We have discussed 2, then another of my favorites, across the south,is the use of Jew as a verb for hard bargaining. If you and your date split expenses you are going dutch. There are others and none of them in current usage for most people are derogatory but when they get vigorous defense one wonders.
Not seeing anyone defending Jew as a verb. Here's one for your list that most people have no idea about: Gyp'ed as a verb.
Why assume someone is looking for cover when all they do are explaining that that is not what the term means to them? Both of your terms that you seem to have issue with have non-racial origins, and are not commonly thought of as such in various wide circles. I can see a pretty big difference between black pots and spades and other terms like Jew as a verb.
The first two are turns of phrases that some people alive today learned when they were young from parents and grand parents who learned them before there were racial overtones. My parents had grandparents born 20-30 years before 'spade' got racial overtones. That's where they learned those terms, and thus where I did. To throw around your own racism term and accuse people of seeking cover from it seems counterproductive in these instances. Can those phrases be taken wrong, sure. Are they of origin or general use meant wrong, no.
On the other hand, there really is no defending using a term like Jew or Gyp as verbs, even though many people don't think of them as being derogatory. Most people would recognize them as such pretty quickly.
He has been asked for concrete examples of his intriguing idea of fossil racist language, but so far, "to Jew" is the only example he has offered, and even that example isn't really a fossil in his sense of unwitting use of language with racist origins.
Your example of "to gyp" is better. Its origin is obvious to an educated person, however it is not obvious to someone, especially children and young people, who does not know the history of public sentiment toward and stereotypes of Gypsies.
I would avoid the phrase "to call a spade a spade" because it has been ruined. I also avoid a whole list of unwitting sexual terms.
Words which were never connected to race donтАЩt become racist because people decide they do. тАЬCalling a spade a spadeтАЭ is just a colloquialism for plain talk. Until you give a concrete example of the alleged тАЬfossilizationтАЭ it remains just a theory.
I think the more interesting part of this back and forth is how strongly people want to deny the obvious, "calling a spade a spade" is deeply tied into American racism. It is not calling a shovel a shovel or a playing card a playing card. But I suspect the examples of both given here were just as bigoted in their day. After all how is calling a shovel a shovel blunt speaking unless calling a shovel a shovel is an insult that would make polite folks uncomfortable.
We are all racist it is part of our nature but we are, also, intelligent animals and can modify and control our nature.
My personal story, I grew up in an overtly racist world. That world didn't use euphemisms or dog whistles, we used the real words. In other words we called a spade a spade. For 60 years I've been working to root out the racism instilled in my childhood. More or less successful. But it has taken work and vigilance. My original comment was a musing on how even after 60 years, I'm not through yet.
To follow where you all want to lead me would be an easy path but it won't get to where I want to be.
In order to promote your thesis about the phrase "to call a spade a spade," you have to ignore the etymology and pretend it dates from the 1920s. There is no reason to suppose it was somehow bigoted back in the 1500s.
Today, the word "liberal" is in the process of being ruined. There are a lot of Trump supporters, many your age, who do not even seem to know what the word really means anymore. They interpret the phrases like "liberal arts" and "liberal democracy" as somehow having something to do with those damn "libruhs." It is ironic that right-wing propaganda has turned "liberal" into a pejorative when it is conservatives like the Texas GOP creating dystopian platforms and voting for literally Orwellian resolutions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiAJbEXutbY
That you are made uncomfortable by a word or phrase doesnтАЩt make it wrong. Are you also offended by тАЬniggardly?тАЭ Huck Finn must have been torture.
I recommend a better use of your time. Attempting to eliminate phrases which no one else thinks are racist is going to exhaust you to no end. Further, this isnтАЩt a тАЬback and forthтАЭ because you offer no examples.
We have discussed zero examples.. Both of your supposed examples predate American racism and had zero to do with black people. One example was corrupted in the 1920s and should probably be avoided. No one has defended the use of racist language in any way.
Your examples here are better. The anti-semitic use of "to jew" can even be found in Shakespeare. "Going dutch" came from the English experience with negotiating with The Netherlands and concluding they were stingy. Not racist exactly, but at least there is a direct connection between the people and the saying, not a merely coincidental connection stemming from the relatively recent adoption of the word "black" as opposed to the historical appellations of "Negro" or "Colored" as memorialized in the name of the NAACP, founded in 1909.
I like the term "fossil" but so far you have not identified any examples of such fossils.
