What's the definition of racism? What's the definition of creep?

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

An open letter to liberals:

Imagine you went to a pet store and said "Here's some money, give me an animal" then they give you either an adorable puppy, or a venomous snake.

You'd think to yourself, "Maybe I need a better word than "animal". Maybe something a bit more precise?

Maybe for the same reason we have a category for "puppy" and another one for "venomous snake", we also need a category for "Sweden" and another one for "Kmher Rouge killing field". Calling them both "socialism" just isn't giving us the precision we need.

While we're at it, let's have a different word for "not up-to-date on upper-class social graces" [1] and "shoves Jews into gas chambers". Calling them both "racism" isn't giving us the precision we need. [2] [3]

Also, "not up-to-date on upper-class social graces" and "sex offender" could use different words. "Creep" doesn't cover it all. Especially since the legal definition of "sex-offender" covers everything from "caught peeing behind a bush", to "watching cheerleader porn in the wrong state", all the way up to, well, you know, what we think about when you hear the word "sex offender".

In order to show that I'm negotiating in good faith, I'll accept the liberal proposal that we redefine "weapons of mass destruction" to something more precise than "it's manufacturer doesn't donate to the NRA".

If nothing else, at least admit that there are degrees of intensity. Like if you're shy and instead of making eye contact your eye settle for center-of-body-mass, you're a 4th-degree creep. If you've been accused of sniffing bike seats, you're a 34-th degree creep.

It's like the olden days when you got executed for every single crime down to stealing a loaf of bread to feed your starving kids. And when somebody witnessed you stealing that bread, you'd murder them. There were no muggings, people would just kill you and then go through your pockets. What did they have to loose?

PC warriors love to mess about with words, they believe that words have huge power, so this is no accident. [4] It's impossible to convince them that it's wrong, so let's at least point out that it's counterproductive.

Godwin's law was an attempt to fight back, it needs to be expanded to beyond literally saying "Hitler", to basically saying the same, minus the actual six letters.

The idea of "Rape culture" is like Godwin's Law, only for jokes involving rape, or other ways of treating rape lightly. Unless you're tossing around completely false accusations of rape - then you don't have to be weighty about it. And you have to wonder how seriously people are going to take rape when you don't have different terms for "I was innocently going about my business when I was viciously attacked" and "I voluntarily choose to hang out with people who are known to screw unconscious women, and then I voluntarily choose to drug myself into unconsciousness."

"The boy who cried wolf" is a solid argument, when every social faux-pas is called Hitler, then the word "Hitler" ends up meaning "social faux-pas". Maybe in the future people will think we fought WW2 because the nazis wore dreadlocks, the expropriating bastards.

Footnotes:
[1] Racism meaning social faux pas:

Let’s say you make a stupid racist comment. A friend might say, “Damn, John, that was kind of racist.” It’d be really easy for John to get incredibly upset at that point, because for a lot of folks, ‘racist’ = the kind of extreme racist who burns crosses on people’s lawns and wants to lynch black people. But most of the time when I use the word ‘racist’ these days, I’m not talking about that kind of extreme action. I’m talking about the often subtle thoughts and words that emerge out of a culturally-conditioned subconscious...pointing out he’s been racist is not a scathing attack on his character — it’s just someone pointing out that’s he’s messed up, like a friend pointing out that you’ve got snot hanging off your nose.

Their tactic is to change the definitions as needed: when they're bullying someone, "racist" means cross-burner and jew-gasser, and "creep" means rapist. Until someone calls out the SJW bully on their viciousness, then suddenly "racist creep" is just a reminder to tuck your shirt in. This tactic of swapping definitions as needed is called the "motte and bailey doctrine".

[2] From Chris Rock's Oscar speech:

"Is Hollywood racist?

...Is it burning-cross racist? No.

Is it fetch-me-some-lemonade racist? No. No, no, no.

It’s a different type of racist."

So why not use a different type of word?

[3] https://goplifer.com/2016/04/12/not-...ts-are-racist/:

If racism can be institutionalized, if it can be the product of a culture as much as a choice, then addressing racism solely as a personal moral flaw is itself flawed....

It is often said that the Inuit have a vast vocabulary to describe snow. America, a nation burdened with a long, vexing racial heritage has only one word to describe racism.

In our language a ‘racist’ may be someone who unconsciously passed over a resume with a black-sounding name. A ‘racist’ is also a guy who dragged a black man to death behind his truck. If the same terminology accurately describes Trump fans that beat up black protestors and the clueless, affluent Bernie-Bros who denigrate blacks voters’ support for Clinton, then we have a language problem. -

[4] To lazy to create real change? Create an escapist pseudo-activism that stomps on the working class:

I, too, believe that something pernicious has taken hold among liberal activists on college campuses. But I do not ascribe it to softness of spirit so much as political impotence and an excessive faith that ideas and language (rather than state and economic resources) are the realm in which power is allocated.
...
[They believe] If we can just find the right words...we will be making a better world.

Of course, in its practical consequences, these adjustments do not make a better world. Instead, they make a world in which people who are not “with it” on all the latest fashionable terminology (who will disproportionately be the less well-off and less educated, unaware of the words that have newly been deemed offensive) will be made to feel bad. And they do literally nothing for the material conditions of the vulnerable populations they supposedly support, other than intricately readjusting the language about which such populations are spoken.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: What's the definition of racism? What's the definition of creep?

Godwin's law was an attempt to fight back, it needs to be expanded to beyond literally saying "Hitler", to basically saying the same, minus the actual six letters.

Forgive me, I over-reached when I wrote this. I was all the way back in May, after all. Now I'll settle for just bringing back Godwin's law.

"The boy who cried wolf" is a solid argument, when every social faux-pas is called Hitler, then the word "Hitler" ends up meaning "social faux-pas".

And then it just means "President". Here's a well-written article on why crying wolf is a bad idea.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: What's the definition of racism? What's the definition of creep?

There's another thread on "rape culture" that could be merged with this one. I can't find it.

Anyway, generations ago people used to use the word "seduction" to describe 90% of the situations which are called "rape" today. That is, if you enticed someone into sex knowing they'll regret it afterwards, you were guilty of "seduction". Men who did this were hit with status-destroying labels like "cad", "rake", "scoundrel", "rascal", and so on - words that today have not been used seriously for generations, and now sound like quaint historical footnotes. (I checked a thesaurus which listed "creep", but today only failures are called "creeps", successes are "studs", "playas" and of course "pimps" which is now a compliment. Women who guilty of this were called things which are today considered compliments. "Seduction" itself is not a negative word at all today.

But of course, the main victims seduction are men. We treat it like a joke when it happens to men - "coyote arm" and so on.

Also the main victims of marital rape (having sex with your spouse when you don't want to) are probably men also. So in the leftist victimhood hierarchy, they best way to demote men is to erase the concepts that make their victimhood describable.

Of course, there are also those of us who are not interested in jockeying for status within a victimhood-aristocracy, we only want to solve the problem. The first way to solve a problem is to understand it, and the first thing that you do while trying to understand, and communicate about about a problem is developing a precise vocabulary.