"I'm not trying to..."

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Basically, "I'm not trying to be a d**k" means "I'm about to be a d**k."

More like "I'm trying not to be a dick but I feel this is a harsh truth".

It's the same kind of logic folks use when they give you the, "Don't be mad, but I need to tell you..." Doesn't work that way. You may not want me to be mad, but it's not up to you. If you're being a dick, you're being a dick. If someone is that worried that they're about to sound dickish, they should change how they're saying it instead.

Otherwise, it's the equivalent of how my state (NC) handles road maintenance issues: instead of fixing the problem, they just label it with a sign ("Low Soft Shoulder" or "Uneven Pavement" or somesuch) and call it a day...

Sometimes people use it as a disclaimer when they're generally not trying to be racist/sexist/dick. For example, someone saying, "I'm not trying to be racist, but has anyone noticed how most of the leading Olympic sprinters are black?"

And yet, strangely, the only reason to so pointedly make such an observation is to lead into a line of discussion that is racist. It's just couched in that, "Hey, isn't this interesting?" voice.

and what racist comment would they be paving the way for? That black guys are more likely to be good sprinters than white guys? That's not racist. It's certainly not racist against blacks, and it's not really racist towards whites either, because it on its own is not saying that whites can't possibly ever be as fast as blacks, or that white people have no business being on a running track. However, most importantly of all, it's not racist because it's a biological fact. People with African, particularly West Coast African, genetic roots have a slightly different muscle structure that Caucasians. They're muscles are naturally more suited to 'twitch-response' actions, releasing high levels of energy over a short period of time, which makes them more naturally inclined to be good sprinters.

So yeah, I'm with Matthew94 on this one. I think it's more "I know this has the potential to be read as racist by overly-reactionary people, but bear with me because I'm going somewhere with this" rather than "I'm about to be racist. Flame shield up".

agreed, the person generally saying it is giving context in saying "look, this might sound racist, and i can understand why you/someone might think that, but i'm really not meaning it in any such way, so please try not to take it that way".

does context not matter to people in the slightest?

That does not give it context. The context would be how it gets used, now whatever disclaimers get thrown up that fail to explain anything. And I say that they fail to explain anything because people can easily be deluded about their own bigotry so the only way to tell is by their actions, not their protests that they aren't bigoted in some manner.

oh look, we meet again! I figured you'd be biting at the chance to have at me again sometime soon

You think too much of yourself. I didn't notice your name until after I posted and didn't remember why I thought I should recognize the name until I checked the avatar.

by how it get's used? give me an example then without using the phrases above that it could be used with context of not being *racist/sexist/etc..*

Can you rephrase that with English grammar in mind?

Judge by their actions? it is discussion, there should be next to no actions involved unless people are getting really upset and shaking their fists in the air, in which case, they probably are sexist/racist/etc for having to defend whatever it is so adamantly.

Then let me amend that statement. By the actual discussion, not worthless disclaimers that provide no content.

right, because you hawked onto my post 10 hours after you last posted yours? funny coincidence at that then.

It's called waking up in the morning and seeing the thread on the first page still.

what i meant by that was, give me an example of how a sentence could be used, without using "not trying to be *insert here* but.. " with context that would actively describe it not being taken in a racist/sexist manner, as you seemed so sure of yourself about.

Context that would actively describe it not being taken in a racist/sexist manner? English grammar, dude. When you're making a demand like this make it clear. What you just asked for doesn't make sense.

once again, funny coincidence that you quoted me so quickly at that, is all i was pointing out.

Only if you think waaaaaaaaay too much of yourself.

The context would be how it gets used, now whatever disclaimers get thrown up that fail to explain anything.

okay, since you aren't understanding what i'm getting at, what exactly did you mean by this sentence?

That someone's intent to not be racist isn't really part of the context of the statement. Whether they intend to be racist or not is utterly irrelevant to whether they actually are being racist.

yes, i think of myself quite highly...*sips*

quite.

if i actually thought that highly of myself, would i actually sit here and debate with you?

