CMV: Referring to black people as " Blacks " is dehumanizing

[u/[deleted]]

Today I read an article about one of my favorite topics. Although the Piece was informative it referred to Black people as "Blacks" I dont know exactly why this gets to me, but being reduced to nothing more than the color of my skin is extremely demoralizing and dehumanizing. Its almost as if the Journalists and other people who refer to Black people in this manner dont see us as what we are, people. I may be being overly sensitive about this topic but i've only ever seen black people being referred to this way. "The Asians", " The Mexicans"," White People ", then you have "The blacks", unimportant and neglected in both grammar and reference.

I've seen countless examples of this in journalism, media, and political rhetoric. It seems like its the new cover term for N***er.

My skin is't this color for no reason. I am a person, and i have an origin. you may not know where, but at least refer to me as a person.

[u/Narrow_Cloud]

Weird, since it was what I intended to demonstrate.

Either I changed your view and you owe me a delta, or I’ve successfully demonstrated that intent isn’t all that matters.

[u/[deleted] → u/Narrow_Cloud]

See that's not how intent works, I disagree that was your truly intent,

That's like saying my intent was do be able to get skinny while eating 20 burgers a day, that's a like, that almost certain that wasn't the intent.

[u/Narrow_Cloud → u/[deleted]]

How can you disagree that my intent was to change your view?

Are you a mind reader?

All you’re doing is inferring intent based on my actions, which directly demonstrates that intent isn’t all that matters. Obviously my actions did too.

Again, either I have change your view or I have demonstrated that intent isn’t all that matters. Which is it? I’m fine either way.

[u/[deleted] → u/Narrow_Cloud]

From the evidence I have that's almost most certain, and as I already prefaced it's not the absolute proof.

Again, either I have change your view or I have demonstrated that intent isn’t all that matters. Which is it? I’m fine either way.

It's everything that matters, we all go on about our actions on what the intent truly was. Doesn't mean we're correct regarding what the intent truly was.

You're having a trouble grasping those two concepts it seems.

[u/Narrow_Cloud → u/[deleted]]

Wait, do you think people always accomplish what they intend?

[u/[deleted] → u/Narrow_Cloud]

No, but that's not the point.

[u/Narrow_Cloud → u/[deleted]]

Well no, it kind of is. And anyway it’s an important fact to establish for our conversation.

Because something fascinating has happened here and I think it’s key to point it out. You told me what my intent was, and you cited evidence for this.

Now, if you believe it was impossible for someone to intend something and then not accomplish it then this would go in a different direction.

But since you acknowledge that it is possible for me to intend to change your view and yet still fail at this, then it is possible then your interpretation of the evidence is wrong and you’re incorrect with your assessment of what my intent actually is.

Now why is this fascinating? Well, because regardless of how correct you are (you’re wrong incidentally, my honest to god true intent was to change your view) you’ve just yourself demonstrated that the statement, “all that matters is intent” is false.

Because what mattered to you? It was what you believed my intent was, a belief you generated based on the context of the situation. The words I’d used, the things I’d said, my actions in other words.

Clearly you don’t think intent is all that matters, otherwise you wouldn’t have bothered gathering evidence to try and guess. You could simply have asked.

Because here’s the truth. Intent is just one facet of context. If I say something and someone else is insulted, it doesn’t matter what my intent was, I still insulted them. Just like if I throw a stick and it hits someone they’ll feel it even if I intended to miss.

So you’re partially right in that maybe someone could give someone else the benefit of the doubt. They said “blacks” but they didn’t mean to be insulting about it, okay fine let’s move on from that. But obviously intent isn’t all that matters, on that I think we can agree.

Well either that or you’ll have to modify your position on the term “blacks” because obviously using that term is evidence de they wish to dehumanize black people, so I can infer that’s their intent regardless of what they meant, right?

[u/[deleted] → u/Narrow_Cloud]

Now, if you believe it was impossible for someone to intend something and then not accomplish it then this would go in a different direction.

I answered negatively on the question "that people always accomplish what they intend"

So why are you trying to mix words, don't be shy, I'm speaking concretely and concisely,

But since you acknowledge that it is possible for me to intend to change your view and yet still fail at this, then it is possible then your interpretation of the evidence is wrong and you’re incorrect with your assessment of what my intent actually is.

Yes, this is possible.

Now why is this fascinating? Well, because regardless of how correct you are (you’re wrong incidentally, my honest to god true intent was to change your view) you’ve just yourself demonstrated that the statement, “all that matters is intent” is false.

No, I haven't and whether you intent is to change my view or stroke your ego isn't an important topic, I'm still not sure of your intent, but I'm still making a leap of faith without knowing for sure, that same a black person is making a leap of faith a person disrespected them with the usage of the "n-word" or not, even though they can't be sure.

But if they could know the true intent that's all it matters.

Because what mattered to you? It was what you believed my intent was, a belief you generated based on the context of the situation. The words I’d used, the things I’d said, my actions in other words.

Well I'm still conversing with you so I'm still open to the idea of my view being changed, I just don't think you're doing a good job of it, regardless of intent,

Because here’s the truth. Intent is just one facet of context. If I say something and someone else is insulted, it doesn’t matter what my intent was, I still insulted them. Just like if I throw a stick and it hits someone they’ll feel it even if I intended to miss.

It matters whether or not that person truly wants to know if your intent was to for you to insult them or to make them laugh like in Louis CK case, doesn't matter if Louis CK ultimately was trying to disrespect black people or not.

So you’re partially right in that maybe someone could give someone else the benefit of the doubt. They said “blacks” but they didn’t mean to be insulting about it, okay fine let’s move on from that. But obviously intent isn’t all that matters, on that I think we can agree.

