The reason "Wypipo" is not offensive.

[DanTex]

It's not even necessary to add the caveats "not all white people are wypipo" and "black people can be wypipo too". Maybe it's good to add those, but that's not the point.

The point is that, if a white person gets stereotyped as "wypipo", that person has the privilege to be able to say "OK whatever" and then go on with their lives unaffected by it. That's part of white privilege. Derogatory terms for white people have no power to harm the lives of white people. White people aren't actually hurt by them, unless they are trying to be. Not so for minorities who are systematically discriminated against.

I will say, the guy who wrote the "wypipo" article does strike me as a moron. Not because of that term, but because of another article he wrote advocating for people to sit out of the last election rather than vote for Hillary Clinton because she wasn't absolutely perfect. Anyone with a media voice who says things like that is a Trump ally. But the term "wypipo"? Meh. Some people might find it hilarious and spot on. Others might find it silly. But as a white person, if I don't like it, I have the privilege of treating it as a curiosity.

[hughee99]

1. I remember when people used to say that you don't get to decide what other people find offensive.

I guess we've now found an exception to that. Nice work!

[OnDoutside]

2. Ouch !

[whathehell]

85. Nope.

See my posts.

[DanTex]

3. Obviously, some people can and will find any silly thing they want offensive.

Some people find the term "white privilege" offensive, for example. The question, of course, is whether it is justifiable to consider a term offensive, not whether anyone could possibly find something offensive, because by that standard everything would be "offensive".

[hughee99]

6. Does one person get to decide when another person is justified in being offended?

I have certainly seen things that I don't think are offensive, but other people do. While I may not fully understand what causes them to be so offended, I wouldn't say that whatever it was is NOT offensive. Yes, anything has the potential to be offensive to someone. Whether that offense is genuine or false is another matter.

[DanTex]

12. Nobody "gets to decide". There is no official committee that determines this.

People have opinions on it. In my opinion, the term "wypipo" is not offensive. I gave my reasons why. I also don't think the term "white privilege" is offensive. I don't think that talk of income inequality is justifiably offensive to billionaires that whine about it. And so on.

Other people, of course, have different opinions, and might think that discussing income inequality is indeed offensive to billionaires. Those people have a right to share their reasons for thinking so.

[hughee99]

13. When it comes to being offended, everything is a matter of opinion.

You just declared that white people are not justified in being offended by wypipo. It's your opinion. My opinion is that no should tell someone else when it's okay to be offended. If you were telling people who were black, or hispanic, or gay or female that they're not justified in being offended by something, you know you'd get a big fight here. You SHOULD get the same pushback regardless of which group of people you don't think are justified in being offended, even white people.

[DanTex]

49. So what? I stated my opinion, and backed it with my reasoning.

The problem with your logic is that following your reasoning results in all claims of offensiveness automatically being accepted, and equally accepted at that. So people offended by the n-word are put in the same category as billionaires offended by the term oligarchy.

To me, that is absurd. And it also points to the weakness in the argument that the word "wypipo" is offensive. For legitimately offensive things like the n-word, it is not necessary to fall back on the baseline argument "anytime someone says they are offended, then that thing is offensive". The only time people trot that argument out is when there is no other rational argument that can be made as to why the term is offensive. For example, terms like "wypipo" and "oligarch".

[hughee99]

70. Everything can be offensive to someone.

I may not be offended, and may not understand why someone else is offended, but it’s not my place to declare whether their offense is “justified” or not.

Generally, that is not supported on the DU, but I commend you on sticking to your guns on someone’s ability to decides what should and should not be offensive to others. Perhaps you can call this the “Wypipo exception”.

[DanTex]

73. Correct. That's why your standard would result in nobody being able to say anything.

That's why, before criticizing someone for using a term like "wypipo" (or anything else) because someone finds it offensive, it is important to determine whether the offensiveness is justified.

[hughee99]

90. That's only the case if you think you should never say anything

That offends anyone. I don’t get to decided whether other people find something offensive or not, but I do get to decide whether I care if they’re offended. For example, I understand why members of the KKK are offended by being called fascists, I just don’t care if it offends them. Membership in that group is voluntary, people choose to be there and can leave if they like.

You’re arguing that people who are offended by this aren’t justified in being offended, but based on you’re reasoning, you really should be arguing that white people have it pretty good, and you don’t care if they find this offensive.

