Ethnic Stereotyping and Slurs

Moriah_Conquering_Wind

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2006
23,322
2,233
✟34,164.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Moriah has a good friend what bes German and one day introduced him to its circle at the time. And they decides they don't likes him because he bes German AND liked listening to the band Joy Division. They claimed that made him a "Nazi" and they refused to hang out with us anymore because we bes friends with a "Nazi".

Nevermind that Moriah's friend DID have a childhood fascination with Hitler -- many disaffected teens go there or to similar places -- fact remains he bes no "Nazi", never espoused any sentiments like that and Moriah known him all his life. A pothead he could certainly be accused of being! ;) But not a "Nazi".

Thing being though, they ONLY harassed him like this because he bes German. Had he been French or Mexican or African-American they would never have considered him a "Nazi" just for liking Joy Division's music. :doh:

Bes there any truth to negative ethnic stereotypes, though? Where do they originate from? Bes they a combination of traits-patterning with "seeing in the worst light" of prejudice? Or bes they pure hostile inventions? Or what?

Would it EVER be justified to consider someone to be fulfilling that type of negative stereotype? What if, for example, someone of a particular ethnic background expressed sentiments or ideals completely in keeping with some negative "stereotype" associated with that background? :scratch:
 

spinningtutu

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2005
2,521
177
✟3,648.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
love will tear us apart...

The whole "Nazi" label is overused. It has become an insult and functions as a way to villify one... I don't see why liking Joy Division makes one a Nazi... or for that matter, any other band. Siouxsie had to write the pro-Jewish song "Israel" to "prove" she wasn't a Nazi (she got accused of being both a Nazi and a Satanist back in the day, neither of which were true).

I like Joy Division & I think my political leanings are practically opposite Nazism.
 
Upvote 0

Gukkor

Senior Veteran
Jun 14, 2006
2,137
128
Visit site
✟18,202.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
If anyone here's ever seen a cartoon called "The Boondocks," they should be familiar my views on this matter. No group of people is bound by the stereotypes associated with them, but if they so choose, they can most certainly act in a way that conforms to, and thus promotes a given stereotype. Their behavior reflects poorly on their entire group.
 
Upvote 0

Moriah_Conquering_Wind

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2006
23,322
2,233
✟34,164.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Good point, Gukkor. So what do you think -- would someone of a particular "ethnic" heritage thus have a greater responsibility to avoid the near-occasions of feeding a stereotype and thus reflecting poorly upon his or her "people-group" as a result?

Have to admit as much as it has been lifelong dedicated strongly to the eradication of stereotypes and refusal to participate in racism or bigotry of any sort, it had an experience recently it found chilling. On another website, a person living in Germany (thus ostensibly presumed to be of German descent) posted a severely tasteless joke with a 'punch line' referencing Jewish people numbering nearly two dozen as fitting into a car ashtray. Now granted, coming from anyone this "joke" would have been in severely poor taste. But coming from a person with a German background -- again, as much as Moriah despises stereotyping and strives not to contribute to it or to racial prejudices -- honestly, this one found it just CHILLING on top of tasteless.

And it wagers her "Joy Division loving" friend would agree. Provided he bes not stoned. ;)
 
Upvote 0

Sylvanspirits

Senior Member
Aug 30, 2007
1,122
79
Washington State, United States
✟16,697.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Bes there any truth to negative ethnic stereotypes, though? Where do they originate from? Bes they a combination of traits-patterning with "seeing in the worst light" of prejudice? Or bes they pure hostile inventions? Or what?

Would it EVER be justified to consider someone to be fulfilling that type of negative stereotype? What if, for example, someone of a particular ethnic background expressed sentiments or ideals completely in keeping with some negative "stereotype" associated with that background? :scratch:

I think negative stereotypes originate from a few bad apples, and some people associate them with people who they think fit that mold regardless of whether or not they actually do. Generally people of certian races are more likely to be associated with certian stereotypes, like a German to a nazi or a Mexican to an illegal immigrant. I think the only possible exception where it might not be wrong would be in a few rare cases, for example, saying someone who held membership in a neo-nazi organization and expressed the belief that Hitler was right to kill the Jews was a "nazi", because it would be a statement of fact, not a stereotype. Although I suppose that means it's not a stereotype anymore... :scratch:

On the whole though, stereotypes are overused and hurtful. I've known two German exchange students, they were both really nice people, and the word "nazi" never even entered my mind when thinking of them.
 
Upvote 0

Moriah_Conquering_Wind

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2006
23,322
2,233
✟34,164.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Just like it would not have entered Moriah's mind for her long-time friend, either. (Or for the 2 exchange students IT met many years ago, or just about anyone else.)