Well you'd probably at least figure out to use proper grammar to make sentences if you did. There I went thinking you must be from another country, then I checked your profile and you're an American so there's no excuse for that nonsense.

so by that then, everyone is racist/sexist/etc based on the words and not on the context? okay then, finally, i've come to the crux of your opinion.

I seriously had to hold myself back from getting banned. Here. No, I did not say that it isn't based on context. I just pointed out that it wasn't context that you were talking about and that context is something different. Why don't you actually address what I said?

oh yay, low blows for everyone! way to keep attacking me, these are quite fun to read. *sips cup* quite. No excuse for not giving a care about grammar on the internet? *gasp* dastardly! such absurdness cannot be allowed.

If it really makes you feel better, I'll capitalize my I's and add slightly better punctuation if me being American truly matters to you so much.

I was referring to the bits that didn't make sense syntactically.

Okay, please quote or point out what I did not actively address, since we are misunderstanding each other here, and I'll give my two cents on it, so you can have your quota for the day on attacking me yet again, sound good?

You did not actively address:
"That someone's intent to not be racist isn't really part of the context of the statement. Whether they intend to be racist or not is utterly irrelevant to whether they actually are being racist."

Any of that. The bold part you ignored in particular with that stupid strawman in the previous post.

I probably didn't say what I meant in the most fashionable manner for one such as yourself to understand, so I'll try to keep it more "syntactically" as you put it next time.

Most fashionable? If by that you mean it isn't a gibberish sentence =|

Just because they are pointing out an observation that might include a race, does not mean they are being racist. Most of the time that intro is used to dignify the grey area, so the person won't misconstrue their intentions with the statement.

Oh look, you ignore it AGAIN. I didn't say that it makes them racist to make such an observation. I said that the 'intro' was not part of the context and there's no reason to take it into account. Now why don't you address that instead of diverting for once?

I'll just quote Monoochrom as he seems to be getting the point across in a much clearer sense than my strawman is.

Dude, your dishonest strawman thing has jack shit to do with what Monoochrom said, and what Monoochrom said has jack shit to do with the part I pointed out that you failed to address.

fashionable manners is for us higher class, gibberish for you simpletons

gibberish = juglkasdtyyy pee pee poo poo

Okay as lack the knack pointed out, this is getting incredible hard to follow...I must be horrible misunderstanding what you exactly want, so could you please just actively say what you want from me, then I'll say it, then you can go ahead and snark at me again?

like I just said, I must be horribly misconstruing what you want, and his point was different than mine yes, but it was still going along the guidelines of my thoughts and opinion on the topic, so I felt I should quote it.

heres how i see it:

What they want you to hear, or what they think they hear is-
"Im not trying to be X but -insert the most hateful thing on the subject in cold blood-"

What it is 99.99999% of the time is-
"im not trying to be XS but -insert a reasonable opinion or fact that is neither 'politically correct' (read as 'wrong') or popular in today's culture, no matter how reasonable it is-"



It's like this one time an acquaintance of mine said "Im not racist but i do know that black people are over represented in criminal statistics in both the UK and USA, which possibly reflects something about they're culture or group mindset."

Then some woman who over heard butted in and lost her shit in a rude manner.
The irony being, he was not incorrect. But he's opinion and fact is not PC so he got shit for telling the truth even when he did say the "im not X but..." part.

So really, unless what you're saying is truly straight up racist and not more of a semi-sensible opinion takeing taste into consideration or a known fact...dont apologize.
You dont need to, no one got hurt, you stated a fact and or personal opinion.*

*note: saying something like "Im not racist but all X are scum", is not the type of reasonable opinion im talking about. if it was "Im not racist, but i find that i dont get along well with X people" that would be fine.

another wonderful post that I agree with, and I failed to point out in a clear manner in the first place.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Basically, "I'm not trying to be a d**k" means "I'm about to be a d**k."

More like "I'm trying not to be a dick but I feel this is a harsh truth".

It's the same kind of logic folks use when they give you the, "Don't be mad, but I need to tell you..." Doesn't work that way. You may not want me to be mad, but it's not up to you. If you're being a dick, you're being a dick. If someone is that worried that they're about to sound dickish, they should change how they're saying it instead.

