| 5:41 pm on Nov 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
It doesn't directly refer to race. It refers to the colors of the hats worn by good guys and bad guys in old movies: the good guys wore white hats, the bad guys wore black hats. So you'd have to sue the old producers, if you want to try to argue that they were racist.
| 6:57 pm on Nov 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|It refers to the colors of the hats worn by good guys and bad guys in old movies |
Been doing this for 7 years and never knew the origin. Thanks!
| 7:26 pm on Nov 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|It refers to the colors of the hats worn by good guys and bad guys in old movies |
So what? Here in the UK, the government can invent a department that takes offense to everything. This departments achievements so far include:
Changing 'Baa Baa black sheep' to 'Baa baa rainbow sheep'.
Changing 'school blackboards to 'chalkboards'.
Changing 'Dustmen' to 'Sanitation Engineer'.
I believe they're now working on a gay fairy tale where a king marries a prince. So kids of age 4 can be sexually confused.
| 8:08 pm on Nov 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
> Changing 'Baa Baa black sheep' to 'Baa baa rainbow sheep'.
Hahaha, that's really funny! Great joke, Dabrowski!
Then some small voice inside me said, "Go ahead, search the phrase..." Something cold crept down my spine when I saw the SERPs, then I felt queasy when I read the story...
Nursery opts for 'rainbow' sheep [news.bbc.co.uk]
Next up, no more "Ring Around The Rosie" as it's disrespectful to the dead? Err, our dearly departed?
Hmm, I guess that means Rupert The Bear & Golliwog don't hang-out together anymore? Rupert was why I wanted a red jumper as a kid - and got one, with a yellow plaid scarf as a bonus!
| 9:27 pm on Nov 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Let's not even get into Peter Peter Pumpkin eater . . . .
Yeah this whole P.C. thing is a bit too much for me. Does anyone remember why the professor (Anthony Hopkins) lost his job in The Human Stain? Fictional, but a perfect example, society had become far to sensitive and our language is descending into the DoubleSpeak of 1984.
| 9:33 pm on Nov 21, 2007 (gmt 0)|
They had to take the Golliwogs out of Noddy years ago.
| 11:44 am on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
There have always been phrases that use the word black in a negative way, such as:
Probably something to do with the night seen as being bad or dangerous.
| 11:48 am on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Next up, no more "Ring Around The Rosie" as it's disrespectful to the dead? Err, our dearly departed? |
I think the word you're looking for is "mortally challenged" ;)
| 1:03 pm on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
When issue of black and white comes in any discussion, two lines from Cry Freedom comes to my mind, and I share them with all the people at webmasterworld, black, white, brown, yellow . . . :)
Judge: Why do you people call yourselves black? You look more brown than black.
Steve Biko: Why do you call yourselves white? You look more pink than white.
Oops, Mr. Biko seems to be right :)
| 1:34 pm on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|When issue of black and white comes in any discussion, two lines from Cry Freedom comes to my mind |
I don't know whether I should admit this as I may be branded as something I'm not ... but the thing that comes to my mind is always that Star Trek episode "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield". It really has to be the absolute best portrayal of the ludicrous nature of racism based on colour. Two men hate each other, both have faces that are one-half white and one-half black:
Bele - "It is obvious to the most simpleminded that Lokai is of an inferior breed."
Spock - "The obvious visual evidence, Commissioner, is that he is of the same breed as yourself."
Bele - "Are you blind, Commander Spock? Well, look at me. Look at me!"
Spock - "You're black on one side and white on the other."
Bele - "I am black on the right side."
Spock - "I fail to see the significant difference."
Bele - "Lokai is white on the right side. All of his people are white on the right side."
I am not a trekkie, please do not start spamming me with items you have for sale like William Shatners used tissues ...
| 2:11 pm on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
caucasian-hat webmarketing versus afro-hat seo..?
| 2:20 pm on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|caucasian-hat webmarketing versus afro-hat seo..? |
Ah! Now therein lies the predicament ... due to current PC trends will we eventually have to stop using colours to define good and bad qualities in something?
| 3:53 pm on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
black-hat is beautiful vs. white-hat trash..?
| 6:30 pm on Nov 22, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|use the word black in a negative way |
Black and white have traditionally been used to represent good/life and evil/death throughout history, in all sorts of media.
Star Wars: The Dark Side
Harry Potter: The Dark Lord
17th Century London: The black death.
