispite my very white skin (im Arab). Not once has a Asian, or a Black person insulted me in a racist way. Now i know that everyone can be racist, but i still think that whites are more racist then most other races. Or their more vocal about it. Either one is bad.

Oh, and for the record, just because a countrys 3rd world, doesn't neccessarly make it a crappy country. Infact, i could think of a word some people use to describe that as....

[Duke87 1,070]

Thread meiosis. Fun.

Well, here's the thing about racism: it's human nature. We're naturally wired to fear that which is different from us and that which we don't understand. Used to be an adaptive trait when "that which is different from us" meant a predator that might try to eat us. But now that we're living in civilized society, it becomes maladaptive at times since that fear gets misplaced on harmless things, such as people of other races.

Of course, as people live together more and more, the misunderstanding will go away and people will get along better. It's particularly important that this happen during one's formative years (i.e., as a child), since as an adult the brain has already been trained and changing it is much harder.

In many areas, this already happens since there will be a lot of diversity in the schools. But in some areas where there aren't as many minorities, it may not.

It obviously used to be the case that the south was more racist than the north (Jim Crow laws and all that), but it's hard to say whether that's really stiil the case. The stereotype is of inbreeding rednecks who'll gladly go and lynch themselves a black guy, but that's just a stereotype. Besides, the "southern hospitality" thing contradicts it somewhat. I can tell you from experience that people in the south (and out west) tend to be much more friendly and courteous than people in the northeast, particularly cities in the northeast like New York or Boston.

Aside, a tidbit of trivia: the term "Jim Crow law" comes from a (then-)popular 19th century blackface comedian in New York. "Jim Crow" was the name of his black character.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Manticorefan said: Jewish families are famous for insisting that their children only marry Jews, black women are the most offended when a black man marries a white woman, etc. This isn't a racist or conservative vs. liberal reaction, it is a human reaction. A Darwinist would likely agree that it is a hardwired reaction, for protection of the family genetic lineage.quote>

While I am not a true Darwinist (I'm more of a neo-Darwinist), I agree mostly with your comment.  Since we are human, it is, technically, a human reaction.  However, this is evident in most species and is a major contributor to speciation.  Differences in appearance, along with geographic separation, physical incompatibility, and a couple of other drivers I am currently unable to recall, all lead down the line to both genetic isolation and ... oh, sorry, I digress...

Easy Bakes said: There maybe a difference in attitude between  Native Africans who live here then those who live  in Africa.quote>

Possibly, but I don't really see the logic behind that statement.  A lot of what you say depends heavily on individual characteristics.  For example, I am an American and whether I live in the US or abroad, I am still an American with all most of the American quirks.  I am sure there are Americans who would say I am "tainted", but I would also point out that I come from an American environment and I am as American as the next guy.  Native Africans living abroad are still Africans and they very likely have many of the same observations as their fellows.  A key point is that every African I have known (and I have known many, from different regions) has the same exact POV.  I don't disregard your comment, I just think it is a bit of a stretch.  =)

Barbarossaquote>

 

I guess attitude was  the wrong word to use, But what i meant was that those that have come to live here are more open minded, or are most likely better educated then the average African who has neven been outside the region they were born in. 

I guess the same could be said for those of any country/race that have chosen to move to another country, barring say a refugee situation.

[ilikehotdogsalot 307]

Is there racism in the U.S? Yes. Is there less of it then there was 40 years ago? Most likely.

We voted for a black president, I think that's a pretty good sign

[TheSixCents 0]

Although I am Irish (Born in Limerick) Ive lived in a suburb of Los Angeles most of my life.

To be quite honest, I think the biggest problem now is not direct racism, but "Jokes". For example, one would say they are not racist but point out somthing about a "N**ger" right away. Same thing is shown when people say they are pro gay marriage and turn around and make fun of someone for being a "F*g". TBH though, the biggest problem where I live is White/Mexican friction. I live in a more affluent area of my county, but as part of the districting I go to school at a 75% Hispanic school in much poorer Oxnard (I live in Camarillo). Strangley, I see alot more Anti-White Racism by Hispanics than the other way around.

As a side note we have at most 70 black people at our school of 2300.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: TheSixCents

To be quite honest, I think the biggest problem now is not direct racism, but "Jokes". For example, one would say they are not racist but point out somthing about a "N**ger" right away. Same thing is shown when people say they are pro gay marriage and turn around and make fun of someone for being a "F*g". quote>

Okay, response from someone who's in the category of not racist but will willingly throw pejorative terms around when not in mixed company:

I always like to repeat the old "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" phrase in relation to this matter. They're just words. It's no big deal. Especially if it's being used in a humorous context. Really, there's no point in getting all worked up over something somebody said. There are much more important things in the world to worry about.

