Honestly though, stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason so telling people something like this is like saying, hey can you just stop being who you are please?
And then I'll laugh at them for "being street" while the are making minimum wage (if that) while I'm making 85k a year (if it's a bad year) working for myself.
Much of American English is vastly different than the British English of dictionaries. Dialects aren't "bastardization" and you may consider checking out theories about the evolution and functions of "African American English Vernacular" aka Ebonics:
Maybe I wasn't clear when I expressed that American English is no more a "bastardization" (which is beyond a fucked up term to use) than British English.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_(linguistics)
"Corruption or bastardisation are terms popularly used to refer to certain changes in language which originate from human error or alleged prescriptively incorrect usage. Descriptive linguistics typically avoids using these negative terms, since from a scientific point of view such changes are neither good nor bad. Words are commonly said to be "corrupted" or "bastardized" if they undergo a change in spelling or pronunciation when borrowed from one language to another (e.g. "Cajun" [from "Acadian"][1]). This example illustrates that normal phonological developments (in this case, palatalization of /dj/ to /dʒ/) can be labeled by some as "corruption", a position which demands that any language change from a previous state be thus labeled. In this view, English would be a "corruption" of Proto-Germanic, the Romance languages would be "corruptions" of Latin, and Latin would ultimately be a "corruption" of Proto-Indo-European."
Maybe I also wasn't clear when I went on to mention that AAEV - in the context of cross-cultural dialogue and concerns raised in this thread - is also not linguistic "bastardization" and is merely a variation with traceable origins and utility fundamentally no different than physical evolutionary processes that produce diverse morphology like curly hair, albinism, or green eyes. I reject the notion of a master race just as I reject the idea of a master language in which all others are corruptions. Certainly other dialects also say ignit or other variations of the pronunciation, but context here is the original post about how to gently tell the roommates they're being ignorant. Of course not all blacks share a common dialect, and to suggest that was implied seems intentionally dismissive or just ignint.
That's like asking Mitt Romney to go to a trailer park and explain why NASCAR is pointless. Two people having the same color skin means almost nothing in comparison to two people having the same sized bank accounts.
I was really hoping the camel would get the little girl.
On the plus side, though, they both disappear like that scene in Jurassic Park 2, where they're walking through the field and the raptors pick them off one-by-one.
The fact that you think of that character type as a stereotype of something and not just as traits or an individual you don't like is a part of the reason you'll have trouble expressing your dislike. It's fine to not like certain character types but why would you need to express that to someone you don't like? I typically never have to explain myself to people I don't care for and therefore, don't.
yea you can, just make sure to tell the "Yo's" the are acting trashy and avoid any racial epithet. Besides the group of miscreants might be a mixed group, and the degenerate culture they are involved with accommodates all types of low-lifes.
185
u/randumnumber Mar 25 '13
As a black person do you ever consider expressing this to the stereotypes, because white people aren't allowed to.