Foo - Was that racist?

I was at the returns section of a store today (x-mas shopping is torture, BTW) when the cashier told another customer to go talk to the guy in shoes. She said, "His name is ... He's African American."

Am I being a bad American if I'm not offended by that?

by strict semantic definition it was racist, yes. they differentiated or discriminated by race.

Not that it was necessarily intended as derogatory or negatively.

"talk to the tall guy that appears to be good at basketball"

it was also sexist.

Should have said "that person over there". "he's" implies that only males are allowed to sell shoes.

For best results, try to arrange it so that there are fifty or so people in the direction you are pointing and then say "just go find the human being over there among those human beings, it will help you."

whoops, that was specie-ist...

"go find that life form over there among those other life forms"

whoops, that was specie-ist...

"go find that life form over there among those other life forms ... "

wearing a [insert colour] [insert garment]

whoops, that was specie-ist...

"go find that life form over there among those other life forms"

why do you hate zombies?

why do you hate zombies?

I lol'd

why do you hate zombies?

It's not my fault...

I was raised by rabid anti-zombie bigots.

All this damn "political correctness" drives me nuts. Yes, the shoe salesperson was a he. Yes, he was African American. The cashier gave the customer the necessary information to find the shoe salesman. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Nothing. Not one thing. It was a fact. The shoe salesperson was African American and a he. ENOUGH OF THIS STUPID, IDIOTIC POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!!!!


GGGGGGAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!:mad::mad::mad::mad::bang::bang:

Am I being a bad American if I'm not offended by that?You're being a bad USian if you're looking out for things to be offended by.

Chill out. Quit trying to inject everyday life with drama.

quit trying to quit trying.

All this damn "political correctness" drives me nuts. Yes, the shoe salesperson was a he. Yes, he was African American. The cashier gave the customer the necessary information to find the shoe salesman. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Nothing. Not one thing. It was a fact. The shoe salesperson was African American and a he. ENOUGH OF THIS STUPID, IDIOTIC POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!!!!


GGGGGGAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!:mad::mad::mad::mad::bang::bang:

ya want fries w/ dat?

ya want fries w/ dat?

I'd rather have an AR-15, but sure.


Oh wait. Are they curly fries? Or can I not call them curly fries, because that might be discrimination against other types of fries?

I'd rather have an AR-15, but sure.


Oh wait. Are they curly fries? Or can I not call them curly fries, because that might be discrimination against other types of fries?

you un-american! They're FREEDOM Fries!!!:mad:

you un-american! They're FREEDOM Fries!!!:mad:

Where did I say "french fries" in my previous post? I called them fries, because I did not was to be accused of being discriminatory against fries.

Where did I say "french fries" in my previous post? I called them fries, because I did not was to be accused of being discriminatory against fries.

I'm not liking the cut of your jib...it's Guantanamo Bay for you, son!:notamused:

ooops - P&R, here we come:o

Where did I say "french fries" in my previous post? I called them fries, because I did not was to be accused of being discriminatory against fries.Quit yer whinin', cracker.

I'm not liking the cut of your jib...it's Guantanamo Bay for you, son!:notamused:

Bring it, *****.

*pulls out M-4, loads a 203 and a full mag*

Cut me a switch, Jeb!

Err, I mean "European-American of indiscriminate gender."

I hope you're just trolling because as a serious question this is stupid.

Though some could say the descriptor of "African American" is useless and more stupid than "black", considering one is a descriptor, and the other is a guess at their ancestry due to just their color (consider a black brit visiting America...) where as the other is just color.

Case and point, if I'm in a place with lots of say Mexicans, and they say "the white guy over there" I really wouldn't care, it isn't malicious, it's just a tool to help pick me out when someone needs to find me, to try to be offended by it just makes you look horribly pathetic.

Once you try to get offended by non malicious actions, you know you've been broken by the PC idiots. It defeats the entire reason for political correctness and actually makes it a weapon for more segregation and violence.


Learn what racism is:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racism

*pulls out M-4, loads a 203 and a full mag*No you didn't.

You all are being racist in assuming that the store was majority white. The store could have been majority African American and the cashier was trying to be a jerk. :p

You all are being racist in assuming that the store was majority white. The store could have been majority African American and the cashier was trying to be a jerk. :p

Well it's better than to "talk to the guy in shoes" (har har, I know shoe dept. but still).

