Well, technically speaking, children are apes, not monkeys...

Oh I can certainly see how.

Deliberately.



So, when Danes chide their own children for acting like 'little monkeys' (in Danish by the way), then we're actually being racists?



Such as refering to people as colours for example, which you just did yourself. Does that make what you wrote racist?

Language doesn't belong to etymology. People use words to describe what they're thinking and they don't care about the real meanings of the words they use. You can call your best friend 'fool' because you like him.

Touche

Not necessarily. Look the woman was fined. Why assume the judge was a complete idiot or complicit? Perhaps there is more to the situation than meets the eye.

All I'm saying is that we can't entirely discount the possibility of a racial motive.

We can assess probability, that's all. The certainty displayed in this thread is a product of emotion

Do you believe these comments were racist?

No, I don't. I remember a delineation of the ages of kids this way, and it had nothing to do with race:

Rug rats
Curtain climbers
Yard apes
J.D.J.G. (juvenile delinquents, junior grade)

...and so on and so forth.

I have referred to children as climbing or acting like monkeys, and they were white like me. Big (pardon the pun) Hairy Deal.

Just because it used to be believed by ignorant people that the darker-skinned races were closer on the evolutionary scale to apes doesn't mean that a women trying to get kids out of a tree had that on her mind, especially if she is supporting an African American candidate for President. It doesn't make sense, especially if her name is Ramirez (a name from darker-skinned people). Add to that the "-ski" name--anyone ever hear of Polish jokes?

Let's carry it a little further. Why is the Archbishop of Canterbury called the "Primate"? Geez, must be some racism there...

It's not like the campaigns come with those little paper rings like you would find on toilet seats in motel rooms, "Sanitized for Your Protection." Nor should they.

But it would be nice if those introducing Senator McCain did not make oblique references to Obama like, "Tiger Woods" as one uber-patriotic functionary did the other day when introducing McCain to some pro-war veterans organization.

Do you think it was the correct decision for the Obama campaign to ask her to step down as a delegate?

No way. If Obama's campaign is going to spend its time always dealing with every little thing that might not be construed as "PC", how are they going to have time to deal with anything else? They need to be bigger than that.

If you're listening for something to sound racist, eventually you're going to hear it, because you've set yourself up with that expectation. It doesn't mean it was intended that way.

Now if staffers or delegates start talking about "Aunt Jemimas" and "Uncle Bens", that's the time to worry.

In the meantime, I'm for Hillary Clinton for as long as she is running. If it doesn't work out for her, I'll be for Obama.

Very well.

Is it more probable that one of Barack Obama's people is a racist because she refered to some dark skinned children up a tree as monkeys?

Or, is it more probable that the mother of the afore mentioned 'monkey children' was looking for a way to get back at some one who had bruised her maternal ego?

My guess is the latter, same as yours. I don't blame people for coming to that conclusion. I just thought all the hand wringing about political correctness was melodramatic.

She was ticketed - it's a $75 ticket. There was no judge involved. She was ticketed because she "disturbed" the other woman. This has not been brought before a judge yet.

Now it seems that she will not be stepping down as a delegate.

Link.

Well, I'll be a monkey's uncle!

No one has mentioned this, so I will. There is no excuse for this woman being given a ticket for calling some tree-climbing kids, "monkeys". This is not a "fighting word" and we still have a first amendment.

It appears, quick, that Ramirez Sliwinski is fighting the ticket through the courts. Isn't that where people go when they think their constitutional rights have been violated?.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/c...,0,568283.story

Yes. But, imagine how you'd feel if you were going to have to hire an atty at considerable expense and waste lots of your time because someone thought you shouldn't call a kid climbing a tree a monkey. Pitiful.

And I realize that some might think this is nitpicking, but she did not call these kids monkeys. She likened their climbing to the climbing of monkeys. "Climbing like monkeys."

It does make a huge difference regarding possible interpretation.

Tough! That's how the system works. You haven't seemed much like a system bucker in your previous posts.

I think, though, that she'll probably beat the rap.