In religion, Jesus is portrayed as white, yet he was born in the middle east. What are the chances?
Also black and white are just used to describe things of that colour. If I wanted to describe a black man, I would call him black. That's not an insult, that's just the colour he is.
Likewise, I wouldn't be offended if a black man described me as white (or pinkish!).
I think there are very few actual racist slurs, I think most of the 'problems' are caused by people taking offence where none was intended.
| 5:28 pm on Nov 23, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|In religion, Jesus is portrayed as white, yet he was born in the middle east. |
1) In predominantly white countries where artists used the models available
2) In former colonies of predominantly white countries
Other countries tend to depict Jesus as looking like themselves: search for Ethiopian images of Jesus for example.
Incidentally, Middle Easterners look pretty much the same as Europeans in skin colour (not quite in features) to Africans or South Asians.
|Black and white have traditionally been used to represent good/life and evil/death throughout history |
In much of Asia white is the colour of death and mourning.
| 5:37 pm on Nov 23, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|In much of Asia white is the colour of death and mourning |
Really? That's interesting. Maybe in those countries it's more offensive to be called white?!
| 11:19 am on Nov 24, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Anyone that bothers about silly semantics needs to get a life.
Newham Social Services no longer refer to Asian and black children as just that but (this is great) 'Brown eyed children'
| 11:58 am on Nov 24, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Anyone that bothers about silly semantics needs to get a life. |
I think the problem has become just that, the focus on the actual "words" rather than the "intent" behind them. If you actually say a word that is deemed offensive by ... well, whoever is in charge of deeming what people should find offensive ... then you have actually offended someone apparently, whether the intent was to offend or not or whether there was even someone around that would be offended by that.
You can offend by proxy now by saying something that someone else could find offensive in the presence of someone who wishes to report you for saying something that someone else who was not present might have found offensive.
But to get back on track, every other industry has scandals and lawsuits regarding race, sex and age so why has it not come up in this industry? Never heard of someone quitting the use of an SEO because they were black or about Google not hiring woman because they think men are better at algorithms.
Is the internet industry completely gender-neutral, race-neutral and age-neutral?
| 7:07 pm on Nov 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Black and White aren't races. Any more than Yellow or Brown or Red are. They're just colours.
Temporarily ignoring the fact that "race" itself is a long outdated proto-anthropological term (from before the 19th century) which has at times been used interchangeably with "nationality" and which actually has no genetic or biological meaning whatsoever - it does not fit in anywhere in the hierarchy of species, genus etc. (can you imagine there being "races" of dogs or "races" of fish?) - races as we commonly recognise them might include Indo-European, South Asian, East Asian, Middle Eastern, West African, East African, North American etc.
We might use colours as perjorative or as neutral shorthand for these "races of continents" but that's all they are.
To try to then argue that because a yellow card in football denotes a lesser infraction than a red card is somehow imperialist / racist because it suggests that Chinese people are less undesirable than Native Americans is just silliness on many levels.
| 9:36 pm on Nov 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|can you imagine there being "races" of dogs or "races" of fish |
What, so now we have different 'breeds' of human?
| 1:27 am on Nov 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I think the problem with 'race' - which was recognised by 20th century anthropologists - is that it is a theoretical concept based on what people look like which does not map neatly onto reality. One of the main issues is that variation within designated 'races' is more diverse than between those same designated 'races'. (Not the case with dog breeds as far as I'm aware, but someone correct me if I'm wrong).
The whole idea of 'race' is supremacist bunk articulated to shore up military imperialism, cultural imperialism, mass religious conversion, slavery, colonialism, land appropriation, segregation and God knows what other tragic, if otherwise ridiculous, injustices.
It makes about as much (and possibly less) sense as dividing humanity into right-handed, left-handed and ambidextrous people and calling them the three 'races'. Or dividing humanity into auditory learners, visual learners and kinesthetic learners and calling them the three 'races'.
Getting back to the topic...
If SEO terminology were deemed racist, presumably the rules of chess would also have to be changed so that black could play first half the time (?)
| 1:30 pm on Nov 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Tend to disagree there Ronin, id be very surprised if there wasnt a genetic variation common to various people in diffrent locations around the world.
You could say we are all a variations on a theme, but quite distinct just like animals (with those living in Essex being more perfect that the rest of mankind), it doesnt make anyone 'theme'/'race' better than another just diffrent.
But thats way off topic though very interesting.