Otherwise, it's the equivalent of how my state (NC) handles road maintenance issues: instead of fixing the problem, they just label it with a sign ("Low Soft Shoulder" or "Uneven Pavement" or somesuch) and call it a day...

Sometimes people use it as a disclaimer when they're generally not trying to be racist/sexist/dick. For example, someone saying, "I'm not trying to be racist, but has anyone noticed how most of the leading Olympic sprinters are black?"

And yet, strangely, the only reason to so pointedly make such an observation is to lead into a line of discussion that is racist. It's just couched in that, "Hey, isn't this interesting?" voice.

and what racist comment would they be paving the way for? That black guys are more likely to be good sprinters than white guys? That's not racist. It's certainly not racist against blacks, and it's not really racist towards whites either, because it on its own is not saying that whites can't possibly ever be as fast as blacks, or that white people have no business being on a running track. However, most importantly of all, it's not racist because it's a biological fact. People with African, particularly West Coast African, genetic roots have a slightly different muscle structure that Caucasians. They're muscles are naturally more suited to 'twitch-response' actions, releasing high levels of energy over a short period of time, which makes them more naturally inclined to be good sprinters.

So yeah, I'm with Matthew94 on this one. I think it's more "I know this has the potential to be read as racist by overly-reactionary people, but bear with me because I'm going somewhere with this" rather than "I'm about to be racist. Flame shield up".

agreed, the person generally saying it is giving context in saying "look, this might sound racist, and i can understand why you/someone might think that, but i'm really not meaning it in any such way, so please try not to take it that way".

does context not matter to people in the slightest?

That does not give it context. The context would be how it gets used, now whatever disclaimers get thrown up that fail to explain anything. And I say that they fail to explain anything because people can easily be deluded about their own bigotry so the only way to tell is by their actions, not their protests that they aren't bigoted in some manner.

oh look, we meet again! I figured you'd be biting at the chance to have at me again sometime soon

You think too much of yourself. I didn't notice your name until after I posted and didn't remember why I thought I should recognize the name until I checked the avatar.

by how it get's used? give me an example then without using the phrases above that it could be used with context of not being *racist/sexist/etc..*

Can you rephrase that with English grammar in mind?

Judge by their actions? it is discussion, there should be next to no actions involved unless people are getting really upset and shaking their fists in the air, in which case, they probably are sexist/racist/etc for having to defend whatever it is so adamantly.

Then let me amend that statement. By the actual discussion, not worthless disclaimers that provide no content.

right, because you hawked onto my post 10 hours after you last posted yours? funny coincidence at that then.

It's called waking up in the morning and seeing the thread on the first page still.

what i meant by that was, give me an example of how a sentence could be used, without using "not trying to be *insert here* but.. " with context that would actively describe it not being taken in a racist/sexist manner, as you seemed so sure of yourself about.

Context that would actively describe it not being taken in a racist/sexist manner? English grammar, dude. When you're making a demand like this make it clear. What you just asked for doesn't make sense.

once again, funny coincidence that you quoted me so quickly at that, is all i was pointing out.

Only if you think waaaaaaaaay too much of yourself.

The context would be how it gets used, now whatever disclaimers get thrown up that fail to explain anything.

okay, since you aren't understanding what i'm getting at, what exactly did you mean by this sentence?

That someone's intent to not be racist isn't really part of the context of the statement. Whether they intend to be racist or not is utterly irrelevant to whether they actually are being racist.

yes, i think of myself quite highly...*sips*

quite.

if i actually thought that highly of myself, would i actually sit here and debate with you?

Well you'd probably at least figure out to use proper grammar to make sentences if you did. There I went thinking you must be from another country, then I checked your profile and you're an American so there's no excuse for that nonsense.

so by that then, everyone is racist/sexist/etc based on the words and not on the context? okay then, finally, i've come to the crux of your opinion.