I am speechless. Unless I'm misinterpreting a lot of you, many of you are saying that black people shouldn't take offense if they are called monkeys becuase everyone gets called monkeys. What kind of logic is that? How can you not appreciate that other people may take words (even words you deem innocent) in a very different fashion then you becuase of how those words have been used in the past against their people. Seems to me like many of you are saying "Yes black people were called monkeys out of hate and racism; but that was a long time ago move on." As I've said before what she said was not in of itself racist. Neither was how she said it. At worst it is insensitive; but to say that the family had no right to be angry seems asinine to me.

So, what are you suggesting? that no one should ever speak with any one darker in skin tone than themselves, lest they some how use a word which might be interpreted as an obscure racial slur?


edited to add

Is it okay to tell African American children to stop 'clowning around'? I mean, wouldn't that also imply there was something wrong with them?

Well, being that what she said wasn't in and of itself racist and neither was how she said it... then how does that family have any right to be angry? She didn't call those kids monkeys.

I noticed that your location is Denmark. I am curious if you've ever lived in America? If not I could understand your attitude becuase outside looking in it would seem this isn't a big issue. And of all the racial slurs thrown at African Americans monkey isn't the worst one ever. But it was a racial slur and its still used in some places (especially the South) to degrade African Americans. I'm not suggesting we should limit who we talk to I'm saying we should look at both sides of the story instead of just saying the family had no right to be angry.



Well, being that what she said wasn't in and of itself racist and neither was how she said it... then how does that family have any right to be angry? She didn't call those kids monkeys.

No she didn't call them monkeys; but thats almost a matter of semantics. If I said "you shouldn't act like an insensitive close minded neo-con" then by your logic you shouldn't get mad becuase I never called you that I said don't act like it. In order to see how they could be mad you have to (and this seems hard for some of you) take a walk in their shoes. This woman comes yells at your kids and tells them to not act like monkeys. Monkey an animal your people have been compared to to say you don't have intelligence. Monkey a word used to say that your people aren't as evolved as other humans. Monkey the same word used by people of authority to oppress your culture. You think you are living the American dream white picket fence house in the 'burbs and someone comes along and says your kids are acting like monkeys. In their mind that phrase may have just confirmed their worst fear. That no matter what they do, how far they climb the social ladder, they won't be seen as Americans; but as the Black family down the street. So as I've said they may have flown off the handle with their response; but considering the racism African Americans have suffered through since the founding of this country I'd the family was entitled to it.

Just because the phrase can be a slur doesn't mean it was intended to insult.


You're the one injecting semantics, TFL. Do you have evidence the phrase's origin is racist? The phrase 'playing in the trees like monkeys' isn't specific to blacks. The phrase only has one context and it appears everyone, regardless of race, uses it to describe children. Why should we make an exception for black kids?

She didn't say "acting like monkeys" either. She said they were climbing like monkeys. The climbing is what was being described as monkey-like.

This isn't simply a matter of semantics. This is a very common simile used to describe an action and not an individual.

TFL, your last couple of posts put into focus something that definitely does escape us white people. You can be offended by something said that was not meant to be offensive. The way you explained it makes it sort of understandable, even though I can't think of any racial slur that I myself would take offense at. I don't know if that comes from being part of the majority, or if I just have thick skin, or because I haven't heard a lot of anti-German or anti-Swedish slurs thrown around.

But even if we can understand where you are coming from, then what? Somebody has to give for everyone to move past this uncomfortable stage we are at. Should white people continue to walk on eggshells when we talk to black people for the next couple of hundred years, and watch everything we say, even if the cost is real communication? Or should black people resolve to lower their sensitivity level in cases like this one? Is that even possible?

I hate walking on eggshells, and I don't think that's the answer. Every time I'm talking to a black person, or even within earshot of one, everything that comes out of my mouth goes through the filter. And it's not that I would normally be spewing out racist comments or anything - it's just a little thing in the back of my head that doublechecks the words, often making them a little less interesting, a little less descriptive, a little less communicative. As long as that fear of offending is there, communication will be a little stifled. And there will always be that difference in talking with a black friend as opposed to a white one.