We have discussed 2, then another of my favorites, across the south,is the use of Jew as a verb for hard bargaining. If you and your date split expenses you are going dutch. There are others and none of them in current usage for most people are derogatory but when they get vigorous defense one wonders.
Not seeing anyone defending Jew as a verb. Here's one for your list that most people have no idea about: Gyp'ed as a verb.
Why assume someone is looking for cover when all they do are explaining that that is not what the term means to them? Both of your terms that you seem to have issue with have non-racial origins, and are not commonly thought of as such in various wide circles. I can see a pretty big difference between black pots and spades and other terms like Jew as a verb.
The first two are turns of phrases that some people alive today learned when they were young from parents and grand parents who learned them before there were racial overtones. My parents had grandparents born 20-30 years before 'spade' got racial overtones. That's where they learned those terms, and thus where I did. To throw around your own racism term and accuse people of seeking cover from it seems counterproductive in these instances. Can those phrases be taken wrong, sure. Are they of origin or general use meant wrong, no.
On the other hand, there really is no defending using a term like Jew or Gyp as verbs, even though many people don't think of them as being derogatory. Most people would recognize them as such pretty quickly.
Also, *sigh* is not an argument with much merit.
He has been asked for concrete examples of his intriguing idea of fossil racist language, but so far, "to Jew" is the only example he has offered, and even that example isn't really a fossil in his sense of unwitting use of language with racist origins.
Your example of "to gyp" is better. Its origin is obvious to an educated person, however it is not obvious to someone, especially children and young people, who does not know the history of public sentiment toward and stereotypes of Gypsies.
I would avoid the phrase "to call a spade a spade" because it has been ruined. I also avoid a whole list of unwitting sexual terms.
And yet, that's not good enough for him apparently. We're apparently risking our souls with some of these language choices.
I do have to say though, most of what people would accuse me of risking my soul over is more fun.
Words which were never connected to race donтАЩt become racist because people decide they do. тАЬCalling a spade a spadeтАЭ is just a colloquialism for plain talk. Until you give a concrete example of the alleged тАЬfossilizationтАЭ it remains just a theory.
I think the more interesting part of this back and forth is how strongly people want to deny the obvious, "calling a spade a spade" is deeply tied into American racism. It is not calling a shovel a shovel or a playing card a playing card. But I suspect the examples of both given here were just as bigoted in their day. After all how is calling a shovel a shovel blunt speaking unless calling a shovel a shovel is an insult that would make polite folks uncomfortable.
We are all racist it is part of our nature but we are, also, intelligent animals and can modify and control our nature.
My personal story, I grew up in an overtly racist world. That world didn't use euphemisms or dog whistles, we used the real words. In other words we called a spade a spade. For 60 years I've been working to root out the racism instilled in my childhood. More or less successful. But it has taken work and vigilance. My original comment was a musing on how even after 60 years, I'm not through yet.
To follow where you all want to lead me would be an easy path but it won't get to where I want to be.
Jack
In order to promote your thesis about the phrase "to call a spade a spade," you have to ignore the etymology and pretend it dates from the 1920s. There is no reason to suppose it was somehow bigoted back in the 1500s.
Today, the word "liberal" is in the process of being ruined. There are a lot of Trump supporters, many your age, who do not even seem to know what the word really means anymore. They interpret the phrases like "liberal arts" and "liberal democracy" as somehow having something to do with those damn "libruhs." It is ironic that right-wing propaganda has turned "liberal" into a pejorative when it is conservatives like the Texas GOP creating dystopian platforms and voting for literally Orwellian resolutions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiAJbEXutbY
my cynical nature thanks you, he won again.
*sigh*
That you are made uncomfortable by a word or phrase doesnтАЩt make it wrong. Are you also offended by тАЬniggardly?тАЭ Huck Finn must have been torture.
I recommend a better use of your time. Attempting to eliminate phrases which no one else thinks are racist is going to exhaust you to no end. Further, this isnтАЩt a тАЬback and forthтАЭ because you offer no examples.
*sigh*
We have discussed zero examples.. Both of your supposed examples predate American racism and had zero to do with black people. One example was corrupted in the 1920s and should probably be avoided. No one has defended the use of racist language in any way.
Your examples here are better. The anti-semitic use of "to jew" can even be found in Shakespeare. "Going dutch" came from the English experience with negotiating with The Netherlands and concluding they were stingy. Not racist exactly, but at least there is a direct connection between the people and the saying, not a merely coincidental connection stemming from the relatively recent adoption of the word "black" as opposed to the historical appellations of "Negro" or "Colored" as memorialized in the name of the NAACP, founded in 1909.