what the fuck are we supposed to call them, calling them black is racist, even though when they call us white, its fine, we still try to dull down the 'racism' by saying african american, because the majority are, now thats racist? wtf Tl;Dr what the fuck do you want us to call them then?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

What's racist about calling them black? It doesn't offend anyone, it is one syllable as opposed to 7, it doesn't make any assumptions about their culture, and we've been using it for hundreds of years. If all Black people are African-American, then all Asian people are from China.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's also a little racist to label all black people 'blacks' -- they are people, not objects. The more correct term is 'black people'.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes, it's more correct, but it's faster and nobody seems to be offended. "Am I right" is more correct than "amirite," but we still use it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Well done, thanks for stating the obvious. I didn't say that people are offended by 'blacks', only that it isn't very correct -- it's the equivalent of calling gay people 'gays', pluralising and generalising on the basis of one tiny, relatively insignificant characteristic.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Whether you say "gays" or "gay people," there is still emphasis on the tiny, relatively insignificant characteristic, compared to simply "people." You wouldn't be saying either unless it was significant at the moment.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Emphasis isn't the same as objectification.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Just because I like to communicate more efficiently doesn't mean I think gays are objects.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

There's nothing efficient about objectification of a sentence's subject.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Gay(s) -1 syllable, 3-4 letters Gay person/people -3 syllables, 9 letters + space Homosexual person/people -7 syllables, 16 letters + space Black(s) -1 syllable, 5-6 letters Black person/people -3 syllables, 11 letters + space African American person/people -9 syllables, 21 letters + 2 spaces YES it's more efficient.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Efficiency isn't the same thing as haste, and not all black people are African-American.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Exactly. Therefore it is better to call them black than to call them African American.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes, it is. But it is not better to call a group 'blacks'.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

OK, I guess that's a matter of opinion. But if you agree that calling them African American is wrong, why did you NW?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I didn't say that calling an African-American person an African-American person is wrong; however, not all black people are African-American, and there is nothing inherently racist about the phrase 'African-American'.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Of course it's OK to call them African-American if they are African-American, but it's not OK to assume that all black people are African-American, which is what the OP is saying, which you seem to agree with.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes, it is. So what is your point?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes what is? My point is, it seems like you agree with the post, but you NW'd it, and I don't understand why.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I made that pretty clear in the comment right at the top of this string of replies! Circular argument much?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Do you even know what a circular argument is? No, you did not explain why you disagreed with this post in your first comment. All you said was it was racist to say "blacks" instead of "black people."

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes I did. Maybe you should get off your high horse because you're clearly having difficulties with reading from so high up there.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Copy and paste the part where you explained.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Use your ability to read.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I did. Unfortunately, I can only read text. Also, I can only read text written in English (or occasionally French). Another limitation is that I can only read text that was actually written. I cannot read your mind. Your first comment in this thread was "It's also a little racist to label all black people 'blacks' -- they are people, not objects. The more correct term is 'black people'." That does not explain why this post is wrong. "Well done, thanks for stating the obvious. I didn't say that people are offended by 'blacks', only that it isn't very correct -- it's the equivalent of calling gay people 'gays', pluralising and generalising on the basis of one tiny, relatively insignificant characteristic." That does not explan why this post is wrong. "Emphasis isn't the same as objectification." That does not explain why this post is wrong. Now, if your ability to read is far superior to mine, then would you be so kind as to tell me when you did explain why this post is wrong?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You copied and pasted my reasoning, so you must just be a bit thick. I have, therefore, come to the conclusion that efforts of paraphrasing would be lost on you.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Nothing you said suggested that calling people African-American when they're not is acceptable. You seem to think otherwise. I have, therefore, come to the conclusion that you are either dyslexic, hallucinating, or just really stupid.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Trying to be a condescending dickhead doesn't make you correct. You seem to be mixing up a number of points to form one that wasn't ever made, and then you're trying to prove that I didn't say something in support of this new fictitious point of yours. You're trying to fight a point that, quite frankly, you're failing to make. Just give it up already. I made the comment I wanted to make several days ago, and I must have made it effectively enough because other people have +1'd it since then, so I'm done here.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If it doesn't make you correct, then why did you do it? "...you must just be a bit thick. I have, therefore, come to the conclusion that efforts of paraphrasing would be lost on you." Yeah. Totally not condescending. Other people have +1'd my comments too, in case you didn't notice. You seem to agree with this post completely, and yet you voted No Way. Contrary to your delusions, you never explained why. You said "It's ALSO a little racist to..." Also. That means you think that the post is true, AND what you're saying is also true. Amirite has everything we say on record, and that record is clearly visible and legible. You can't lie to me about what you said and expect me to believe you.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Oh no, not on record! If only I hadn't made public comments in a public forum. Now I'll never be able to sleep at night... My use of the word 'also', which wasn't written in caps for added emphasis -- or at all -- you are taking out of context and choosing to interpret in such a way that supports your argument that I agree with the original post 100%. Stop taking things out of context; you're just being plain retarded and it isn't helping you prove any point. My point has nothing to do with the fact that your comments have been +1'd; the fact that mine have been would suggest that people understood what I wrote and the point I was trying to make. My 'condescending' comment was made after a long, lengthy, and pointless attempt to divert your attention to that which you seem still to be completely oblivious to, and after your attempts at dickheadishness and condescension at me. Let the matter drop and move on with life! I happily made my point days ago, as I already said, while you're just getting nowhere.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