I'm Italian. Go ahead and call me a "wop", "guinea", or "greaseball". I won't take offense to it. Use it in a good joke and I'll laugh at it.

It's basically impossible to offend me with words, actually. I don't take offense to much anything. I hear news stories of the type "Oh my god! He used the N word! Scandal!" and have the response "Yeah, he used the N word. So? Who cares? Why is that a big deal?". Seems like making a mountain out of something that isn't even a molehill if you ask me.

[masochist 111]

Originally posted by: Duke87 Okay, response from someone who's in the category of not racist but will willingly throw pejorative terms around when not in mixed company:

I always like to repeat the old "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" phrase in relation to this matter. They're just words. It's no big deal. Especially if it's being used in a humorous context. Really, there's no point in getting all worked up over something somebody said. There are much more important things in the world to worry about.

I'm Italian. Go ahead and call me a "wop", "guinea", or "greaseball". I won't take offense to it. Use it in a good joke and I'll laugh at it.

It's basically impossible to offend me with words, actually. I don't take offense to much anything. I hear news stories of the type "Oh my god! He used the N word! Scandal!" and have the response "Yeah, he used the N word. So? Who cares? Why is that a big deal?". Seems like making a mountain out of something that isn't even a molehill if you ask me.quote>

The deal is that words like that carry so much more weight than simply words--there are very distinct meanings behind them.  For example, to call someone a wetback is to go beyond simply saying "You're from Mexico;" it's more like saying "You're an outsider, and you don't belong here.  You'll always be part of the lower class, and no matter how much you've 'assimilated', you're still an alien."

It's the real reason why the N-word is perhaps the most derogatory word in the English language.  Calling someone that is like saying "Because of the color of your skin, you're beneath me," " I am better than you in every way because of something you have no power or choice over," or, "You're not even fully human." (2/3, remember?).  That's why it's a big deal; that's why those words are so heavy, and so taboo.

Funny enough, I actually think jokes are a good way to talk about racism and stereotypes.  I'm sure there are a lot of people who will avoid this thread simply because of the title, but I bet those same people will watch "Chappelle's Show" or "The Boondocks," because even though they're entertaining to watch, they still bring these issues out into the open to a wider audience who might not otherwise want to acknowledge that such things exist.  This is what making jokes about this does: it makes acknowledging racism much easier...and the best comedians (like Dave Chappelle or George Lopez) will joke about it without making a joke out of it.

For the exact opposite reason, it's hard to watch a movie like "Crash" or "Mississippi Burning," which address these issues head on without remorse.

Just the thoughts of a black guy who hasn't really had to deal with racism to the extent of others.

--edited to fix quote problem--

[Odainsaker 2,133]

In Hawaii, we have "haole," a word which generally means foreigner, but is almost always aimed at whites, and especially at U.S. Mainlanders. Native-blooded Hawaiians would be "aina" or "kama'aina," other non-native-blood Hawaii residents would be "local." In the past, "haole" would often be used descriptively, ie., "I'm part Chinese, part haole," "speak with slight haole accent," or "eat haole food like pizza," but there has definitely been an upsurge in perjorativeness in the term ("stupid haole tourist," "Kill a Haole Day") which is exposing an underlying racism, and after reading of complaints by some visiting whites, I do not use the word anymore as I might have in the past when living there.

[duack 14]

Originally posted by: nazaguy  Well, my experience of racism is nearly always white against (insert ethnicity here). I myself have been the victim of racism, dispite my very white skin (im Arab). Not once has a Asian, or a Black person insulted me in a racist way. Now i know that everyone can be racist, but i still think that whites are more racist then most other races. Or their more vocal about it. Either one is bad.

quote>

 

I'm assyrian, and Ive only ever experienced racism from arabs and lebanese people, even though I live in a very multicultural town in Australia were Arabs and lebs are a minority (Asians make up most of the population here). And the arabs are racist to everyone quite vocally. Everyone else seems to get along finely despite there being people from every continent on Earth in my school, but the 6 out of 7 lebs/ arabs in my grades were the most racist. So thats 6/7 compared to only 1 out of about 12 whites in my grade that were racist.

[The_Hutt 11]

I attend, literally, the most integrated and diverse public high school in the U.S. - our demographics are something like 33% Latino, 27% Asian, 25% white, 11% black, 4% other. No joke. We have students from all ends of the socioeconomic spectrum - kids who are just dirt poor all the way up to kids who live in million dollar homes and drive Mustangs to school.

