It's not an identity attack to call them white, that's the race they are. Even if I were to call them black, it wouldn't be an identity attack. It be disinformation though, since it's fairly clear that they are all white, and was never in dispute. It would be particularly suspicious if I pulled some "we were always at war with East Asia" bullshit, and told you that we've always known that they were black, and that you should kill a black person. That would be me acting in an incredibly malicious manner.
It's not an identity attack to call them white, that's the race they are.
Prove it. Also define race since you’re clearly not using the standard definition of genetic lineage.
Even if I were to call them black, it wouldn't be an identity attack
Just Jewish right?
It be disinformation though, since it's fairly clear that they are all white, and was never in dispute.
Clear how? If they are Jewish it makes them of Levantine descent which is quite literally “not white”. Unless you’re now rewriting the definition of race to say whatever you want it to?
would be particularly suspicious if I pulled some "we were always at war with East Asia" bullshit, and told you that we've always known that they were black, and that you should kill a black person. That would be me acting in an incredibly malicious manner.
You did the first two, not the third. Still disinformation, still subjective gatekeeping. Just like when you denied slave was a racial slur, it’s funny how often you commit identity attacks you ban others for huh?
Slave isn't a racial slur, it's not even used in such a way within English.
It literally is and has been, it is the oldest racial slur in the English language, no historian denies that the word slave comes from the Slavic people or that the definition of an owned person changed to be Slavic people. Thats is by every definition a racial slur. Why are you blatantly lying after you have been repeatedly proven wrong on this? You’re now intentionally spreading misinformation, why do this?
I seriously doubt it's the oldest slur, even in the event that it was a slur.
You are reframing a word into being a slur when it isn't one. You're adding moral weight to a word that wasn't carrying it. No one called black slaves, slaves, because they thought of them as almost as worthless as Slavs. They called them slaves because they were held in bondage without consent for the purposes of utilizing their labor.
People didn't go from using the roman term "servus" and change it to slave because they thought Slavs were inferior.
It's not an identity attack to call them white, that's the race they are. Even if I were to call them black, it wouldn't be an identity attack. It be disinformation though, since it's fairly clear that they are all white, and was never in dispute. It would be particularly suspicious if I pulled some "we were always at war with East Asia" bullshit, and told you that we've always known that they were black, and that you should kill a black person. That would be me acting in an incredibly malicious manner.
Prove it. Also define race since you’re clearly not using the standard definition of genetic lineage.
Just Jewish right?
Clear how? If they are Jewish it makes them of Levantine descent which is quite literally “not white”. Unless you’re now rewriting the definition of race to say whatever you want it to?
You did the first two, not the third. Still disinformation, still subjective gatekeeping. Just like when you denied slave was a racial slur, it’s funny how often you commit identity attacks you ban others for huh?
It is never a violation of Rule 16 to mis-identify someone's race, even intentionally, it never has been.
Slave isn't a racial slur, it's not even used in such a way within English.
It literally is and has been, it is the oldest racial slur in the English language, no historian denies that the word slave comes from the Slavic people or that the definition of an owned person changed to be Slavic people. Thats is by every definition a racial slur. Why are you blatantly lying after you have been repeatedly proven wrong on this? You’re now intentionally spreading misinformation, why do this?
I seriously doubt it's the oldest slur, even in the event that it was a slur.
You are reframing a word into being a slur when it isn't one. You're adding moral weight to a word that wasn't carrying it. No one called black slaves, slaves, because they thought of them as almost as worthless as Slavs. They called them slaves because they were held in bondage without consent for the purposes of utilizing their labor.
People didn't go from using the roman term "servus" and change it to slave because they thought Slavs were inferior.
Comment Reported for: Rule 12 - Disinformation
Calling people who are not black black as part of an analogy is not disinformation.