OK, I give up. If you really have no idea what you yourself said, and you lack the ability to scroll up and read, then that's fine by me. However, I have nothing else to do, so I will make one last attempt to get through to you. You say I misinterpreted the word "also." If you look it up in the dictionary, you will see there is only one definition. It was placed in a location that could only mean you agree with the post. "I didn't say that calling an African-American person an African-American person is wrong; however, not all black people are African-American..." You seem to believe it is wrong to assume that all black people are African-American. This post is saying it is wrong to assume that all black people are African-American. You disagree with this post. does not compute What's possibly even more interesting is that you claim that was somehow your first time being condescending, whereas I have apparently been condescending the whole time. Normally I'm arguing to convince people to agree/disagree with a post. Now, you clearly do agree with the post, but you're NW'ing anyway. Since you already made points about why you agree, why don't you tell us why you disgree?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Just lol. I just can't be bothered trying to explain myself to one person when the course of my life doesn't actually depend on my success; this is too insignificant for me to actually spend any meaningful amount of time on arguing. Other people have understood what I meant, so you're the only person who's not interpreted my words in the way they were intended as far as I am aware.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If you actually believe this post is wrong, then doesn't it annoy you that it has a positive score? All these people who YYA'd it are idiots, and it is your duty to educate them by explaining why this post is wrong. Maybe then this post will get the negative score it deserves. Also, when you go against popular opinion you should try to justify your answer so you don't look like an idiot. And please stop denying your own comments; it's not like you're fooling anyone. Yes, other people did understand what you meant. I upvoted your comment too at first. So? Your comment didn't have anything to do with whether or not this post is correct.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No, it annoys me that you think I'm actually that bothered about this.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Still, just saying this post is wrong without explaining is sort of stupid. The post includes an argument for the affirmative, so it is your turn to give a rebuttal. If you don't, then the post will continue to be right, and you will continue to be wrong. You don't seem like the kind of person who likes being wrong. Pretending you did explain when we can clearly see you didn't is also stupid. Claiming you are right because of a positive score on an unrelated comment is quite stupid as well. So far you've done 3 stupid things. I strongly reccomend you correct them. BTW I lied about the whole giving up thing. I have nothing better to do with my time.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

What I'm not is the sort of person who cares this much! I have explained myself adequately enough, and you don't even know me so just give it a rest already and stop trying to make judgements about the sort of person I am based on the few contributions I've made to this - of all websites. Also, you're twisting truths again; I haven't said that I was right because of supporting clicks; I said that other people have understood what I have said. I strongly recommend you do something productive with your life, instead of popping up notifications I don't care for every time I follow a link through to this website.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How many people will die if you just tell me why you think this post is wrong? Right now I have no idea how this post could be wrong, and I'm curious about your opinion. You never said it made you right, but you implied it. The only other possibility is that you were just being random. So it's bad if I assume you don't like being wrong? Does that mean you DO like being wrong? If you do, then that explains why you NW'd it. However, I don't think you would be on this website called "amirite?" just to pointlessly be wrong, especially since your profile says we usually vote the same way. If you really don't care about this, then you can just delete the notification.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I didn't imply anything; that's a conclusion you've come to by yourself. You have demonstrated a clear inability to understand me, so just go away and stop trying to provoke me. Your attempts to elicit the response you want have all failed.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

