(December 9, 2015 at 11:30 am)bennyboy Wrote:In those situations it isn't the word that dehumanises them, the word is interchangeable to the dehumanisation.(December 9, 2015 at 9:08 am)paulpablo Wrote: It isn't the word that does the damage.
Yeah, it is. These words serve to dehumanize. And once someone is seen is sub-human, then they are outside the umbrella of protection of "civilized" fold-- you know, good guys. Like. . . white and stuff.
It's hard to point a flame thrower at Korean civilians. It's easy to point one at "fucking Gooks." It's hard to attack a homosexual person. It's easy to beat up a "fucking faggit." Same thing goes for "fucking niggers."
The word can help a person dehumanise another person, or it could be used to flirt with that person, or joke with them. I've been called a Brit before by American girls on chat rooms who are flirting, and I might called a Scottish person I like a Scotty, but if I use the word paki in work id get fired because people say this word is racist.
I got called honkey by my ex girlfriend who was Bengali and I called her chocolate cheeks, the word negro is considered racist but it's derived from a word that means black.
I get your point words can be used to dehumanise and antagonise but the individual words don't make a difference.
The words nigger paki or honkey might not even exist in 1000 years time and it's not important if they do or don't but attitudes are important.
And I don't think it would be easy to harm random homosexuals, black people or Koreans no matter what name you give them and I don't think you would either.
Are you ready for the fire? We are firemen. WE ARE FIREMEN! The heat doesn’t bother us. We live in the heat. We train in the heat. It tells us that we’re ready, we’re at home, we’re where we’re supposed to be. Flames don’t intimidate us. What do we do? We control the flame. We control them. We move the flames where we want to. And then we extinguish them.
Impersonation is treason.
