Moderators Promoting Racism?

[kaleokahu]

Today there appeared in General Chowhounding an overtly racist post entitled: "What is Whitey Food?" It is remarkable not for its racism, but rather for the fact that A MOD SPLIT AND REPOSTED this offensive bigotry!

Had I posted a thread entitled "What Is Darkey Food?" I would probably be banned for life.

What gives?

[Jacquilynne]

After discussing the situation internally with staff and volunteers, we've decided to alter the title and moderator note on the General Topics thread.

While it was our intention only to neutrally mirror the language under discussion by members of the site, several members have made it clear that they feel that moderators using the phrase give it a level of official approval that was particularly upsetting to them. As well, using the phrase in the title of a thread gave it prominence in the board index, making it unavoidable even for those who would choose not to read the thread.

Because this thread has started to reach the length where many people (including some staff and moderators) are unable to open it, we're going to lock it, but have started a new thread: http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/795964

[paulj]

Why didn't you squawk about
http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/585076
'How do you define trashy' thread? It's been active for ages.
"A post here made me wonder: how do you define trashy? As in White trash cooking? Or do you have another definition? Do you think it is a good thing, a bad thing, or sometimes sorta fun?"

[Jase]

He didn't squawk about it because it doesn't give him an excuse to complain about the mods.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, jase:

Of those racial slurs listed in the link below, which do you think the Mods should actively be putting into thread titles?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_nig...

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Veggo]

My gringo chicken mole would be a good start. I don't have the skill to make the genuine article, but it's still pretty good.
We did the whole "Is gringo PC?" thing years ago here, let's let it be.

[bobcam90]

I've always been under the impression that gringo just means foreigner. How could that be a problem?

ETA: Just checked Spanish/English and Portuguese/English dictionaries and in both it just translates as "foreigner."

[mcf]

So is your objection to the word, or to the moderators??

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Paul:

I'm not sure to whom you directed your post. If it was me, I didn't (and won't) squawk about that one because (a) I hadn't seen it; (b) "trashy" is not an intrinsically offensive racial epithet; (c) "trashy" can be used to describe food (e.g., as made from nutritionally bereft/health-damaging ingredients, or junk food); and (d) the Mods didn't tacitly approve a nasty epithet by republishing "What is White Trash Food?" under its own title. I'm sure there are other good reasons as well.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[rworange]

I am a whitey. I claim the term to take away the power from the word.

I think you might have hit on the hidden racism in Chowhound. We've been brainwashed to think delicious food can only be Mexican, Asian, Eastern European, African, etc.

But whitey food? It has been shamefully segregated to its own board ... Chains.

Think about that term ... chains. And don't even get me started on the implications of 'dumbed down".

We all know that is code. Sure there's the Taco Bell, P.F. Chang, etc discussed on that board .. but we all know as one poster discussed in the Whitey thread it is "'Takes' or reinterpretations of ethnic cuisines such as taco soup, spaghetti and meatballs, chicken kiev."

So I say after all this talk about the term, we get back to discussing Whitey cuisine to understnd it and appriciate it fully. Here's a start

Why would anyone go to Denny’s these days?

http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/795911

[Servorg]

His food was so white he had to wear shades...

[mcf]

"But whitey food? It has been shamefully segregated to its own board ... Chains."

LOL... and hospitals!

[kaleokahu]

Hi, mcf:

"But darkey food? It has been shamefully segregated to its own board ... Chains."

Why would anyone go to KFC or Ribbins these days when there's so much watermelon around?

Knee-slappin' good humor there.

Kaleo

[rworange]

I find it offensive you dismiss my claims of oppression and demand you ask the moderators delete your post.I'm every bit as sincere in my campaign to elevate this cuiisine and remove the stigma attached as you are to try to opress it. I insist the stigma of the word be removed by making it mainstream.

I will let other groups speak for themselves on when and if use of other words are used on this site. However, the issue you are persuing is with the word 'whitey'.Just what do you thing the "W" stands for in my handle?

Anyway, I move on to post about pupusas and banh mi ... two foods I learned about on this site and not only taught me about new cuisines but gave me insight into the cultures responsible for this food ... and as I said before that is the real way this site has worked to overcome racism. Post about food. .

[mcf]

If you had a sense of humor, we wouldn't have this stupid thread. Somebody's irony meter is broken.

[bobcam90]

So you don't think French, Italian, Belgian, English, Irish, etc. foods are whitey foods?

[rworange]

As discussed, only if altered to suit the whitey palate. A true whitey would snigger at 'spotted dick' and the thought of eating such a dish would not be palpable.

[bobcam90]

That's totally not true. I'd say the majority of the people I know who are white eat straight up other cuisines, unaltered. That's why to me whitey food has no meaning. I assume you meant palatable :)

[rworange]

Yeah, palatable .. but what can you expect from a dumb whitey?

I think most people who jumped on the term in this thread, didn;t read the Whitey topic on the General Board which was interesting from the original perspective of Canadian whitey food ... poutine was one mentioned

When it got moved to the General board it got more inclusive of all of North American. But one of the points ... US or Canada ... was eating straight up the food of other countries.

[bobcam90]

Sorry. I was questioning your post above, not the OP.

[kaleokahu]

Ya, and she was having "Whitey lunch". You go, RWO!

[paulj]

Are you using 'true whitey' in the true Scotsman sense? Or do you have a more precise definition? Is it USA specific (as in white trash) or generally applicable to Canadians? Could it be used for a Brit of Anglo-Saxon-Norman stock?

[rworange]

Well, there is a thread on the General Board discussing the cuisine. This thread is about the use of the word and racism on the site. Instead of trying to get people to eat words, it seems more productive to guide people to eating good food ... whatever that might be. It seems even Denny's still has some good food such as Moon over My Hammy.

[paulj]

What's been settled in the 500 posts here? That's twice the number on the long running 'trashy' thread, and many times more than the 28 on original 'whitey' thread (which has remained civilized).

[rworange]

Well, that s the point.

After almost 10 years of following this site, I have yet to see anyone's mind changed by impassioned posts like this on Site Talk or Not about Food.

However, impassioned posts about food ... very persuasive.

IMO, getting people interested in good food ... whatever its origins ... has done more to break down racial barriers than trying to stiffle the way people talk about it.

For most, if you are sitting at the same table, it is diffcult to name call the person serving or breaking bread with you. Most people find we are more alike than different.

Post about food if anyone is sincerely interested in eliminating cultural barriers..

[chowser]

" And don't even get me started on the implications of 'dumbed down'."

Don't you mean "whitey-ed down?"

[jen kalb]

I looked at the post you link and from the perspective of a northern-european origin white american find the reference totally non - offensive. Context is everything (when a bunch of guys threw stones at my husband years ago in our neighborhood calling him "whitey" as well as even more offensive names yes that was hateful because they were acting hatefully) ; in this context, the word was used the same way we often use "gringo" and gwailin on this site for the same purpose. those words can be used offensively also in certain contexts. "Whitey" (think of Whitey Ford) in and of itself is not an offensive term. IMO the writer was struggling for a term to describe the majority culture.

Its a shame that sensitivity talk and political correctness are themselves veiled and sometimes, like in this case, not so veiled ways of being aggressive, hateful. and trouble making. Instead of leading to peace, they make it impossible to discuss anything at all.
In the case you are criticizing, forks seemed to understand and have a civilized discussion..

[bobcam90]

You may have noticed that prior to it being split it was about Toronto/Ontario. Since being split there have been only a handful of replies. I think no one has any idea what "whitey" food is.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, again, bobcam90:

Of course no one knows what "Whitey food" is. There is no such thing. Nor is there "[insert epithet here] food".

Aloha,
Kaleo

How about Spic?

[MandalayVA]

Wow, never thought I'd see such an epic trainwreck on CH. This has at once been scary and entertaining.

[HillJ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90ELle...
why not just open a window.

[davidne1]

For the sake of balance should the thread not have been called "What whitey food would any self respecting nigger not eat?"

[blue room]

A wiki search brings up an awful lot of real people called "Whitey", and you can search the Internet Movie Data Base for movie/TV character's names-- "Whitey" is here:
http://www.imdb.com/find?s=ch&q=w...
I don't think whitey it is the opposite of "darkey" in American culture. So no, IMO the moderators aren't promoting racism.

[bulavinaka]

It's about context - context. Whitey Ford is fine. I'm gonna kill me a whitey tonight is another issue. This one lies to the right of Mr. Ford and to the left of some of the dudes on my high school football team.

[DPGood]

Dear OP, you've made your case persuasively and passionately. Now it's getting repetitive. With so many posts from so many people, the thread has veered off topic and with a lot of insults back and forth, something I don't think you intended, and the thread is now generating more heat than light.

I think, respectfully, it's time to put this thread to sleep. In that light, why not post one last time, summarizing your position again and/or adding whatever you would think may be needed to clarify what you've already said.

[Chemicalkinetics]

No... I want to see if we can get 400 posts...Can't we stop at post #400?

[T Long]

Agree with DPGood. A final statement by the OP.... and I will add a request for a final response from the CH Mods...then close this out!

[kaleokahu]

Hi, DPGood:

Thanks for your advice, but I'll stop fighting when the offensive title to the GH post comes down or is edited to remove the epithet.

This from the Mods in the recent thread Negative Posts...: "We consider thread titles to be somewhat community property rather than specific to the poster. " They CAN do it, they SHOULD do it, but they WON'T do it.

If you think I've been repetitive and it bothers you, I recommend you take the Mods' advice and look away. Sorry.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[bobcam90]

I agree. I think this is a valuable thread.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, bobcam90:

Mahalo. I hope that something good can come of this.

Let me also say that I'm appreciative that the Mods have allowed it to continue even though it is their ox being gored. It hasn't always been that way. Mahalo to them, too.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Servorg]

I too have a most fervent hope that the Mod's will title this thread anew. My suggestion is "Moby Dick" - Food of the Great Whitey Whale...

[Servorg]

Second choice for a new title "Food to eat while wearing tighty whiteys"

[Servorg]

Third choice "Whitey Bulger's favorite foods on the run"

[Servorg]

Fourth choice: "Foods of the Great Whitey North"

[Servorg]

Fifth choice: "A Whiter Shade of Pale" - The Foods of Procol Harum

[Jenny Ondioline]

Just don't talk about the Leave It To Beaver episode where Whitey Whitney talked The Beav into climbing up on that soup billboard!

[Bill Hunt]

Now, would that be the culinary choices of Keith Reid, or that of Gary Brooker?

Either way, "Shine on Brightly."

Hunt

[Servorg]

Knights in Whitey Satin...or Darkest Nights in Whitest Satin? Just because I'm feeling Moody at the moment...

[Dave5440]

Just don't criticize all clad

[Bill Hunt]

Hey, that brings the replies to 374, and on a night, when CH is running horribly slow too!

Hunt

[kaleokahu]

Aloha, Hunt:

You're an old Hawai'i hand. What's "Kanaka food"? Acceptable? Pono?

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Bill Hunt]

Aloha,

I have to admit that you have me on that one. Being a haole, and from the Mainland, but with part of his heart in Hawai`i, I am missing something very important here.

Do you mean "kanaka maoli?"

Now, probably the closest that we come, being Mainlanders,is when we attend Chef Wong's New Wave Lu`au, and get to dine on the food of da kine.

When we are fortunate enough to be in The Islands, we are often doing "Mainlander things," but from a culinary standpoint, greatly enjoy being included in non-mainstream cuisine.

On my pono list, I rate Alan Wong near the top. That spot is in contention, between La Mer, and Chef Mavro's, but AW wins, more than he looses. Still, that is just me.

There are probably great lunch spots (beyond Nico's), but we usually miss them, going more for a breakfast, and then dinner. In that respect, I am a "one trick pony," as we will often do our mainstays one each trip, though we do try to add in a few new restaurants, and then revisit some old favs., that have fallen off the list.

I try mightily to do O`ahu on most trips, even if for but a few days, and then spread our travels over the other Islands. That could mean that I would post reviews on the Kona-side of the Big Island, but then not get back for some years. As we both know, chefs change, and major movement can happen. In that above example, the AW restaurant, at the Four Seasons in Kona, was great - but it has been gone for some years.

Maui used to come into our rotation about every five years. However, recently we found ourselves back twice in 15 mos. Even then, chefs change.

That is why I rely so heavily on local folk, as they are on the ground daily, and I cannot be, though that is not my choice. I just cannot steal my lovely wife away, half as often, as I would wish.

Aloha, and a mahalo nui for all that you contribute to the Hawai`i Board!!!!

Hunt

[Chemicalkinetics]

Wow... that (All Clad) would be a touchy subject, but I bet Le Cresuet is an even more touchy subject. I bet you that a title like "Le Cresuet is an inferior cookware" would not last for 300+ posts.

[kaleokahu]

Now, Chem...

As you know, we're not even close to "LeCreuset vs. Staub".

Kaleo

[cowboyardee]

Think we could get either this thread or the original offending 'whitey' thread shut down just by talking enough shit about Le Creuset? I'm game. Not even because I want these threads shut down, but just to openly hate on LC for a while.

[petek]

love brah,don't hate....

[bobcam90]

I don't get the "shut down" part. When I've had enough of a thread I just don't read it anymore. Easy .

[cowboyardee]

It was an inside joke among cookware board regulars - basically to the effect that we can have a long, sometimes-angry but mainly civil discourse on racial epithets and the thread stays open, but if one were to say something negative about the wrong cookware product and the wrong person noticed it, the discourse would go to hell in mere minutes and the thread would be closed.

I don't actually have any interest in getting any threads closed.

[Dave5440]

No All Clad is INFERIOR, Le Cresuet is soso

[Chemicalkinetics]

Despite its all joking aspect, there is a truth to this: if we rant on Le Cresuet or All Clad for awhile, this thread will probably get shut down fast.

[cowboyardee]

Perhaps true, but All Clad just doesn't have the ferocious cult following of LC.

[Dave5440]

Bobcam90

I hate to admit it but I have to agree with what you have been saying , and all is not so rosy up in canada, the racists are just quieter , but rampant none the less.

[bobcam90]

Ah, kid, I'm just trying my very best to see all sides. It's tough but I keep 'listenin' to you in particular.

[Dave5440]

I take offence to being called kid,,,thems fightin words

Is that 400 yet

[Chemicalkinetics]

I am post 400! I am!

I like to thank my mother for this day. I won't have able to get through this far without her. She believed in me (making the 400th post) when no one does. Of course, I like to thank Sony Entertainment, my beautiful imaginary dog, Chow-chow....

Edited: I really thought I was poster #400 because I saw post 399 and I entered my post really quick, but when I refreshed, it stated that there were 404 post. So I could have been 400, 401, 402, 403, or 404 post.

[Dave5440]

Chem
I actually teared up from laughing at your post

[Chemicalkinetics]

? Bob, you are a Canadian too?

[petek]

Why you got something against canadians???

[Chemicalkinetics]

:) There seems to be more Canadians than American (USA) on CHOWHOUND these days. It is an internet immigrant nightmare. :)

(No, I don't have anything against Canadians).