[DanTex]

97. OK, well then to put it in your terms. I don't care if anyone is offended by "wypipo".

Because, for the reasons explained in the OP, I don't believe their being offended is justified. It's just a question of semantics. I use the term "unjustifiably offensive" in such cases, whereas you say "I just don't care".

The crux of the matter is, white people offended by the term "wypipo" is in the same category as rich people offended by the term "oligarchy", and not in the same category as black people offended by the n-word. The rest is semantics.

[Adrahil]

8. Hmmm... consider this....

I am not particularly offended by “wypipo.” As you said, I have privilege and it won’t hurt me.

BUT, it is a bad idea to stereotype people by race. It is. Let’s not support that.

I grew up in an area where people tried to justify the use of “nigger” by saying not all black people are “niggers” and there could be white “niggers.”

That argument was bullshit then, and it’s bullshit now.

If a term is not meant to sterotype an entire race, how about we leave race out of it entirely?

[DanTex]

50. Stereotypes about privileged groups are not the same as stereotypes about disadvantaged groups.

So I don't buy the comparison to the n-word at all. It's a totally different thing.

One might argue that stereotypes in general are bad. But are they really? How about stereotypes about rich people, say "trust fund baby" for people with wealthy parents or "robber baron" for ultra-rich capitalists. I think "trust fund baby" is a much more apt comparison to "wypipo" than the n-word is, since they both refer to a subgroup of people with unearned privilege who act a certain way.

I'm nut sure whether it's harmful to use the term "trust fund baby". I think it may have its place. But, whether or not it's harmful, it's clearly less harmful than the n-word, and I believe that is a better measure of the level of harmfulness of "wypipo", if any.

[58Sunliner]

55. Stereotypes by race, sex, religion, etc.. are all inherently offensive.

[DanTex]

99. How about the term "fundie" for (some) evangelical Christians?

[Adrahil]

63. Actually you're missing the point....

I'm not saying they are equivalent. They clearly are not... power relationships come into play.

And as I said, I don't think "wypipo" is all that harmful.

BUT, and this is the point, do we really want to have rules about when it's okay to reference someone's race in a derogatory epithet?

I mean, do we tell put kids that it's NOT okay to do that except to certain groups of people, and then it's okay?

ANd that's the difference between "wypipo" and "trust fuind baby." "Wypipo" explicitly references race. Trust fun baby does not. It references class.

I don't want to make too much of an issue of it. But I think we should consider these things, instead of just justifying what we want to do.

[DanTex]

100. Actually, I do think we should have standards as to when it's OK to include race in an epithet.

We have standards for when it's OK to use class as a epithet: "trust fund baby" is OK, "trailer trash" is not.

Now, maybe the rule should simply be don't use race at all. That's arguable. It's also arguable that there shouldn't be any epithets at all period, whether or not they include race, which means "trust fund baby" is out too. But I think that would be overly limiting on expression.

How about the term "whitesplain". Or if we want it in noun form, "whitesplainer". Suppose after an unpunished incident of police brutality against a black person, someone says "the whitesplainers are hitting Twitter with their excuses". In that context, "whitesplainer" is clearly an epithet, and it clearly references race. In fact, from what I can tell, "whitesplainer" and "wypipo" have pretty similar meaning. Should the term "whitesplain" be off limits? Or maybe it's OK to use it as a verb, but putting the "er" on it makes it off limits? Personally I don't think so.

[Adrahil]

101. Okay. I disagree with you on a fundamental level.

I mean, I do get your point. But I don't agree with where that leads up. At what point is it no longer okay? I dunno. Just seems like a terrible idea to me.

[treestar]

36. But then you can't decide that for nonwhite people

We've heard that many times. Even if we think it is something absurd, we are told we are whitesplaining. Yet there would be an objective type of standard somehow. But the person merely deciding they think it offensive (regardless of knowledge or intent) is the least objective standard possible.

[DanTex]

98. I would be more hesitant to make such a case for a group I wasn't a member of.

Particularly if that group were systematically discriminated against and disadvantaged in our society. That doesn't mean I would never do it, though no examples come to mind at the moment.

[whathehell]

86. Sensitivities vary, and people don't normally "decide" to be offended

they feel it, and there is something called 'intersectionality".that can come into play.