In the context in which you used it, you made it clear that you were trying to prove that I am stupid, and the only way you could do that is by proving you were right. If that sentence wasn't there to prove that, it shouldn't have been there at all. I asked you a simple question, and you have wasted all this time refusing to answer. I really am curious about why you think this post is wrong. You believe that so strongly, yet you won't explain why. The whole point of this website is to debate, discuss, and disagree on things. You seem to be hellbent on making sure you don't do that. I'm not trying to provoke you. If you really don't have a reason for disagreeing with this post, then stop wasting both our time by replying, and just leave.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I thought the point of this website was to have fun. You're making this into something serious by continuing this unnecessary diatribe. My initial post was sufficiently fit for purpose, and so I refuse to waste my time paraphrasing or breaking it down into its constituent elements just so you have a better grasp of what was a simple passing comment that was already accessible enough for public consumption. Also, your comments regarding how I 'waste' my time are not needed. However, you have repeatedly tried to make the point that I have either no reasoning or no substance, and I have replied each time with words to the effect of those above. I am not here to engage in hardcore political discussion, teaching, or anything in between, but I get the impression that you might be the sort of person who just needs closure right now. I won't give that to you. You have patronised and insulted me with ridiculous comments about me that have no real basis, and failed to understand a minor point I made days ago - which in itself suggests you have only a superficial command of the English language. Don't tell me to leave; I peruse this website at my own choosing, and not when it suits you.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm not trying to make a point, you imbecile. I'm trying to get you to make a point. I did understand that point, as I have tried to explain to you first by upvoting it, then by stating it in plain English. In case you haven't noticed, this current argument has nothing to do with that point. "...you have only a superficial command of the English language." "You have patronised and insulted me with ridiculous comments..." Being a hypocrite does not help make your point. In fact, it just lowers my opinion of you. If you enjoy this thread enough to continue, then don't criticize me for continuing it. Anyway, you win. I realize too late that if you had the intelligence to come up with a good reason for NW'ing, you would have the intelligence to have done that the first time I asked, 2 weeks ago. The description of this site is "Post opinions and see if other people agree." Since explaining your opinions to others is apparently disgusting to you, there is no reason for you to be on this website and no reason for me (or anyone else) to reply to you. This is your last chance to prove me wrong.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

And again, throwing insults because you still don't understand. I'm not here to explain my easy-to-understand comments to you, and I'm not here to prove you wrong, so carry on with your life and your lowered opinion of me. Also, don't be the dickhead who quotes people's comments out of context.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't see how ""...you have only a superficial command of the English language" could mean anything other than what it looks like. If I really am wrong, then explain it to me, because just saying "You're wrong because I SAID SO!" makes you look stupid. I am ASKING you to prove me wrong. At this stage I might not even rebuttal to your argument. Just give me one!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Maybe because it was preceded by the words, "You have patronised and insulted me with ridiculous comments about me that have no real basis, and failed to understand a minor point I made days ago - which in itself suggests" - I'd say that was looking pretty out of context as an isolated comment. Let's not get all dickheadish and get all "oh you can explain that so why not the pertinent point that you already explained quite adequately in the initial post and your correspondence, but I'm too pre-occupied with being an ass to actually digest what you said so I'm going to continue pestering you for a real response and, until you do, I'm going to hurl insults and diatribes at you to try and fool you into thinking you need to prove me wrong because reverse psychology totally works", now.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I now officially give up. There are so many things wrong with that comment, but I will resist the urge to tell you just how stupid you are. I'm just going to say, if you're not comfortable with sharing your opinion, a) You should probably stop using this site. b) Don't try to convince me that you already did. If saying something repeatedly made it true, then I would be an omnipotent multitrillionaire and you would be dead. c) Be warned that it makes you seem stupid if you can't back up your opinion. I am now ending the argument. Do not reply.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Med students ain't stupid. Just sayin'. And you kinda did just tell me how stupid YOU THINK I am - it's an opinion, and it will do you good to be reminded of the fact that it is an opinion. I also get the impression that you're kinda elitist and that you get a bit pissed off when other people are right about something and you can't see why. I'm not trying to rub you up the wrong way; I'm just stating facts.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You are not "right about something" yet. That is currently up for debate. In order to win a debate, you have to make an argument. You have been refusing to do that this entire time. You're saying your correctness is a fact when it's barely even a hypothesis. In order to be a fact, it must first be a theory, meaning there must be supporting evidence. Going to medical school, while meaning you have good grades, doesn't make you right about everything by default. Saying you are is stupid. A person who does stupid things regularly is stupid. I have no evidence of whether or not you do this regularly, so I'm drawing a conclusion based on what information I do have.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I didn't claim to be right about anything, and I also didn't say that anybody's correctness was a fact. Again, you're taking my comments out of context; what I said was a fact was that I hold the opinion I stated. I also didn't say that being a med student means I am right about everything by default - the fact that I'm a student is pretty much a declaration that I know relatively little in comparison to my lecturers, who themselves are experts in their fields. If you go back to the beginning of this stupidly unnecessary argument, you'll see that I tried to make a point numerous times because you didn't seem to be taking it on board. So, here in this one reply, I have inadvertently provided evidence to support my claims that you: * indeed only have a superficial grasp of the English language, rather than a more intimate/technical understanding of it * have failed, repeatedly, to understand what I have stated - again in plain English * keep throwing unnecessary insults at me that have no real basis - how pre-pubescent of you I think my only fault here is that I've allowed myself to continue this pointless exchange - there are heaps better ways I could be procrastinating.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