Although it occurs now to Moriah perhaps by posting that stupid tasteless joke that other person bes trying to bait ppls into making that comparison so they could go off on them for thinking "such a thing" when in reality they'd invited the comparison in the first place. Would not put it past some, really, to pull a stunt like that ...

Honestly, what personal satisfaction some people derive from being noisome tarbabies, it cannot fathom. :(
 
Upvote 0

Izdaari Eristikon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2007
6,174
447
69
Post Falls, Idaho
✟32,831.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Married
I have concerns about anyone, regardless of ethnicity, who says positive things about a totalitarian ideology (ANY totalitarian ideology -- Communist, Nazi, Fascist, Islamist, etc. -- I have no tolerance for any of them). I think those concerns are very legitimate, since I think the whole totalitarian concept is pure evil, one of Satan's nastier plots against humanity. But I have the good sense not to judge someone about it until I'm sure they really believe that stuff.
 
Upvote 0

Izdaari Eristikon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2007
6,174
447
69
Post Falls, Idaho
✟32,831.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Married
Totalitarianism brings out what bes BEST in humanity though Izdaari. Would you then say I have no place in the Universe?
Moriah, I think you're wonderful! But I've never perceived you as a totalitarian, just somebody who's had an unusual and very tough life. It seems to have given you wisdom and insights that most of us don't have. I don't doubt that totalitarianism can be used for good, since God is able to use anything for good. And yes, I know of many, many cases where having to struggle against totalitarianism has brought out the best in humanity. Satan must find that very frustrating, the way even his best schemes are turned against him.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Moriah_Conquering_Wind

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2006
23,322
2,233
✟34,164.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Moriah, I think you're wonderful! But I've never perceived you as a totalitarian, just somebody who's had an unusual and very tough life. It seems to have given you wisdom and insights that most of us don't have. I don't doubt that totalitarianism can be used for good, since God is able to use anything for good. And yes, I know of many, many cases where having to struggle against totalitarianism has brought out the best in humanity. Satan must find that very frustrating, the way even his best schemes are turned against him.

strange this division you make. why would bringing out the best in humanity be considered thwarting? consider the tower of Babel - a monument of human achievement. one mind, one language, one accord. It can do it again.
 
Upvote 0

Izdaari Eristikon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2007
6,174
447
69
Post Falls, Idaho
✟32,831.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Married
strange this division you make. why would bringing out the best in humanity be considered thwarting? consider the tower of Babel - a monument of human achievement. one mind, one language, one accord. It can do it again.
The best in humanity is loving the individuals who comprise it. Sacrificing the individuals for the sake of some collective achievement is the opposite of everything this one believes in. The only sacrifice we need on that scale has already been made on Calvary, and the only world government worthy of us will be when Christ returns and leads it Himself (if that's the correct interpretation of Revelation -- I'm not enough of a scholar to say for sure that it is).
 
Upvote 0

Im_A

Legend
May 10, 2004
20,111
1,494
✟35,359.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
In Relationship
The best in humanity is loving the individuals who comprise it. Sacrificing the individuals for the sake of some collective achievement is the opposite of everything this one believes in. The only sacrifice we need on that scale has already been made on Calvary, and the only world government worthy of us will be when Christ returns and leads it Himself (if that's the correct interpretation of Revelation -- I'm not enough of a scholar to say for sure that it is).

couldn't "god" be compared to the totalitarianism that you speak against tho? (i'm not meaning to be disrespectful here. :) )

this ruler, this king, required the death of an innocent man for a various amounts of collective acheivements. be it, take away sin, bring communion with him and his creation...the lamb of God to bridge the gap that sin created.

i would hate to think that because i'm able to have benefits from this, that it seems more just than the collective sacrifices totalitarian rulers called for and committed.
 
Upvote 0

Izdaari Eristikon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2007
6,174
447
69
Post Falls, Idaho
✟32,831.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Married
couldn't "god" be compared to the totalitarianism that you speak against tho? (i'm not meaning to be disrespectful here. :) )

this ruler, this king, required the death of an innocent man for a various amounts of collective acheivements. be it, take away sin, bring communion with him and his creation...the lamb of God to bridge the gap that sin created.

i would hate to think that because i'm able to have benefits from this, that it seems more just than the collective sacrifices totalitarian rulers called for and committed.
I can think of several obvious differences. The great sacrifice was made by the King's own Son, not by one of his subjects. The Son was a volunteer, not an unwilling victim. And although the suffering Christ endured was very real and unimaginably awful, His death was only temporary.
 
