Nope, it's still me, I'm right: I just saw a whole new group of content on the first page of /g/, still lots of racism & homophobic slurs. A an even mix of f- & n- words, though it also included these two gems: "tranny fa--ot shitskin" followed by "Holocaust never happened"
So nope, nothing is conflated for me and I haven't jumped anywhere. My feet are firmly planted in the land of "4Chan has lots of racism & hate speech". I don't know what land you're in if it's a place where calling someone a "fa--ot [n-word]" doesn't get categorized into some sort of hate speech.
This is the main point of contention. No one denies that such words are a common occurrence on 4chan, but you believe these words are automatically indicative of racism.
Are you open to the idea that someone who refers to himself as “an Archfag” is simply communicating on his being an Arch Linux user, and not otherwise intending to communicate his sexual orientation, and certainly not to proffer a negative view of his own sexual orientation?
You got this wrong, it's not an insult. Somethingfag such as "oldfag", "newfag", "Archfag", etc. are not insults whatsoever. They're shibboleth terms for "old users", "new users", "Arch users".
Your entire premise is incorrect.
>2) The language of the insult is a comparison to another group of people.
No one is being insulted, so this point is also wrong.
>3) Being a member of that group is supposed to be a bad thing, which is what makes it an insult.
You're projecting here big time. No one there is tying any negativity or positivity to the "fag" suffix, only you are.
>4) Therefore the person believes that group of people is in some way inferior, bad, or otherwise undesirable in some way.
Nonsensical since nothing is being tied to inferiority, "badness", or anything undesirable.
You still don't get it.
I don’t agree with people getting too insulted by any of this. It’s not edgy. It’s corny and part of the gate keeping. Both sides don’t get it at times. At least when the using side seriously thinks there’s nothing wrong at all, ever, with the usage. Again, I don’t think the word usage matters at all. I was once a “/b/tard”.
The extremes of saying it’s so bad or saying there’s nothing wrong at all in any way shape or form are both incorrect.
I think you interpret these words are insults when they are simply descriptors.
You keep saying they are used so commonly but you don't provide any context for these quotes.
Let us consider: https://desuarchive.org/g/search/text/archfag/
On the first page of 25 comments, 10 were used in a manner of disagreement with the person referred to, 5 were self-descriptors, 5 were in praise of others, and 5 were with no positive or negative inference to it.
If we search or "Arch user" instead:
https://desuarchive.org/g/search/text/%22arch%20user%22/
We get rather similar results.
> So let's break it down:
Given that the phrase “Arch user” is used insultingly with the same frequency, would you apply the same logic to the word “user”?
I'm refuting those claims, which are falsifiable, your claims are not and are merely a moral axiom such as “Stealing is bad.” which entail no factual, falsifiable component.
4chan most definitely exists in the real world and is subject to its morals. It doesn’t matter if you use a slur at a private club, Internet forum or at home. It doesn’t change its offensiveness.
No one is being called a "fag" though.
>A slur you’re arguing it’s ok to use.
I've successfully argued that "Archfag", "oldfag", etc. are not slurs, and are therefore OK to use. QED.
Wrong, 4chan is a subset of "the greater real world", and therefore has different sensibilities, culture, etc. Exactly how Blacks can say the n-word and it's not offensive, they have their own sensibilities and customs, and are a subset of "the greater real world." QED. Argument is proven factually correct here. I win.
>Your entire premise is faulty, because it does.
Just proved my entire premise is logically consistent and bullet proof.
> "Fag" is a slur on planet earth (where the 4chan users reside). There's no argument beyond that.
Stop shifting the goal posts. No one is calling anyone "fag" in this instance. Even then, using the logic above it is not a slur.
>There's no argument beyond that.
You're right, because I 100% proved my point and there's no argument that can say otherwise.
I win. Any response from you is you admitting that I'm right and that I won.
Good thing I'm neither, and you discussing with me proves that I'm not. QED.
>Sorry, I'm done with you.
Glad you admit defeat.
>"Fag" and the N word are slurs,
Except no one is calling people those. Stop moving the goalposts and stop creating strawmen.
>and there's no escaping that
Just did above, with bulletproof logic. QED.
>no matter what your cognitive dissonance says). I hope you grow up someday and learn this.
There's your famous IMAX-level projection!
I won.
There's no other way to use these words. They're always racist and homophobic. That's the point, /pol is a cesspool of racism and homophobia.
The way this thread progressed was very fascinating to read.
First, an absurd baseless generalization was made. Then, when challenged, the generalization was narrowed down a bit. Then it was narrowed down again and again until we got this comment which asserts an outright lie.
These words aren't always used in a racist and homophobic way. 4chan is proof of this.
Try to step back and move into another level.
What are words?
What is this "vibration of air molecules" hitting my ear?
What is the meaning behind them?
Why so?
Do these certain "frequencies" always mean a certain meaning? Always?
If you wish to still call that “racism and homophobia”, then neither of which necessarily has anything to do with race or sexual orientations, or even disdain. — you should also know that your usage of these words is then quite nonstandard, and does not align with what most mean with them.
The word “nigger”, in particular, has been of particular interest of study in how depending on context the word can very much be about race, and negatively so, to a simple form of address that has no implications of race.
If you find that hard to understand, maybe stay away from HN where we try to have at least some minimum of reason in our discussions: you either lack that by minimizing racism and hatred to "bad words" or you are a troll arguing in bad faith.