[petek]

I was just funning with you Chem.I was actually trying to be the 400th poster!!

[inaplasticcup]

Have you watched the documentary A Day Without Canadians, Ck? It painted a very bleak picture of an America with no comedy. Frightening, really...

[petek]

I'd love to see that doc,but if it"s not on the CBC I'm SOL..it's the only station we get up here.

[inaplasticcup]

That was my personal parody of this film:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0193862/

And I'm really sore-y you only get one tv station, pete.

[Chemicalkinetics]

That movie you cited has horrible review.

[inaplasticcup]

That's not the point. The point is, you will rue the laughless day Chowhound is without Canadians.

[Bill Hunt]

I have not seen that, but "a day without Canadians" would mean that the Winter population of Phoenix would only be about 2.5M, and not 3.5M.

Hunt

[petek]

"the Winter population of Phoenix would only be about 2.5M, and not 3.5M."

Don't forget Florida "land of the snowbirds".

[bobcam90]

Not even close.

[Chemicalkinetics]

I thought so. I thought you are a Southerner...

[bobcam90]

Bred and born.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Dave5440:

Mahalo for that, and I do not thank you only for validation. Wrong is wrong.

People here must have ideas that I am some sort of PC liberal. I'm not. I'm a proud lifelong Republican, and I recoil at anyone telling me what to think or say. I used to think that we in the US and Canada were mostly past our tawdy national racist pasts. I have argued in court and out that the rampancy is gone. But sadly, as the underlying post (and now this one) proves, I was wrong. It lies just below the surface still, and is much closer to prevalent than it is to rare.

The best that can be said for this sorry state of affairs and discourse is that many, many racists are not even aware that they are racist. They need not harbor real animus or espouse racial preference or apartheid to be bigoted or racist. But the tolerance of racist language in public discourse encourages hatred and resentment. Especially when it is a respected entity like CH, that has smart management and expensively-written and -policed policies of tolerance, respect and equality, that uses vile language.

Let me be clear. I do not know a single poster or Mod here well enough to call them a racist. If anyone thinks otherwise, let me apologize to them without expectation or qualification. But titling a Mod-generated thread "What is "whitey food?" is inherently racist, offensive language that can only *perpetuate* the problem, not reduce it.

But if people (or in this case a corporation) use racist language without apology or correction, what confidence can we have that they won't be racist in their actions?

Aloha,
Kaleo

PS LOL, why would you hate to agree with me, my friend?

[bobcam90]

I'll reiterate. I'm in complete agreement with you. "Whitey" is not acceptable. And for Chowhound to bless it is just beyond my comprehension. thank you, kaleokahu.

[Chemicalkinetics]

"I'm a proud lifelong Republican"

Until today :P

"respected entity like CH"

Respected?

"I do not know a single poster or Mod here well enough to call them a racist."

Now, now, suggestive insult is still dangerous, you know that. That is like I go on a date and say "I am not sure if your mother is ugly..."

[kaleokahu]

Not intended as an insult, Chem, but as an apology. You know the "rule": anything is permissible unless done with malice. Do you know my mind, friend?

I do respect CH immensely, and the Mods a great deal. That they punted on this one doesn't reduce my respect of CH in general, but it is a big crack in the windshield until it is made right.

Kaleo

[Chemicalkinetics]

"I do respect CH immensely"

I wasn't refer you. I was referring CHOWHOUND as a whole. Like if someone said, the National Enqurier is a respected media.

While Chowhound is an interesting and very fun place, I am not sure if that many people considered it as a respected media or respected community board.

[Jenny Ondioline]

"People here must have ideas that I am some sort of PC liberal. I'm not. I'm a proud lifelong Republican, and I recoil at anyone telling me what to think or say."

On the contrary. Building up false equivalencies *and* using the term "racism" when you really mean "bigotry" (they are not interchangeable terms, as many others have already pointed out elsewhere in this thread) are both extremely common tactics in the modern GOP. So fear not, your political sympathies have been clear to most of us from the very start.

Just wanted to put your mind at ease on that point. In case you were concerned.

[Dave5440]

Jenny O
I fail(maybe I'm white trash or stupid) to see any major difference

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

[Jenny Ondioline]

The major difference is explained right there in the openings to those pages.

"Racism is the belief that there are inherent differences in people's traits and capacities that are entirely due to their race, however defined, and that, as a consequence, justify the different treatment of those people, both socially and legally."

"A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs."

Let me try to break it down as simply as I can:

Bigot: "[insert epithet of choice here] suck!"

Racist: "[insert epithet of choice here] suck and we're going to keep them from being allowed to live in our neighborhood/date our women/take our jobs/go to school with our kids/etc."

In other words, racism is institutionalized in a way that bigotry isn't. Does that help?

[hill food]

JO: I think to put it this way makes it easier - a racist is by definition a bigot, but a bigot isn't necessarily a racist (but not unheard of) there are plenty of reasons to be a bigot, race is just the most obvious.

[Dave5440]

kaleokahu
I've agreed with you all along, my post was to bobcam, to whom I though taking "white trash" too seriously was being a bit thin skinned, but there is a word that sets me off when liquored that would result in me trying to beat the crap out of someone, so i needed to recant as best I can, but the rampant racism in canada was aimed at anyone reading the thread, I live in a fairly small town, but work in a really small town and what I hear on a daily basis still shocks me,

[petek]

Dave
I live and work in a big city(T.O) and have worked in kitchens filled with many different ethnic groups,Asian,SE Asian Caribbean,European etc etc.And let me tell you they all hated someone.It's not just small towns,white vs black anymore.Canada's no worse than the U.S or Sri Lanka or England....It's everywhere

[Chemicalkinetics]

Com'on. We need to hate something. It is part of the larger goal. I hate babies (just kidding. I love babies).

Yet, in all honesty, there is a theory that every nations need to have their own enemies. They need to set their foreign policy against some nations, no matter it is a strong or weak policy. They need to see a rival. I think it is same as individuals as well.

[chowser]

"People here must have ideas that I am some sort of PC liberal."

If it makes you feel better, that never crossed my mind about you. I would have pegged you as a lifelong conservative.

[iL Divo]

You ask what gives Kaleokahu?
Me too, but I've stopped trying to figure out how the mods work things out.
Many things that disappear shouldn't while other things that should be yanked remain.

[Monch]

Given the premise that all that should have been said...SHOULD have been said after 363 posts..AND the fact that the mods cannot, without appearing callous, take a stance, can we break the thread...return to the discussion of deliciousness, and abandon the politicizing of this forum...?

Just asking.

[bobcam90]

As the mods said on the Gen. CH OP, if you're offended, just don't look. Seems pretty easy.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, bobcam90:

Friend, the Mods put the epithet in the TITLE. When you scan the thread index, what? It's not there? If it was a porn popup, would you still buy the "Oh, don't look" excuse?

That's one of the reasons I can more easily dismiss the individual (still vile) uses of it that the Mods amazingly chose to dignify with a title (and actually repeated the epithet 3 times). Easy not to read something as the umpteenth post in a thread. Not so much when it's in the title.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[bobcam90]

I'm definitely in agreement with you. Just wanted to point out to Monch that there are options.

[iL Divo]

then just tellin.......................uh, did you post that request to anyone else that posted on today's date?
I didn't think so.
MONCH

[bobcam90]

Sorry, don't understand your post.

[greygarious]

Is it not simple common sense to avoid using terms that others will - or may - find offensive? Lots of tempestuous whistling from many a hound's teapot here! Just noticed that the full moon is tomorrow --- it all makes sense now.

[onceadaylily]

That was my thought (full moon boiling the pot and all), but I may not have conveyed it well. I did mean to convey this.

[Passadumkeg]

Racism has nothing to do w/ the phase of the moon, but it has a lot to do w/ education.

Notsodumkeg

[bobcam90]

But I know highly educated people who are bigoted, racist.

[linguafood]

Are those the ones with which you have an educated discussion about racism?

Oh, wait... you punch them in the face instead...

[Passadumkeg]

Wow! I've been in real mine fields less confusing than this. I have one word to say: Crucible. I met a lot of racist innuendo in 'Nam, but when things go hot, all men were brothers. We Chowhounds, should stick to the heat of the kitchen rather than the etymology of race.
Carpe chow,
Not so Dumkeg.

[sjahns]

+1 kagillion.

[srsone]

true....but not all us out here were marines either
my uncle was in Nam.. 2 tours as a corpsman ...

i realize we are probably not going to solve the worlds racism problem on here...
but so far a good healthy debate and knowing/learning more about each other and the rules of the site...is going on....

[Passadumkeg]

Srsone, I was a corpsman, USMC 1 9, everyone has red blood. Racism is a form of ignorance. Education is the key. I feel ethnic food introduced into the US of A in the last generation, help educate and alleviate racism.

[cb1]

What a topic for a food website. I can see where kaleokahu is calling out the double standard, but as someone up above said...it's their website, the mods can and will do what they want. I've had a few posts deleted because of the mods, even though other people have posted similar posts that weren't deleted. I just chalk it up to "oh well" and move on. This website isn't going to make my day one way or the other. Not going to get to worked up over it.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, cb1:

Yeah, it's lamentable CH Mods injected racial prejudice into a food website, but that's what they did. It's still there for everyone to see. No apology. No retraction. Nothing. They leave THEIR epithet in General Chowhounding and delete different epithets placed there.

The funny thing is that CH is NOT (despite what many posters here say) "THEIR" website. It belongs to CBS. The Mods are given authority and discretion, discretion they abused in this case.

I've had posts pulled down, too. Some deserved to be, too. There is no shame in admitting one is wrong. That's where the Mods rarely get it right. This time it's a doozer, because it has the potential to hit CBS right in the wallet.

Aloha,
Kaleo.

[linguafood]

Yeah. You're just about to take 'em down with this.

[Passadumkeg]

Don't forget the additional irony of CBS's ad w/ the Obama reelection campaign above Whitey's food.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Passa:

Lucky me, my settings must have miraculously spared me that.

But thanks, I'll ask the campaign how they feel about advertising on CH. Great idea.

I really liked your "Crucible" post.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Passadumkeg]

My pleasure.

[The Chowhound Team]

Folks, we're trying to leave this open so people can have their say, and it's remained as polite as such a difficult topic ever could, but things are really starting to go downhill with posters getting pretty personal and attacky towards each other and particularly towards the original poster.

If you're replying to someone else's comments, please take care to ensure your comments are on topic and not focused on the other poster themselves.

Thanks.

[nooyawka]

"attacky"? Awww...that's such a cute word :)

[Chemicalkinetics]

Did you know your reply has turned into a weblink because it includes "www..."?

[inaplasticcup]

Yes, Dad. :)

[srsone]

i think kaleokahu is doing a pretty good job of defending himself....and his position

[Pixie Muse]

Precisely. Sticking to topic would certainly put an end to the avalanche of emails hitting my blackberry at the speed of greased lightening. Now I have to modify my email settings because of this, when I could be slurping the minestrone I've warmed up in my "white" microwave.

[bobcam90]

You could turn your Blackberry off til you're done eating. Just a Chow-ish thought :)

[Dave5440]

Now that's funny, everybody knows there's no off button on a crackberry,,,,,well really there is but nobody seems to be able to use them!!!!

[MidCoastMaineiac]

Hmmm, what IS Mr. Bulger eating behind bars....I wonder....

[bobcam90]

k, I keep reading your OP and still agree that if you'd posted about "darkey food," it wouldn't have lasted a nanosecond.

[srsone]

i wonder if aser knows the brouhaha he stirred up with his comment..........

[petek]

I'm sure he does and I'm sure he doesn't give a shit.If people on here have ever read any of his other posts they'll realize he doesn't mince words..

And did he really stir up this brouhaha? Or was it the mods or kaleokahu?
Whoever did,it makes for a great read :D

[inaplasticcup]

He's probably Canadian. Those Canadians are so rude and brusque all the time.

Excuse me. I meant canucks.

[petek]

Excuse me Missy.but I'm a Canadian and I take great offence to the word "canuck".. :D

[inaplasticcup]

You're gonna get me ousted, aren't you... :(

[petek]

I'm just kidding.You can call me whitey,cracker,gwilo, white trash or canuck,it doesn't bother me... ;)
But to say all Canadians are rude and brusque all the time..well them's fightin words.. :D

[Chemicalkinetics]

I am going to call you Moritaka acolyte :P

[petek]

I'm flattered..thanks doctore!! :)

[inaplasticcup]

I don't even know what that is, much less how to poke fun at it.

[Chemicalkinetics]

I am a Plastic Cup,

Pete loves a brand of knives made by Moritaka.

http://www.moritakahamono.com/en/inde...

With this new found knowledge, you can now make fun of Pete.

[petek]

Why would you guys want to make fun of me?
I've been nothing but nice to the two of you,and this is how you repay me??

[Chemicalkinetics]

Well, we are trying to get you to buy some Watanabe/Takeda instead of Moritaka.... so peer pressure in the form of making fun of you is one way of doing it. :P

[petek]

Sorry Chem,but I rarely succumb to peer pressure..unless there's something in it for me

[Chemicalkinetics]

Takeda! Takeda! Takeda! Takeda!.....(chanting)

[petek]

lalalalalalala..(drowning out your chant)

ok ok enough about knives.where were we? oh right. we were talking about how funny and charming I am..please continue :-D

[Chemicalkinetics]

"we were talking about how funny and charming I am..please continue :-D"

No, we are (I am) talking about how Eiron is as funny as you. :P

[petek]

spoilsport :(

[inaplasticcup]

What I really meant to say is that all Canadians are really, really funny all the time. It's true. That's what we ugly Americans think, anyhow. :P

And actually quite contrary to my original tongue in cheeky comment, y'all have a reputation round these parts for being exceedingly polite. So you can just delete *rude* and *brusque* and insert *brilliantly comedic* and *well mannered*. You may now proceed to slay me with your dry and understated wit, please. :)))

P.S. I know you're Canadian. Remember the Kevin Brausch soul patch???

[Chemicalkinetics]

Just becaue Pete is very funny, it does not mean all Canadians are. Pete is specially talent, although we Americans have Eiron (another CHOW HOUND) who is very funny as well.

[petek]

nice save buddy

[inaplasticcup]

*whew!*

[petek]

"That's what we ugly Americans think, anyhow"
you're not all ugly..what about Judge Judy? hello.. she's totally hot.

[chowser]

LOL, see you Canadians are really, really funny, ehhh (trying out my Canadian, please excuse the American accent)?

[petek]

It's pronounced "eh" ehhh is more Broklynese like "ehhh ohh fuggetaboutiit"

[donovt]

As someone from Brooklyn whose father was born in Canada, I'm offended by this entire discussion.

[inaplasticcup]

Those Brooklynites of Canadian descent. So sensitive all the time...

[donovt]

I'm calling CBS!!!

[chowser]

Thanks--oops, that's ehhhg on my face.:-)

[Withnail42]

If you step on a Canadian's foot they will say 'sorry'.

[inaplasticcup]

But only more like *sore-y*, so maybe what you think is an apology is really just a very subdued exclamation of pain.