I seriously had to hold myself back from getting banned. Here. No, I did not say that it isn't based on context. I just pointed out that it wasn't context that you were talking about and that context is something different. Why don't you actually address what I said?

oh yay, low blows for everyone! way to keep attacking me, these are quite fun to read. *sips cup* quite. No excuse for not giving a care about grammar on the internet? *gasp* dastardly! such absurdness cannot be allowed.

If it really makes you feel better, I'll capitalize my I's and add slightly better punctuation if me being American truly matters to you so much.

I was referring to the bits that didn't make sense syntactically.

Okay, please quote or point out what I did not actively address, since we are misunderstanding each other here, and I'll give my two cents on it, so you can have your quota for the day on attacking me yet again, sound good?

You did not actively address:
"That someone's intent to not be racist isn't really part of the context of the statement. Whether they intend to be racist or not is utterly irrelevant to whether they actually are being racist."

Any of that. The bold part you ignored in particular with that stupid strawman in the previous post.

I probably didn't say what I meant in the most fashionable manner for one such as yourself to understand, so I'll try to keep it more "syntactically" as you put it next time.

Most fashionable? If by that you mean it isn't a gibberish sentence =|

Just because they are pointing out an observation that might include a race, does not mean they are being racist. Most of the time that intro is used to dignify the grey area, so the person won't misconstrue their intentions with the statement.

Oh look, you ignore it AGAIN. I didn't say that it makes them racist to make such an observation. I said that the 'intro' was not part of the context and there's no reason to take it into account. Now why don't you address that instead of diverting for once?

I'll just quote Monoochrom as he seems to be getting the point across in a much clearer sense than my strawman is.

Dude, your dishonest strawman thing has jack shit to do with what Monoochrom said, and what Monoochrom said has jack shit to do with the part I pointed out that you failed to address.

fashionable manners is for us higher class, gibberish for you simpletons

gibberish = juglkasdtyyy pee pee poo poo

Or "what i meant by that was, give me an example of how a sentence could be used, without using "not trying to be *insert here* but.. " with context that would actively describe it not being taken in a racist/sexist manner, as you seemed so sure of yourself about." works too.

Okay as lack the knack pointed out, this is getting incredible hard to follow...I must be horrible misunderstanding what you exactly want, so could you please just actively say what you want from me, then I'll say it, then you can go ahead and snark at me again?

...

I pointed out that what you said is context is not context that changes whether it is racist or not. How hard is that to follow?

How dare thee, my quote was among the few flawless tributes to this thread!

So your point is, adding the intro to the statement doesn't give it context if it's racist or not?

If that is what your saying, then yeah, I agree to a point. As mentioned before, the grey areas are not covered exactly depending on how well you know the person or not. If you say something that could be twisted/misused for a racial remark rather than an observation, as many have pointed out, it helps relieve any miscommunications someone might have in a conversation.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Basically, "I'm not trying to be a d**k" means "I'm about to be a d**k."

More like "I'm trying not to be a dick but I feel this is a harsh truth".

It's the same kind of logic folks use when they give you the, "Don't be mad, but I need to tell you..." Doesn't work that way. You may not want me to be mad, but it's not up to you. If you're being a dick, you're being a dick. If someone is that worried that they're about to sound dickish, they should change how they're saying it instead.

Otherwise, it's the equivalent of how my state (NC) handles road maintenance issues: instead of fixing the problem, they just label it with a sign ("Low Soft Shoulder" or "Uneven Pavement" or somesuch) and call it a day...

Sometimes people use it as a disclaimer when they're generally not trying to be racist/sexist/dick. For example, someone saying, "I'm not trying to be racist, but has anyone noticed how most of the leading Olympic sprinters are black?"

And yet, strangely, the only reason to so pointedly make such an observation is to lead into a line of discussion that is racist. It's just couched in that, "Hey, isn't this interesting?" voice.

and what racist comment would they be paving the way for? That black guys are more likely to be good sprinters than white guys? That's not racist. It's certainly not racist against blacks, and it's not really racist towards whites either, because it on its own is not saying that whites can't possibly ever be as fast as blacks, or that white people have no business being on a running track. However, most importantly of all, it's not racist because it's a biological fact. People with African, particularly West Coast African, genetic roots have a slightly different muscle structure that Caucasians. They're muscles are naturally more suited to 'twitch-response' actions, releasing high levels of energy over a short period of time, which makes them more naturally inclined to be good sprinters.