There's very little racism in the sense that certain racial groups assail others (well, excluding gangs, but they haven't been a problem for awhile now). Most students at my school would probably agree. This is typical of those growing up in Californian cities.

I would say that there is some measure of overt discrimination - not so much in the negative connotation of the word, but in the sense that social groups are often formed along racial-socioeconomic lines. You mostly see Latinos hanging with each other, blacks hanging with each other, and Southeastern Asians hanging with each other. But predominantly middle-class-to-upper-class whites and Asians are probably the most integrated in terms of mingling of racial groups - although in my experience, the farther one goes up the socio-economic and achievement scale, the greater racial integration becomes. The handful of African Americans and Latinos who hang out with the aforementioned whites and Asians are typically high achievers like their peers.

It's an interesting melting pot.

[DocRorlach 25]

Interesting split of topics.

Having travelled to roughly about 60% of the planet in the last four-and-half decades, and worked in places as diverse as Tokyo, Ryadh, NYC, and Amsterdam, my take on the matter is that racsim - in any form - comes out more glaring in the US for two historical reasons, and one present day phenomena: historically the US is the only western country that started out on the idea of equality; it was its raison d'etre and its formation. 

Secondly, it openly endorsed and made use of slavery on a scale not seen anywhere else since the antiquity. And although Lincoln abolished it it wasn't until the Sixties that its racial frontiers began to crumble.

The modern-day sensation of political correctness also started in the US, thus adding weight to words beyond reason (the case of an LA counsellor springs to mind, who was fired because he used the word "*****rdly" - which actually means miserly and originates in Norwegian).

But I would agree that every people are racist. It stems from self-preservation, as a people as well as individuals. We classify at first glance, not because we're mean, but because we're lazy: it takes too much mental effort to go beyond sterotypes.

However, racsim far beyond that currently "available" in the US of A is re-emerging in Europe. Formerly liberal Holland now has a population were more than 30% of the country's inhabitants are foreign-born. That cannot work, and is not welcome because in a country as this it leads to an excessive focus on the plight of the foreigners, to the dtriment of the locals. Hence the backlash.

Being the direct result of a cultural mix of, in direct lineage, at least four different nationalities and two distinct racial groups, I have come to the conclusion that all that mixing is an inherently bad idea. And when it comes down to it the problem is not even racial but cultural: and while you may be able to mix races and demographics, you simply cannot mix cultures. And any time of living in larger cities, with the different ethnic neighborhoods and subcultures - and the conflicts arising from both - will show you that.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: masochist

The deal is that words like that carry so much more weight than simply words--there are very distinct meanings behind them.  For example, to call someone a wetback is to go beyond simply saying "You're from Mexico;" it's more like saying "You're an outsider, and you don't belong here.  You'll always be part of the lower class, and no matter how much you've 'assimilated', you're still an alien."

It's the real reason why the N-word is perhaps the most derogatory word in the English language.  Calling someone that is like saying "Because of the color of your skin, you're beneath me," " I am better than you in every way because of something you have no power or choice over," or, "You're not even fully human." (2/3, remember?).  That's why it's a big deal; that's why those words are so heavy, and so taboo.quote>

I dunno. I always consider the use of such terms in an insulting manner as really just a more adult form of kids on the playground calling each other things like "boogerface". The intent is to offend. As such, just like with teasing, if you let it offend you, you give the person using the word what they want and they win. But if you don't let it offend you, you deny them that pleasure and that power, and they lose.

By being offended by such terms, we only encourage those who would use them in an insulting manner to continue doing so. But if we shrug them off and don't react to them like they're anything special, they lose that desired effect and thus people will stop using them. A racist person wouldn't call a black guy the n-word if it didn't net the reaction it does, after all.

Besides, offense is in the eye of the beholder. One can offend people unintentionally, and so can one intend to offend but fail. While intent is not meaningless, it's what actually occurs that governs the situation. Someone who offends, even if it's unintentionally, will be compelled to apologize.

Now, with me personally, the other aspect of it is the shock value. I enjoy the use of such words since I find the kind of reactions people have to them amusing. As in, "You're offended, and I'm laughing at you for that. Why do you let that offend you? I wouldn't  be offended by it!"

It's another way in which I have fun at other people's expense, essentially.

Those words are quite taboo, but I see absolutely no reason why they ought to be. I tend to shun the idea of taboos in general. Things which there are an actual logical, rational reason not to do is one thing, but things which we only avoid doing for emotional reasons and/or reasons of tradition... that I don't like.

Also, it was 3/5ths, not 2/3rds.