Why is the hard r N word allowed but not "z*g" which is not a slur?
A mumber of users were recently banned for using the term "z*g" in reference to the recent takeover of Japan. But nobody ever seems to get banned for uaing racial slurs. Logic would doctate that both constitute as identity attacks.
But, again, how is that different than calling out disproportionate distribution in other identity groups, like alphabet pedophiles or black criminals?
Firstly, I'm just here arguing the logic, I'm not personally making any assertions (at this time.) More importantly, I certainly never argued an entire race. You're basically the only one saying that.
Alright, that's extremely silly. Black identity groups are made up of explicitly black people, by virtue of their race. Asian identity groups...you get the point. So, if there was a Jewish cabal, why couldn't they organize based on race?
Yeah, and joggers are just criminals, of no specific race, and pedophiles are just child abusers, with no specific orientation.
Unless, like other existing, factual, real racial groups, they were to, theoretically, choose to organize that way.
Alright, so why do we allow any slurs?! You haven't answered the base point in OP's post; why can we say "nigger" or "fag," but not "ZOG?"
Basically, the primary point of my argument is I honestly don't get what's special about ZOG versus other slurs. That's my only point. None of what you've said can't easily be applied to other offensive terms. There's just as much of an argument to say that when you say "nigger" you obviously mean all black people, or "fag" obviously means all gays, than there is to say that "ZOG" means all Jews, and thus is (for some fucking unnecessary reason, but that's a different discussion) a banned term.