We could have ended it. By definition, you believe you are correct. By voting on this post, and claiming there was a reason for doing so, you said you were right about this post being wrong. Also, saying I get pissed off when other people are right is illogical unless you have evidence of it. I suppose I could sound pissed off, but that would only be relevant if you were right. You said med school meant you weren't stupid. What you just said proved nothing of the sort. It's almost funny when you call me condescending, or when you say I like to throw unnecessary insults, after you insult me like that. Unless you speak some completely different language which is also called English, which looks very similar to English, the point you were trying to make was about the implied objectification when saying "blacks" instead of "black people." I don't agree with this, but I do understand it. Your opinion on that point is not connected to your opinion on this post.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I must disagree with that last bit. Your other faults are: -you believe that if you continue to insist that you said something in one of your earlier comments, and you ignore when I remind you how wrong you are, then eventually I will believe you. -you think that saying I can't read is somehow acceptable if it is preceeded by hypocrisy. -you probably thought to yourself "Holy shit, this kid can spell hypocrisy? Did you get your mother to help you with that?" or something along those lines. -you at least pretend to think that saying "It's also a little racist to label all black people 'blacks' -- they are people, not objects. The more correct term is 'black people'," means the same thing as "No, calling them African-American isn't racist at all, because..." -you could have started a short, somewhat respectable debate about the post. Instead you chose to start a 2-week-long, pointless argument about whether or not you said something that would be clearly visible on this site if you did. -you like to criticize me for insulting you, then immediately say something extremely insulting about me. You see nothing wrong with this. -you seem to have no understanding of anything you say.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I actually didn't read any of that because, as I keep telling you, I don't actually care. As I've also told you, I have no urge to prove you wrong (again), and I'll quite happily continue with life without this playing on my mind. I also won't be losing any sleep over this. In fact, I am going to go to sleep right now - got to pretend to be a doctor again tomorrow! Maybe you should get an impartial third party to read over all of this. Someone who cares enough to want to explain the intricacies of whatever it was I said that you decided was so wrong that you needed to protest against. I expect you'd have to pay them, though.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

So basically: -you're continuing this thread even though you claim you don't care -you're making up stuff that I said too (I never said you were losing sleep) -you think asking a question is the same as protesting -you think that if nobody can understand what you're saying except you, that makes you smart BTW, I'm not going to leave until I have either the satisfaction of the last word or an answer to my question. Every time you reply without telling me why you think this post is wrong, I will reply.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

So you do need closure. And you're making up more things - when did I say that you said I was losing sleep? I didn't. What I said was that I wouldn't be losing any sleep over this. Just accept your flaws - you are making them apparent enough. And, as I have said before (notice how I say that a lot? It's because I have to repeat things to you a lot...), this is procrastinatory in nature and nothing more. Don't think you're getting a rise out of me because this is nothing more than a blip on my radar. Are you this much of a dickhead with people who would actually need to exercise restraint if the desire to punch you in the face should overwhelm them?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