[petek]

Ha! it's true but what we really mean is "watch were you're goin. duffus"

[Withnail42]

Can’t say I was offended by the term. But was quite surprised to see it out there. For a variety of reasons social, historical, PC, etc, a bit of a double standard is at play here. This is due in part, to the odd reaction and often inconsistent actions of ‘The Chowhound Team’. Certainly a similar comment, innocently posted or otherwise, about a different ethnic group would most certainly be deleted.

[srsone]

yes...
see also this thread..

http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/786458

[chowser]

"Certainly a similar comment, innocently posted or otherwise, about a different ethnic group would most certainly be deleted."

I've read many that have not been (and I did report them before knowing that was the CH policy and they remained). Do you have examples of racial epithets that have been deleted? You can see above that swearing, racial epithets of different groups (nonwhite) have remained. Like this one:

http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/7954...

[TheHuntress]

Hi Kaleo,

I must admit I did a double take when I saw that post also. I read the thread to see what it was all about and have been surprised (and a bit dismayed) at the choice of language used. While I don't feel quite as strongly as you do I commend you for standing up for what you believe is right. After all, remaining silent is just as powerful as condoning an activity, no?

[kaleokahu]

Aloha, Huntress:

The pay, your voice. There are times to stand up, and this is one of them.

Mahalo,
Kaleo

[MidCoastMaineiac]

At what point does common sense apply? Are white people offended when they are called "whitey"? No. Are black people offended when they are called "darkey"? More likely.

As a Supreme Court justice once said: "I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it".

[bobcam90]

Er, excuse me. I and others on this thread have stated that we would be offended if called whitey.

[mcf]

Well, yeah, but you've also offered up how likely you are to hit another person for any infraction, that it kind of didn't mean much. ;-)

[kaleokahu]

Hi, MidCoastMaineiac:

Well, OF COURSE many white people are offended when they're called that. I have seen fistfights over this. And read of knife fights and shootings all the time that start with racial epithets. Producing one/several/many blacks who aren't offended by "nigger" doesn't make use of the epithet acceptable.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Jase]

I think it's quite alright to bring up the subject if someone finds something offensive. But to also keep in mind that everyone has different levels of tolerance.

Additionally the OP seems to be using this issue more as a means to hammer away at the moderators and call for firings. He has a history of complaining about prosecution by the moderators. Anyone who disagrees with him is immediately thrown in the camp of being a moderator or in bed with them.

There's a big difference in pointing out that something can be construed as negative and racism and asking for a deletion and how the OP has handled it. He's used it as a platform for his own agenda.

[ultimatepotato]

I read some of the original thread. I was drawn in by the title and wondered how long it would be before it was deleted, for many of the reasons already hashed out above.

My view (yes, mine, not what I think everyone else should think) is that:

1) The OP of the thread (the bit that was split off) was questioning someone else's use of the term 'whitey food'.
2) it should never have been split off - the term was used in a negative way (anyone that wants to argue that someone was saying 'whitey food' to positively describe the way a group of people like to eat can go join the 'fighting words' debate)
3) The post that they were replying to should have been deleted.

I was offended that the term was acceptable, but more so by the moderators response of (paraphrasing) "if you don't like it, move on".

[odkaty]

I'm in complete agreement. It makes me question the ethics of the moderator who was responsible for splitting the thread.

[ipsedixit]

I don't believe the post about "Whitey Food" was racist.

There's a difference between using a racial epithet for descriptive purposes, and using the same racial epithet as a purely derogatory term.

For example, a person can say, "At one time, African-Americans were called 'niggers" in the South." Not racism.

Conversely, someone can say, "You are a nigger." Racist statement.

The title of that post is the former, not the latter.

At worst, the OP was ignorant in her choice of words.

Let it go.

And if the Moderators were promoting racism, so what? It's their board. They can do what they want.

Life's too short. Let it go.

[Funwithfood]

Wise words.

I'm a 'whitey' and don't mind the term at all. (I'm not prickley sensitive though.)

[Servorg]

I guess the term "whitey" has always connoted an absence of being able to understand what the black culture and black power movement was all about. A failure to be "hip" as it were. I grew up in the 60's when the Black Panther Party and Back Student Unions were springing up on college campuses all over the US. I always seemed to get the impression that the black power groups used the term more in the vein of "square" or a "white men can't dance or jump" sort of attempt to let us know how it feels (if only just a little bit) to have a pejorative term define us (something that the black community has had to deal with all their lives to a large degree). So I just can't see this as some terrible racist term that ought to upset me.

[Funwithfood]

Being "offended" seems to be all the rage...again, I'm out of fashion.

[MidCoastMaineiac]

What if that someone is black? Still racist?

[Siobhan]

I am so afraid to reply to this thread but here goes.
I'm Irish so I feel more able than anyonbe to respond to the fact that Whitey is an offensive term.

Secondly, the reason that it is offensive is that the responding racial descriptor is not darkey or blackey, but "N-----" . at least here in plain spoken old New Yowk.

Cut the crap Chowhound and delete the whitey thread.

[E Eto]

Or just do a search and replace of "whitey" with "caucasoid". Problem solved.

[pikawicca]

Lordy, Lordy, this thread is the biggest train wreck I've ever seen on CH. Please, mods, put it out of its misery!

[Pixie Muse]

I agree pikawicca.

[DeppityDawg]

Never! This is going national! "Racially-charged on-line discussion reveals shocking double standard". The world must know.

[onceadaylily]

Stop, please. My reaction to this word isn't some imagined offense to make light off, and I was grateful to see that someone else was troubled by the title of the post, even if this thread has gotten too heated.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Deppity:

Oh, it's already gone national. Phones are ringing. Sph!@#$%ters are clenching. CYA at CH. Watch.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[hill food]

nah don't delete it, just at some point lock it. it's fascinating.

[nooyawka]

I read the thread and didn't find anything wrong with it. In fact, I learned some things. I do, however, understand and sympathize with the complaint about the double-standard.

[ospreycove]

Is the term, White Trash, offensive? Then tell Ernest M. Mickler author of "White Trash Cooking".

[bobcam90]

Growing up in the South, calling someone "white trash" was as bad or worse than calling a black person "nigger."

[Chemicalkinetics]

"calling someone "white trash" was as bad or worse than calling a black person "nigger.""

No, it is not. One is a fighting word, the other is not.

[bobcam90]

In your opinion. What part of the south are you from? If anyone ever called me white trash there would be a fight. Very loud and very long.

[Chemicalkinetics]

"In your opinion."

No... not in my opinion, rather according ruling of the North Carolina Supreme in 1995 on Spivey and several other courts since then including the California trial court. You are welcome to show me which court has ruled that White Trash is a "fighting word"

"If anyone ever called me white trash there would be a fight. Very loud and very long.'

I don't know if I should cry or laugh. Do you seriously think "fighting words" means you want to fight with a very loud noise for a very long period of time? How are you going to define "habeas corpus"? Something to do with a corpse?

"Fighting word" has true deep meaning, not something you can arbitrary come up with examples of loud and long noise. The Fighting Words Doctrine was established in 1942 Chaplinsky vs New Hampshire.

[bobcam90]

Let's just say if anyone called me that I would hit them. I would start a fight. That's what *I* mean by "fighting words." Courts can define the law, not what's in my gut. And I wasn't aware that you were giving legal advice when you used the term. If you'd prefaced your comment with that it would have helped. Thanks now.

[Chemicalkinetics]

"I would start a fight. That's what *I* mean by "fighting words."

That is completely arbitrary and in no way justify actions and behaviors.

"I wasn't aware that you were giving legal advice when you used the term. If you'd prefaced your comment..."

I would think most people know the phrase "Fighting Words" is a legal term, as such there is really no reason to "preface" a rather common usage. Type "Fighting Words" on google and see what comes up:

http://www.google.com/search?q=fighti...

[bobcam90]

Hmm, guess I'm not "most people." Never heard of it as a legal term. But have you ever heard the expression "Them's fightin' words" ??? There is truly nothing that anyone could call me (and feel free to think of the vilest words) that would insult me more than WT.

[donovt]

That's the exact way I've always heard it.

[Chemicalkinetics]

All I can say, I have said. Nigger is legally a fighting word ruled by several courts. White Trash is not.

I am not going to argue about individual definition because there is no end to it. It is just pure "you say, I say".

[pikawicca]

Don't know where you are getting your information, but it's incorrect. Any malicious language intended to wound and cause a violent reaction can be deemed "fighting words."

[dmjordan]

Never heard it as a legal term, just as bobcam90 used it.

[linguafood]

Then you have other issues. Starting a fist fight over something someone calls you?

Cheesesfreakingchristmas.

Grow up, people. There is no constitutional right not to be offended.

[donovt]

I've heard the phrase a bunch of times and never knew it was a legal term. I've mostly heard it said before two people got into a fight.

[Chemicalkinetics]

Well, I cannot ensure your definition, but I can tell you that it is a legal term. Like I said, type the phrase "fighting words" in google and see the top 10 or top 20 returns. It is a common knowledge, and I am far from a lawyer.

From a legal standpoint, there is a special meaning to "fighting words". It grants certain immunity to the person who is spoken to.

[donovt]

Not arguing with you, just saying I've heard it used by many people as a non-legal term.

[Chemicalkinetics]

I know. I am just saying there is a special meaning to the word. I was editing as you replied, so something does not come the way I wanted to. Sorry.

[donovt]

I know, and actually find it quite interesting. Just saying, I think as many people don't know as do. I'm using my iPhone and for some reason can't edit. That's why I have multiple posts.

[donovt]

When you get a chance, google "them's fighting words". It's a very common phrase.

[mcf]

So are "low and behold,", "doggy dog world," and "for all intensive purposes." Folks say stuff they have no idea the meaning of or correct usage all the time, when they're not busy putting apostrophes before the "s" to pluralize.

Don't even get me started about the use of the word "literally" as in "people were literally glued to the television sets for the Casey Anthony verdict."

[donovt]

I don't disagree. Just saying that just because a word has a legal definition, doesn't mean everyone knows that meaning.

[Servorg]

It's just that when my lawyer gets up and tells the jury that because someone called me a "nattering nabob of negativism" and THAT's why I hit them with my beer bottle, I shouldn't be surprised when I get a lesson in "ignorance of the law being no excuse" at the outcome of my trial on assault charges...

[donovt]

I believe I've been called that before!! See, I thought that would be listed as a fighting word.

[Chemicalkinetics]

It is more than being a just another legal definition. The legal definition, in this case, dominates the search engine which suggests it isn't an uncommon term. I didn't say everyone knows the definition. I said most people know the definition, and it seems unnecessary to define a rather common usage of the phrase.

[donovt]

This has gotten way off-topic. I don't think it was necessary to define the word. I actually was glad to learn something new. But, I found your reply to bobcam condescending and a little insulting. Anyway, let's be done with this conversation.

[Chemicalkinetics]

"I don't think it was necessary to define the word."

It is necessary to clarify the definition when there is a disagreement of the definition.

"I found your reply to bobcam condescending and a little insulting"

Probably, but not any more than what he suggested (intentional or unintentional). His definition is random to say the least, and to use it to justify the violent acts is...

He said he will fight someone long and loud if a person use the phrase White Trash. To justify, he replied because White Trash is a fighting word according to his own definition.

It is a full circular argument.

a) I justify beating a person up because they use "fighting words"
b) "Fighting words" are defined because I want to beat that person up.

So, the combing a) and b) is: I justify beating someone up because I want to beat that person up.

Tell me this is not a circular argument. Now, tell me that it is not condescending to use a circular argument to justify beating another person.

P.S.: I think it is repulsive to use the term white trash, but it is not justifiable for physical violence.

[Chemicalkinetics]

"people were literally glued to the television sets for the Casey Anthony verdict."

It would be rather scary if it is indeed LITERALLY. :D

[srsone]

no they were duct taped........

[Chemicalkinetics]

"no they were duct taped........"

Now, that is a lot more realistic. :)

[donovt]

I have to admit "literally" drives me insane.

[Servorg]

Insane in a figurative sense one would hope... ;-D>

[donovt]

No, I think that if I assaulted someone who misused literally, I would legally plead temporary insanity.

[Servorg]

Insanity defenses rarely prove effective. Literally you should throw yourself on the mercy of the court and hope for the best... ;-D>

[mcf]

Yes, my head "literally" explodes when I hear it misused. ;-)

[mcf]

I wanted to bitch slap the NBC reporter when he said that. ;-) (It was Jeff Rossen).

[Chemicalkinetics]

Thanks.

[Dave5440]

bobcam90
Pretty thin skinned , as opposed pretty fly for a white guy

[bobcam90]

Not sure I understand the last part of your sentence. But if I were black and someone called me a nigger, would you think I was "thin skinned" if I punched his/her lights out?

[Lizard]

Ugh, I hate the word "white trash" because it implies that with white people there needs to be such a qualifier and with everyone else it's understood.

[cowboyardee]

Agreed. It always struck me that the term should be way more offensive to minorities than to white people. Though I guess most people just sorta throw the term around without thinking about it.

[Chemicalkinetics]

Lizard,

It does, does it? White Trash is a slur, no doubt, but it is one which refers to the lowest of the social and moral class of the whtie people. Basically, saying the person is the scum among the Whites. It distinguishs the normal whites from the group. Whereas "Nigger" refers to black people, period. The target is not inferior because he is morally corrupt among the blacks. He is not inferior because he is a poor black. He is inferior because he is black -- no adjective needed.

[soupkitten]

*pain*

[bobcam90]

Just as an aside, Ck, you don't have to be lacking in money to be White Trash. You can be rich and still be that. But you and Lizard make a good point there. Something I never thought of. Thanks.

[Chemicalkinetics]

Agree that you do not have to poor to be called a White Trash.

Due to historical difference, there isn't really an equivalent term quiet the same as the word Nigger. It was used during the slavery and afterward. There were large scale systemtic (institutional) suppression policies of the blacks. The usage of the word "nigger" to a black person is more than a just an individual person insult. It insults the person with a painful historical past.

Let me try an example. If you are to go up to a white friend and say "Why do you act like a slave for the boss?", it would simply be interpreted as a tease and possibly a jab between two buddies talk. If you say the same thing to your black friend, it will likely bring up some hurt feelings even if he may understand where you are coming from. It just bring up the fact that the pain which his ancestors have gone through. So that historical events make the difference.

[melo7]

This.

[Chemicalkinetics]

"This."

What are you trying to say?

[melo7]

This - One-word response placed after a quote on a message board as an affirmation of the author's agreement with the quoted person's view or opinion

[Chemicalkinetics]

Oh. I learn something new.

[nooyawka]

Whereas "Nigger" refers to black people, period.
----
Interesting to note though that Chris Rock, in his famous shtick Niggers v. Black People, differentiates and uses N word to describe the ignorant, criminally-inclined black people that make the black community look bad.

[bobcam90]

I certainly knew black people growing up who would refer to a particularly loathesome black person as nigger. I and they knew the difference.

[kaleokahu]

Aloha, bobcam90:

You know the difference? Do tell, I would like to know the difference between a black person and a "nigger".