Feel like I'm spinning my wheels here. I can't believe some of you are really that dense. John seems to be the only one to understand what I'm saying. What she said is not racist. I've said this in every post. You want evidence that the comparing black people isn't or hasn't been used by racists? That is just ignorant. I'm all for debate; but some of you act as if you have to win. As if by even conceding a little you some how lose. How can you honestly say that calling black people monkeys hasn't been used and isn't still used in a racist way? You want proof or it didn't happen? What do you think a bunch of us African Americans got together and decided to come up with phrases we were going to say were racist against us? Its like you guys have your feet trenched in and are on repeat. I'm not saying walk on eggshells around black people with what you say. I'm saying have an appreciation (in this matter) for why the parents may have been offended even if you disagree with them. I'm saying look at it from their perspective have and say "Yea I guess that could have been offensive." Instead I hear "Everyone is compared to monkeys as kids its just part of growing up." Have a little empathy. I'd like to think you don't have to be a victim of racism to feel or understand that pain. Part of growing up includes learning about your heritage and how you got where you are. And in learning about your past you learn the good, the bad, and the ugly. So I'm going to say it again for the last time and be as clear as I can be.
1) What she said was not racist.
2) She should not have been asked to leave the campaign.
3) I can understand and appreciate why they made the decision that her being there may be a liability.
4) While I disagree with the family I can appreciate why they would consider her words negatively.
That being said I've gotta walk away from this particular debate before I say something I might regret.

You also said it was asinine to believe that this family did not have the right to be angry at this woman for her comment, which you clearly state was not racist. So, I will ask you again... why would this family have the right to be angry if the comment was clearly not racist? Why is it asinine to say that family had no right to be angry? You also said that despite the fact that the comment was not racist, you say that this family was entitled to fly off the handle because of the suffering African-Americans have had to endure since the founding of this country. Why?

Then perhaps Obama should see the error of his campaign's ways, and ask her back. That is within his power, and if he doesn't do that it means that he is hyper sensitive, or at the very least, condones hypersensitivity and the misactions it can lead to.

She's not stepping down as a delegate.

I know I said I'm done but this is my last say on the topic. Ent you are intentionally being close minded here. Was it racist no. That is my opinion. The opinion of the family is that it was racist. Difference between you and me is I can look at this incident from their side and see how they can take it as a racist statement. You refuse to see it from their side. It is asinine to say someone doesn't have a right to be offended because you don't think what happened to them is offensive. Ent you don't get to decide what another culture takes as offensive and what they don't. All I was trying to do was to explain to a group of people that don't understand the problem with the terminology why it would/could be offensive. From the continuing debate on this subject (one which has gone off topic) it is clear that the problem is not that some don't understand its that they refuse to understand. You are looking at a statement and saying since its not a racist statement (in your opinion) here it can't be a racist statement at anytime anywhere. At the end of the day the family saw it as a racist statement so they reacted as such. They had every right to be angry if they though their kids were being verbally or emotionally assaulted.

Furthermore calling the police is not flying off the handle. I wouldn't have used the phrase if I'd known it was going to be taken so literally.

Turnea

TinFoilLiberal makes my point clear as day:

See what I mean. Deliberately.

No racial offence is meant, but offence is taken regardless. Thats a deliberate ploy to use race in order to play the victim.


True, but there is such a thing as over reacting, and no one is innocent of that.


So, you place yourself at the mercy of strangers who may call you out on anything you say, no matter the context, and brand you racist. Congratulations.

What gets me, Tin, is that you are changing the statement in order to make it seem reasonable for someone to perceive it as racist. Now, you haven't said that this is what the family did in their minds. You have simply changed the statement and said you can understand how they could see that statement as racist. Well, it's not the same statement. She did not call them monkeys, she did not say they were acting like monkeys. And if, in their mind, they changed the statement such that they perceived it to be racist, I understand that, but that is their issue and not this woman's. So, they had absolutely no right to be angry with her. Their misperception of a common, innocuous simile as a racist slur is their responsibility. The problem I have is that you are saying that they bear no responsibility... you are saying they had a right to be angry at someone else over their misperception because of history and that's a cop out. The only way that I could see that they have a right to be angry is if the statement was actually racist. If this woman had innocently called them monkeys, I'd understand, because then it would be a case of the woman being ignorant of her use of a racial slur - her responsibility even if she didn't mean it to be racist. But that isn't what happened here.



