Bigotry or NOT?

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 157604


> Magpie:
> And I continue to be amazed that apparently calling somebody a    
> dirty Jew isn't the kind of name-calling that depends on prejudice.
 
> Sydney:
> 
> It's exactly Magpie's example of calling someone a "Jew" as a 
> slur. It's not an insult to say someone is Jewish when they are;
>  but if you use the expression 'sneaking Jew' to someone who is 
> Jewish in an argument, well, yeah, I'm afraid that's bigotry. 
> I'm really amazed that this is even in question. <snip> 
>
> That does not change the fact that he used a 'racial' expression  
> as a slur in an argument. And implied that his enemy's handicap   
> made him categorically a lower sort of person. That is bigotry in 
> action.

Mike:
And I continue to be amazed that people equate Hagrid calling Filch 
a "sneakin' Squib" to someone using the bigoted slur "dirty Jew". 
Furthermore, calling someone a "Jew" is not equal to calling 
someone "Jewish". But calling someone a "Squib" is the same as 
calling someone a "Squib". Do you get it now? 

But both Arabella Figg and Argus Filch referred to themselves 
as "Squibs". Hagrid added the pejorative "sneakin'" when referring 
to Filch. Was he name calling? Sure he was. Should he have called 
Filch a name? In a perfect world, no. Was it bigotry? 

African-Americans don't use the "N-word" when referring to 
themselves, (the rappers have changed it to "niggah", which I don't 
like either, but I'm not them). Jewish people refer to themselves as 
Jewish not as "Jews", unless they want to put in some self-bigotry 
or point out others bigotry. (I hate speaking for another racial or 
ethnic group, I hope that I have not mis-stated their positions, and 
apoligize in advance if I have). How many members of a minority 
refer to themselves in a derogatory fashion when they're not trying 
to draw attention to the prejudice of that term? If "Squib" was only 
used by Filch, I wouldn't be sure. But how Figgy used it, when she 
used it, I was convinced that "Squib" was not a bigoted slur.

Conversely, my adversaries in this argument are convinced that it 
was a bigoted slur. Will I change your minds? No, you seem spring 
loaded to find bigotry in Hagrid's comment because there are obvious 
undertones of bigotry running throughout this series. But, 
pronouncing something as bigoted or a slur doesn't make it so. I 
understand your opinion, but I'm not convinced.  Your response seems 
to be one of incredulity that everyone doesn't share your opinion.

Magpie:
Name-calling where you zero in on someone's minority group is just 
superficial and can't be related to prejudice? I would have thought 
it was one of the more obvious flags that someone's got some issues 
with bigotry.
<and>
I see no reason to try to explain how bringing up somebody's status 
as a minority group to hurt them has nothing to do with how bigotry 
works just because Hagrid did it.

Mike:
So it's a done deal as far as you are concerned. It's bigotry and 
there is no two ways about it. All of the evidence that I have put 
forward matters not, because you have pronounced the scene as 
bigoted and that's that. Mind you, I have not asked you to explain 
how bigotry works. Thank you, no, I understand it. I *have* asked 
you to explain how you justify your claim that the term "Squib" is 
bigoted in the face of the canon evidence to the contrary. You have 
declined. Referencing one's minority status is all you need to 
proclaim bigotry and you see no need to explain yourself further.

Ceridwen:
Still, it was Hagrid thoughtlessly using a WW prejudice, even if in
his daily life he has nothing against Squibs as a group or
individually. It was singling Filch out as Different and Less-than.

zgirnius:
If Hagrid had called Filch a jerk, or a git, or a berk, or any other 
generic pejorative word, we would not be having this discussion. But 
the noun he selected identifies Filch as having a particular birth 
characteristic, over which he has no more control than a Muggle has 
over their skin color, ethnicity, or physical disability.

I'll let Ken put something in here:
I think we have two long time rivals here who know *exactly* how to
push each other's buttons. Filch is sensitive about being a Squib.
Hagrid is sensitive about being substandard teacher with a tenuous
hold on his position. Each of them attacks the other at their weakest
point. This is a personal battle, there is no need to elevate it into
an exchange of bigotry. 

And Sydney adds:
As to whether this translates into, "Hagrid is therefore a bigot", I
wouldn't say so myself, but not so much because it doesn't logically
follow. I really don't like applying labels to people, period, and
that goes for labelling people bigots as well. 

Mike now:
I am not an apologist for Bigots, far from it, I deplore bigotry and 
racism. Likewise, I have an enormous distaste for people that too 
easily pronounce something as bigoted or call someone a bigot. If 
you are going to put someone into a position of defending themself 
against the charge of bigotry, you better have a damn good reason 
for levelling that charge. Defending oneself against a bigotry 
accusation is akin to trying to prove a negative. 

Like I said before, pronouncing bigotry at the drop of the hat 
trivializes those situations that are truly serious bigotry.

I'm done. I'll read any responses, but I'm getting too worked up 
over this topic. If you can't tell by now, I've had personal 
experiences in this area, and it brings back memories. I'll leave it 
at that

Mike