[regnaD kciN]

4. Bingo!

If you're white (and, better yet, straight and male as well), other people get to decide what you're allowed to find offensive.

[cwydro]

24. I remember that too.

I guess things have changed.

Bigotry is apparently alive and well here.

[X_Digger]

26. Some people have principles, others have preferences.

Principle:
It's wrong to use derogatory terms based on a person's race.

Preference:
You shouldn't use derogatory terms based on race, unless it's a person who's white and/or male.

[whathehell]

84. You make an important point..

Being a minority group member does not give one a blank check to insult or abuse members of the majority.

[treestar]

35. Exactly!

That one needs to be worked out somehow. Only the most liberal of liberals are going to go along with it. How does this wake up the average white person?

[lark]

57. Ooh, fantastic use of sarcasm!!

Truly awesome.

[whathehell]

83. No, the OP describes the "macro" situation, but there are many "micro" situations

'in which a PoC may have a power advantage over a white person. See my post above.

[IluvPitties]

5. To me, calling me a wypipo because I am an animal rights activist

is as stupid as calling me an Uncle Tom or an Oreo.

[EffieBlack]

7. You've completely missed the point

The term isn't used to describe white animal rights activists. The it's used to describe, among other things, white people who fight for the rights of animals while ignoring harm to people of color.

If you are a white animal rights activist who is fighting police brutality against black men, you are likely not a Wypipo, a term that describes behavior and attitude, not race.

[cwydro]

25. Labels are stupid.

This amazes me.

It speaks volumes about those who enjoy labeling others.

[EffieBlack]

27. We label everything in this country

The only time it becomes an issue is when we label white people - which is pretty funny since it’s white folks who’ve pretty much cornered the labeling market.

But I’m fine with halting with all the labels. But y’all go first.

[cwydro]

33. You are fascinating.

[EffieBlack]

34. I know.

Thanks!

[Doodley]

60. Please give examples of slang terms to describe non-whites that aren't offensive? Or retract

"the only time it becomes an issue is when we label white people."

[Exotica]

67. as a PoC, I rec this reply wholeheartedly

This is all just one giant divisive shit stir, IMHO.

It only helps the RW, white nationalists and/or Rethugs.

[lark]

59. You seem to have missed the point.

The original article posted on here defining the term said it was a white person who cared about animals but didn't care about people of other ethnicities. So now you are disputing that definition? I was also told that wypipo are not necessarily racists - so WTF are they? Sounds like just a rude dismissive term for white people with no definition whatsoever about being liberal or conservative or about their belief systems or qctions. A useless phrase and diversion from reality and the fight we are facing against real racists, misogynists, oligarchs and traitors.

[Doodley]

61. Well said.

[pangaia]

62. I guess i misunderstood you post a bit which makes my very first reply also uninformed.

Looks like i am not, i truly hope, a wypipo.
I didn't research the term.. just read your OP.

I still like very much what you posted.

Thank you.

[oberliner]

9. "Derogatory terms for white people have no power to harm the lives of white people"

Derogatory terms have no power to harm the lives of anyone. Systematic discrimination exists independent of any derogatory terms.

[bettyellen]

18. Untrue, as is the underlying assertion that all derogatory terms are equal. Denying hundreds of

years of oppressive behavior is not a good look.
Nor are passive aggressive attacks on people who dance and like organic food. The veiled hatred is obvious, and disconcerting.

[oberliner]

20. Of course it's true

Derogatory terms cannot hurt you. Oppressive behavior, however, can.

[Demsrule86]

39. The last word many people of color heard before lynching or other forms of murder was the 'N' word.

This word and others was used to dehumanize them...making it OK to murder them. wypipo may irritate but with white privilege, it won't hurt white folks...we shrug and go on with our lives...that is not the case with POC.

[oberliner]

80. Right, but the term itself cannot and did not hurt anyone

It was the action that followed.

[Demsrule86]

92. That is debatable...by using such words to dehumanize POC....it certainly did hurt.

It is not just a word really.

[whathehell]

113. The last word women hear before they're beaten, raped or murdered

is "bitch" or "cunt". Being white doesn't exempt them from that "privilege".

[DanTex]

52. I disagree. Language and word choice matters.

Word choices can reinforce assumptions or prejudices.