Excuse me? Calling the police because some woman said your kids were climbing trees like monkeys is not flying off the handle?? And I didn't take it literally... I didn't believe that you meant that the family was standing on a handle, sprouted wings and took off...

So if she told the neighbor that she took a pedagogical approach to raising children, and they misinterpreted it to mean she was telling them she was a child molester, should that warrant a ticket and an invitation to leave the Obama campaign too? No one likes a child molester....

The family has every right to be angry, if the choose to be. What is ridiculous is that the "thought police" chose to issue her a disorderly conduct citation for using using a culturally transcendent simile.

If kids are climbing trees, they can be called monkeys. The analogy fits, regardless of skin color. People need to lighten up.

I understand the Obama campaign's take on it, but I'm glad that sanity prevailed regarding her delegate status.

Brilliant! Although I suspect you just set race relations back 200 years.

...but is this example typical?

I mean I seriously doubt most black parents would call the police about something like this.

I don't think "people" need to lighten up. More like this one person needs to lighten up.

If you mean the mother of one of the children, I agree.

If she contests the ticket, the Rainbow PUSH Coalition has said it will get involved... so it's not just one person that needs to lighten up.

Trustee Never Intended to Step Down:

You mean the president of one chapter of the Rainbow PUSH coalition has implied he may get involved.

Not exactly the same thing.

According to this article what the lady said was not racist if this statement is a true quote:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080408/ap_on_...elegate_resigns

She was speaking to the father of the children and not the children and was simply using common language to describe the children's actions. To me it would be similar to watching children running away from a garden hose and saying they scurried away like mice or a mom saying my two year old is acting like a little monster when he doesn't get his way. If the woman had screamed to the children calling them monkeys and asked them are you little monkeys being raised by wolves or what then perhaps the parent should have taken it the way this parent apparently took it.

Yes, the woman, Georgia Lockett, who called the police has "vowed" to get them involved - and she is a member of the organization... the president of the that chapter has made comments in support of her position.

I just found this article that seems to change things a little
http://www.examiner.com/a-1330145~Obama_De...es_to_Stay.html

Quick said:

I lol'd.

Entspeak said:

That's racist.

You know, a lot of black people, back in the day, had to work manual labor in the fields with shovels. "Flying off the handle" could be a description of a slaveowner losing his temper, and physically pushing a black slave backwards while he was holding a shovel, hence the poor guy would be literally "flying off the handle" as he was pushed to the ground. That's violent, racist and oppressing, and anyone who uses that term needs to be punished.

I see Tin's point of view, but really, couldn't ANYTHING be made to be racist?

Are we going to make laws regarding "what is", or are we going to make laws regarding "what people feel"?

I'd say people need to get thicker skin, but then I might be shown a boardroom chart, complete with dry erase markers, of how melanon in human flesh actually decreases the thickness of skin, thereby, I'd be suggesting for people to "get whiter", which of course, suggests racial supremacy not in favor of black people, and then "it is suggested" that I am either racist, or insensitive.

And that's a great lesson to teach those kids climbing the trees. They learned that you can climb the neighbors trees, and in the face of being corrected, you can turn the tables completely 100% in you favor by finding fault with how words are presented and have the cops called to get that person in trouble. And then be a victim! (I wonder if those kids even knew they were victims of hostile racism)

/both people need to calm down
//first mistake in this situation: trees are made for climbing
///and if the tree falls, or a branch breaks, it was a sucky tree
////Plant another one - not exactly a shortage of trees, stupid

I have a habit of being ignorant when I look at the context of words like lynching. Unbelievably dumb idea, I know, for trying to figure out when non-blacks use racist terms.


Please quote one member on this thread who has said this. Come on. Try it.


Putting words in my mouth isn't polite. I'm going to call the cops on you.

You're so ticked off at my "insensitivity" I don't think you're intentionally putting words in my mouth. You just can't read what I'm typing. I asked you to come up with evidence the


"climbing trees like monkeys" is racist in origin. Got it? Not the word monkey. The phrase that compares people climbing trees to monkeys.


Well, if I'm part of the "you guys" address in my defense you're reading things I haven't typed.


