Quote:
Originally posted by thermobryan
How do you know? For a word to be used in the general public there has to be some sort of history behind it, and all it sounds like is that youre trying to justify using derogitory remarks towards white people since there is supposedly no history behind them, does that still make it right?
|
Look . . . the term "cracker" supposedly comes not from the saltine variety, as many assume now, but rather from being the 'whip-cracker' - it's a reference to being a slave owner, if I recall correctly.
Now, sure, it could be slightly offensive to be lumped in with slaveowners . . . but it's probably way more offensive to be lumped in with SLAVES.
I don't feel this needs any more clarification - if you get offended by the word 'cracker' and by 'moving into the dorms 2 days earlier' . . . perhaps we can arrange some sort of 'Trading Places' scenario, finding an Eddie Murphy to your oblivious Dan Akroyd.
It's obviously not a very cool thing (I'm going to avoid "right" or "wrong" for a minute) to refer to someone by an offensive racial term - it is demeaning to use someone's ethnic background as representative of the entirety of their person, or as representative of their status in society. However, when you carry the historical weight of being on top of the totem pole, rather than the bottom, complaining about minor slurs with no history of abasement behind them seems an awful lot like pissing at the rain.
I'm just saying.