[edited by: Essex_boy at 1:33 pm (utc) on Nov. 27, 2007]
| 1:32 pm on Nov 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
The speaker is not in charge of whether the listener is offended, so the speaker's intention can have nothing to do with whether what they say is offensive to someone else. Anybody who has ever loved anyone knows this. It's the listener who gets to determine whether they are offended by what someone else says. Now, usually when you offend someone and you don't mean to, you take responsibility for your offense and apologize: "I'm sorry that I offended you." But somehow with the anti-PC backlash, people who would like to be offensive start crying about how they are oppressed because they can't be as offensive as they want, like some spoiled toddler pitching a fit about not being allowed to toss their bowl of oatmeal on the floor. Or worse, they act like they are just wild and crazy outlaws who simply chafe at confining conventions. Bah, humbug.
| 1:35 pm on Nov 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Agree with that to a large extent HROTH.
| 2:26 pm on Nov 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|It makes about as much (and possibly less) sense as dividing humanity into right-handed, left-handed and ambidextrous people |
We all know that there is something wrong with lefties ... ;)
Disclaimer: the above comments were meant as a joke and it should be clear from the intonation, the little smiley face with the wink and indeed the sheer ludicrousness of the comment itself that such is the case. If such was not clear whilst reading the actual joke it should be now by reading this disclaimer. By reading this disclaimer you agree not to hold me liable for any wars, floods, fires or acts of god (whether real or just attributed to god to prove that your side is right) that may arise from this joke. If anyone was seriously offended by this joke and as such has been unable to go to work for a considerable time and is claiming benefits and other welfare cheques from the government as a result of my "persecution" and is seeking compensation as a result please feel free to contact my attorney who will laugh and put the phone down.
Disclaimer 2:If anyone was offended by the previous disclaimer this disclaimer is to state that the previous disclaimer was also meant in fun and was not meant to offend anyone.
| 5:10 pm on Nov 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|id be very surprised if there wasnt a genetic variation common to various people in diffrent locations around the world. |
Well, you've touched on it there. For example Ireland and Russia are far apart so you wouldn't expect their populations to have very similar DNA. That is indeed the case, but they are both considered the same race (that is, related) based on a few external characteristics.
|human genetic variation tends to be distributed in a continuous fashion and seldom has marked geographic discontinuities |
Genetic variation, classification and 'race' [nature.com]
Back to the original topic, yes it's those old westerns where the bad guys wear black hats. But I prefer to think of black-hat SEO as being as bad as (dare I say?) Garth Brooks.
| 8:16 pm on Nov 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|rules of chess would also have to be changed so that black could play first half the time |
In the UK, they'd flip a coin, then the Department of Political Correctness would rule that the coin was discriminating against him, and that to show we weren't racist he should start first anyway.
|with those living in Essex being more perfect that the rest of mankind |
And your women easier to get into bed! Essex_boy! ;)
|who would like to be offensive start crying about how they are oppressed |
You mean like wanting to fly a St. George's flag on St. George's day? Yes, we were asked not to this year incase it offended the ethnic minorities. Yet, councils happily put up xmas style lights saying 'Happy Diwali'.
What's next? Fish 'n' Chip shops must also serve curry, noodles and sushi because it's discriminatory to only sell typically English food?
Do you mean people who want to be offensive, or English (in this case) people who simply want to celebrate being English? Please clarify your context on this.
I am not racist, but I'll happily campaign against the PC brigade when they try to take away the country and culture in which I live.
|Ireland and Russia are far apart so you wouldn't expect their populations to have very similar DNA |
You're talking about DNA? Come on?! We're 98% monkey, you really expect the Irish and Russian to be different. Well, the Irish maybe..... ;D
Incidentally, on that topic, I don't agree that just because they have 98% same DNA that they're necessarily our closest relative. We're 50% the same as a Halibut, but you wouldn't say we're half a fish now you you?
| 10:22 pm on Nov 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|the little smiley face with the wink |
I think it's about time that someone points out that the symbol is offensive to all those who have lost one or both eyes due to accident or illness, Cyclopes, and those born without facial muscles. It is also extremely offensive to people who do not believe in smiling.
| 2:01 pm on Nov 28, 2007 (gmt 0)|
OK participants. Thank you for your restraint in posting on this subject. However, topics such as this are borderline insofar as WebmasterWorld discussion is concerned. In any event the conversation seems to have run its natural course so I am locking the thread.