[oberliner]

81. But they can't hurt anyone

Isn't that self-evident?

[DanTex]

91. I don't see why that's self-evident.

I mean, sure, words can't cause direct physical pain. But beyond that narrow definition, yes they can hurt people in many ways.

[whathehell]

87. "Systematic discrimination" describes gender as much as raace..

and there are situations of intersectionality in which your "white people can't be hurt by PoC" meme is simply false. It really can be complicated -- If you think, for instance, that I haven't felt demeaned (and threatened) when being called a "White Bitch" you're greatly mistaken.

[oberliner]

89. That's not my meme or what I am saying

I am saying derogatory terms can't hurt anyone, but actions do.

[whathehell]

105. I think derogatory terms do hurt people

although the extent to which they do varies in terms of their situational and societal power.

[Abu Pepe]

110. However. They do have the power to identify the speaker as an asshole.

Insults say way more about the people who use them. Especially sexist and racist ones.

[MicaelS]

11. At first I was offended.

After thinking about it, I decided it was funny as hell.

[sarah FAILIN]

22. I'm more offended by the attitude

By that I mean the attitude that it is ok to have derogatory names for white people because they haven't been oppressed yet. Substitute white and whypipo with any other race and the derogatory word for that race in these conversations and I bet you people would be getting erased left and right.
The word itself is silly, but the intent is enlightening.

[MicaelS]

23. I agree completely.

It's amazing how often that excuse is trotted out. WYPIPO WILL get thrown back into people's faces once the term becomes more widely known.

[sarah FAILIN]

45. I'm already contantly correcting coworkers as it is.

I know they are racist and when their negative attitudes leak out I try to correct them.. They always whine about how it's ok for black people to call us names and I can't argue with them now.
That anyone thinks it is ok to call anyone names is crazy to me.

[treestar]

37. White people may have been oppressed to some degree by other white people

That has happened in Europe and the US. Now before I get that sarcastic response that it is nothing as bad as happened to POC, I am not saying it is equal or as bad. There are degrees of everything.

[sarah FAILIN]

44. I agree with you

But I don't think there has to be equality of oppression either.
The poor whites have lots of names that are denigrating and belittling. As a former poor child with only 2 shirts who had to ration our weeks groceries and work in the field to raise our food, I felt every sting of their words but to some here it is not enough since my ancestors didn't arrive in chains.
I just can't believe that any racist attitudes are allowed here, but it seems to be fine.

[Bucky]

75. the intent seems to be divisive. So who benefits from racial divides?

hint: it ain't the Democrats

[sarah FAILIN]

88. Very true

But try telling that to some of the people on this board.

[cwydro]

14. I got on DU late today.

It’s spring, and m busy outside.

Never heard of that guy, but he sounds stupid as fuck.

[Gothmog]

15. I am not offended by this term

[XRubicon]

16. I think "wypipo" hurts POC more than it does any white person

It plays into the white racist stereotypes of the way POC speak.

[IluvPitties]

17. Good point.

[XRubicon]

19. I understand the feeling behind the word but I think it doesn't help anyone.

[EffieBlack]

28. Wow

[treestar]

38. I predict that any white person who repeats it

Last edited Sun May 6, 2018, 01:10 PM - Edit history (1)

and pronounces it that way will be called out as a racist.

[Demsrule86]

43. Against other white people? Don't see that happening.

[treestar]

48. It could come across as mocking

Black speech, thus offending black people. Also right wingers would not be above using that.

The 1% condescends to allow white privilege for whites to keep them on their side. Against their own real interests. It is on them that they value the privilege more. Yet it would be awesome if it were all 99% of us vs the 1% instead.

[Demsrule86]

64. Any words can be used by righties in a discriminatory way.

[Demsrule86]

40. Wow...just wow.

[Demsrule86]

42. You do understand that by holding up the way you speak as better than how POC speak...

you are demonstrating your innate belief in white superiority? Why they are acting 'Black'.

[XRubicon]

47. I never said that- read it again

[Demsrule86]

65. I think you did...not saying you meant too.

"It plays into the white racist stereotypes of the way POC speak."

[XRubicon]

66. "You do understand that by holding up the way you speak as better than how POC speak..."

Please tell me where I said that I hold the way I speak as better than POC.