Unbelievable.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[bobcam90]

A "nigger" was a loathesome, scummy, moral-less, etc., etc., etc. black person. That's a black person's judgment.

[Chemicalkinetics]

Yes, when a black person refers to another black person, it can carry that meaning, but the root of the word is not that, and when a white person uses it against a black person, it also does not mean that. It just refer to the black people. You can trace back the word which was used during the slave trade.

When a slave owner whipped his slaves and called him a nigger, he wasn't thinking about criminally inclined black people. During the civil right movement, white students who stood by their black friends were often refered as "nigger lover".... in no way it means "those whites who love ciminally inclined blacks". No. In both cases, they are racist slur against blacks.

Now, when black people use it, they are also using it as a way to put down another black person (seriously or jokingly).

That being said, I won't cite Chris Rock as an authority in this matters. I think it weaken your original point which is a fine point. Using Chris Rock is like citing Conan O'Brien for the Irish peace process or Sarah Silverman for Middle East peace talk. For better citation, I would read Randall Kennedy's writing and a few other respected historians and scholars.

[Lizard]

White people LOVE to use Chris Rock when it comes to defending their use of certain words and perceptions.

[Lizard]

CK,
Your first response to me is puzzling. It sounds like you're vehemently disagreeing with me whilst offering elaboration on my actual point. I would assume we agree on the loathesomeness of the term and the reasons why.

[Jenny Ondioline]

I'm from south Texas and call myself white trash. Who should I report myself to?

[kaleokahu]

God?

[bobcam90]

Since you don't understand what it means then ignorance is bliss. Go for it.

[hill food]

bobcam: I get what the implications of WT are, but it's never been explained where the term 'cracker' fits in (as long as we're on the subject) - more, less or just as offensive? never used or received either, but they seem interchangeable.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, hill food:

Let me try...

One is a pejorative with rural overtones, bumpkinish. The other is a pejorative redolent of the indolent, nekulturny, low self-expectation. You decide which is which, but both terms are vile. The mere possibility anyone would self-identify with either is very sad; that they would defend the use of either term hurled at against another is evil.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[ospreycove]

Hill, The term "Cracker" has a cloudy origin, some say in Florida the term came from the old time Florida "cowboys" who would carry whips and "crack" said whips and dogs to startle cattle out of the swampy brush. Other origins date back to Scotland and England and even Spanish language roots. Cracker in current day Florida is not necessarily a pejorative, as there are "Cracker Festivals" that dot the state, Cracker style of architecture, Cracker ancestry and in defference to this thread, Cracker Cooking!!!!!

[Jenny Ondioline]

So, by this theory, gay people shouldn't have been able to reclaim the term "queer" for themselves, since someone else, somewhere, might find that term offensive? Gotcha.

[bobcam90]

No, what I meant is that you clearly don't understand what WT means so you can call yourself that and not feel like a third class citizen.

[Jenny Ondioline]

It's fascinating that you assume that you get to decide what I do and do not call myself. Check your privilege, dude.

[bobcam90]

My apologies, JO. Sincerely. I have a friend who's always calling himself WT but never gets what it actually means. I made an assumption which I shouldn't have.

[Jenny Ondioline]

No problem.

[inaplasticcup]

I think she calls herself that because she's both poking a little good natured fun at the culture from which she came and also possibly, but probably not primarily, to preemptively disarm any and all others who might seek to use that term against her in a hurtful way.

Happens all the time with people who fully understand the implications of the epithet.

[Jenny Ondioline]

Exactly. Hence the comparison to gay folks reclaiming "queer." Thanks for understanding. Pity that not everyone does.

This conversation keeps reminding me of a singer-songwriter I know from Los Angeles called Stew. In the '90s, he led a band called The Negro Problem, a perfect name for a band led by a black man that played '60s-style psychedelic pop. (To give an idea, one of their big songs was an utterly faithful cover of Jimmy Webb's "MacArthur Park.") He ended up retiring the band name because, as he put it, middle-aged white liberals kept freaking out about it, even when they found out that the singer-songwriter was black. As a matter of fact, many of their posters and concert listings ended up listing them as "The Negro Problem (It's Okay, The Singer-Songwriter Is African-American)."

[mcf]

ROFL... very illustrative. :-)

[im_nomad]

Your example is somewhat in line with the use of the word "Newfie" where I come from. Plenty of people couldn't care less about the word, but plenty of people hate it, because it does have a negative history and association and has further grown with the use of "stupid newfie" jokes and the like. Being nudged in the ribs by someone "from away" while they "yes b'ye" at me and call me a Newfie while telling me jokes about Jarge and his buddy, is not going to go over well. I may shrug it off in their presence, but there are lots of people who feel this way.

I think a lot of what it boils down to on this thread though, is that there are things you can get away with in private conversation etc that are not considered offensive by your group, but might be by others. This is a very visible website, an international one at that.

[ospreycove]

im.....Good point!

[bobcam90]

Very good point.

[sunshine842]

Indeed. I vividly remember hearing a group of elementary-age school kids in a rural southern town singing something along the lines of "dirt is dirt, and ash is ash, I'd rather be a n**** than po' white trash". I'm pretty sure the first half of the rhyme is wrong, as I was pretty dumbfounded when I heard the second half -- but I have no doubt the second half was accurate.

I can't honestly say that "whitey" offends me, but it's pretty squicky, and I'm pretty amazed that the mods would let it ride. There have been *plenty* of other threads that have disappeared because the word chosen set off a shitstorm. (Dragon lady, anyone?)

[im_nomad]

I think "squicky" sums up what the word is. It gives me the icks. I'm not about to make a federal case about it, but it does make me squirmy and makes me think "wow did you just say that?"

[bobcam90]

That was my reaction when I first saw the thread on Gen. CH. It was, like, no WAY am I reading this right!

[pikawicca]

I don't find the two terms at all equivalent. "Darkey/darkie/darky" has a long, miserable history in this country, tied to centuries of the worst kind of oppression.

"Whitey," if I recall correctly, came into somewhat common usage among angry young black males during the civil rights movement. I don't feel threatened or demeaned when I hear or see this word; I doubt that black people feel the same when they see or hear "darkey."

That said, though, calling something "whitey food" is odd. Not offensive, just odd.

[Servorg]

"That said, though, calling something "whitey food" is odd. Not offensive, just odd."

Haven't we been down this path before with "redneck" food threads?

[Servorg]

One example here: http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/701472

[kaleokahu]

Hi, pikawicca:

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, a weaker racial epithet, one with a shorter, perhaps less painful history of use than another, is acceptable. Is that what you're saying? If that really is your position, then there can only one racial epithet at a time that is unacceptable. Which one do you not want the Mods to use?

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Servorg]

Well, lets talk about your aversion (however mild it might be) to WASP. What part of that acronym do you find "racially" insensitive? Or are you simply taking that stick you seem to have found and stirring the pot as furiously as you can, trying to make CH into an unpalatable stew?

[donovt]

I find the "A" offensive.

[bobcam90]

WASP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_An...

I don't think of WASP as being an ethnic slur just a plain old slur.

[Jenny Ondioline]

My aversion to W.A.S.P. was that they were just a bad Quiet Riot clone.

Wait, are we not talking about the hair-metal band?

[Servorg]

I've always been partial to the Grateful Dead and Steely Dan...old WASP fart that I am...

[Duppie]

Quit while you're ahead, the campaign has begun and it's now just a matter of time.

[linguafood]

Whoa, now it's a campaign?

Dontcha folks have something to prepare for dinner?

[jamesm]

Does it make a difference if the person who originally asked about whitey food is Asian?

[Duppie]

The grill is heating up,couscous is warming and the kabobs are all seasoned.....your point?

[bobcam90]

I watch little network tv but I seriously doubt that CBS would have a cooking show called "Whitey Food."

[Servorg]

Man, that "Whitey Ford" guy got away with a LOT when he was pitching. However did all those newspapers and sportscasters cover him anyway?

[bobcam90]

From Wiki:

"He was given the nickname "Whitey" while in the minor leagues for his exceptionally blond hair."
"

[Servorg]

But what about that whole under toned "racism" thing? I mean, come on! lol So white bread could indeed be whitey food then based on it's exceptionally white appearance?

[mcf]

This all reminds me of an old joke: Why do WASPS go to the hospital?

Answer: For the food.

Just sayinzall. It seemed on topic.

[inaplasticcup]

That's funny. :)

[Servorg]

I thought it was because they had great health insurance? ;-D>

[hill food]

alt answer: the neighbors might talk

[Jeebs]

As a white guy, I wasn't offended. I even have a cat named Whitey. Starting a mirror thread as an attempt to point out a double standard is nothing but blatant trolling.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Jeebs:

Nope, not trolling at all. Just checking for double standards.

CBS front office has expressed interest. Racism has no place on CH or CBS is what I'm told.

You disagree?

Aloha,
Kaleo

[donovt]

Absolutely trolling. Your post was only made because you knew it would be deleted, therefore "proving your point".

[kaleokahu]

Hi, donovt:

No, you're incorrect. I was actually hoping the Mods would be consistent for once. "Whitey" is OK; "Darkey" is not.

You do not know what's in my, the Mods', or the people who fling "Whitey"'s minds better than they do. The N-word, even spoken with affection is still the N-word. Either it should be allowed or not. Same thing with "Whitey".

This is going national.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[donovt]

I know what's in your mind because you've written it on the board for all to see.

[hill food]

I understand the opinion that Whitey can be offensive, but it just doesn't carry the weight a lot of other racially charged terms do. I mean as a Euro-Am, I've never been the recipient of racism (except that one time at 3 AM in East St. Louis, but even that was mild) so I can only comment on what the words mean to me. I generally only use any in a self-deprecating sense, as I don't know how they may affect others.

[Jeebs]

I don't disagree that "racism has no place", but I do disagree with your approach.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Jeebs:

Well, thanks, I guess. What approach would you suggest be taken when a MOD splits a thread and supplies the bigoted title as was done here, and then refuses to fix the problem?

Just so you all know, I'd be taking the same position and approach no matter what the substitute epithet used for "Whitey".

Aloha,
Kaleo

[davidne1]

I suggest one or two people need to get over themselves.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, davidne1:

I was waiting for this to happen. It fits the pattern. A thread on Moderation's shortcomings (in this case encouraging racism) is pointed out and discussed. The clatch that considers the Mods are infallible rushes in to defend whatever the hypocrisy du jour, and then a post like yours appears, personally attacking the person who calls out the hypocrisy. Then the Mods lock and bury the thread as being hostile (or "not about Chow"--THAT'S rich here on the Site Talk Board) without taking any corrective action.

Like it never even happened....

Aloha,
Kaleo

[FattyDumplin]

alternatively, if you're intent on getting the original offending thread ended, you could basically use the same tact as you just described...

[kaleokahu]

Hi, FattyDumplin:

I know. It drives them crazy when I remain civil. I learned that from some wise CH veterans who have been banished at times. But it will happen eventually anyway. One ruse is to have some shill get into it with the first insulter, and you get the same "Well folks, this Thread has grown increasingly hostile now and we're going to lock it." result. You watch.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[FattyDumplin]

i would've thought the definition of the word (which is known) would be enough to make a determination of whether that word should be allowed to stand, regardless of context (which is unknown)... i just googled Whitey... Per Google - A contemptuous term used by black people to refer to a white person, Per Princeton.edu - (slang) offensive names for a White man

fwiw, I was totally undecided on which side of the debate I came in on, but one man's view here is that the thread should not be allowed to stand. regardless of whether the context itself is meant to be offensive, the word itself is an offensive term.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, FattyDumplin:

It's two men now, thanks.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Servorg]

"Just so you all know, I'd be taking the same position and approach no matter what the substitute epithet used for "Whitey". "

So, "waspy" food is verboten then?" It's always seemed that the "fly over" states (no offense intended) have been known for their "meat and potatoes" food (with Wonder Bread - oh gosh - It's WHITE bread - on the side). To me that is pretty much the epitome of "white" food. White vs Whitey? Do we have two racist terms? Or none? I vote for none.

[petek]

Ever heard of the term "white bread" to describe the upper crust members of Anglo- Saxon society?

[Servorg]

I usually see that term as meaning "bland" or "unexciting" - or is that not the case?

[chowser]

Me, too--white bread, as in generic bland Wonder bread. No more racist than black sheep.

[petek]

It must be a local "Scarborough" saying then..

[FattyDumplin]

sorry, "white bread" and "whitey" are not equivalent terms.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Servorg:

I was wondering when they'd go to the bullpen...

I *do* find the term 'WASP' mildly offensive in a racial sort of way, so yes I find the term 'waspy food' an objectionable stereotype. But if there is such a thing as "waspy food", it certainly isn't verboten. White bread can be good. Whitey bread, on the other hand is a racial insult. As would be D!#%ey rye.

[Manager touches left hand, signalling for LH relief]

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Duppie]

I believe a lot of us was wondering also....good call.

[Servorg]

If you find WASP at all offensive then it seems that the bearings are totally shot in your personal GPS and the whole unit needs to go back to the shop for a major overhaul...and I would say the "bull" was already flying out of the pen at a velocity approaching the speed of light with your initial post...

[donovt]

Servog, since we disagree with the OP, we clearly aren't appreciated here. obviously, anyone with a different opinion has been called by the mods and asked to post so they have an excuse to close the topic. We've been caught!! Abort mission!!

[twyst]

Can't wait to see the campaign against soul food when we get a soul food thread. I'm sure some will be offended at the insinuation only african americans have souls! This thread is ridiculous.

[inaplasticcup]

Correction, twyst. The offensive insinuation would be that only African Americans have *SOUL*.

YEOWWW!!! <-- That's me doing my best James Brown...

[twyst]

Yes I understand what "soul food" means, but attributing the term soul food to the presence of souls seemed ridiculous and therefore in keeping with the theme of this thread so I went with it :P

[inaplasticcup]

At any rate, it's getting too hot in this hot tub...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLY7Ry...

[twyst]

I really miss the days when eddie murphy was funny.

[Dave5440]

Amen to that

[chowser]

I don't understand why WASP is offensive. It's as descriptively factual as you can be. Some people are WASPs, some are Jewish, some are Catholic Italian, etc. I'm normally as PC as anyone but that's reaching for straws.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, chowser:

To try to answer your question, I find WASP mildlty offensive because it stereotypes white anglo-saxon Protestants *as* something (as if they all enjoy the same food). I don't consider it an epithet or an intrinsically offensive term, it just gives me the creeps as an invitation to further stereotyping. I feel the same way about J.A.P.

Hoe this helps.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[chowser]

I don't find the term anything but descriptive. I have friends who are descendents of the people who've come from the Mayflower and describe themselves as WASPs, just as I'd describe myself as an Asian American. No racially charged stereotypes. I'd say racially charged stereotypes are wrong, factual words aren't. JAP on the other hand is a stereotype, not at all like WASP. JA, would be fine but everyone I know just call themselves Jewish in that case. Just because a word CAN be used to stereotype someone doesn't mean it normally is.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Servorg:

The Mods didn't like my polite reply to yours, so in case you mised it, yes, I consider the term WASP mildly offensive, and so the term 'waspy food" to be objectionable. If there is such a thing as waspy food, it certainly isn't verboten or kapu.