I hope you're just trolling because as a serious question this is stupid.

Though some could say the descriptor of "African American" is useless and more stupid than "black", considering one is a descriptor, and the other is a guess at their ancestry due to just their color (consider a black brit visiting America...) where as the other is just color.

Case and point, if I'm in a place with lots of say Mexicans, and they say "the white guy over there" I really wouldn't care, it isn't malicious, it's just a tool to help pick me out when someone needs to find me, to try to be offended by it just makes you look horribly pathetic.

Once you try to get offended by non malicious actions, you know you've been broken by the PC idiots. It defeats the entire reason for political correctness and actually makes it a weapon for more segregation and violence.

Most people I know who use the term (or another like it) will use it negatively. As in "Did u hear about the ____ guy who killed his wife?" Whereas if it was a white guy, they;d just say "Did u hear about the guy who killed his wife?"

On the one hand, you could argue that whites being the majority in the US (Majority being a term and concept exclusive of actual population numbers), thse two statements make sense - you are clarifying in the former that the crime was committed by an individual who is a minority, outside a norm, ostensibly unusual or noteworthy. Inasmuch, it still is not necessarily negative or deragatory.

However, language and communication do not occur in a sterile lab environment; inflection, emotion and other contextual factors can and do convey positive or negative shadings. I have heard the "_____ guy" statements enough times (too many, actually) to know derogatory statements when I hear them.


Not having been there I can only guess that the employee was genuinely being helpful and trying to make it easier for the customer to find the person who can help them.

But what if the guy in shoes was white. average height. Hair of an average length, indistinguishable age of anywhere from 25 to 45, etc etc? what do you say to the customer then? "Look for the ugly guy in shoes?" "He's the dorky guy in bad pants?" "you'll know him by the BO as soon as you enter the shoe dept.?"

Once you start to objectify you run the risk of offending even if you didn't intend offense. Annoying? maybe. Pick a notable trait about yourself and imagine it being used to single you out....maybe it wouldn't bother you in the least. Then again maybe it would.

In any case, it is racist and discriminatory to differentiate between anything....that's not negative in and of itself. It's just being able to tell different things apart. Semantics, ok, but maybe we need to be clear on this stuff.

However - even if the employee didn't mean any harm (and I am guessing they absolutely did not) their statement still carries weight. It's just a fact. I think the OP was just sensitive to that.


has it moved to P&R yet?:lol:

You all are being racist in assuming that the store was majority white. The store could have been majority African American and the cashier was trying to be a jerk. :p

make that two switches, Jeb

http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/4231/potkettleblackpn2.jpg

let us put down our racism my friends and go back to judging people by the type of bicycle they ride.

let us put down our racism my friends and go back to judging people by the type of bicycle they ride.

the guy in shoes rides a Free Spirit. He sux

whoops, that was specie-ist...

"go find that life form over there among those other life forms"

Whoops, it was thingy-ist.

Oh SNAPist!!:eek:

Was the cashier comment a racist one?... Yeah. Often people see nothing wrong with it when your own race is not the one being pointed out. In real life, with the people close to me, I start calling them Gringos (which is also not meant to be offensive in any way) till they get it. Some never do tho, and they are good people...

let us put down our racism my friends and go back to judging people by the type of bicycle they ride.

or by the silly musical instruments they play while riding. That tuba has to be the silliest

that would make you an instrumentalist


wait...

damn tubist!
http://207.237.40.194/rberbec/images/Picasso963works/Picasso%201910-19/Picasso%201912/Picasso%20Guitar%20and%20Violin%20,%20circa%201912,%2065.5x54.3%20cm,%20Eremit.jpg

too many people discriminate against anti-matter.

quantum stateists.

[QUOTE=pgoat;8015722]damn tubist!


:roflmao2: I must be slow. That took a second reading before I got it

Most people I know who use the term (or another like it) will use it negatively. As in "Did u hear about the ____ guy who killed his wife?" Whereas if it was a white guy, they;d just say "Did u hear about the guy who killed his wife?"

On the one hand, you could argue that whites being the majority in the US (Majority being a term and concept exclusive of actual population numbers), thse two statements make sense - you are clarifying in the former that the crime was committed by an individual who is a minority, outside a norm, ostensibly unusual or noteworthy. Inasmuch, it still is not necessarily negative or deragatory.