"It plays into the white racist stereotypes of the way POC speak." I am observing what I think will happen - that is different.

Stop accusing me based on your ignorance.

[Demsrule86]

68. That remark implied that White people talk better or different than Black people...

This is not the case. How people talk depends on where they come from and other factors...race is not one of them...although there is no such thing as race...manmade labels....there is racial discrimination.

[XRubicon]

69. Maybe try hooked on phonics?

Not sure how else I can help you. Goodbye.

[mythology]

21. It's too small and petty to be offensive

It does indicate a certain amount of ignorance which I sometimes find offensive if I've had to endure, but the term itself is just inane. The world is full of ignorant small-minded people, if all of them left me outraged, I'd be very tired. Instead I just shrug and go on with my life thankful I was taught to be better than that.

[Bucky]

76. Sure, it is possible to shrug off inoffensive term

But as you well know, many people will not just shrug it off. They will chalk it up to racial insensitivity on the part of Democrats.

It's not a rational process, it's there to deepen the sense of us versus them among swingable voters. It's meant to shut off critical thinking and shut off any receptivity to a progressive message. And to that extent the slur is a great weapon for the Republican cause.

[Docreed2003]

29. It's funny as hell to me...mainly because I see "wypipol" examples every day

It's funny...it's comedy..and it has a measure of truth, which is why it's so funny. It comes from a "punching up" perspective instead of "punching down", which is why I'm not offended in the least. I'm actually surprised so many here are offended by this!

[PatentlyDemocratic]

30. Mocking based on race is foolish

It will only serve to turn people against you. If the term describes warped priorities (e.g., focusing on animal rights over human rights), then use a term that describes that behavior. It is not an inherently white behavior.

[Demsrule86]

41. Right and people of color better damn well keep us on their side or else right?

Do you hear what you are saying?

[Bucky]

77. I hear what you are projecting onto someone else's words

I see what you are making up out of thin air, without any basis for your ridiculous accusation.

[Demsrule86]

93. I didn't make anything up. I suggest you read the entire thead.

[sarah FAILIN]

46. I agree with you

Those supporting using racist words here never will. If they substituted any race and the derogatory term for that race in these posts about whypipo, this wouldn't have made it past the first post.

[LanternWaste]

104. My reaction is merely a hearty, "bless your little heart" to anyone pretending to be offended by it.

"It will only serve to turn people against you..."

Your unsupported allegation is refuted by my own reaction to it... it's not turning me against anyone, hence it not in fact, the only thing the mocking will do.




My reaction is merely a hearty, "bless your little heart" to anyone pretending to be offended by it.

[betsuni]

31. I love making fun of white people because they are my people.

Garrison Keillor is good at it (From "Lake Wobegon Days" ):

You have fed me wretched food, vegetables boiled to extinction, fistfuls of white sugar, slabs of fat, mucousy casseroles made with globs of cream of mushroom, until it's amazing my heart still beats.

You have subjected me to endless boring talk about weather, regularity, back problems, and whether something happened in 1938 or 1939, insisting that I sit quietly and listen to every word.

You have provided me with poor male role models, including the Sons of Knute, the Boosters Club and others whose petulance, inertia, and ineptitude are legendary. ... Stupidity had the floor, always.

You instilled in me a paralyzing nostalgia for a time before I was born, a time when men were men and women were saintly, and children were obedient, industrious, asked no luxuries, entertained themselves, and knew right from wrong. I, on the other hand, was a symptom of everything going to hell in a handbasket.

Your own mistakes you managed to explain to your own satisfaction. When you gossiped malicious gossip, you explained that 'everyone knows this and besides it's true.'

Your illnesses were the result of exhaustion by good works, mine the result of having disobeyed you by not having worn a scarf, not taking vitamins. I crawl into bed like a dog and feel not only unwell but unworthy. if someone came in to shoot me, I'd turn on the light so he could take better aim.

Bigotry is never a pleasant subject so you didn't bring it up but you stuck by your guns anyway. Indians were drunks, Jews were thieves, and the colored were shiftless. Where you got this, I don't know, because there were none of them around, but you believed it more absolutely for the utter lack of evidence.