Dark rye vs. Darkey rye. Don't you see a difference?

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Jase]

I saw that reply before it was wiped. I would hardly have called that polite. It was condescending and insulting. If you considered that polite, I can understand why there is a difference in perspectives.

[E Eto]

I always preferred the term gringo, or sometimes gweilo or haole. I don't know anything about it, but I wonder if the lack of creativity on the part of the OP is reflective of being from Canada (which didn't have a history of slavery or racial uprisings).

[srsone]

there was slavery in canada ....
just not to the extent it was elsewhere...

[Dave5440]

It was abolished in 1830 in what was to become canada, canada didn't become a country untill 1867

[srsone]

true....but the way e eto worded it ..it sounds like there wasnt ever slavery period..
which there was..
and canada does have racial issues...
but no they both werent to the extent and near history as other less enlightened countries.........

[E Eto]

You're right, my wording was terse, but I did mean it in comparison to the grand history of slavery (and post-slavery) in the US. As far as I know, Canada isn't burdened by it, and probably doesn't have the long-lasting legacies associated with it. And from my brief internet search on the subject, Dave5440 is correct. Moreover, it seems that much of the slavery in Canada was among various indigenous (i.e., native north American) groups. Anyway, I just wondered whether this history also influences the kinds of rhetoric that is used when touching on subjects around race.

[Chemicalkinetics]

"I just wondered whether this history also influences the kinds of rhetoric that is used when touching on subjects around race."

Yes I agree, which is why race is a much more sensitive issue in US than many other countries.

[Matt H]

The reason why race is a more sensitive issue in the US is because minority groups have more of an established voice, especially politically. In other countries that voice is not as established or respected, so do not mistake the silence for absence.

I have lived in both Canada and The US and despite having different histories racially there is just as much if not more racism in day to day life, especially for people of African heritage.

[Chemicalkinetics]

You can think of it that way, which is very true, but the other side of the coin is that slavery had a much much darker history in US. US slavery was (1) very racial, (2) very cruel and (3) very dominant. What do I mean by these.

In ancient times, slaves were simply the by-product of warfare. Slaves were essentially the prisons-of-war. If that prison is from a wealth family, his family will pay for the release. If not, he becomes a slave. In the US, slaves was not a by-product. They were the goal and slaves were almost always black with the assumption that these blacks are intellectually inferior. Then, on top of that, the US laws at the time evolved to promote slavery. It evolved to give slave owners more rights and to take more rights from the slaves. You may not know believe this, but slaves in the 1600 had more legal rights than those in 1800. The entire legal and economy of the US evolved to support and to justify slavery.

Black slaves in US, as mentioned, got less legal protection as time went on. They had very little rights. They don't have the right to properties and they don't even have right to their own children. What does this mean? In many other parts of the world slaves could accumulate wealth and to use it to what they like including to save the money to buy their own freedom. A famous case is the Roman gladiators which we all know about stories of buying their own freedom. The ancient Chinese slaves could also do that. In Muslim countries, a Mamuluk is a slave who usually was captured as a young boy from a foreign county, yet he has significant rights and power. He could rise as high as a military general or even a ruler. To quote "In places such as Egypt from the Ayyubid dynasty to the time of Muhammad Ali of Egypt, mamluks were considered to be “true lords,” with social status above freeborn Muslims"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamluk

Of course, most slaves do not enjoy the privileges of a Mamuluk, but most slaves in history had better legal rights than the US black slaves had. In many regions of the world, a child of a slave is legally a free person. That was not the case in the US. A child of a black slave is still a slave and is a property of the slave owner.

Of course, slavery existed in every parts of the world at one point or another, in that sense, USA was not any special, but if you look at how slaves were treated in US and how they were viewed at, you will inevitably come to the conclusion that black slaves in the US were treated very poorly in comparison.

[Matt H]

I completely agree with you and my reply was in no way meant to diminish the struggles experienced by the Black community in the US or imply that the treatment historically was equal to other countries.

My point was meant to highlight that currently blacks in Canada face the same or even more discrimination than South of the border. One positive of the well publicized racial history of the US is that it has given a voice to that community and pushed them to break a lot more barriers than what is possible for those in Canada or Europe. Whereas in Canada and Europe that voice is non-existent and ignored.

I enjoyed your reply though, great information for those who were not aware of the history of slavery.

[Chemicalkinetics]

Thanks for your reply. I do agree with you that a lot of the racial issues in US are very historically driven. That is to say, much of the distrust and hurt feelings are not based on what the neighbors did to me last week, but rather what the neighbor grandparents did to my grandparents. The painful history is a significant part of the baggage -- not to downplay there are real racial issues of today.

[Lizard]

Personally, what offended me about the other thread, and this particular subthread, is the complete dismissal of First Nations in Canada.

[im_nomad]

Jeebs, as I said above, *you* not being offended doesn't really amount to a hill of beans, when there are others, and particularly several others who are.

[Servorg]

But what is being discussed is what to do about something that offends some and doesn't offend others. Should it stand or should it go simply because one side or the other gripes more vociferously about whatever was said? I like the position that if it's not written to offend or cause trouble that it ought to stay, even if some folks find it offensive. You might believe that the opposite is the way to go.

[im_nomad]

I just think that if nothing else, it is common courtesy that when someone, especially a group of people tell you that something you are saying is offensive, to at least reword what you are saying.

I realize we're not in a workplace, but I'm used to workplace discussions about these things. "well I wasn't being mean" wouldn't hold water when it comes to some stuff.

I admit that it particularly bothers me when others are bound and determined to hold on to certain words and expressions despite being told expressly that it offends a person.

[Servorg]

If nothing else the First Amendment is something to actively cherish and protect in this country. And the fact that someone can say "I'm offended" by just about anything really doesn't make it offensive, since our society seems to be making "taking offense" into an art form lately.

[im_nomad]

If it is offensive to that person, it is offensive. Doesn't mean a law has to be made about it, but it should not necessarily be minimized, and I don't get to tell you what you shouldn't be offended by. I may not like it, or may roll my eyes in private, but it is what it is.

Be legal, or "allowed to say" doesn't mean you SHOULD.

[Chemicalkinetics]

It is interesting that Servorg and I are offering the same argument. Although I am just trying to offer a counterargument (devil's advocate here).

"If it is offensive to that person, it is offensive."

It is true, but sometime you don't simply want to yield just because a group is offended. It is important to look at the inherit right of the other side. If we simply go by "We should stop this because it offends some groups", then it tends to rewards the the least tolerance group and punish the most tolerance people. Imagine you have two religious groups and one group get offended much easier than the other one. The last thing you want to do is to constantly yield to the less tolerant group. Think of it the other way, you have two kids, one is extremely picky about what he eats, and the other is not. Do you really want to cater your cooking to just one kid because he makes more noise? I think this is where the individual rights come in. It does not matter how easily or difficult to offend the two boys. You want to grant them equal basic rights. Is it true that one will get more easily offended than another? Sure? But it is in the name of basic right and fairness.

[im_nomad]

I think not caving to pressure holds true if someone stands to lose out if the expressed issue is not used. In your example, the non-picky kid stands to lose out on a bigger variety of cooking. I doubt anyone here is going to suffer if no one uses the word "whitey".

[Chemicalkinetics]

You are probably correct, and personally I cannot approve the word whitey, not arbitrary like this anyway.

On the other hand, I think some people (not truly speaking for them) believe others has no right to correct how they want to speak.

In fact, come to think of it, I can think of another case which I do approve offensive words. The "F" word. One may say no one is going to suffer if we stop using the "F" word. Now, while I understand how the "F" can be offensive (in fact, its main purpose is to be offensive), I wouldn't want the word to be outlawed. I won't want any of these wonderful four letter words to be outlawed or banned. I hereby argue that it is my right to expression to use this very insulting word at the time and the place of my choosing. Is the word insulting? Of course, in fact, I will probably use it just to be provocative.

[Servorg]

"Be legal, or "allowed to say" doesn't mean you SHOULD."

Actually we should express ideas that offend if that's what we believe, or if even only to play devils advocate. That's exactly what needs to be done to keep the right of free speech intact. If we start to censor ourselves because someone MIGHT be offended by our ideas or the way we express them then we run the risk of losing that right. There are plenty of countries around the world today where you would be murdered by an angry mob for expressing ideas that we take for granted. Keeping that right whole and unfettered here is much more important (completely trumps) the rights of those who might take offense at the ideas or words that we need to keep choosing and using to keep freedom of expression FREE.

[im_nomad]

I fully understand rights, and the need to speak your mind about what you believe in, although I fail to see what throwing one hot button word into a conversation has to do with expression of ideas and the flow of conversation. And I do think some people twist the idea of free speech to mean "I can go around being a complete a-hole because it is my legal right to do so".

[Chemicalkinetics]

In all honesty, (not trying to agree or disagree here), it is always a competition between creating a non-hostile environment vs freedom of speech. Something our court system has tried very hard at balancing.

Think about the infamous Spivey case where the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled against Spivey's First Amendment defense. The Danish Muhammad cartoon controversy. Some are legal, others are social and political. Still, it is often about the struggle between of individual right vs the protection of public opinion/interest.

[Cachetes]

That's an interesting point, and I agree in principle. Except there are a lot of people who would see it as inoffensive to refer to someone as 'Boy" when we know how truly offensive the underlying meaning is.

What shocks me even more than them letting "whitey" stand, however, is that they've let personal attacks on the OP stand.

[onceadaylily]

I was surprised to see that thread this morning as well, kaleokahu, and failed to be educated when I read through the responses. I was curious if I was neglecting to eat a proper whitey diet. I wanted to be given a glimpse into my heritage I might have missed, or be reassured that I was honoring my roots with supper. Sadly, North American and picky doesn't give me much to go on.

Teasing aside, this statement from the team "If you are offended by the term, please ignore this thread and move on" surprised me more than the potentially offensive terminology used in the posting title. It seems contrary to what we are often told about the moderation of this site, that we do have a part in such, and was unnecessarily brusque, I thought, considering the potential offense to some. I've found the moderation on this site to be uneven, and sometimes troubling.

I have two examples. In one, I reported a sarcastic comment made to a vegetarian, and the comment was let stand (and was followed by a few more snarky comments). I have no doubt that if the diet was chosen out of ethics driven by religion, instead of a different but equal sensibility, any comments that derided it would have vanished faster than I could hit the report button. In a second example, a poster started two threads, one asking CHers what the craziest thing a server ever said to them, and another, asking servers what was the craziest thing a customer ever said to them. Guess which thread was removed? As if my dining education can be formed by a tale of a server mispronouncing a cheese six states away, but not an inverse tale? The best servers are the quiet ones, then.

*sigh*

[The Chowhound Team]

We apologize if our team note seemed brusque. We were trying to dissuade people from piling on about the offensiveness of the word 'whitey' in the thread, as educating people about sensitivity issues is considered off-topic.

We didn't mean to dissuade anyone from using 'report' to flag that post or anything else. We may not always act on every report we receive, but we do appreciate them, and wouldn't want anyone to feel that reports are unwelcome.

[kaleokahu]

I'm calling the CBS ombudsman. There's still time to do the right thing.

[onceadaylily]

I do appreciate your response, and correctly understood the intentions underlying your note in the thread, but my point still stands. There are groups that can be targeted with unkindness here, comments that are outside of the scope of the discussion of this site, and when those comments are allowed to stand, it sends an uncomfortable message. Granted, I am a (mostly) white vegetarian former server, but I do think I am being observant, and not merely sensitive.

I am, however, glad this topic came up for discussion, as this issue has been on my mind of late, and feel better for having said my piece.

[knecht]

Wow, just wow. To defend ignoring this issue as being off-topic is so shortsighted I am amazed it would even be posted. If there is a race problem would you ever find it topical?

[im_nomad]

The "if you are offended, move on" thing really surprises me too, if for no other reason than it is not applied to other threads.

And not to get into an off-topic, but I hear you on the vegetarian thing. I once brought up the issue of why there was so much vitriol directed there here in site talk, and it was swiftly locked after a few responses involving stereotypes were made (i.e. because you're all trouble sort of thing). Its a touchy topic though for some, not that I understand that. But whatever.

[onceadaylily]

I remember that thread, and I've thought very often that I wished I could change my vote on whether or not a vegetarian board would benefit this site. I did think, at the time, that the separation would hurt both 'sides', but I've come to think I might have been too quick to answer.

I do have to say that the mods did contact me and asked to be supplied with the thread of which I spoke in that instance, with the implication that my initial objection would be reassessed. I appreciated that. Still, I see the sentiment on the boards, that certain groups are fair game when other, much more benign comments are pulled down, and it is tiring, and not OT here at all, I think.

[greygarious]

Within the last month or so, I reported a comment on Koreans that I thought was a mean-spirited stereotyping. (I am a WASP). I can't recall the thread. Someone's post relative to a particular restaurant was that the Korean owner was rather surly. The following post was something to the effect that service from Koreans is always surly. Nothing else in the post. I reported the latter post - it was not deleted.

[inaplasticcup]

I'm probably the Korean who posted that comment!

Lots of people take offense to generalizations, but they exist for a reason. There are lots of general positive attributes to any kind of people, but there are some general negative ones, as perceived one culture to another, as well.

I grew up in a very culturally diverse environment, and we poked fun at everyone on basis of culture, ourselves included, all the time. I think people who might kneejerk at any culturally-based comment that isn't positively positive might benefit from seeing some friendly back and forth between people of different cultures, discussing and learning about other cultures - even if through sometimes snarky banter.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, inaplastic cup:

I do not think this issue is one of demographic or cultural generalizations, politely expressed and discussed. The issue is that the management of CH has put its imprimitur of approval on the use of a racial epithet in the split board's title: "What is whitey food?"

This is racist, and there's no explaining or justifying it away.

I don't even know an epithet for a person of Korean descent. I hope there isn't one. But if a CH Mod used such an epithet to include you, the Korean people or culture in a Thread's title, you and most Koreans would probably be offended. And it would give license to even more epithets and racism.

We've worked too hard to backslide on this. CH should apologize for its Moderator's poor judgment and commit to it not happening again.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[inaplasticcup]

Aloha, Kaleo.

Well, I might be in the minority here, but I'm one of those un-PC people who isn't bothered by the use of the term *whitey* in this particular instance because I didn't read any animosity or denigration into the intent at all.

And just as a point of discussion, without malice, if the comment that you don't even know if there's an epithet for a person of Korean descent might imply that I wouldn't know what a white person feels like to be referred to as *whitey*, the epithet is *gook*, and I've been called it both in jest and with malice, both taken differently depending on context and other indicators of intent.

I see your point. I personally would not choose to make it with this example. :)

[kaleokahu]

Aloha, inaplasticcup:

You know, the funny thing is I've argued the other side of this, too, at points in my life. I wouldn't be belaboring the point if the offensive term had indeed been used incidentally. But that is not what happened. The problem is some Moderator's unbelievably poor judgment in putting a racial epithet in boldface type into the title of a separate thread.

