OT: MCoy Should Just Shut His Mouth and Go To Work

[jayviabay]

I got one for you to break down for me JDM...

The word Fat in literal sense just means chemical compound. Our society has always used it as an insult toward those who are physically unattractive to most.

Now, in today's hip hop culture the word has transitioned into a positive way with two spellings. The first the regular spelling, if you say "damn my ni&&a your car is tight(cool), you doing it fat (your doing big things/successful)!! Second, "da-a-a-mn gurl!!, you looking PHAT (Pretty.Hot.And.Tempting) today! Neither party who are on the receiving end of these compliments would be offended.

Based on your stance, there is no way these usages of the word could have a positive impact because of the long history of how fat was used in such a negative way?

 

[imac_21]

Beast does not fit the criteria of primarily discriminatory with no other meaning.

I already made it very clear there is not one source for this. It is pulled from a variety of different very basic pieces of psychology, including a variety of text- and other books that are not accessible online. I am not going to go find a lot of background information on psychology for you because I have no desire to do so.

Also, claiming that there is never any possible positive use of the word is very explicitly a claim that it is not acceptable for me to do so.

So it doesn't apply to every word. Since there seems to be a very firm criteria for what words do and don't fit this, you should be able to give some more examples.

Although, you did say that this psychology "applies to everything." Yes, that's a direct quote you posted earlier in this thread.

If I understand your dance around the source topic correctly, there is no source out there that scientifically claims or proves what you are claiming. You are forming your own hypothesis based on portions of scientific studies that have been done, but nothing has been done regarding this topic in particular.

So, to clarify, you have made this theory up and have presented it as fact in this thread.

Or is there some sort of study out there that explicitly studies the involuntary actions people have (heart rate, breathing rate, pupil dilation, sweating (basic symptoms associated with the release of adrenaline and other hormones) when exposed to the terms n***er and n***a in a variety of contexts, including both derogatory and endearing terms (eg "I will fight every n***er in here," and "You did it my n***a, congratulations."

I need you tell me that somewhere there is a reputable study on how the human body involuntarily reacts to these terms in a variety of context if you want me to take this argument even slightly seriously.

 

[jayviabay]

No. It's not a part of society. It's just words. English is just a jumble of old Germanic & Anglo Saxton words with sprinkled with others. One context of a word has nothing to do with another.

For example, I could accurately use the word "he" or "his" referring to a woman. "One should always wash his sports bra after a long run." This is grammatically correct because "his" refers to the gender neutral "one." However, since 99.99% of the time a sports bra is worn by women, most people would say "her" sport bra. But if I said "his," there aren't any underlying connotations of a sports bra being masculine because the word "his" usually refers to something belonging to a male. People who say otherwise are just connecting two things that don't have anything to do with each other.

Just because the word "seamen" (sailors) is pronounced identically to "semen" doesn't mean one definition has anything to do with the other. If you were dressed in all yellow and I said, "Wow, you're pretty yellow today," that shouldn't be viewed as an insult just because one definition of "yellow" is cowardly. And someone shouldn't avoid wearing yellow because of a homonym.

Another example is the german word "uberaffengeil." Literally it means over-monkey-horny. But idiomatically it just means something that's really cool. So if someone in Germany calls you "uberaffengeil," don't punch them in the face because you think they're saying you're an overly horny monkey. Just accept the compliment and move on with your life.

I mentioned this in the beginning of this thread. Thanks for the word "uberaffengeil", I like it!!

 

[JDM]

I got one for you to break down for me JDM...

The word Fat in literal sense just means chemical compound. Our society has always used it as an insult toward those who are physically unattractive to most.

Now, in today's hip hop culture the word has transitioned into a positive way with two spellings. The first the regular spelling, if you say "damn my ni&&a your car is tight(cool), you doing it fat (your doing big things/successful)!! Second, "da-a-a-mn gurl!!, you looking PHAT (Pretty.Hot.And.Tempting) today! Neither party who are on the receiving end of these compliments would be offended.

Based on your stance, there is no way these usages of the word could have a positive impact because of the long history of how fat was used in such a negative way?

I think it has enough variety of meanings that on a culture wide scale, it's use is not all that harmful. Specific cases can be.