However, language and communication do not occur in a sterile lab environment; inflection, emotion and other contextual factors can and do convey positive or negative shadings. I have heard the "_____ guy" statements enough times (too many, actually) to know derogatory statements when I hear them.


Not having been there I can only guess that the employee was genuinely being helpful and trying to make it easier for the customer to find the person who can help them.

But what if the guy in shoes was white. average height. Hair of an average length, indistinguishable age of anywhere from 25 to 45, etc etc? what do you say to the customer then? "Look for the ugly guy in shoes?" "He's the dorky guy in bad pants?" "you'll know him by the BO as soon as you enter the shoe dept.?"

Once you start to objectify you run the risk of offending even if you didn't intend offense. Annoying? maybe. Pick a notable trait about yourself and imagine it being used to single you out....maybe it wouldn't bother you in the least. Then again maybe it would.

In any case, it is racist and discriminatory to differentiate between anything....that's not negative in and of itself. It's just being able to tell different things apart. Semantics, ok, but maybe we need to be clear on this stuff.

However - even if the employee didn't mean any harm (and I am guessing they absolutely did not) their statement still carries weight. It's just a fact. I think the OP was just sensitive to that.


has it moved to P&R yet?:lol:

And that post is exactly why political correctness fails at any logic or actually providing anything but a hindrance to the idea of racism, it makes it so trivial and become a joke.

To redefine racism as "anything to do with race" is a fallacy in the first place, it's an oversimplification of the word and it's meaning. Mainly by those with low slumping foreheads that can't get over that a word means more than it's components especially when the word has strong historical and sociological context.

Sorry, calling a guy African American isn't the same as saying a guy is ugly or smells bad, unless you have a real personal hang up on African Americans... that being black is similar to not bathing or something. It's the same as saying "The guy with the glasses", "The guy wearing a hat", "The guy who is wearing a green shirt", being black isn't a social stigma, and shouldn't be treated as such. To say that it's "untouchable" places blacks in a context that is unlike any other... a racist situation of it's own.

Then again, for every racist we need an anti-thesis to him, guess that is people like you, digging up racism where there is none to be found.

stop being different!

If everyone were to just be the same then we wouldn't have to worry about people getting offended.


Remember, you are unique, just like everybody else.

If everyone were to just be the same then we wouldn't have to worry about people getting offended.
This is wrong, people have their inherent need to be offended, otherwise they don't feel like they're getting anything out of life.

And that post is exactly why political correctness fails at any logic or actually providing anything but a hindrance to the idea of racism, it makes it so trivial and become a joke.

To redefine racism as "anything to do with race" is a fallacy in the first place, it's an oversimplification of the word and it's meaning. Mainly by those with low slumping foreheads that can't get over that a word means more than it's components especially when the word has strong historical and sociological context.

Sorry, calling a guy African American isn't the same as saying a guy is ugly or smells bad, unless you have a real personal hang up on African Americans... that being black is similar to not bathing or something.

exactly what I said. unless you're dumb, you'll know when the person saying it does. I'm willing to bet the employee didn't have a hang up. It still has connotations, whether you like it or not.

Pick a trait of yours and try it. are you bald? fat ugly stupid short old skinny brainy young tall? any of those can have positive or negative connotations. You might not like having those traits pointed out.

Sorry, racist means differentiating between races. Period. There are differences between the races. If a doctor recognizes different risk factors in his patients based on race and varies his advice accordingly, he is practicing racism, albeit for a sensible and positive reason. A person who hires a less qualified applicant for a job based on their skin color is also practicing racism, but for negative reasons.

I doubt the employee in this case meant any harm. If the customer found the shoe clerk, no harm was likely to have been done. If the shoe clerk was within ear shot it may have been a different story....maybe not.

Finally i highlighted part of your post. Care to elaborate?:)

P & R in 4...3...2...

fat ugly stupid short old skinny brainy young tall? any of those can have positive or negative connotations.

"You're such a stupid idiot, Lenny."
"Oh, that's so sweet of you to notice!"

:P

"Which one is Huhenio?"

"You're such a stupid idiot, Lenny."
"Oh, that's so sweet of you to notice!"

:P

squiggy?:love:

"Which one is Huhenio?"

The one with positive connotations.

squiggy?:love:No, I just bathed. Why, did I miss a spot?

No, I just bathed. Why, did I miss a spot?

*Snif sniff*

no, we cool:thumb: