Should "Cracker" be a racial slur?

[Liudeius]

I don't find it offensive, but it was developed to be used for Europeans as a racial slur, so it is a racial slur.

Since you say the other side of your argument was an African American, I'll mention that n***** was not initially a racial slur. It just means the same thing as negro and colored, dark skinned, and while neither of those are seen in good light either, they don't quite ruin your life if you say them.

Even today, it is only counted as derogatory if said by a European, and while it is wrong to judge someone because of their race, and some Europeans do use the word in this sense, I could say someone on the street is "the friendliest African American I have ever met,"
and mean it to be more offensive than "What's up n*****" (as demonstrated by the fact that it is often ok when both the speaker and subject are African American).

Cracker however, when referring to European Americans, has always been intended to be derogatory (specifically towards southerners). While Europeans may not find it offensive, that doesn't mean the nature of the word is any less offensive.

Just to clarify, both Cracker and N***** are racial slurs, but I find it disturbing that I have been desensitized to one while I am offended to even type the other.

 

[II2none]

Well if it's offensive I guess it still should count.

 

[dementis]

Don't you know the rule?

It's only racist if a white person said it.

Gawwwd.

I thought everybody knew that.

I know it's meant to be sarcasm, but sadly that's how things are treated a large amount of the time, at least in America.

It's like that pretty much everywhere, England didn't even really have African slaves on the mainland, we just used our own race instead but but it's still only racist if you're white.

 

[Gigano]

Whenever it's used as one, then yes it certainly should.

And the exact same condemnation should befall any who use it against Caucasians as befall those who use other racial slurs about Blacks, Asians etc.

Of course, if it's used jokingly and without malice, then - like with any others words which are nominally derogatory - it shouldn't warrant much in way of offence. While both "Cracker" and "******" are as a point of departure derogatory and discriminatory when used to describe a group or person (Though, like "Voldemort", they're hardly problematic to utter when it's clear they are viewed negatively; If you can't even name the beast, then how will you slay it?[footnote]I actually often wonder if Americans deliberately make the very mentions of such words taboo in order to avoid facing the underlying problems they're symptomatic of. The majority safely locked in their pleasantville cocoon, kindly killing off any prospect of actual progression and grabbing at the roots of the problem, be it consciously or not.[/footnote]), that doesn't mean this is the sole meaning they can have in all contexts and uses.

Don't really see why anyone would be troubled by either anyway though; they obviously say more about the user than the target.

 

[gazumped]

If someone said it (or any other racial slur) to insult me, I wouldn't be offended, but it'd indicate that they have a problem with white people and it would suggest they're mostly only angry with me for being white. It would upset me because they're prejudice and that's an upsetting thing, but I couldn't take it personally.

But that's the thing about prejudice, you can't take it personally because the point is it's not an attack on YOU, but on a group you fit the description of.

On the most part, however, (in my multi-cultural, multi-gender, multi-sexuality friendship groups anyway) people just use words like that to joke around. Which is why it does black people no good to say "****** is OUR word", 'cause that just means you've segregated yourself in some way and now other people feel like they have to tip-toe around you because even if they're not trying to be offensive they now feel you might be offended.

If everyone everywhere suddenly agreed that there were no offensive words at all, then all slurs would lose their power and no one would ever be upset by them again.

EDIT: By the way, you have no idea how much this thread has made me want some Ritz cheese crackers...

 

[Therumancer]

I had this debate with two friends (one white, one black) and I guess you can determine which side backed which. On the one hand I can see where my white friend is coming from, it is often used in a pejorative sense, directed at white people. On the other hand, I don't really take it offensively (that might be cause I'm not called it much, looking more Asian than white).

Where do you stand on this? Do you stand on this? Should this be discussed or am i just wasting bytes?

Well, in the US we have a dual standard when it comes to minorities. "Cracker" is okay because it's used against the white majority. On the other hand the "N word" ( ) and calling someone a "fag" both refer to relatively small minority groups.