 

[JDM]

So it doesn't apply to every word. Since there seems to be a very firm criteria for what words do and don't fit this, you should be able to give some more examples.

Although, you did say that this psychology "applies to everything." Yes, that's a direct quote you posted earlier in this thread.

If I understand your dance around the source topic correctly, there is no source out there that scientifically claims or proves what you are claiming. You are forming your own hypothesis based on portions of scientific studies that have been done, but nothing has been done regarding this topic in particular.

So, to clarify, you have made this theory up and have presented it as fact in this thread.

Or is there some sort of study out there that explicitly studies the involuntary actions people have (heart rate, breathing rate, pupil dilation, sweating (basic symptoms associated with the release of adrenaline and other hormones) when exposed to the terms n***er and n***a in a variety of contexts, including both derogatory and endearing terms (eg "I will fight every n***er in here," and "You did it my n***a, congratulations."

I need you tell me that somewhere there is a reputable study on how the human body involuntarily reacts to these terms in a variety of context if you want me to take this argument even slightly seriously.

That's not the claim I made. That would be evidence the word causes stress.

My claim is that when a word is used, the neurons that fire include all of the meanings associated with it. When the word is significantly negative, the negative meanings are reinforced by repetition.


If you desperately want sources, I'll start you with one about how researchers are able to identify a category of thing you are thinking of by looking at brain scans.

Princeton University - Word association: Princeton study matches brain scans with complex thought

Similar concepts and words fire neurons in similar parts of the brain, and are closely connected. What is connected and fires every time that word is used is the history and meaning that goes with it, which are reinforced by repetition.

 

[jayviabay]

That's not the claim I made. That would be evidence the word causes stress.

My claim is that when a word is used, the neurons that fire include all of the meanings associated with it. When the word is significantly negative, the negative meanings are reinforced by repetition.


If you desperately want sources, I'll start you with one about how researchers are able to identify a category of thing you are thinking of by looking at brain scans.

Princeton University - Word association: Princeton study matches brain scans with complex thought

Similar concepts and words fire neurons in similar parts of the brain, and are closely connected. What is connected and fires every time that word is used is the history and meaning that goes with it, which are reinforced by repetition.

how can this happen if you don't know the negative meanings? How can the neurons fire all meanings associated with the word that is not programmed into your database? Like IMAC asked, if a 19 yr old man has only heard all of the positive meanings, how can your brain fire off the negative history of its usage?

he would have 19 yrs of positive reinforcement of the word in the case of repetition. right?

 

[JDM]

Of course. But this is not the case. There are very few people who are unaware of the history of the word.

 

[jayviabay]

For young members of our society, it is the case. There is not a lot of states and cities where the original word is used as blatant in public settings with negative intent. Like I have said before, by changing the meaning and spelling, the power that was once associated with the word, has weakened dramatically.

The word is used in a positive context today far more than it is used with negative intent. So many of the young blacks who are 20+ and younger, really dont have a ton of negative meanings in their database.

 

[imac_21]

That's not the claim I made. That would be evidence the word causes stress.

My claim is that when a word is used, the neurons that fire include all of the meanings associated with it. When the word is significantly negative, the negative meanings are reinforced by repetition.


If you desperately want sources, I'll start you with one about how researchers are able to identify a category of thing you are thinking of by looking at brain scans.

Princeton University - Word association: Princeton study matches brain scans with complex thought

Similar concepts and words fire neurons in similar parts of the brain, and are closely connected. What is connected and fires every time that word is used is the history and meaning that goes with it, which are reinforced by repetition.

I'm asking for something specific to these words. I say these words, because they are different words. Have any studies compared brain scans of people when exposed to n***er vs n***a? How about in whites vs blacks? Urban vs rural? Poor vs wealthy?

Reading the link you have provided it doesn't directly support your assertions in this thread. This study is about looking at brainwaves and deciphering what general topic the subject was thinking about. This study is not about brain patterns in reaction to positive vs negative words. What this study tells me is that if someone were exposed to the terms n***er and n***a they would have similar brain patterns. However, it isn't because they are associating them with negative thoughts. It's because they are associating them with the same general concept (people). You could add African American, human, white man, homo sapien and any other term used to describe people and get similar results.

To demonstrate this, they have a chart of their results that shows "carbohydrate" and "heroin" as having the same topic and result in their study.

They found that "Scotch drink" and "neon lamp" had similar results and were classed as being in the same topic.

Doing a quick scan of the results table, I notice they have "United States dollar", "Japanese Yen", "Silk Road", and Christmas all in the same topic. Know what else is in that topic? "Counterfeit." I assume most people would associate counterfeit with negative, and Christmas with positive, yet the brain wave results were similar enough to be classified in the same topic within this Princeton study.

Furthermore, "deity" and "mother nature" were classified with "devil" and "death." Also classified under that topi were Goddess, love triangle, Damsel in Distress, Henchman, Hero, heart (the symbol) and Water (as the classical element).

"Blood type", "amniotic fluid" and "breast feeding" were classified in the same topic as "AIDS", "cancer", "herpes" and "diabetes."

"Bullet" and "gun" were associated with "camera" and "microscope"

"Circus" and "flag" were associated with "Hitler salute" and "Coat of Arms" and "art museum"

"Lion" and "Mouse" and "Meadow" are all the same topic.

"Prosecutor" and "judge" and "r*pe" and "police" and "outlaw" are in the same topic. (this one really seems to contradict your thesis)

"table" and "tattoo" are together.

"Number of the beast" and "family" are together.


I stopped skimming the results table at that point. I felt my point had been established when they got similar brain wave results from "number of the beast" as they did from "family." That kind of tells me that the idea of negative and positive reactions to words in the brain is not supported by this study.

Here's the table
http://minerva.csbmb.princeton.edu/wikipedia/topicToConcept.html

It was linked directly from the link JDM provided with the words "list of topics" in the first line under the heading "Matching brain activity and words with related topics"

 

[imac_21]

Of course. But this is not the case. There are very few people who are unaware of the history of the word.

After taking some time to study the link you provided, I've discovered that it not only fails to support what you are saying, but actually seems to contradict it.

 

[TobyTyler]

You are going to learn something today JDM rather you want to or not... Vast majority of the country is Caucasian, and they(most) have no interest in Black History or African history. Vast majority of black families who have past down wisdom to the next generation, have plenty of knowledge of its use. The fact of the matter is the word was just normalized over time.

A lot of the Africans who were sold over into slavery were Christians. In Africa, you were considered "black" if you were a devil worshiper or a pagan. If you are not a Christian or do not have religious beliefs, then you have no clue of what it means to be classified as a "pagan". Thats why it was so important for those who were free, to fight to be recognized as "colored", or "Negroes".
Example: Baseball- "The ***** League". If black was just a normal description of skin color, then they would of just called themselves, "The Black League". I do agree with you that, Knowledge is priceless!!

Count me in that group.

 

[JDM]

It is solely an example that they are able to significantly narrow down what you are talking about by what neurons fire. It was not intended to be specific to the words in question because that research has not been done. They were able to identify the category by looking at the brain scan, because similar objects fire similarly in your brain. This connects with my claim because it shows that you think about the essence of that word, what it is, instead of the word in isolation. When the N word is used, the connections that go with it are the history of it's use.


The list you are referring to was chosen by a computer before the study to attempt to have as complete a picture of the words they used. It is not a result of the study or how objects mapped to the brain.

 

[TobyTyler]

Could have fooled me. Here I thought he shouted it in a public place.

In a sea of white people comfortable in one of the most racist groups in America; Country music fans. Cooper said it to his friends, McCoy to a reporter who was looking to fan the flames.

 

[imac_21]

It is solely an example that they are able to significantly narrow down what you are talking about by what neurons fire. It was not intended to be specific to the words in question because that research has not been done. They were able to identify the category by looking at the brain scan, because similar objects fire similarly in your brain. This connects with my claim because it shows that you think about the essence of that word, what it is, instead of the word in isolation. When the N word is used, the connections that go with it are the history of it's use.


The list you are referring to was chosen by a computer before the study to attempt to have as complete a picture of the words they used. It is not a result of the study or how objects mapped to the brain.

So essentially this study does nothing to further prove your point. At no point do they discuss positive or negative associations, and the fact that they expect "married name" and "number of the beast" to be classified together.

Even if the lists are developed by a computer, the implication is the same. They are associating positive and negative words with the same topics. Did "heroin" and "devil" render similar brain scans, as both most would agree are negative words, though in different topics for this test. However, the table to which I refer also includes brain scans of two of the subjects.

No one has argued that the brain doesn't fire differently for different words. The disagreement comes from your assertion that everyone has negative responses to n***er and n***a and therefore on a subconscious level, these terms are equivalents. Nothing in this test does anything to support that point.

Since, as you admit, no test has been done studying brain scans in reaction to these two words I wonder how you can state with any degree of confidence that all people have the same reaction to them based on the historical context of one of the words, but ignoring the (more recent) historical context of the other word?

To sum up for those that are skimming:
1. The study does not address positive or negative associations with any words.
2. No study apparently exists to support or refute the claims JDM is making regarding the subconscious responses to n***er and n***a.
3. Does such a study exist that has study brain scans in people searching for different results to positive and negative words?

 

[TobyTyler]

In terms of blacks in America, it was not a small percentage. As far as the number of whites who were involved in that subjugation, certainly a relatively small percentage owned slaves. But a very large number of whites was involved in and benefited from slavery, and virtually all whites felt blacks were inferior. And a "short" period of time is relative. Outright slavery for 65+ years, legally inferior for another 100 in a nation that isn't much over 200 years old doesn't seem like a "short period of time" to me.

Plenty of groups have been subjugated in awful conditions. In the US, it was based entirely upon race. That is fairly unique.

This is a strange place' no doubt. But you have to remember this country was founded by white Europeans, the most class and race conscious continent ever. In those days, the strong and educated dominated the weak and ignorant, that's just the way it has been throughout history.

 

[imac_21]

It is solely an example that they are able to significantly narrow down what you are talking about by what neurons fire. It was not intended to be specific to the words in question because that research has not been done. They were able to identify the category by looking at the brain scan, because similar objects fire similarly in your brain. This connects with my claim because it shows that you think about the essence of that word, what it is, instead of the word in isolation. When the N word is used, the connections that go with it are the history of it's use.


The list you are referring to was chosen by a computer before the study to attempt to have as complete a picture of the words they used. It is not a result of the study or how objects mapped to the brain.

Second reply to this:

Based on this study, n***er, n***a, white man, American Indian, Caucasian, Ch**k, K**e, Jew, African American, George Washington, Martin Luther King, human being, and homo sapien would all result in similar brain scans. It's quite likely that neanderthal, homo erectus, Australopithecus, and caveman all would as well.

 

[TobyTyler]

Curious as to why you think that. As I've mentioned, I think the n-word holds a special place among slurs, but otherwise I don't see a huge difference between racial and sexual preference-oriented slurs.

And people who say "N Word" hold a special place of derision in my mind. It sounds like a little child running to his parents telling on his brother for "saying the "F" word".

 

[JDM]

The most prevelant recent use is that used in rap, which is in most cases still not a positive image. If the word did not have the heavy association with the negative image, this would not be a story.

 

[imac_21]

The most prevelant recent use is that used in rap, which is in most cases still not a positive image. If the word did not have the heavy association with the negative image, this would not be a story.

It has a negative association in rap because people that choose to be ignorant of it see it that way (See Toby's confessions in this thread this evening).

You have asserted that it carries negative associations with Americans, and have gone so far as to claim that there is one American culture.

Furthermore, through those assertions you have stated that everyone automatically has a negative reaction to the termS regardless of the context in which they're used, due to the deep rooted history of one of the two words. When called on this, you have tried to evade answering the question directly.

According to what you have said, the example I earlier provided of a guy being congratulated at his wedding by his best man with a "congratulations my n***a, you did it," has the same involuntary response as a black man being accosted by a white man and having "I'm going to kill you n***er."

You have provided nothing to support these claims (sorry, your Princeton study does not support your claims).

What you have tried to argue is that there is a single word (and a derivation of it) that, due to its history, automatically results in negative reactions in all who hear it. Conveniently, no other English word apparently invokes the same reaction. Is it safe to assume that with all other words, context matters, as in my beast example from yesterday.

As I said earlier, this is simply a way to justify the use of one of the word in racist contexts.

 

[imac_21]

I would also love to see your evidence that most uses in rap is not positive.

I'd also love to know why you feel that it's used more often in rap than it is in black communities.