As politics and history instruct, the coverup is almost always worse than the underlying offense, and serves no purpose BUT to attract attention. This is what the Mods have done since this issue arose. Unfortunately, there is an institutional climate here in the moderation of CH that makes admitting any lapse in judgment or hypocrisy unthinkable. Today proves that they would even prefer fostering racism and racist resentments over doing the right thing. Not holding them to account would be just as wrong.

I enjoy your posts. Keep up the good work.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[invinotheresverde]

Forgive me, but you seem to be the one trying to attract attention.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, invinotheresverde:

How you been? I am indeed trying to attract attention to a wrong. Thank you for your help and praise.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[inaplasticcup]

And cheers to you for grace under fire. I think this is a good and important discussion to have, even if, or especially because, we can voice our different opinions like grown people and still walk away fellow Hounds. :)

[hill food]

I think frank discussion of a subject easily shoved under the table is somehow refreshing (I haven't seen the original thread yet, just referring to this particular discussion)

I have always been impressed by someone (addressed with or without accuracy) who takes ownership of an epithet and throws it back in the face of the giver. "damn right I am, my mom says I'm the biggest one in the county!"

[kaleokahu]

Hi, hill food:

[Applause}

Do I remember correctly, you are also a lawyer?

You should read the original (Toronto) post. It really had little to do with epithets, except for some isolated, individual racism. The problem began when a Mod chose to split the thread, and republish the epithet into a thread of its own in General CH. The rest, as they say, is history.

But I like your "ownership" parable. We would all be better off everyone followed
that guidance--unless ownership is followed by a rope and a tree limb.

Regards,
Kaleo

[hill food]

me a lawyer? sorry (ha!) skimmed it just now. yeah, my only gripe about the thread itself was the impression that expensive ingredients need be involved.

I see why they split it, but I'm not sure how it could have been better titled unless "what foods are perceived to be X?"

[kaleokahu]

Sorry, I had you confused with another intelligent person.

It could have been better titled if they [the Mods] hadn't republished the epithet, I guess.

[hill food]

heh, my only thing about lawyers is all my friends who are, seem to have intense and wistful daydreams about doing something else...

[Chemicalkinetics]

You are a lawyer too? Damn it. Too many lawyers on Chowhound, too few scientists.

[hill food]

oh no I'm a materials science engineer with a specialization in metallurgical R+D. (sorry CK I really teach interpretive dance through sock puppets at the County Jail - community service y'know),

[Chemicalkinetics]

I have not heard of County Jail hires people to do sock puppet interpretive dance, but then I don't know much about County Jail. Talk to you later.

[im_nomad]

With all due respect inaplasticcup, when it comes to things like this, it doesn't really matter if you as an individual are not offended by something, as long as there are others, and especially several others who are. We kind of don't get to tell other people what they're not allowed to be offended about, whether we like that or not.

[bobcam90]

I remember years ago, back in my corporate life, sexual harassment was finally getting dealt with. One thing we learned was that harassment is in the eye of the harassed. In other words, I agree with you.

[inaplasticcup]

nomad, while there are lots of people on CH who like to tell people what they should or should not be offended by, what they should or should not say, and/or how they should or shouldn't say it, I'm not one of those people.

I expressed an opinion to the contrary, but I don't think I said anything that can be construed as telling kaleo whether or not to be offended. As a matter of fact, my last comment to kaleo was essentially an agreement to disagree.

I also disagree with this idea that everyone with a differing opinion should just step aside and remain silent simply because someone takes offense to something, whatever that thing may be.

[im_nomad]

I was speaking more in general to the "well I wasn't offended by it" statement that people seem to make when it comes to stuff like this. Didn't mean to suggest you were telling kaleo what to do.

[The Chowhound Team]

When splitting threads, we have to provide a title for the newly created thread. We aim for a short summary of the content of the thread. While it wasn't a word for word copy of the first post in the new thread, it was meant to capture the gist of it in a slightly shorter form.

It would likely have been less controversial if we could have found a way to summarize the content of the thread without using the phrase 'whitey food', but since the thread was specifically about that concept, it seemed the most accurate.

[kaleokahu]

Thank you for your voice.

With respect, the underlying thread was not even started about "Whitey food". You (or some indistinguisable other) chose to break out a subsequent poster's question that just happened to contain the offensive term (which she had put into quotes, suggesting to me that perhaps SHE was also offended by or incredulous at the original user of the term's racism).

It never should have been split at all if it meant reprinting broadcasting a racial epithet.

I do not mean to rub it in. Please just speak the truth.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Servorg]

I took her comment putting the term in quotes to indicate that she didn't come up with the word and her problem with it is that it meant nothing to her in terms of what type of food the original poster was talking about. If fact she replied to someone else who posted "What continent? And ethic to whom?" That sealed the deal for me as far as her query was concerned. She was simply trying to discern whether the term had or has any real relevance to food, and if so what type of food.

As to your comment "Please just speak the truth" you seem to indicate that when someone takes a stand that doesn't agree with your slant on things then they aren't speaking the "truth." Truth here is not black and white.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Servorg:

My comment, to which you responded, was directed at the Mods. Do you speak for them?

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Servorg]

Your comment was made on a public board in the midst of a free form discussion and all the ideas conveyed to anyone here are open for comment and reflection. Or is that not the case? And I speak for one person and one person only. Me.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Servorg:

I am relieved to learn that you do not speak for the Mods.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[thew]

again - if everything was exactly the same, but the word used was "chink" food it would not have been used , even if the thread was "specifically about that concept"

frankly your explanation ring as unaduldterated bullshit to me

[ospreycove]

Thew, that's for sure. The old phrase in 60s era NYC was variations of "Let's go out for Chinks", never used today, and for good reason!!!!

[Vetter]

By calling "whitey food" a concept, you validate it, and the whole stupid notion of "race".

[The Chowhound Team]

Our policy on incidental vulgarity, obscenity, and general offensiveness in otherwise chow-ful postings is that anything is OK so long as it's not said in anger or is clearly intended to stir up trouble, and that didn't seem to be the case here.

Someone used the term 'whitey' to describe the food at a specific restaurant, and though many people were offended by the term, there was also a fairly long and polite discussion of the poster's choice of word and the type of food. That discussion was pretty off-topic where it was, so we moved it to General Chowhounding Topics where types of food are discussed.

We certainly understand why people would be offended by the term 'whitey food', and on a personal level, most of the mods probably agree with them. But it wasn't aimed at another hound, and was posted by a poster with a long history of contributing to the site, so we had no reason to believe it was meant as either an insult or a troll.

[kaleokahu]

OK, check the General Board in a few minutes...

[donovt]

Your post was clearly intended to stir up trouble. Not sure what that was supposed to prove.

[kaleokahu]

No, it wasn't. It was intended to point out there is a double standard at work here. Withy the deletion of my identical post, my point has been proven: The Mods are selectively encouraging approved racism.

[donovt]

When you say "ok, check the general board" before making the post, you are clearly just posting in order to get a reaction.

[kaleokahu]

No, I'm not. I'm interested in good darkey food in Toronto. It's an appropriate question, according to the Mods.

[donovt]

Oh, ok. Now I'm convinced. Especially since you say that your point has been proven.

[Querencia]

Okay, I'll bite---but I still don't know what "good darky food" is in Canada. In the States we identify Southern food with black culture, which I find hilarious because it's exactly the same stuff that my very prejudiced bigoted name-calling white great-grandmother cooked in Southern Illinois (which is historically and culturally Southern). But I know that various racial epithets cognate with "darky" have been used by English Colonial in Asian countries when speaking of an entirely different population and cuisine. What is a "darky" in Toronto---an American black person, a Jamaican, a Southeast Asian, a Pakistani? It's a long way from a mess of greens to curry and chapatis.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Querencia:

Well, I'm not sure how to answer your question. I've never actually had "darkey food" before. But if "whitey food" is the food that whiteys eat, all that time wasted in Logic classes tells me that "darkey food" is what darkeys eat.

I think others here seem to think that whitey and darkey are opposite cuisines, but I don't understand what that could mean. I infer from the additional fact that "whitey food" has been described here as white in color, is bland, and is utterly dehors of real ethnic or national cuisines, that "darkey food" is very dark, exceedingly flavorful and spicy, and marvelously informed by all cultures and nationalities. That must be why darkeys eat where they do. I don't know, that's why I asked.

Maybe the Mods will be so kind as to split out this part of this thread to General Chowhounding with the title "What is 'darkey food'?" Then we might both find out.

I have a knifemaking friend named Blackie Collins who's not offended by being called "Blackie". Just like Whitey Ford doesn't mind being called Whitey. So maybe we ought to title it "What's 'Blackie Food'?" instead.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[DeppityDawg]

An obvious point (to me anyway), but "whitey" and "darkey" are not, as you say, identical. Unless you also think that "white" and "dark" are equally acceptable terms for talking about race? From a purely linguistic point of view, "whitey" vs. "blackie" would have been the correct parallel to draw. But it should still come as no surprise that in this case the term referring to the minority group is perceived by most people as markedly more offensive. It's not consistent, it's not logical, but it is the result of certain historical realities that were/are neither consistent nor logical.

[kaleokahu]

Now, Deppity...

Do you REALLY think that if I substituted "Blackie" for "Darkey", my otherwise identical post would have been allowed? I think there's zero-point-zero chance of that happening. Why don't you try it and see?

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Servorg]

You seem to have blown right by this part of Deppity Dawg's post: ''But it should still come as no surprise that in this case the term referring to the minority group is perceived by most people as markedly more offensive." without even slowing down to pause for the stop sign...

[hill food]

I don't want to get my fingerprints on this train wreck, but in idiomatic historical usage "Darkie" as a pejorative term is a much more established (entrenched?) in popular culture that didn't fade until well into the mid to late 20th c. in the US and was much more common than "Blackie" (I think we all know the more commonly used term of disrespect)

personally I can think of far more derogatory words to use against myself than "Whitey" and find it has a certain retro 1974 charm. takes me back to grade school and the gals that called me Honky, or Ofay! (heh)

[kaleokahu]

Hi again, Servorg:

In the words of The Dude: "I'm sorry , I wasn't listening." What on earth is your meaning? That there can only be one really offensive epithet? That's been tried already in this thread.

In the same vein: "This aggression will not stand, Man." [You have to have seen the movie]

Aloha,
Kaleo

[thew]

bigotry against the majority group is still bigotry

[Servorg]

Bigotry without the power to make others lives miserable is fairly meaningless.

[thew]

bullshit.

bigotry is personal. if it make a child run home crying it's fucked up. that's enough.

but let me be clear. I am not all that easily offended, and racially charged language doesnt offend me that much. but hypocrisy does.

now, ive said many times before - the answer to racism is to finally kill the false notion of race. culture exists. race does not - we do not exist in quantum stepped racial leaps, but across a continuous of physical traits that belie the very notion of race. The sooner we drop the idea of subspecies from humanity, as we have from the rest of biology, the better off we all will be. There is just one race. human.

[Servorg]

I don't recall any black citizens of this country with fire hoses and police dogs making the lives of "whitey" a living hell in the 60's. Bigotry may be personal, but when it's "institutional" then you have an imbalance that breeds attempts to right it, even a little bit as with the term "whitey". Or with Rosa Parks refusing to move to the back of the bus any longer. Or I don't recall any young civil rights volunteers (some of them white) being murdered by black men. Only white men who thought that the N word was something they could use with total impunity. If you think that the term "whitey" has the moral equivalence of the N word you are sticking your head so far into the sand that you can probably see China if you look around.

[onceadaylily]

The moderators have it within their power to ensure that we here speak respectfully to one another across the board. It is a large part of their job (and a difficult one, yes) to do this, and sometimes they fail. That is the issue at hand here.

I should neither have to explain my painful history with that word being bandied about, nor defend myself by telling stories to demonstrate that I am not being merely sensitive. I don't want to do that, and was surprised that an objection to the word was not enough. The casual use of the word in a posting title was misguided, and to be told to tolerate it is, to me, part and parcel of the same sentiments in the racially tense and troubled town I come from that created an intolerance of these types of words on my part in the first place. I'll not get back on that merry-go-round in my lifetime.

The respect I show others comes simply from a desire to respect, and a hope to be given the same in return. We presumably are encouraged to do that on this website, and I can ask for consistency in that regard here.

[Servorg]

So, without getting into specifics, you are saying you've been "targeted" for institutional discrimination based on being white, including the use of the word "whitey" being applied by non whites to belittle you? And you live in the US?

[onceadaylily]

Discrimination? No. Violence? Yes. And I will be specific. I was twelve, the first time the words 'honky', 'whitey' and 'ghostie' were thrown at me, moments before I was grabbed from a swing, by my hair, and beaten by four girls I had never seen before and would never see again. That was the first time I experienced such a thing, children lashing out at each other with a momentum that did not belong to them. My aunt was alarmed when she saw me, but quickly shushed me when I told her what happened. She was uneasy that others would hear, and it would be perceived that we were at fault. That was my lesson, and it would not be the first time I had to learn it.

I was born in 1973, just south of Detroit. Our little town was segregated by color, and by class, and had much ignorance in common. Being taught to hate was a casual affair with a predictable outcome for many, regardless of ethnicity. People said 'nigger' and 'honky' as easily as they said coffee table, and I'll not be made part of it again. I bristle at being told, even indirectly, that I have earned this word, and whatever intentions are behind it. I have not.

[thew]

i didnt equate the treatment of one with the other. i made a smple statement - if a black guy calls me a ofay motherfucker, or a white guy calls me a kike bastard, or I call someone nigger - those are all equally bigoted statements. oppression does not give you the right to take the tools of the oppressor and use them with impunity. as gandhi said - an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind

[Servorg]

However there is a big difference in the laws in Germany (for instance) in what can be said about Jews and the Holocaust because of the history of what has transpired there. The same thing pervades our culture and the societal impact of certain terms based on the history that gives those terms their power to wound. Oppression does give individuals a right to protect themselves from the psychological power that has (and continues to be) wielded against them by the majority. Using the term whitey cannot possibly be found to have the same societal impact as the N word based on the history of the US. It just doesn't rise to the level of bigotry you imply. And now I'm done with this thread and moving back to my home board for chow talk. It's all been very enlightening.

[thew]

i will just end this subthread with a quote from the brilliant lenny bruce (a real american martyr):
Are there any niggers here tonight? Could you turn on the house lights, please, and could the waiters and waitresses just stop serving, just for a second? And turn off this spot. Now what did he say? "Are there any niggers here tonight?" I know there's one nigger, because I see him back there working. Let's see, there's two niggers. And between those two niggers sits a kyke. And there's another kyke— that's two kykes and three niggers. And there's a spic. Right? Hmm? There's another spic. Ooh, there's a wop; there's a polack; and, oh, a couple of greaseballs. And there's three lace-curtain Irish micks. And there's one, hip, thick, hunky, funky, boogie. Boogie boogie. Mm-hmm. I got three kykes here, do I hear five kykes? I got five kykes, do I hear six spics, I got six spics, do I hear seven niggers? I got seven niggers. Sold American. I pass with seven niggers, six spics, five micks, four kykes, three guineas, and one wop. Well, I was just trying to make a point, and that is that it's the suppression of the word that gives it the power, the violence, the viciousness. Dig: if President Kennedy would just go on television, and say, "I would like to introduce you to all the niggers in my cabinet," and if he'd just say "nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger" to every nigger he saw, "boogie boogie boogie boogie boogie," "nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger" 'til nigger didn't mean anything anymore, then you could never make some six-year-old black kid cry because somebody called him a nigger at school.

