If Mort Divine ruled the world

I think my answer to the question would depend on the kind of "hurt" involved. I think it'd be more personally insulting to be called a liar, but it would be more socially and professionally harmful to have a reputation as a racist. Although I was offended many years ago online when a woman made a comment to me like "I bet you think I should abort my racially-mixed child" and I was like wtf I've never said anything even close to that before, but that was also because I thought I was on reasonable speaking terms with that person. But I guess if it's a person that I have no connection with, I couldn't care less what they think of me.

Anecdotally I know several people that have reputations for being dishonest, but they get a pass for various reasons, such as simply having already been a friend. I've never met a person in real life with a reputation for being actually racist. Closest thing would be a Filipino guy that could get away with talking about how he doesn't let his little sister play with black boys, and cracking racial slur puns, but he would even do it in front of the lab with black friends/peers around, so it's obvious that even if he was 100% joking and non-racist, there is a gap between being racist and being perceived as a racist.

There might also be a geographical component; reputation of being honest might be more important in a smaller-town environment than in a large city, and likewise I could imagine that in a racially homogeneous town, no one really gives a fuck if you're racist because it isn't relevant. Overall I don't think sociological surveys, particularly where self-reporting and self-identity are concerned, are worth much to begin with.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CiG
I think my answer to the question would depend on the kind of "hurt" involved. I think it'd be more personally insulting to be called a liar, but it would be more socially and professionally harmful to have a reputation as a racist. Although I was offended many years ago online when a woman made a comment to me like "I bet you think I should abort my racially-mixed child" and I was like wtf I've never said anything even close to that before, but that was also because I thought I was on reasonable speaking terms with that person. But I guess if it's a person that I have no connection with, I couldn't care less what they think of me.

Anecdotally I know several people that have reputations for being dishonest, but they get a pass for various reasons, such as simply having already been a friend. I've never met a person in real life with a reputation for being actually racist. Closest thing would be a Filipino guy that could get away with talking about how he doesn't let his little sister play with black boys, and cracking racial slur puns, but he would even do it in front of the lab with black friends/peers around, so it's obvious that even if he was 100% joking and non-racist, there is a gap between being racist and being perceived as a racist.

There might also be a geographical component; reputation of being honest might be more important in a smaller-town environment than in a large city, and likewise I could imagine that in a racially homogeneous town, no one really gives a fuck if you're racist because it isn't relevant. Overall I don't think sociological surveys, particularly where self-reporting and self-identity are concerned, are worth much to begin with.
One of my best friends is a massive racist. First thing he said to me when he introduced himself is "My name's _____ and I hate my pals." Great guy, give the shirt off his back for ya. But reeeeeeallllly doesn't like anyone even remotely brown lmao.
 
Last edited:
That entire my pal thing is stupid. Using a slur is ok and mega cool but we're also super pc so we gotta make some rules. O yea, white people not allowed. Good job rap and hip hop, your culture is special.

But the girl got what she asked for.

Yeah it's a pretty bizarre thing, because it's not like hip hop is some niche thing, and a closed culture. It dominates a lot of the world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Onder
Yeah it's a pretty bizarre thing, because it's not like hip hop is some niche thing, and a closed culture. It dominates a lot of the world.

Yeah.

Gangsta rap is on my no-go list of genres. Along with NSBM. Meaning I would never go to a show or buy a shirt or something.

I consider it so uninviting. It's like by using my pal all the time they're signaling the music can only be fully enjoyed by blacks who truly get it. White girl can look at how cool it is but she's still only a white girl. Well enjoy your circle jerk.

It's funny how strongly ideologically driven music like this is often so formulaic unoriginal. NSBM is the same. Racist rock bands are usually the weakest as well.

I enjoy some NSBM but you won't see me going to a show.
 
I don't think hip hop is as ideological as NSBM. Kendrick Lamar's reaction and the crowd booing seems more like a kneejerk reaction because of America's culture and racial history. They don't stop to think that a) they wrote the fucking lyrics, this girl didn't pull those words out of her ass to be racist, b) white fans of hip hop support the culture with their money and should be seen as friends of the culture and c) we really need to hurry up and decide whether there's even a difference between the n-word ending in 'er' vs ending in 'a' because there's supposed to be a difference, yet even the most die-hard white hip hop fans can't say either word?
 
lies have a pretty broad range where as being a racist does not?

Being a racist used to be narrow. Now no one can agree on what it means. I think that's a primary reason conservatives don't care much about it. In comparison, we can generally agree on what constitutes being a liar, and leftist philosophy has spent considerable effort downplaying the moral issues of lying, subsuming them under the narratives of oppressor and victim. For the former truth is only a weapon of oppression, for the latter, lies are a weapon of resistance.
 
Regarding gangsta rap, there's a Supreme Court case that's looking into whether or not there's a First Amendment-protected right to threaten to kill named individuals (cops, in this case) as long as it's in the context of a song or some other form of artistic expression. Assuming it doesn't just get punted back to the appeals court I think it could be a funny ruling either way.

Actually, nvm, the SC already declined to hear the case two days ago apparently, lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CiG