-By saying you weren't losing sleep over it, you implied that I said you were. There is no other reason for your unconsiousness to be relevant to this. Since I never said that, there is no reason at all. -So, my flaws are apparent, but you don't have any flaws, right? -Getting a rise out of you? What the fuck is that supposed to mean? -What was that last sentence about? My inability to exercise restraint will only affect you if you continue to reply. I like to continue my arguments until they are finished, and I like to be the one to finish them, an addiction which you claim to lack. You could have ended this a long time ago if you wanted. There are so many better ways to procrastinate.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Don't think I come on this website solely to reply to your messages. They just happen to be there. Firstly, get the fuck over yourself. Secondly, get the fuck over your need to have the last word. Thirdly, what you failed to understand that time was an idiom - Google is your friend. Fourthly, I didn't say I've no flaws. Fifthly, I didn't imply anything. If I wanted to say something, I wouldn't hide it behind a flowery sugar-coated implication. Sixthly, I don't care for your inability to exercise restraint - you've clearly misread yet another sentence. Now, if you really want to have the last word, make it a notable one and at least have some ground to stand on when you're trying to make it; so far, you've said you'll end this a number of times and you've tried to suggest that I'm in the wrong when, in actuality, you've just failed to understand points I've reiterated more times than Jesus wept.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Running out of ways to fail?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm done repeating myself for you. You just keep saying the same thing to me, and I just keep replying with the same response. There is nothing more to be said.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That's because you're not understanding what I'm saying, otherwise you wouldn't be feeling the need to reiterate something that's already been shot down. If you're done here, go be a dickhead on other amirite posts.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Allow me to correct myself: There is nothing more to be said except the answer to my question. From now on, whenever you comment, I will scan it for things like "The answer to your question is..." or "I disagree with this post because..." or "It is not racist to call black people African-American because..." If I see something like that, I will read your answer and if it even appears to be a good reason, I will leave. If I do not, I will reply with a facepalm. Starting now.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Autistic? The annoying pedant nobody can stand? Friendless? Are you still in high school? Are you like 12 years old or something? I have to wonder. Is this an attitude you would have in a situation that wasn't entirely online and anonymous? Are you this ridiculous-looking thing from the ACT? http://steamcommunity.com/id/personthingy

by Anonymous 12 years ago

by Anonymous 12 years ago

BTW I changed my mind. I can't stand reading anything you write, so now I'm only checking the top of the comment for an answer. Of course, you're not intelligent enough to even have an answer, so it doesn't really matter, but I just thought you should know. BTW I have never heard of that website before, nor am I 12 years old. And no, if this were a real conversation I would have the willpower to walk away and leave you to your stupidity. Also, I wouldn't be talking to someone who was incapable of answering a simple question.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You're completely ignoring the fact that you've not been able to understand the point you keep asking/telling me to make. Every response you've made has made it plainly obvious that you've misunderstood something, and that you interpret everything very literally. I'm gonna go with autistic.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Autistic until proven otherwise.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You must be so proud of what you're doing with your life right now. Or is this the only distraction from how pathetic it is?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm bored, so I'm going to make a list of things you should know when you're on this site: -"In general, an opinion is a subjective belief, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion) Every opinion is supported by facts or beliefs. If it's not supported, it's not an opinion. This is an opinion-based website, so you should be able to support everything you say. -Everyone on this site can read and write in English. You're not going to convince anyone that what you said means something completely different from what it looks like. -Ad hominem arguments are only useful when they're clever. Your comments should be based on supporting evidence, not insults. -If you're going to be an ass, don't be surprised when your opponents return the favour. -After your arguments have been refuted, don't continue to regurgitate the invalid arguments. It gets boring. -After you've read every post on the homepage, you can read the "Just in" section, or read random or top posts. There are so many better ways to waste time on this site than to argue a hopeless point against me.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's only hopeless because you're too autistic to be able to interpret it the way it was intended - that rigid thinking of yours is not allowing you to see what everyone else can see.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Just so you know, you are not everyone else. I hope one day you become more like everyone else, but you have work to do.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I wasn't referring to myself; scroll back up to the top, and re-acquaint yourself with those supporting +1s. Then consult a dictionary, just to remind yourself of 'hyperbole'. And then stop being a patronising prick; I'm fine enough, thank you very much. I have friends, I function pretty well in society, and I am very happy with where I am in life right now - no adjustments needed. You, on the other hand - if this performance is anything to go by... Well, let's not waste words on stating the obvious.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Alright, fuck you, I can't resist replying to something so stupid. The supporting +1s were for the point that you made, not the imaginary point to which you are referring. The first comment you made wasn't saying at all that "African-American" is an acceptable term for black people. I already tried to explain this to you multiple times (even though you're the one who said it, and you should now what it means), and it didn't work. I don't know why I bother. From now on, please start all your comments with "DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS" just to remind me not to reply.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Apologies for this late non-reply; I've been busy having a life.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I thought it was nigga.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Since when did 'nigga' convey plurality? Retard.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Since when did people start taking obviously sarcastic stuff like that serious? Retard.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Since when did people start thinking that the word 'nigga' was socially acceptable? Deluded narrow-minded retard.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Obviously it's not. That's what makes it a sarcastic remark. I'm trying to keep my words simple because you can't seem to grasp the concept of thinking.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Sure, of course not, which is why my first reply to this amirite was actually original, whereas yours was just generic tripe. Aww, you're such a try-hard!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yeah, that's not funny.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It wasn't meant to be funny. It was meant to offend people that take stuff to serious....it worked.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How sad the reaction troll.... Streaking past his little bridge to see what others will do.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

lolz. And yet...it's still working. Even while you're calling me out you're still feeding me all those delicious potatoes. You probably don't understand because you're a woman.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