A scene, repeated thousands of times:

You: (in the easy chair): Dear? As long as you're up, would you mind --
Me: (in the doorway): What?
You: (rising): Oh, never mind. I'll do it myself.
Me: What? I'll do it.
You (sighing): No, that's all right. You'd never find it. (Or: 'You might burn yourself,' Or: 'I'd just have to do it myself anyway.' Or: 'It's nothing.')

[treestar]

32. True though what of the standard that

people get to decide what they are offended by? We know DUers understand, but how to square that with that claim when dealing with independents or even Republicans? We can feel superior to those white people all day, but they can quickly point to that one and they don't get the white privilege concept (or pretend they don't) - so it is just giving them something to work off of.

[DanTex]

54. My opinion of that standard test is:

if that standard test is the only rationale for arguing that something is offensive, then it's really not very offensive at all.

Because by the standard test, for example, discussion of income inequality would be considered offensive simply because some billionaires complain about being a persecuted minority.

I mean, strictly speaking, the test is true. If someone is offended by something, they will continue to be offended by it no matter what I think. But that doesn't mean I have to consider the offendedness to be justified, nor do I have to refrain from stating my opinion about the matter.

[Loki Liesmith]

51. To you. Not offensive *to you*

You don’t get a vote on whether it is offensive to someone else.

[DanTex]

53. I get to state an opinion on whether it is justifiably offensive to others though.

I mean, sure, there are always people who are going to get offended by any silly thing. There are billionaires who get offended by the term "oligarch" or even by any discussion of income inequality. So?

[Doodley]

58. Do you encourage childish name calling that others may find offensive?

[Rob H.]

71. I think his OP has already answered that question

in the affirmative.

[whathehell]

112. Exactly. n/t.

[Doodley]

56. It is disgusting to defend slang terms to describe a person, whether it refers to their race,

age, gender, sexual orientation or anything else.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

94. So if someone tells me they prefer the pronoun "ze," I should tell them no

because that's slang and, therefore, disgusting?

[Doodley]

103. Yes, if that word is a slang word and the person is saying it can be used to .

Last edited Mon May 7, 2018, 12:37 PM - Edit history (1)

describe others.

[XRubicon]

72. The 2017 Wypipo Awards

https://www.theroot.com/the-2017-wypipo-awards-1821347209

Not offensive as long as you are not Hillary Clinton or a white woman, other than that...

[Crunchy Frog]

74. Trash Thread is my friend today.

[Thekaspervote]

78. Seems maybe those that find it offensive should do a little self examination...

But.. that’s probably too much to ask

[Soxfan58]

79. Lets all just be people

Brothers, and sisters on this small rock in space.

[whathehell]

82. It depends on the circumstances..

The idea that every white person, male and female, is always in a position of greater power relative to a PoC is a fallacy.

A white employee in a workplace where most of the other employees are not white -- a "majority minority" situation -- can definitely be hurt by their co-workers.

Another circumstance where this dynamic plays out is a one-on one situation in which a minority member is stronger -- physically, professionally, or economically -- than the white person and chooses to use that power against them. This could be a male vs female or boss vs employee situation -- any in which there is an Inbalance of power and the power advantage is with the PoC.

[LeftInTX]

95. Not offended

I think it's kinda funny...

Especially if used as satire...


This is from Saturday Night Live - 1976

Announcer: Ladies and gentlemen -- Mr. Very White.



Very White: [ reciting as he belts the piano ]
"Oh, baby!
[ breathes deeply ] Ooooh, baby, baby, baby, baby.
You know you've put me through sssssssso many changes
Oh no, baby, don't cry, little girl!
Because you know I know you know I know you know I know
That I dig you and you dig me.
And, baby
I remember -- I remember the first time I saw you.
You were down on a beach entertaining the Van Der Camps.
And I was at the tennis camp, looking for a fourth for mixed doubles.
And, baby, I -- I feel like I've got to sing to you now!"

"But, baby
Baby
I'm gonna sing about the love and the music
Incessant, rambling music with no beginning and no end, baby
Like our love.
And you WILL know, baby
Because it's music with no, no soul
And with absolutely no redeeming artistic value, my love.
Oooohhhhh, baby, baby, baby, baby!
Because deep down -- deep, deep, deep down
In my very heart
My very simple, simple mind
I feel so -- so strange, baby So strange, talking to you this way in front of all these people But, baby, I FEEL like I've got to -- I feel like I've got to sing to you now. And I -- I feel like you've got to hear me, in my heart!