No. I'd be lying if I said I could see it from Lockett's perspective. And nobody has said being compared to monkeys is normal.


I'll save my empathy for when it's called for. For when some Hispanic calls black children (or adults) not playing in trees monkeys. Asking for empathy in this situation increases the reasons why I should be empathetic, and I have a feeling that is going to multiply awkward social situations without reason. Moreover, Lockett is a jerk for involving the police and now involving a civil rights/social justice coalition. What a waste of time and money for that organization.


I am capable of understanding it when there is pain to overcome instead of a grudge to nurse.

I have a hard time believing anyone who lives in America fails to understand how this means of describing a child could be taken as being insensitive when used or directed towards black children. I always have felt an inner need to censor myself when around black people with the word monkey, and I know I did not come up with this social conditioning all on my own. So yeah as a white person I would never complain to a black parent that their children were acting like monkeys and if I did, I would not be surprised to cause offense.

That being said I did not think it was necessary to involve the police in the matter.

EDITED TO ADD

I call my own kids monkeys alllll the time too, but they are my kids and I call them all sorts of things I wouldn't call other peoples kids

Let me go ahead and flip the script a little here. I am no longer talking about What Obama should have done, but the incident itself.

Every one is taking her version of what was said... but what did Georgia Lockett, the one who called the police hear??



It's one thing to tell kids to stop climbing trees like monkeys, It's another to say they are monkeys and that they are making the neighborhood look bad.

And how does Mrs Ramirez see this.



Hmmm... this to me points that even Mrs Ramirez understands her comments could have been construed as racist, but that's just not "technically" what she meant.

Lesly



That's a problem. So what are you going to pretend that Blacks aren't and never were compared to monkey's in a racially deragatory way. Does it have to be preluded with the word "porch" for a Black to get offended??


How does this work.. If I see a mexican kid with a wet back and I call him a "wet back", no one can think I am speaking of anything else??

Or maybe I can go up to my Mexican neighbors and call them taco eating monsters... as long as they are eating tacos.

Now saying that I could be talking and it just comes out wrong, but I mean nothing bad about it, but because I mean nothing by it doesn't mean that I can't understand how someone could be offended cause they took it as angry and deragatory.

The person who heard said Mrs Ramirez called the kids monkeys. Not "stop climbing trees like monkeys", not "stop monkeying around", not "you're not monkeys so stay out of the trees" the neighbor heard her tell the kids "they are making the neighborhood look bad and they were a bunch of monkeys"

I ask you, since when did driving through a neighborhood where kids are in the front yard climbing trees make make it (the neighborhood) look bad???

Technically according to Ramirez-Sliwinski this is what she said: "This is not a tree for them to be climbing in like monkeys" (Daily Herald).

I'm sure the police report includes this discrepancy in what was said unless Ramirez-Sliwinski and/or Lockett and Stewart are lying to reporters.


I'll save myself the trouble of writing a point-by-point rebuttal and give you the same challenge I gave TFL. Go back and quote somebody in this thread who has said monkey has never been a racial slur against blacks, let alone porch monkey.


Off topic but good question. I'm not sure. I'm desensitized to wetback thanks to Carlos Mencia. I'm not sure if Mexicans still take issue with this insult. Could be they're trying to own the word like blacks have with nigger, though I hope that's not the case because I think the attempt to empower themselves this way will backfire just like it has with blacks.


Now you're grasping. Yeah, that's exactly what they'd be doing: eating tacos.


That's the problem, Droop. I could be offended by something but my offense doesn't change your intent and racial sensitivity. I wish I knew whether Lockett and Stewart alerted Ramirez-Sliwinski to the fact that they were insulted and asked for an apology before calling the police, or whether the duo think comparing black children to tree-climbing monkeys when they're climbing trees is so obviously insulting that reading black minds is a foregone conclusion.

If what Ramirez-Sliwinski says she said turns out to be false I'm willing to change my mind. Until then I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.

According to the police report - and I've not seen an account that states the police report is incorrect, this is not what she heard or, it isn't what Lockett reported to the police. This is the first I've heard of this version of events.

Link


This jives with Ramirez-Sliwinski's account of events. Sounds to me like someone is changing their story.