Upvote 0

Im_A

Legend
May 10, 2004
20,111
1,494
✟35,359.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
In Relationship
I can think of several obvious differences. The great sacrifice was made by the King's own Son, not by one of his subjects. The Son was a volunteer, not an unwilling victim. And although the suffering Christ endured was very real and unimaginably awful, His death was only temporary.

kind of hard to see it as obvious tho don't you think? the king's own son is supposedly god himself which proves us BOTH wrong eh? :p

but with that, if Jesus knew his purpose and sweated blood, than was it really his choice?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DeanM

Well-Known Member
Jun 4, 2007
3,633
402
59
✟5,870.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
couldn't "god" be compared to the totalitarianism that you speak against tho? (i'm not meaning to be disrespectful here. :) )

this ruler, this king, required the death of an innocent man for a various amounts of collective acheivements. be it, take away sin, bring communion with him and his creation...the lamb of God to bridge the gap that sin created.

i would hate to think that because i'm able to have benefits from this, that it seems more just than the collective sacrifices totalitarian rulers called for and committed.


Hi Tat,

Consider the statement I bolded in your quote.

Did God require the death of Jesus to to take away sin? God, being all-powerful, should not require this. I think humanity required this.

Case in point: Let's say God waved His hand and took away all sin and did so with no explanation to us. We would be sinless in all we did, and therefore have no distinction between right and wrong. We would destroy ourselves.

This would be like a sheppard who let his flock wander off a cliff.

But consider how our sin was taken away. We can now understand that sin is wrong in God's eyes because of the sacrifice that God had to make.

In doing so, humanity now sees that the wages of sin are death. God showed us that for our benefit.

Now, the flock (mostly) stays near the sheppard, which preserves the flock.

I am not saying this as part of the discussion of 'totalarianism,' but to state my view on who 'required' Jesus' death. I don't think that -God- required this sacrifice, but His children did.
 
Upvote 0

Im_A

Legend
May 10, 2004
20,111
1,494
✟35,359.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Hi Tat,

Consider the statement I bolded in your quote.

Did God require the death of Jesus to to take away sin? God, being all-powerful, should not require this. I think humanity required this.

Case in point: Let's say God waved His hand and took away all sin and did so with no explanation to us. We would be sinless in all we did, and therefore have no distinction between right and wrong. We would destroy ourselves.

This would be like a sheppard who let his flock wander off a cliff.

But consider how our sin was taken away. We can now understand that sin is wrong in God's eyes because of the sacrifice that God had to make.

In doing so, humanity now sees that the wages of sin are death. God showed us that for our benefit.

Now, the flock (mostly) stays near the sheppard, which preserves the flock.

I am not saying this as part of the discussion of 'totalarianism,' but to state my view on who 'required' Jesus' death. I don't think that required this sacrifice, but His children did.

the only question i'd ask with this is, how are we, a people dead to sin to know what is required to heal us?
 
Upvote 0

Izdaari Eristikon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2007
6,174
447
69
Post Falls, Idaho
✟32,831.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Married
kind of hard to see it as obvious tho don't you think? the king's own son is supposedly god himself which proves us BOTH wrong eh? :p

but with that, if Jesus knew his purpose and sweated blood, than was it really his choice?
Yes, the King's own Son is in a mysterious, hard to fathom way, the King Himself. But if anything, that just makes my point the stronger.

Jesus was very reluctantly willing, but still he consented.

[bible]Matthew 26:42[/bible]
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Moriah_Conquering_Wind

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2006
23,322
2,233
✟34,164.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The best in humanity is loving the individuals who comprise it. Sacrificing the individuals for the sake of some collective achievement is the opposite of everything this one believes in. The only sacrifice we need on that scale has already been made on Calvary, and the only world government worthy of us will be when Christ returns and leads it Himself (if that's the correct interpretation of Revelation -- I'm not enough of a scholar to say for sure that it is).

Sorry Izdaari. It remembers not its part in this conversation.
The best in humanity, it thinks, bes arousing truth from the muckpit ashes of propaganda, obloquy, lies and spin in whats drownsy them public opinion; turnsy them tides without and within, and raises up them warriors whats do battle with weapons not carnal.

Individuals bes sacrificed in the process, however, the long range goal bes met in the betterment of the species.

Till next generation what has no knowing what it all cost. Hence the reason there bes never world peace in this lifetime or this world timestream as it bes vectored present. Them humans whats generation 2 or 3 removed from them whats achieved it, havesy no notion what it cost to achieve or how it bes in the face of what bes before it. They cannot learn from history so they undoes it. Bes happens these past decade what with them seeksy undoing the 1960s. But they cannot prevail; the children of the 1990s know better and their children born in the season of mutable fire shall arise and grasp the mantle before them beginning five years hence. Pray you marksy.
 
Upvote 0