In general one of the reasons why I have little respect for left wingers on social issues is that they maintain a serious dual standard. If they're going to violate free speech protections and crack down on so called "hate speech" at least have the decency to do it accross the board, as opposed to just focusing on what issues they think earns them "good boy points" for protecting minorities.


That said, "Cracker" is a racial slur, but at the same time I don't think it, or any other form of "hate speech" should be banned. You have the right to hate and to express it, unless your sitting there in front of a crowd of people trying to actively incite them to on-the-spot violence, then there shouldn't be an issue.

The issue with Kobe is actually a little more complicated than what he said, and what happened as a result. Simply put the actual GOVERMENT can't do anything about it, nor should they be able to, but the NBA which is a private organization is leveling a fine, backed by the threat of denying him services (ie being unable to play and practice his trade) if he doesn't comply. I have an issue with the idea of private organizations holding more power than the goverment in cases like this. For all defenses of being able to "control what happens in your own house" I think that when the goverment was selectively limited, the way the mass media, and busines would develop was not forseen. I think that private citizens and groups should have no abillity to regulate the speech of others on anything that is publically accessible (or viewable in the case of the internet).

The sole exception to "free speech" IMO is national security.

So basically, "Cracker" is a racial slur and hate speech, but it shouldn't be banned or surpressed any more than any other term.

 

[Woodsey]

I'm white, British, heterosexual and male. Really, if you look at 'my' history, and the history of those like me, there really isn't much you can say to insult us. If you are insulted by the word 'cracker', I would call you just a tad over-sensitive.

The difference between '(whip)cracker' and '******' is that one was used until very, very recently to aid in oppressing an entire race of people. 'Cracker' is nowhere near as fresh, nor is it widespread enough - I doubt many people would even know what the word 'cracker' means these days.

Its only a racial slur if it has those connotations; 'cracker' really doesn't any more, and if you're in the same place as I am (white, British/American, straight, etc.) you really have nothing to complain about with the use of the word. Why? Because you're one of the most privileged groups on the fucking planet.

 

[TheIronRuler]

A cracker - " a baked good commonly made from grain flour dough and typically made in quantity in various hand-sized or smaller shapes".
Yeah, haven't heard of it refering to white people.

 

[Revenge Revisited]

Yeah, because we need more racial slurs right? /sarcasm

 

[rokkolpo]

I don't care much, but the first black man to call me a Cracker will be called ******.

It's as easy as ''don't do to others, what you wouldn't want anyone to do to you''.

Also ****** is just a variation of Negro, which means black.
So what is the problem again?

 

[Nuuu]

I don't think i should be offended when someone calls me a tasty, salty snack that goes well with cheese.

 

[twistedmic]

As long as the term 'Spear Chucker' is offensive to black people 'Cracker' should be offensive to white people.
And to anyone who thinks that whites have been the only race to practice slavery needs to read some history books. Slavery has been in existence practically since recorded history began. Every ancient civilization (Greeks, Romans, Egyptians etc.) from around the world practiced slavery, so did a lot of Medieval/ Dark Ages civilizations. There have even been modern civilizations (within the last five hundred years or so), besides America, that have practiced slavery.

Also, there are other countries that have prosecuted other (non-white) races. The Rwandan genocide in 1994, the whole Mogadishu incident, Saddam Hussein's reign, and Kim Jong-il are good examples.

Finally, I think any and all derogative terms used to describe a group or race of people should be treated as a racial slur, regardless of what race it is directed at and what race is using it (black people calling each other '******' for example).

 

[Bags159]

I don't take it offensively but it's kind of a double standard to allow us to be called crackers when the second we go on the offensive it's dubbed racism.

Well, that's because of, uh... slavery

So it's not racism because slavery happened? That makes a whole lot of sense. Like I said, I really don't care about people using it as an insult, I care about the hypocrisy.

 

[For.I.Am.Mad]

Nah, 'white boy' should be a slur. I've noticed white boys do not like being called white boys.

 

[Urgh76]

I thought it already was :/

 

[Zykon TheLich]

Yes, if it is used as one.