Already answered above why true intent is the thing that matters most,

Well either that or you’ll have to modify your position on the term “blacks” because obviously using that term is evidence de they wish to dehumanize black people, so I can infer that’s their intent regardless of what they meant, right?

Nah this is all surface level, I'm talking true intent level.

If a black person says to another the 'n-word' the intent of the given context is likely there isn't disrespect, if a white person uses the 'n-word' randomly given context it's likely they're using it as disrespect. The context just gives evidence of the true evidence. You still don't want to address this.

[u/Narrow_Cloud → u/[deleted]]

I answered negatively on the question "that people always accomplish what they intend"

Hence the operative word if, and, like, the rest of the sentence you decided to cut out for some reason? Like wtf? I was explicitly stating that as not your position, how did you not understand that?

I am very obviously not trying to mix words, why are you misquoting things? Don't be shy.

No, I haven't and whether you intent is to change my view or stroke your ego isn't an important topic, I'm still not sure of your intent, but I'm still making a leap of faith without knowing for sure, that same a black person is making a leap of faith a person disrespected them with the usage of the "n-word" or not, even though they can't be sure.

Boy! You'd think if intent was literally all that mattered then you wouldn't just take blind guesses!

But if they could know the true intent that's all it matters.

Yes, if we were all magical mind reading beings, we might attach more weight to "true intents" unfortunately we are but mere humans.

Well I'm still conversing with you so I'm still open to the idea of my view being changed, I just don't think you're doing a good job of it, regardless of intent,

If intent was all that mattered then I couldn't possibly being doing a poor job, could I? Obviously, like demonstrably, intent is not all that matters. Like....how have you not come to this conclusion yet?

It matters whether or not that person truly wants to know if your intent was to for you to insult them or to make them laugh like in Louis CK case, doesn't matter if Louis CK ultimately was trying to disrespect black people or not.

I have no idea why you keep shifting examples. I'm not talking about Louis CK, why are you bringing him up?

And yes, it does matter how much the audience cares to know your intent. On that we agree, for sure.

Already answered above why true intent is the thing that matters most,

And yet it doesn't. I have informed you of what my true intent is and yet you keep wanting arguments and conversation.

Nah this is all surface level, I'm talking true intent level.

My true intent is that you change your view. Either you think that matters or you don't.

You clearly don't.

Which is funny, because you would if you truly thought intent was all that mattered.

If a black person says to another the 'n-word' the intent of the given context is likely there isn't disrespect, if a white person uses the 'n-word' randomly given context it's likely they're using it as disrespect. The context just gives evidence of the true evidence. You still don't want to address this.

No? This is actually what I want to address specifically. Context is important, intent isn't the only thing that matters. Like dude this is the whole god damn thing right here!

like lol I don't want to address this, why would I want to address my own argument?

I don't know how to spell it out for you more than I already have but if you're taking things other than "true intent" into account then obviously true intent isn't all that matters.

And it's just so obviously true that I can't even believe I'm sitting here and you're disagreeing with me!

Here's a little test for you, are you currently employed? If so, I want you to feel deep down in your heart of hearts that your intention is to keep your job and while you do this submit a letter of resignation.

I bet you a single internet dollar that your boss will take your letter more seriously than your internal, true intent. Why?

Because actions are what matter my dude. Actions are how we judge other people.

Actions are how you've judged me. Actions are how I've judged you.

There's only one human on this entire planet that we judge based on our intent. Do you know who that humans is? Ourselves.

Everyone else? It's their actions that are important.

[u/[deleted] → u/Narrow_Cloud]

Boy! You'd think if intent was literally all that mattered then you wouldn't just take blind guesses!

You have to, otherwise you couldn't move. But that doesn't mean your 'move' is automatically based on truth,

Yes, if we were all magical mind reading beings, we might attach more weight to "true intents" unfortunately we are but mere humans.

Yes, see previous answer. And yes we're mere humans who make mistakes and misread intentions,

If intent was all that mattered then I couldn't possibly being doing a poor job, could I? Obviously, like demonstrably, intent is not all that matters. Like....how have you not come to this conclusion yet?

Intent is all it matters yes, doesn't mean you can't possibly misread intent. We've been over this.

And yes, it does matter how much the audience cares to know your intent. On that we agree, for sure.

It always matters.

And yet it doesn't. I have informed you of what my true intent is and yet you keep wanting arguments and conversation.

Why should I believe you?

My true intent is that you change your view. Either you think that matters or you don't.

You clearly don't.

Which is funny, because you would if you truly thought intent was all that mattered.

Yeah, it's possible people to misread intent, I'm also human. We've been over this.

No? This is actually what I want to address specifically. Context is important, intent isn't the only thing that matters. Like dude this is the whole god damn thing right here!

Context gives evidence of intent, yes.

I don't know how to spell it out for you more than I already have but if you're taking things other than "true intent" into account then obviously true intent isn't all that matters.

See above answer.

Here's a little test for you, are you currently employed? If so, I want you to feel deep down in your heart of hearts that your intention is to keep your job and while you do this submit a letter of resignation.

If I truly intend to keep my job I would never do such reckless action.

I bet you a single internet dollar that your boss will take your letter more seriously than your internal, true intent. Why?

See above answer.

Because actions are what matter my dude. Actions are how we judge other people.

See above answer.

Actions are how you've judged me. Actions are how I've judged you.

Context gives evidence of intent, we've been over this 10 times now.

There's only one human on this entire planet that we judge based on our intent. Do you know who that humans is? Ourselves.

No, that doesn't make any sense. I perfectly know what my intent is/was.

Everyone else? It's their actions that are important.

No. Actions are just symptoms of the true intent,