Perhaps you could provide a link to your quote?



Again, this is not what Ramirez said. She said "climbing like monkeys" which refers to a specifc action and not to the individual. If she had said the general "acting like monkeys," then I would understand. But, for what seems like the millionth time, this is not what happened.

Droop got it from this Daily Herald story: Racially tinged comment may be end of Carpentersville trustee's career

Thanks Lesly. Sorry Enntspeak for rushing through and not posting the link.

QUOTE

No clue, but the point i am making is what Mrs Lockett heard from the story i found offended her. And we can say that she is being over-sensitive, but what ever the case monkey can be a deragatory term to describe Blacks, so it is not out landish that someone ot offended.

And to be honest, this is one of those things were the EXACT wordage, tone, demeanor matters.



So why is it hard for you to even "see" how a word that could be racially deragatory, could be found as offensive from Mrs lockett's perspective. I mean I can see how it was totally innocent.

i'll post more later...

I agree. According to the police report, what Stewart alleged varys quite starkly from the quote you just provided. The quote you provide involves a very clearly racist statement. What she told the police she heard is a completely different story. So, which is the correct statement? Well, her original statement is much closer to what Ramirez says she said, so when there is a similarity in the stories, chances are good that it is the correct one.

Edited to add:

And when one party drastically changes their story as Stewart has, it is much easier to believe the account of the other individual. So, I'm still inclined to believe that Ramirez used the very common phrase "climbing in the tree like monkeys." She did not call them monkeys, she did not say they were "acting like monkeys." I'm inclined to believe that she didn't even say "playing in the tree like monkeys."

I'm not contesting a word, Droop. I'm contesting the subject (black children) makes a phrase racist when it is used to describe them doing a common action (climbing trees like monkeys).


And familiarity with the people you are communicating with. Given the neighbors' history and the fact that Ramirez-Sliwinski sounds like a busybody I still think the "targets" of her observation have an ax to grind.

Lesly is your argument that the subject itself is not to be considered when assessing the power behind a word or phrase? I mean it is part of the context, the person the action was assigned to. IF I heard that someone yell monkey to a white person, I would think..odd. But if I heard it yelled at a black person i would have a TOTALLY different reaction and all that would have to change to alter this reaction would be the subject.

The phrase describes an action. Regardless of the subject, the monkeys reference does not refer to an individual, but, rather, the manner in which the subject was climbing. If she had said, "tell those monkeys to stop climbing that tree," again, you'd have a point... because while she may be referring to the fact that monkeys climb trees, she is clearly calling them monkeys." But, again, this isn't what happened.

The phrase describes an action. I think there is only one context here to consider, Bucket. Taking the subject into account adds a layer of context. I am scratching my head wondering why anyone would want the subject to be taken into consideration when the stand alone expression is irrefutably harmless. It sounds like it takes an effort that doesn't automatically lead one to a "duh" moment of revelation in race relations. At least it doesn't for me. Does someone benefit from taking exception when the subject of the phrase is black children?

I'd sneer if you simply called a black person a monkey too.

I disagree with this verb action argument...who cares about the grammar of it all, it is the social aspect that is important.

I am not saying that this phrase is inherently racist as I describe my own kids' actions as monkey like often. But I am white and this word has a totally different connotation and meaning to me then it does a black person. I think we all know this to be true and so I would hope that when complaining about your neighbor's black kids, that you would perhaps not wish to complain that they are behaving monkey like. I think there is often words that have more power in them socially because of whatever reason, do you like being called a girl by certain people Lesly even tho the word girl is not in and of itself a bad word? Or what about the time Obama complained that Clinton got "periodically feeling down" ? I wouldn't say that these words or phrases in and of themselves are the slur or the insult, the fact that they were presented to a subject in which those words can and do have common other meanings, meant to devalue a person socially, is where the slur or insult is then introduced.

From a legal point of view, it shouldn't matter if she straight out used the N word to refer to the children. That is not a government's role to ticket people for what they say. Otherwise, the cops could make buckets of money by hanging out in school playgrounds at a public inner city school--from black kids.

Of course, had she used an overtly racist term or phrase, the Obama campaign would and should dismiss her posthaste.