See. You're learning. You didn't react. :) And people say you can't teach an old bitch new tricks.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

And what do you do with your life that's actually worthy of calling a vocation? Or is trolling all you've been able to achieve up to now?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Seriously? It's a generic term not meant to be racist. This is going way overboard on political correctness. I've never met a black person who got offended I called them black, nor got offended if i called them african american. How about we stop overthinking stuff that's not even an issue.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't like being called African American because I'm not African....

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Racism is defined as hatred of another race. Calling a black person that is not from America an African American in no way reflects hatred. Just stupidity. Stop misusing the word racist.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

In England, we find it really weird and unnecessary that Americans have to say African American.. do people really get offended when you say black?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Americans don't have to say African American, most of us just say black.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You don't have to be from Africa to be called African American, you just have to have African heritage.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That's pretty stupid. Then shouldn't everyone be called African American because that is, supposedly, where all life started?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Actually, what you're saying is pretty stupid. Why would we trace our heritage back that far when it really doesn't apply to us today at all? Sure, the origin of the human race was most likely in Africa, but that really doesn't have anything to do with my close ancestry whatsoever. It would be ridiculous to make no distinction between each person's lineage simply because we all technically came from the same source a very, very long time ago. We're also all technically very distantly related. Does that mean we should all have the same last name?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Well if it's stupid because I'm taking it back too far how far is appropriate, all knowing one, since everything you say is right and better than what I have to say.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Did I ever say that? You're the one who called my comment stupid first. And we should trace it as far back as our own unique family history can go. But there's no way we can possibly trace it further back than a few centuries, at most. It just becomes too murky. My point is simply that, yes, life had to start somewhere, but at some point we evolved into our own individual families with our own heritages.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

And I stated that everyone has African ancestors making it unfair to call those with the darker skin tones that live in America African American.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Why is that unfair if it's the truth? There's nothing wrong with saying someone is African American. Also, you can be African American and have light-colored skin.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No one in my family is from Africa and yet I am called African American, if anything I'm more white than I am African. Also I never said people that are blacker than tar I said darker skin tones as in darker than fair-skinned people.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No one in your close family has to be from Africa to be called African American. This was my exact point, but you don't seem to understand it. African American means of African descent, not from Africa. If you're black, then your ancestors came from Africa. None of my relatives that I have ever known came over from Ireland or Germany, but that doesn't take away from the fact that I'm of Irish and German descent. And actually, you can be fair-skinned and from Africa. Ever head of South Africa?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I understand what African American means, genius, and once again I NEVER SAID that all people from Africa are blacker than black, it's obvious that you can't read because I have stated that more than once. And no one knows of their African ancestry, but everyone in America is still technically African American.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You obviously aren't the most observant or else you would realize that I can read; otherwise, I wouldn't be able to respond to your comments. And I understand that you never said everyone from Africa is blacker than black, but you did say that people from Africa are darker than fair-skinned, which isn't always true. Sorry if you have short term memory loss or can't make the simple effort of re-reading your comments. Also, some people can trace their recent ancestry to Africa, even if you can't. And like I said, it's just beyond stupid for every person to trace their ancestry all the way back to the source of human life. It's completely nonsensical, and can't really even be done with any degree of certainty.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I like being called black instead of African American, we as people catergories alot of races.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

http://amirite.net/598959 This is kinda a repost, but I do agree with you.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't mind being called either one. I know that my great great grandparents were slaves, but in the mix they married Native Americans, Scottish people, and Chinese people..so technically I have all that too.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

To be african american I feel like you actually have to have experienced your african heritage, or like you immigrated from africa directly. I'm asian, but I was born and raised here and I'm completely westernized. You don't see me going around calling myself an asian-american. I'm just american. Same with african americans, if they were born and raised here and english is their first language, and their ancestors were black, then they're just as american as I am, and they're about as african as I am asian.

by Anonymous 12 years ago