[Servorg]

It's is not about making some child cry. It's about violence and economic oppression. It's about the fall out of institutional slavery and a Civil War. You try to turn the elephant on its head and say "See, it's still just as stable as it was on its 4 feet." Won't wash no matter what comics you quote or what philosophical arguments you muster. The history of this country makes the term "whitey" one without impact.

[thew]

on this we disagree. i think of bigotry as a global problem, and not one solely related to racism in america. especially as this is an international forum we are participating in.

but then not being whitey, but a kike who lost family to racism, my perspective may be skewed

[linguafood]

so, then, your actual point is it doesn't matter whether it says nigger or whitey on top of a thread, cause neither are offensive if used often enough?

i'm not sure i understand your point.

[Chemicalkinetics]

"it doesn't matter whether it says nigger or whitey on top of a thread, cause neither are offensive if used often enough?"

Linguafood. In case you may be interested. Lee v. Ventura County Superior Court has a ruling somewhat related to this.

[linguafood]

thx, but i'm really not. not really.

i'm just passing by '-)

[Chemicalkinetics]

:P

[thew]

my point is, as i think was lenny's, that once we transcend this concept of race as anything important, it becomes impossible to denigrate someone with words like this

[Lizard]

Yes, but transcendence is far off. As long as institutions maintain inequality and people contribute to their discursive existence, this argument is kind of pointless. Language cannot be disarticulated from content-- Bruce's bit has resonance, but takes place on stage, which is a place to perform institutional critique.

I suspect it may be easier for some people to disavow the issue of institutionalised inequality and bigotry when they are less likely to have been affected by it. It would be nice for people to own up to that privilege, not to celebrate it, but to recognise it, so they can they move to seeing the ways others are affected, and perhaps then help fix things. Saying the words now won't diffuse the institutions that say the 'bad' words in nice ways. Tikkun Olam, man.

p.s. I have to confess that the only way I see 'whitey' as a problem, is that it's stupid and inflammatory. I think "reverse racism" is a bulls*** phrase that people use to disavow white privilege. It's kind of like when there are those breathless reports declaring ethnic minorities or women to be "taking over" a field, when really, all that's happening, is greater, and more equal representation.

[hill food]

Lizard, I hear what you're saying, and I have to say I've largely given up trying to explain to certain relatives that visibility doesn't equal a state of 'hell-in-a-handbasket' or describe the POV of anyone considered the 'outsider' and the value and meaning of the cheap digs and small recognitions.

they'll never get it. I just don't bother unless a specific question is raised.

[thew]

i agree with much of what you say. reverse racism is bullshit - it isn't reverse anything, its just plain ol racism

[Lizard]

Thanks, Thew.
But I don't think racism really applies to expressions lobbed at white people (especially not in North America, Europe, and most parts of South America, although there one can address complications of communities who are either of European or indigenous backgrounds)-- mostly because racism involves structures of institutional privilege. Any words used again white people don't have the force of laws, practices and mores giving them heft.
(Meanwhile, part of me very much wants to talk to you about your family; it seems that there are some things in common, although my survivor family (one side) did not move to America... or at least, my mother not until much later and after she married my American father. It's a distinct thing to grow up with, but I'm also curious if your perspective is different for your having been brought up in the US. Or was there family in Europe who survived?)

[thew]

so - it's ok to hate some people based solely on group affiliation or skin color or something?

[Lizard]

No, no one is saying it's ok. But I think that the hate, when directed without any force of institutional backing that has resulted in closing access, ensuring less money earned, increased dangers of violence (often legitimated by law), is not quite the same issue. If people hate me, or my group, but I'm legally protected from the impact of that hatred, it's not really my problem.

It's kind of like when people like Santorum announce that they don't hate gay people, they just hate X; fact is, you can hate me all you like but don't curtail my rights. Don't impede the rights of others. (For what I see as rights, do check UN Convention first, but yes, then also issues of equal access to services for all citizens...)

[thew]

agreed, not the same issue. but i think it is the issue being discussed here

[kaleokahu]

Hi.Lizard:

You had me agreeing with you in your two prior posts, but you lost me with this one.

The MODS think it's OK--they've even made feeble attempts to justify putting "Whitey" in the post title!

When racial epithets are thrown around, a 1- or 2-thug "institution" is often enough. Your insight, on a macro level, that it takes at least the law and institutions turning a blind eye toward racism that is a large part of perpetuating it, is a fine point as far as it goes. In a way that is exactly my point in standing up here--an institution did it..

I. too, have always though "reverse racism" was more of a tool for other demagoguery than a descriptor of what actually happens. But racist language is racist except in EXTREMELY limited situations (Ironically, poor iMarilyn used one of those situations, namely literary cynicism). Up, down, sideways, white, black, red, yellow, racism can and does flow in every direction. Institutional racial preferences are racist, regardless of some imagined good intent--if Act Utilitarianism was the moral theory we lived by society-wide, there would be no law but whim. And an awful lot of blood.

I have seen blood shed through epithet-fueled racial violence a micro scale, in situations where, had there been a gun present, someone (probably an innocent bystander or law enforcement) could have been killed. What goes on the toe-tags when that happens, "Just Inflammation"?

You're a smart person and a good writer. I enjoy reading your posts.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[linguafood]

It would appear to me that the overall presence of & easy access to guns is a problem in and of itself. But let's not get OT here.

[inaplasticcup]

Gawd forbid we stray OT on this thread, lingua... ;)

[Duppie]

Yes, let's not....

[Lizard]

Thanks for the kind words, kaleokahu.

I suppose much of this comes out of my perspective that "whitey" simply isn't that ugly because it does not carry with it the heavy legacy of many of the institutionalised oppressions that the alternatives you and others proposed do.

That said, I think the term isn't useful, it describes little and it seems to sting a group of people. It exists for no reason but to inflame, and in some ways, manages to invoke the very terms you wondered if the mods would tolerate. That is, the "darkey" and others were implied. So for those reasons, I think it was a pretty stupid decision to use the word in the naming of a post.

Once you bring violence into it, I'm with you. Rights involve the right to survive without some dumbass thinking you shouldn't based on whatever your affiliations are. However, from what I've seen, the language is one component of the mechanisms that cause the violence to erupt. And the language that is a problem is more of the top down kind: institutionalised and embedded in discourses of popular entertainment, policy, etc. I'm thinking here, for example of the way various media have been used to get people to kill their neighbours-- eg Radio Milles Collines. People can, at the ground level, incite each other into a frenzy with words, but usually because there are other forces at play. Violence erupting from name calling means there's other serious s*** going down.

But do you seriously think the use of the word "whitey" here is inciting anyone to violence or recalling a painful legacy of violence and ongoing exclusion?

I will give you this: It's a stupid word and it wasn't exactly going to produce any kind of useful debate on General Food.

[chowser]

Your deleted post, as you said was "to point out there is a double standard at work here" and not about food and that's why it was deleted. I'm not supporting the term whitey, which I think is odd but there have been many, many posts that I found misogynistic, racist, prejudice and they remain. I'm not saying I agree w/ it but those are the CH rules not to moderate offensiveness. You can accuse them of allowing offensive posts and I'd completely agree but I haven't seen anything that is a double standard. Your deleted post was purposefully incendiary to prove your point. I'm just not feeling your poor white people are being discriminated against vs non-whites. Recently, there was a thread about Penny on the Food Network star that was very anti-Middle easterner and equated her w/ Al Quaeda. It still stands. I've seen threads about Chinese restaurant owners being rude, about women (especially of a certain age) being rude, cackly poor tippers. There is no "selectively encouraging approved racism", imo.

If you're arguing for more moderation on this site and removal of all posts that anyone finds offensive, that's a different call than hypocrisy.

[DeppityDawg]

Well, there is a double standard, but it's the same one that makes Black History Month, Hispanic History Month, etc. acceptable, but not White History Month. Or why you hear about Gay Pride but not so much about Straight Pride, etc., or why we can give prizes/scholarships exclusively to women in science but not exclusively to men in science. Yes, there are differences between those examples and the "whitey" vs. "darkey" thing, but the double standard is there in each case, for the same general reasons: because unfortunately in the past, and even more unfortunately still today, white and black/Hispanic/etc. are not equal, straight and gay are not equal, men and women are not equal. And so on.

The argument that "if they delete 'darkey' then they must delete 'whitey'" is naive in the best case. In the worst case, it represents in itself a racist attitude, disguised as holier-than-thou egalitarianism. It's like saying "If I can't have a White History Month, then they must abolish Black History Month" or "If I can't hold a Straight Pride parade, then the Gay Pride parade must also be prohibited". I know that there are people who say exactly that, and I recognize that it's a complex issue. It requires more subtle arguments than just "Aha! Double standard! Gotcha!"

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Deppity:

No, insisting on equality is never racism. So not naive.

And what *is* the prohibition against a White History Month or Straight Pride Parade? Maybe those wouldn't be so well attended, but why "can't" those things be held?

And I'm not holding CH to account out of any desire to see my *own* be treated in any particular way, or to get something someone else gets. The stone cold fact is that CH has denigrated and insulted white people by actually publishing an epithet used against them. It doesn't make that epithet the worst historically, nor does it make using a *lesser* epithet more *acceptable*

Racial epithets have no business on Chowhound, according to CBS.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[cowboyardee]

The problem with "White History Month" or a "Straight Pride" parade is you can't have em without begging the question - are these events just about protesting and mocking the minority events they're imitating? Even if, somehow, that's not the intent at all, that's always how they will be perceived for a variety of reasons (historically, white brotherhood organizations in the US have not exactly been peaceful and positive; also, there's not a whole lot of reason to hold white and straight solidarity events - solidarity against what?)

There is most definitely a double standard, but it's not arbitrary. "Darkie" and "whitey" are not equivalent terms. "Whitey" has no equivalent term. Context is everything - historically, sociologically, and on the page.

Anyway, all that said, it's still a little tangential to whether a term like 'whitey' (used without obvious malicious intent) is appropriate for this site. In general, I'm for a little less moderation on CH. And I also don't subscribe to the notion that just because it offends someone, it automatically has to go, as that would effectively give everyone absolute censorship powers over everyone else (also, see the David Howard scandal from 1999). But at the same time, I can see how some people would JUSTIFIABLY take offense at this (that's the important part), and I don't want anyone renouncing their memberships over it.

[soupkitten]

<<
And what *is* the prohibition against a White History Month or Straight Pride Parade? Maybe those wouldn't be so well attended, but why "can't" those things be held?
>>

hey Kaleokahu, i think it's because those things are THE ENTIRE FUCKING REST OF THE TIME!!!

peace, --sk :)

[karenfinan]

AMEN SISTER!!!!!!!!!!

[small h]

soupkitten, I have written a short play in your honor, based on ACTUAL EVENTS. The characters: small h, a naive yet smart-mouthed white college student from suburban NJ; Georgia, a less naive yet also smart-mouthed black college student from Harlem.

small h: So, what are you taking this semester?
Georgia: Black Literature.
small h: Black Literature? How come there's no course in White Literature?
Georgia: There is. It's called Literature.

[Lizard]

Thank you for reporting that. And thank you for learning from it. Invisible privilege can be hard to see!

[chowser]

You'll also notice that the term "nigger" remains and not deleted here, too. You want to overlook the terms that have been used, posts that have been pointed out to you about non-white and talk about the double standards that whites have faced. That seems like a double standard to me. You're not concerned about women who've been denigrated, Middle Easteners, the use of the word "nigger" here. There are offensive phrases, posts. There isn't a double standard. If CH were deleting those threads and leaving the whitey thread, then I'd agree. They're not.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, chowser:

I double-dare the Mods to put the N-word in a Thread's title. They won't do it because it's a vile and racist epithet. Yet they have done so with another epithet against a different race. If they do not pull this down, whose race is next?

Aloha,
Kaleo

[MidCoastMaineiac]

What a joke...calling the term "Whitey" as vile and racist as the "N-word". Give me a break.

Us white folk have been put down too long! Time to rise up against this rampant racism and say No More! NO! I will no longer wait once a quarter for my 401k statements!!!!! I will no longer accept a 15% long term capital gains tax!!! No more $300 40k mile checkup charges for my Porsche 911 Carrera!! Join us!

[thew]

bigotry is bigotry regardless of who is hating whom based solely on group affiliation.

no one is claiming that it's been harder to be white than black in america. no is denying the unjust levels of oppression based on racial perception in america, either historically or today.

it's another strawman argument. i can think both that "whitey" is a racist term, and that racism has been far more damaging to blacks in america than to whites with zero contradiction. I can think whitey is a racist term, adn accept that whites are a far more privileged class in america.

big·ot·ry   
[big-uh-tree]
–noun, plural -ries.
1.
stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

[MidCoastMaineiac]

So one form of racism deserves to be banned from Chowhound, and one doesn't. Context is everything

I take it that you agree that "whitey" is as vile as the "N-word".

[thew]

does one need to be equally vile to be vile? even if one is viler than the other does that make the merely vile one ok, while the very vile one needs to banned?

personally i do not think ANY sort of speech should be banned. ever. I'm the son of holocaust survivors - and i protested for the nazi's right to march in skokie and the KKK to rally in new york. not because i agree with them. because i cherish freedom more than i fear hatred. the answer to ugly speech is MORE speech - correct speech - wise speech, not silence

as long as you fear to type nigger the way you type whitey, the problem will remain. as long as you see the w-word as something other than the n - word nothing will change.

[Passadumkeg]

Wow! New hero movie.

[linguafood]

ahahahahaaaahahaa, good one, 'keg.

just out of curiosity, thew -- did your holocaust-surviving parents join you in that protest for the nazis' right to march in skokie? and if not, how did they feel about your love for free speech over respecting what your parents went through?

[hill food]

lf: interesting question.

thew - did you see how the Fred Phelps Westboro BC group (the yucks that protest at soldier's funerals) was received in SF last Fall outside of I think Twitter HQ? your comment "the answer to ugly speech is MORE speech - correct speech - wise speech, not silence" is perfectly enacted to hilarious results, many links on youtube if you google it.

WBC gave up and went home.

way back around 1991 neo-nazi skinheads rallied in SF's Union Square and the punks and hippies(!) beat the shit out of them. heh.

