View Single Post
Old May 14th, 2013 (3:35 PM).
ANARCHit3cht ANARCHit3cht is offline
Call me Archie!
    Join Date: Sep 2008
    Posts: 2,142
    Originally Posted by Fenneking View Post
    The anti-disability words being used are likely terms like "retarded". I don't think when one uses that term it is always hateful or geared at people with disabilities. The similar thing can be said for someone who uses phrases like "this is gay", and sometimes even "fa*". Racial slurs, well, they may be used comically or light-heartedly as many comedians do, but I would say there is more overt use in that these slurs are mostly geared toward racial minorities than it used in another sense typically. It would have been nice to know the methodologies used to clear up my questions. Overall, it is interesting.

    Though, I will say this study mostly shows which areas employ more sanitized speech, but I wouldn't go as far to say more or less hateful on lines of race, sexual orientation, or cognitive/physical impairments.
    I agree with you. Being gay myself, I am not offended by the word ***, etc. because I know they are not using it in that sense. The word "***" has evolved to mean something entirely different, even if that is what the word *USED* to mean. (It used to mean a bundle of sticks as well, so that's not really an argument. The article said that the researches determined whether or not it was being used in a hateful way... that means that each of the tweets they analyzed underwent comprehensive review, and that would go along way to explaining their small sample size, as they had to individually look at every tweet and judge its content. That takes a far lot more effort than merely collecting the number of posts that have things like #wetback or #porchmonkey or #killallkikes. I haven't worked with twitter data specifically, but I know that when collecting data, taking a comprehensive review of each case slows it down significantly, as you have to more that merely collect the data in that you have to evaluate its meaning in context to your study. |

    That being said... I'm not surprised. I, for one, am not surprised that most of the hate is coming from the Urban/Rural areas. Cities are far more cultural diverse than towns and other rural collectives--as a result, the residents are exposed to these different races, sexualities etc more often and thus naturally grow to accept it more. Even the ones who adamantly hate it, will view it as less wrong when it is something so common place. The number one motivator of hate is misunderstanding and fear(of the unknown, in many cases)--and that is no exception when it comes to race, gender, sexuality etc. City residents get this higher level of "education" in that regard, as the diversity of the city grants longer and more frequent exposures to such things, thus detracting the chance that they'd choose to make a remark about such a thing on twitter or facebook. I mean... there is a reason that the gay capitals of the world are cities and not towns.. people can get together more and feel safer--they build their own little communities where they stick together, and the only ones not of them are people who pay no mind to such unimportant things such as ethnicity and creed. Small towns, everybody knows everybody and people are slow to change... or at least that is what my experience has taught me.
    Reply With Quote