So yeah, I'm with Matthew94 on this one. I think it's more "I know this has the potential to be read as racist by overly-reactionary people, but bear with me because I'm going somewhere with this" rather than "I'm about to be racist. Flame shield up".

agreed, the person generally saying it is giving context in saying "look, this might sound racist, and i can understand why you/someone might think that, but i'm really not meaning it in any such way, so please try not to take it that way".

does context not matter to people in the slightest?

That does not give it context. The context would be how it gets used, now whatever disclaimers get thrown up that fail to explain anything. And I say that they fail to explain anything because people can easily be deluded about their own bigotry so the only way to tell is by their actions, not their protests that they aren't bigoted in some manner.

oh look, we meet again! I figured you'd be biting at the chance to have at me again sometime soon

You think too much of yourself. I didn't notice your name until after I posted and didn't remember why I thought I should recognize the name until I checked the avatar.

by how it get's used? give me an example then without using the phrases above that it could be used with context of not being *racist/sexist/etc..*

Can you rephrase that with English grammar in mind?

Judge by their actions? it is discussion, there should be next to no actions involved unless people are getting really upset and shaking their fists in the air, in which case, they probably are sexist/racist/etc for having to defend whatever it is so adamantly.

Then let me amend that statement. By the actual discussion, not worthless disclaimers that provide no content.

right, because you hawked onto my post 10 hours after you last posted yours? funny coincidence at that then.

It's called waking up in the morning and seeing the thread on the first page still.

what i meant by that was, give me an example of how a sentence could be used, without using "not trying to be *insert here* but.. " with context that would actively describe it not being taken in a racist/sexist manner, as you seemed so sure of yourself about.

Context that would actively describe it not being taken in a racist/sexist manner? English grammar, dude. When you're making a demand like this make it clear. What you just asked for doesn't make sense.

once again, funny coincidence that you quoted me so quickly at that, is all i was pointing out.

Only if you think waaaaaaaaay too much of yourself.

The context would be how it gets used, now whatever disclaimers get thrown up that fail to explain anything.

okay, since you aren't understanding what i'm getting at, what exactly did you mean by this sentence?

That someone's intent to not be racist isn't really part of the context of the statement. Whether they intend to be racist or not is utterly irrelevant to whether they actually are being racist.

yes, i think of myself quite highly...*sips*

quite.

if i actually thought that highly of myself, would i actually sit here and debate with you?

Well you'd probably at least figure out to use proper grammar to make sentences if you did. There I went thinking you must be from another country, then I checked your profile and you're an American so there's no excuse for that nonsense.

so by that then, everyone is racist/sexist/etc based on the words and not on the context? okay then, finally, i've come to the crux of your opinion.

I seriously had to hold myself back from getting banned. Here. No, I did not say that it isn't based on context. I just pointed out that it wasn't context that you were talking about and that context is something different. Why don't you actually address what I said?

oh yay, low blows for everyone! way to keep attacking me, these are quite fun to read. *sips cup* quite. No excuse for not giving a care about grammar on the internet? *gasp* dastardly! such absurdness cannot be allowed.

If it really makes you feel better, I'll capitalize my I's and add slightly better punctuation if me being American truly matters to you so much.

I was referring to the bits that didn't make sense syntactically.

Okay, please quote or point out what I did not actively address, since we are misunderstanding each other here, and I'll give my two cents on it, so you can have your quota for the day on attacking me yet again, sound good?

You did not actively address:
"That someone's intent to not be racist isn't really part of the context of the statement. Whether they intend to be racist or not is utterly irrelevant to whether they actually are being racist."

Any of that. The bold part you ignored in particular with that stupid strawman in the previous post.

I probably didn't say what I meant in the most fashionable manner for one such as yourself to understand, so I'll try to keep it more "syntactically" as you put it next time.