[thew]

i certainly saw counter protests to FPW , not sure if i saw that particular one though

when the KKK were finally permitted to march (sans hoods) in NYC, after much ballyhoo and hoohah about not allowing them, their march had a few dozen tops, while the counter protestors numbered in the thousands. free speech worked

[thew]

my father agreed with me, in a free country, people have a right to speak. my mother as a recall was torn. And, um - that WAS my respecting what my parents went through. they came to america for freedom as well as security

[Passadumkeg]

Wise parents.

[Passadumkeg]

I was being serious. What a plot!

[MidCoastMaineiac]

"even if one is viler than the other does that make the merely vile one ok, while the very vile one needs to banned?"

Yes.

I choose not to use the "n-word" because it is a vile, hateful word that is offensive to the vast majority of blacks. I choose to use the term "whitey" because a) I am a whitey and b) whitey is about as offensive as calling somebody "bunny rabbit".

Perhaps you are working on the theory that "wrong is wrong". Well, going 36 mph in a 35 mph zone is wrong. Murdering and raping a child is also wrong.

Same level of vileness?

On that note, this marks the end to my contributions to this thread. Feel free to shoot this whitey down with your last word.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, MidCoastMaineiac:

There are PLENTY of white people who will rise to murderous rage at being called "Whitey". Even if they don't act in violence, multitudes of others are going to deeply resent it, and that resentment is going to be passed on in families and communities. If it was a person of another race who hurled the epithet (any epithet), there is a temptation to generalize about that person's race. If it happens more than once, it is a damn-near certainty.

36 in a 35 isn't vile, but getting a ticket for it might be if the traffic cop (of a race different from yours) wishes you well with "Have a nice day, Whitey. Stay in your own neighborhood." How would that play with you?

Aloha,
Kaleo

[inaplasticcup]

C'mon now, Kaleo. Let's not make up implausible scenarios to make points.

I understand the principle, but you chip away at your own credibility when you come up with examples that are grounded in mostly unreality.

[givemecarbs]

When it doubt make stuff up. Nicely put inaplasticcup.

[Passadumkeg]

Golly Gee MCM, isn't Maine the whitest state in the nation?

[mcf]

"bigotry is bigotry regardless of who is hating whom based solely on group affiliation."

The mere use of a word does not bigotry make. The use of racially distinguishing words does not bigotry make; the experiences of various groups make words loaded or not so much.

Context and intent matter.

[E Eto]

Since you're providing definitions for the terms you use, maybe you should now look up "racism" and then "prejudice" and then "discrimination." And while you're at it, look up "race" and then look up "ethnicity" (and "ethnocentrism" while you're at it). In many of your rants on the subject, you use these terms as if they were all the same thing, which they are not in the social science use of the terms. Racism does not equal bigotry. Most of your rants have been about bigotry and discrimination, not racism. While bigotry and discrimination have individual consequences in the way you explain, racism happens at the institutional, political, economic level (i.e., more widespread consequences). In a slightly more wider use of the term, "racism" happens at an unconscious level because many times, it fits in with our senses of our color-coded reality. So yeah, "whitey" can be construed as a bigoted term, but not racist.

Here's a decent read on the subject.
http://www.racematters.org/blackslack...

[thew]

actually, having one of my degrees in anthropology, ill just choose to ignore your condescending attitude. i use bigotry instead of racism, because i try to remove the concept of race from my speech as much as i can. i do not always succeed, and sometimes it need be done, but as i see it as a concept with little actual referent, i try not to use it much.

again - most of my family was killed under aegis of ethnicity and culture, the last thing i need is that sort of lesson from you, or the assumption of my ignorance on a topic merely because i do not agree with you

[thew]

i'll also add racism is a subset of bigotry - a specific type of bigotry - so while not all bigotry is racism, all racism is bigotry

[Chemicalkinetics]

" the prohibition against a White History Month or Straight Pride Parade"

Dude, you are a lawyer, you know this stuff.

The reason for Black History Month is that there are many important black people in our history, but they are not mentioned or taught as often as they deserved. The special month to focus on the contribtuions of these special individuals as well as the black people as a whole. You cannot possibly claim there are not enough positive white role models taught in the school.

As for Gay Pride Parade, that is an easy one. Because many people look down on gays and lesbians, view them as something morally less or inferior or whatever.... the intention of Gay Pride Parade to empower the gay people and to give them a chance to stand together to poudly declare their sexual orientation. You cannot possibly claim straight people are prosecuted or discriminated by the society. So what do you need a Straight Pride Parade for? Straight people are not proud of their sexual orientation?

[thew]

the soft racism of cultural pride is also problematic

[Querencia]

Dawg, I don't hear your argument presented by a minority person older than sixty or seventy who personally was excluded from school, employment, promotion, and public office based on his ethnicity---or by a woman of the same age who was barred from about fifty percent of human activity because of her gender---or an elderly gay person who spent sixty years of his life pretending to be somebody else. Back in pre-Affirmative Action days there was NOT a level playing field. Complaints about Affirmative Action nowadays usually come down to is somebody feeling annoyed that he no longer gets to be, reliably, top dog.

[Jim Leff]

Chowser -

Yup. From the beginning of this site, some users have angrily insisted on less moderation, others on more. Deleting anything potentially offensive would mean deleting much much MUCH more, because if the goal is to insulate every sensitive pair of eyes, there's literally no end to it. And it would be silly for the moderators to try to pick and choose (which is precisely what the OP is - incorrectly - assuming they do).

The choice is either for the moderators to extensively hack away at every thread, deleting anything conceivably offensive, or else let people use whatever language they'd like (so long as it's not in anger or with clear intent to insult), and expect folks to be adult and tolerate harsher means of expression....just as in offline communities.

So long as it's about food, of course. Which the deleted post in question was quite obviously not.

[kaleokahu]

Aloha, Jim:

Just for the record, are you in favor of Mods entitling split threads with the N-word?

I thought the Site Talk board was about how the site is run. Did I miss a rule that says Site Talk must be strictly limited to food?

Best,
Kaleo

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Jim Leff]

"entitling split threads"

Not sure what that means. If you mean deleting threads with the n-word:

If someone uses the word in a way that's neither angry nor shows intent to insult, that's ok under our policy (doesn't mean I love it...but who the hell - woops, I mean "heck" - cares what I love?). However, the harsher the word, the more unlikely it could be used without anger or intent to insult.

Of course, those deviously inserting nasty terms just to see what they can get away with should be restrained (any rule you try to make in a large community will be subject to trollish probing).

Site Talks's not about food, no.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, again, Jim:

So you're OK with the Mods splitting a thread and entitling it: "What's N______ food?" Or do you presuppose malice in that case? Careful where you draw your distinctions.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Jim Leff]

I think the distinction's drawn just about right. Let people talk about food however they want, just as long as they don't seem to be trying to be nasty or insulting. It's generally pretty clear when they are. It's not, like, a big stumper.

And the alternative: delving into what each of several million food lovers find offensive - and trying to force every single poster to work around every single user's sensitivities via a gigantic censorship effort - would be obviously unviable. I'd think anyone with common sense would readily agree.

It's not Chowhound's job to protect sensitive eyes from what they prefer not to see, and I can't imagine how anyone would assume it was. This is a public community where all sorts of people talk in all sorts of ways. Anyone whose day's ruined by viewing the word "whitey" in an Internet discussion is surely too delicate to be engaging in public discourse.

I should note that I'm not in any official capacity with this site. Just the one-time founder and an enthusiastic user.

[bobcam90]

And, of course, you meant to add "in my opinion."

[inaplasticcup]

That's a given. Who else's opinion would Jim be expressing as his own?

[Servorg]

Jeff Leff's?

[Jim Leff]

I don't dare speak for Jeff. He's a lot better known than I am!

[Servorg]

lol...and he always gets better press than you ever did...

[escondido123]

You do need to consider posters that use offensive words to supposedly educate when they actually get a thrill out of using them. Please reconsider some of these heavily charged posts.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, escondito123:

Really good point. If you go back and re-read the original thread on the Toronto board, I think that is exactly right. But the Mods didn't have the good judgment just to let it go at that--they had to broadcast the epithet. THEY stirred the pot, not folks in this thread who struggle to (or not to) discuss the situation, draw analogies, make comparisons, etc.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[thew]

i agree that the more words allowed the better. i've spoken long and hard about free speech and how much moderation i think is too much etc etc etc. my comments about the site , in reference to this issue, were that with everything exactly the same, but a word like chink or coon in it's place, and it would not have stood. That's my issue with it

[DeppityDawg]

The parallel with the "n"-word is completely invalid. You yourself acknowledge this by being unable to write the word out in full. Either you yourself find "nigger" more offensive than "whitey", or you at least recognize that in (North American) usage, "nigger" is perceived as more offensive than "whitey". And at the risk of repeating myself and several others in this thread, you must also have some vague idea of why this might be the case.

There is no policy on CH to remove all potential offensive content. The mods have repeated this again and again. Like it or not, it is a legitimate policy. Your problem is that, in this case, they drew the line in a different place than you would have. But the point is, it is possible to draw a line that has "whitey" on one side (relatively less offensive) and "nigger" on the other side (relatively more offensive). Because they are _not equivalent_ in sociolinguistic terms. Find a different argument.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Deppity:

The parallel is valid, however we might differently quantify the offensiveness.

But FYI, I actually *do* find "Whitey" as offensive as "Nigger". Would you be happier or less comfortable if I listed and spelled out a compendium of racial epithets? I choose not to.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[mcf]

"But FYI, I actually *do* find "Whitey" as offensive as "Nigger"."

I find that statement the most offensive thing about this whole topic.

[chowser]

It's telling as to the mindset, though.

[MidCoastMaineiac]

You nailed it mcf.

[mcf]

Sadly, I think you're right. It's the single most racially insensitive thing I've seen expressed in the whole discussion. I'm a white, upper middle class Jewish New Yorker... my white skin is a privilege, a passport to a life of comparative ease, and nothing anyone ever calls me in an effort to offend will change that.

There is just no comparing my experience to those with slave trade and Jim Crow in their personal and family histories.

It just boggles the mind how myopic and focused on sound bites rather than meaning and the experiences of others folks can be.

[chowser]

Nicely put. Added to which, the comparison of a straight pride parade to a gay pride parade is mind boggling. When heterosexuals are made fun of incessantly, bullied, beaten to death for their sexual orientation, there would be a need for it. But, I can hold my husband's hand, kiss him in public, marry the person I love and be accepted completely for that. To say that I need to be a protected class is a mockery of what people who've been persecuted go through. Equality means being treated the same and not ignoring that it's not.

[Chemicalkinetics]

"When heterosexuals are made fun of incessantly"

Typo.....

[chowser]

No, I meant theoretically, if that happened to hetereosexuals, then heterosexuals should be a protected class. Homosexuals have to deal w/ that already.

[Chemicalkinetics]

Opps.... sorry, my fault for not reading more closely.

[mcf]

"To say that I need to be a protected class is a mockery of what people who've been persecuted go through."

That mockery is what's so incredibly insensitive here.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, again, chowser:

I fight for my gay friends' rights and dignity, too. If gays have not suffered as much as blacks (or Armenians), are you OK with calling gay people "queer"? Go ahead and post "What is Faggot Food Like?" and see how long it lasts on CH.

I have actually been around some bigoted, violent gay people who bully and taunt straights. They don't fit your stereotype, though, do they?

How about "Cripple Food"? "Retard Food"? Here's a good one, "Wetback Food". Are these acceptable to you for MODS to title a thread?

Aloha,
Kaleo

[chowser]

I don't believe in using any slurs/derogatory terms and have said I find them offensive (and have found posts on CH to be offensive, too, not just the ones against whites). But, while I'd never call someone "stupid" or "retard", I see a big difference in the vileness between the two.

"I have actually been around some bigoted, violent gay people who bully and taunt straights. They don't fit your stereotype, though, do they?"

I'm scratching my head with the jump between gays being discriminated against and this accusation that I have stereotyped all gays to perfect, peace loving people. Gays are people just as straight people and there are good and bad. But, there is far more discrimination and violence against gays which is why I tried to explain why there isn't a straight pride parade. I support the Americans with Disabilities Act. An Americans without Disabilities Act, for equality? Not so much.

[givemecarbs]

Nicely put mcf. I first crossed paths with mcf on a long ago locked thread on fasting. Been following her ever since. Boy did that thread upset people. Someone just wanted some advice on what to eat after a short fast. People kept commenting how is this thread still going? Why hasn't it been locked yet? I thought well if it bothers you so much, you don't have to keep reading it! Even hounds I liked and respected were terrified by that thread. But I learned so much from it, and I met mcf. Now if I could just start another fasting thread. :)

[chowser]

While I have been offended by posts, I completely understand CH's stance. As evident in this thread, people have different levels of comfort with words.

[mcf]

I think some folks are capable of reading for meaning and intent. The mods have erred only by presuming that level of thoughtfulness and maturity is universal.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, again chowser:

No one should be comfortable using any racial epithet, especially in public discourse, and doubly so in discourse that is sponsored by a corporation whose employees foster racism without accountability.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[Jase]

What a load of complete crock. It's perfectly okay to mention a historically charged word in an intellectual fashion if it's within context and not used as an insult. It's not okay if it's used as an insult.

You obviously fail to see the difference and keep jumping on the platform of the mods are fostering racism. You have this ongoing agenda to complain about the mods regardless.

i don't even know why I bother engaging with you.

[Jim Leff]

"people have different levels of comfort with words"

Much more than that. It's also that people are screamingly uncomfortable with a huge ARRAY of words.

I've been excoriated for allowing users to take the lord's name in vain ("God, that muffin was delicious"). "Damn" and "Hell"......FORGET about! I've seen long time posters quit in a fury because we refused to force everyone to say "African American" instead of "Black". I've caused deep, deep, DEEP offense with my own fave, "crap".

Keffir lime? Offensive. "Gypped"? Same (and fwiw, I dislike that one, myself). Dare mention the "White Trash Cookbook", a sensational bestseller, or the cuisine genre it brought to attention, and people practically swoon with vapors.

It would be madness to try to cater to all sensitivities. At our scale, it'd require enormous censorship. If we just chose "the most egregious" terms to delete, we'd REALLY piss off those whose Big Hot Button Issues (BHBIs) didn't make the cut. We'd INCREASE the pique rather than reduce it.

The solution: simmer down and talk about food. Spare us your incensed indignation (some folks only feel truly alive when they're taking umbrage) and tell us about the lasagna you had last night.

[Jenny Ondioline]

I remember the kefir lime controversy! Kinda fascinating on a linguistic level, but yeah, there was definitely a certain sense of "Really? This is your line in the sand?"

[Jim Leff]

Jenny, everyone thinks their line in the sand is super important. So important that they think everyone in an online food community needs to hear about it, heed it, and accommodate it, and the moderators must enforce around it. It's a weird sense of entitlement, but that's unavoidable in community management.

I've actually been giggling for a couple of days re: the incensed pique over "whitey". Some people clearly lack for real problems in their lives. I envy them.

[kaleokahu]

Hi, Jim:

If you are not bothered by racial epithets. To be amused by them and their discussion may mean you are extremely self-actualized. That is one possibility.

Aloha,
Kaleo

[inaplasticcup]

Sincere question: What does it mean to be *extremely self-actua