From Saturday Night Live:
http://snltranscripts.jt.org/75/75nwhite.phtml

It's music with no soul, cuz he's Wypipo!!! He can't crescendo! Falls off piano instead.

NBC won't post videos, cuz they want you to buy the DVD, but I found it here: https://vk.com/video-72157839_171244562

Shit, we need Wypipo jokes!

[Dreamer Tatum]

96. what a crock of shit nt

[whathehell]

106. What' is "a crock of shit"?

Do be specific.

[Abu Pepe]

102. So somehow a racially based insult isn't racist?

Alrighty.

[mainer]

107. I'm still puzzled by this. Is the term "White people" also considered offensive?

And isn't "Wypipo" the same thing, only with phonetic spelling?

[haele]

108. Ok - It's a stinging word identifying the privilidged who pretend they don't have it.

As a white woman, I'm not outraged because I choose not to be outraged by names. At least it's not sniper rifles in back roads, having a cross burned on my lawn, being targeted by idiot drivers looking to feel powerful...

Wypipo? Give me a break. At it's core, it's a simplistic derogatory term by those without power directed at clueless or selfish people with privilege who show it off. As in - "Those Wypipo - they can get away with all sorts of nonsense that POCs can't. Cops just look the other way."
I would prefer being called "Wypipo" to being sued, having my stuff damaged - or being assaulted if I piss someone off. And I certainly prefer it to being called "White Bitch" or "Cunt".

I do think that while exasperated derogatory name calling is a symptom of poor education, it's better than the alternative when considering what could be other understandable actions (considering history) that any demeaned and casually demonized minority class in a supposedly egalitarian society could take against those who are institutionally marginalizing, criminalizing and murdering those who are unlucky enough to be born into that minority. I know I've got the privilege of being part of the majority, and even though I'm not high up in the hierarchy of that majority, I still am better off than my peers

When I took human development a long time ago, I realized that stereotyping, like prejudice, is an individualized shorthand that a person develops as for immediate anticipation of risk or reward when something is presented to them. One can have positive and negative stereotypes and prejudices - we all have them.
The trick is to understand - to be mentally aware - of how they are developed and where they create emotional and reactive blindsides, and what the repercussions of a stereotype or prejudice can be.
Yes, a word could hurt the feelings of an emotionally protected child or adult, and might be used in coordinated bullying of a child, but then again - any adjective or pro-noun can be a weapon by bullies.

Y'know, some of the stupidest common words made me burst into tears of despair between the ages of 8 and 11 - not "dirty words", but words accompanied with "ugly", "clumsy", "nobody likes you" or "silly, stupid, smarty-pants"...and those awkwardly rhymed sing-song verses kids like to use.
But at least I wasn't called a pejorative singling me out as a minority that could allow me to be abused with impunity, especially if the "authority figures" agreed with the bullies that the social norm must be protected.

It's the relentless, casual hate behind any word that makes it a weapon for bullies and thugs - of any skin tone or economic class.

My rule of thumb when it comes to bad language -
If the use of a word has no power over me or others, f**k it. Just someone blowing off steam or being an asshole. They probably shouldn't be using "bad language", but by insisting they refrain because they're being rude and might hurt feelings also limits their ability to express themselves in an otherwise somewhat safe space. One can only protect oneself or one's dependents so far without intruding onto other's rights.
However, if the use of that word has power to directly abuse, inflame, or otherwise cause harm to someone by singling them out for abuse, then call it out.

For myself, I don't typically use common pejoratives as they are common (my conceit) and I don't take offense (usually) when they're used against me - I always attempt to consider the source and the situation before forming a prejudiced reaction.
(Which means I actually try not to be prejudiced...)

Haele

[backscatter712]

109. The black community deserves to dish out some comeuppance.

"Wypipo" is simply a garden-grade low-level insult describing people who are clueless at best about race, privilege, and systemic racism.

It doesn't have 500 years of cruelty, hatred, and maliciousness behind it like the n-bomb does.

[whathehell]

111. The black community is not entitled to dish out "comeuppance"

to people simply because those people are white. As a white woman I support Black Lives Matter and Reparations, but I do not support a "right" to abuse individuals on the basis of their race or gender. Period.