Most fashionable? If by that you mean it isn't a gibberish sentence =|

Just because they are pointing out an observation that might include a race, does not mean they are being racist. Most of the time that intro is used to dignify the grey area, so the person won't misconstrue their intentions with the statement.

Oh look, you ignore it AGAIN. I didn't say that it makes them racist to make such an observation. I said that the 'intro' was not part of the context and there's no reason to take it into account. Now why don't you address that instead of diverting for once?

I'll just quote Monoochrom as he seems to be getting the point across in a much clearer sense than my strawman is.

Dude, your dishonest strawman thing has jack shit to do with what Monoochrom said, and what Monoochrom said has jack shit to do with the part I pointed out that you failed to address.

fashionable manners is for us higher class, gibberish for you simpletons

gibberish = juglkasdtyyy pee pee poo poo

Or "what i meant by that was, give me an example of how a sentence could be used, without using "not trying to be *insert here* but.. " with context that would actively describe it not being taken in a racist/sexist manner, as you seemed so sure of yourself about." works too.

Okay as lack the knack pointed out, this is getting incredible hard to follow...I must be horrible misunderstanding what you exactly want, so could you please just actively say what you want from me, then I'll say it, then you can go ahead and snark at me again?

...

I pointed out that what you said is context is not context that changes whether it is racist or not. How hard is that to follow?

How dare thee, my quote was among the few flawless tributes to this thread!

So your point is, adding the intro to the statement doesn't give it context if it's racist or not?

If that is what your saying, then yeah, I agree to a point. As mentioned before, the grey areas are not covered exactly depending on how well you know the person or not. If you say something that could be twisted/misused for a racial remark rather than an observation, as many have pointed out, it helps relieve any miscommunications someone might have in a conversation.

As many have pointed out it doesn't do anything to fix 'miscommunications'. And it shouldn't anyway because it adds nothing. It doesn't change whether what was said was racist or not. Such an evaluation would be independent of it.

Most of the criminals around here are white (as monoochrom used as an example)

some people would take that person as a racist, when in fact, it's just a simple observation that happens to include race by organization, not by defilement or judgement.

and by using the intro, it's a simple add on that allows some people to understand that the person is not inherently racist, they are merely stating an observation.

(granted as I stated before, this doesn't work with all statements, just ones that might be questionable if someone wants to twist it in their own mind.)

what is or isn't racist is still argued about to this day, so I wouldn't say there is a clean cut on what is or isn't racist, otherwise yeah I might agree it's not needed, and sometimes if you don't know the person well enough, you might think they are/aren't racist when they are quite the opposite, so I think that intro is fitting in an informal manner to use to dignify your meaning on it.

 

[The Funslinger]

Why is it that when people say 'no offence', they really mean 'kiss my ass'?

I suppose they're a kind of disclaimer, but they always fail

Agreed, but it just means that they know they're in the wrong and choosing to come out with it anyway.

There was a reality TV show filmed in my village last year (shudders) where families competed for a cottage. One of the families was black, and while we're all fairly decent, accepting people, this one prick then had to go and say

"I'm not racist, but they really don't belong here".

Thank you for putting up what will surely be taken as a representation of everyone here. You wanker. He wasn't even old, so you can't pull the "he's set in his ways" card. Really, some locals on that show were complete fucking idiots. I've got stories, man!

 

[ThePenguinKnight]

My uncle says, "I'm not racist but-" or "I'm not trying to be racist but-" about 2-3 times a day and it's not really helping.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I honestly can't remember the last time I heard anyone utter this phrase or any phrase similar to it.

Maybe it's an American thing. [sub]Not that I'm trying to generalize or anything.[/sub]

 

[Don Savik]

It all depends on who uses it really.

But as always this thread turned into someone having a "who has the bigger ego" contest with Mortai Gravesend.

*shrug*

thats life I guess.

 

[Genericjim101]

My personal favourite is "i'm not trying to be funny"....

Well it's a damn good job because if you were, you did not succeed.

Well maybe not trying to be funny was the problem!