[throwanem]

A nearly year-old and fairly active user with a few thousand karma, making a point that you don't agree with via a phrase which you don't like. No doubt the black man from whom I learned it was racist. But of course it's always far easier to reflexively attempt to suppress, than to engage.

I have gathered the impression in my time here that talking about moderation actions isn't really the done thing. In any case, I see no very probable way in which doing so will add value to the discussion, so you're welcome to the last word if you feel the urge to have it.

[namecast]

I don't feel the urge at all, actually, and since you're engaging in discussion now, I'll address you:

I'm certainly willing to engage with you if you make a point that I disagree with - read this thread and my comments in it for proof of that - but that "phrase I don't like" is a racial slur, full stop, and the idea that you "learned it from a black man" fully excuses it's use in every conversation, in every venue and at any time you like going forward is, well, wrong in a way that I don't think you'd ever be able to accept.

Consider editing your initial comment, and reflect on the idea that butting into a thread with a throwaway racial slur is perhaps not the way to get people to engage with you.

[throwanem]

> that "phrase I don't like" is a racial slur

What? No, it's not. It's an intra-group epithet describing someone who is perceived to be selling out his people to an oppressor in exchange for individual privilege. It originated among black people, but the concept isn't exclusive to any one race or group of people, and "sellout" just doesn't carry the same weight of contempt.

I don't mention from whom I learned the phrase to excuse my use of it, which I see no need to excuse in any case, but rather as a less direct way of pointing out that I think you're in error to assume racism here. That you misgather the phrase to be a slur would seem to bear that out.

[namecast]

We are going to have to agree to disagree. Can I ask: would you mind walking up to a group of African Americans in your town, saying that phrase in front of them, and soliciting their take? I think you'd value their feedback more than you do mine.

[throwanem]

I love the idea you seem to have that I exist in a monocultural, monoracial vacuum. It's not impossible to live that life in Baltimore, but you sure as hell can't do it and use public transit, except maybe when the Orioles are playing at home.

And, no, I'm not going to call a black man "Uncle Tom", of course. On the one hand, as I said before, that's an intra-group term; used across boundaries - especially that boundary - in that way, it not only fails to make sense but takes on a lot of unsavory connotations that it doesn't have when used within a group. Since we here discuss a case where it is used within a group, I fail to see the relevance. And on the other hand, what sense would that even make?

As far as the value of your feedback goes, what of it has there actually been, beyond "that's bad and you shouldn't say it because I say so"? You haven't even attempted to substantiate your claim. You've just made it, repeated it, and even tried to enforce it by means of moderation. At whatever point you decide you prefer to discuss substance, I'll be happy to oblige you.

[namecast]

I will repeat:

>"I have flagged your comment for moderator review, as you are using a throwaway account and spreading racially charged rhetoric in lieu of engaging in civilized discussion". I hope that makes things clear.

You've moved on to civilized discussion - which is why I've started engaging with you - but the racial slur and your insistence that it's `totally just a prank brah context brah cmon` is precious.

You seem to understand the idea that this phrase can be used in at least some context without it being a slur, so I ask - does the above thread, where you jumped in to an existing conversation to use 'Uncle Tom' in a one-line comment lacking any substance or nuance- seem like that sort of context?

I am completely comfortable with your assessment of the value of my feedback, throwanem. (Food for thought: not all vacuums are physical. I'm sure you do, as you seem to assert, run into POC when you're on the train and the Orioles aren't playing; this doesn't have any bearing on your use of this term, or your presence or absence in a monocultural thought vacuum.)

[throwanem]

No, I'm done. I've made the points I came here to make. I get that you want to read what I wrote in a way that accords with your prejudices, and that you feel no need to defend or even explain those prejudices but just reiterate them over and over - as though that constituted honest engagement, or anything like an argument.

If you want to double down on the same tactics that just this week have failed to elect you a president, that's your lookout, not mine.