Sorry for misunderstanding you, although I still don't understand you. If the term is associated more with blacks than whites, in you opinion is that caused by: A. more blacks act like thugs, or B. because people unfairly use that word against blacks (ie because the people using the word are racists)? Help me out and tell me what you are really trying to say.

 

I guess it depends on your definition of "racist." I was commenting on the "racial" question posed. The word "thug" is generally associated with blacks therefore it's a racial term. It is not SOLELY for blacks as we've seen stated by some in this thread. Those exception do not disprove the theory that there is a general connotation of "black young male" when most hear "thug."

 

Why? Not sure. I don't believe it's because more blacks act like thugs than whites. However, that perception probably does exist.

I do believe the term is used consciously by some and unconsciously by others but the use of it in and of itself does not fit the "racist" definition to me.

You're sounding really one sided with that post. There are plenty of racist people that are black as well as white, lets not pretend otherwise.

 

 

I would argue that the post you replied to doesn't pin racism solely on whites. His point is that if we don't stand up when we see blatant racism and point it out, regardless of the perpetrator, then we'll never get anywhere. We're all guilty of it. We all have friends who cross the line yet we let them slide.

I would argue that the post you replied to doesn't pin racism solely on whites. His point is that if we don't stand up when we see blatant racism and point it out, regardless of the perpetrator, then we'll never get anywhere. We're all guilty of it. We all have friends who cross the line yet we let them slide.

Perhaps I misread his post, I guess I was lumping several posts with that one actually.

I guess it's all perception and we can't really see their point any more than they can see ours on the use of the word thug. I just really think, where race issues are concerned, this one is minuscule compared to the real problems of racism.

I just really think, where race issues are concerned, this one is minuscule compared to the real problems of racism.

 

Sure. However, having the conversation to get one to at least consider either how they arrived at the term or how it might be perceived has value.

Sure. However, having the conversation to get one to at least consider either how they arrived at the term or how it might be perceived has value.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply the thread or the conversation is useless. Just speaking of where I stand on it. As I said, a thug to me is based on actions, not skin color.

Seriously?

 

As you know, I've worked with a lot of union pipefitters and a large, large majority of them are some of the nicest people, best family men and hardest workers that I've ever met.

 

Somebody really missed the mark calling you a thug.

Seriously!

I think the term thugs depends on your generation as well. My grandpa used it, but it was used for some oversized guys that always tried to start trouble. Somehow, now it is used to describe any black kid w braids, tatoos, and hard fouls. It needs to be reserved for any moron who tries to use his brute force to step outside of the lines of law or fair play regardless of race(I.e. Bill Laimbeer, Ron Arrest, any muscle working for the mafia).

I think the term thugs depends on your generation as well. My grandpa used it, but it was used for some oversized guys that always tried to start trouble. Somehow, now it is used to describe any black kid w braids, tatoos, and hard fouls. It needs to be reserved for any moron who tries to use his brute force to step outside of the lines of law or fair play regardless of race(I.e. Bill Laimbeer, Ron Arrest, any muscle working for the mafia).

 

Now that I have said what I feel should be, young people need to realize that perception is 99% reality. The only way to ensure that you are miscast as a thugs is to not look like the trouble makers that I see on the news every night during their arraignment. If I see a young white kid w long hair and hemp clothes, I'm going to assume that he is a hilly and hasn't showered in 5 days. If I see a kid that is all tagged up acting like a fool, I am going to think that he is a punk, or a wanna be thug. Is it fair? No, but it is the society that exists everywhere in the world. Look at UK this year, what made them easy for white Kentuckians to like? They looked like they were 100% about business. Clean cut and not overly tatted. They had swagger, but when you look like you are there for

business that gets translated as confidence.

 

Like Clyde has been saying, it is great for America to have such a blended culture. It needs to be celebrated and educated. My boys are just now asking and getting interested in their black and Indian sides. Unfortunately, when the same type of rifraff shares a common hair and clothing style, everyone who wears it is going to be associated. In this case it is young black men and the term thug. For my brother it was hippy. So, in short, if you don't want to be misconstrued as Pauly D and Jersey weirdo, don't fake tan and dress like the cast of Jersey Shore. If it doesnt bother you, then dress as you please. You just cant get possess when you are lumped in an undesirable group

You're sounding really one sided with that post. There are plenty of racist people that are black as well as white, lets not pretend otherwise.

 

Never mentioned anybody's race. Heck, my dearly departed grandmother hated white people more than George Jefferson could've ever imagined.

Never mentioned anybody's race. Heck, my dearly departed grandmother hated white people more than George Jefferson could've ever imagined.

As I said later, I may have misread your post and lumped several posts with yours.

As to the anonymity part of your comment, those that really know me on here can tell you if I think it, I'll likely tell you to your face. Then again, I don't think I said anything offensive in this thread at all.

The two terms I heard that are 98+% tied to blacks are "thug" and "athletic."

 

I don't think it's racist. It's just a term that whites now use to describe 1. mean black kids and 2. black basketball/football teams.

 

It seems both descriptions must be evolving....

 

The flip side is white means non-athletic.

 

I never thought of thug as attached to a race....matter of fact a friend of mine who lived in a small town in northern Michigan said all the local girls were attracted to "thugs" who were usually the bad boys in town....and none were black...but they did drive black Monte Carlos.

I guess it depends on your definition of "racist." I was commenting on the "racial" question posed. The word "thug" is generally associated with blacks therefore it's a racial term. It is not SOLELY for blacks as we've seen stated by some in this thread. Those exception do not disprove the theory that there is a general connotation of "black young male" when most hear "thug."

 

Why? Not sure. I don't believe it's because more blacks act like thugs than whites. However, that perception probably does exist.

I do believe the term is used consciously by some and unconsciously by others but the use of it in and of itself does not fit the "racist" definition to me.

 

Thinking about this....MAYBE it is becoming more associated with blacks in the sporting context because there are more blacks by far in professional football and basketball and major D1 than any other race.