Who is a bigot?

This is not a flounder, nor an invitation for political discourse.

This word has been bandied about recently on here, and the news, radio, congress etc.

I think it's the wrong word.

Merriam Webster defines this (The strict definition) as follows:

a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices

So let's examine exactly what this means with absolutely no political discussion.

If you go to work for Joe Gibbs and start wrenching on cup cars with a bent Harbor Freight torque wrench, and someone tells you to throw it away and use a real tool, are they being a bigot for holding a strong opinion about the quality of your tool? He certainly isn't going to want to hear your arguments to the contrary.

If someone likes Chevy trucks over Ford, and doesn't want to hear arguments against his favorite brand, is she a bigot?

What about something closer to home; if I was chased and half eaten by a certain breed of dog as a child, and therefore refused to have one as a pet, would that make me a bigot?

I think we can all agree that wanting other people to die because you feel their opinions are wrong is bigoted. I am pointing out that there are countless shades of grey in between that and a guy who prefers McDonald's over Burger King and who won't submit to a blind taste test.

So, I submit, here and now, that we stop using the word "bigot" carelessly. Just as we ought not to use the word "hate" flippantly. Words mean things. Please use them carefully.

I say we use it more to remove the R card connotation.

bgkast wrote: I say we use it more to remove the R card connotation.

Did you know that humans don't technically have more than one race? I have an issue with that word, too, but we'll save that for another off-topic event later on.

Yes, I think bigot may be thrown around a bit too much, but it's clearly a perspective thing. If you are seen has having an unreasonable hatred of something, you would be a bigot to someone. What is unreasonable? That's clearly the issue. (Throw religion into that and unreasonable goes to a whole different level of hard to define)

Maybe the question (or a question) you want to ask is:

If someone dislikes and actively works against another group of people because they don't agree with things they do, (that do not directly affect that person negatively), are they a bigot?

If someone dislikes the above person, because of what that person wants to restrict, but that has no direct effect on them negatively, are they a bigot?

If someone dislikes a person because they dislike a person, are they a bigot?

Destined to become an awesome thread.

I agree people use it too much, but you left out part of the definition:

especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

I don't think it's good to use the term bigot in reference to stuff like tools, pets, car marquees. That's a dilution of the term.

I would just like to say that the quality of my tool is questionable at best.

aircooled wrote: If someone dislikes and actively works against another group of people because they don't agree with things they do, (that do not directly affect that person negatively), are they a bigot?

Yes.

aircooled wrote: If someone dislikes the above person, because of what that person wants to restrict, but that has no direct effect on them negatively, are they a bigot?

No. My previous words, from "that other" thread:

Duke wrote: You have the right to do anything you want **EXCEPT** stopping other people from doing what *they* want. Get it? If I condemn your attempts at repressing others, it is *NOT* the same as repressing you.

So, therefore, hating bigots does not make you a bigot, provided you hate their bigotry as it occurs and do not simply stereotype the group they belong to as all sharing that bigotry.

I hate everyone equally. That makes me not a bigot right?

There is a substantial difference between unfounded assumptions and personal experience. Look to WWII veterans for example.

In reply to 93EXCivic: You took the words out of my mouth.

If you stick to certain definitions that don't match how society uses a word, you can play all kinds of games. For example, I once argued with a guy who was adamant that only white-against-black racism was actually racism because he really wanted to stick to an auxiliary definition from a '70s dictionary.

I think the full definition that you started with is close enough:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

But more specifically, the way we use the word basically means "a person who judges others on traits about themselves which they can't control."

I also once argued with a foreign guy who only knew the archaic definition of the word, which has something to do with religious fundamentalism IIRC.

On this topic, I wish tolerance in the political context was a different word. Too many people confuse it with tolerance in the mechanical context.

I will go to my death bed firmly believing that 99.8% of the people who regularly post on the GRM message boards are dead wrong and completely delusional about what constitutes a hatchback. Call me a bigot if you want to.

Duke wrote: So, therefore, hating bigots does not make you a bigot, provided you hate their bigotry as it occurs and do not simply stereotype the group they belong to as all sharing that bigotry.

What I get out of this is that everyone is a bigot. Some are just bigot'd in ways different from others.

Nick_Comstock wrote: I will go to my death bed firmly believing that 99.8% of the people who regularly post on the GRM message boards are dead wrong and completely delusional about what constitutes a hatchback. Call me a bigot if you want to.

From the man who does not like HEAT in his car....

In reply to aircooled:

Oh not just in my car, it's 97 right now and I am the most miserable person on the face of the planet. Come on winter time.

I can't be a bigot. I hate everyone equally.

Who is on First. What is a Bigot.

I'm a big Ot. Not that big, but still...

HiTempguy wrote:

Duke wrote: So, therefore, hating bigots does not make you a bigot, provided you hate their bigotry as it occurs and do not simply stereotype the group they belong to as all sharing that bigotry.

What I get out of this is that everyone is a bigot. Some are just bigot'd in ways different from others.

How so? You're only a bigot if you try to infringe on the rights of others based on their differences from you.

I couldn't love GRM the magazine or the website more, and believe me, I don't like to be the P.C police or anything or the guy who has a problem with everything, but I do have a problem with this... I find it a bit offensive that you use terms like “Tools" and "Gibbs" for your little Dictionaries or whatever in the discussions. I myself do not make assumptions, but I feel sensitivity for people who do, as I am a student living among them, and my Girlfriend is pursuing her masters in the field.

These terms although I'm pretty sure are not even real words, are obviously meant to resemble the facial gestures used to mimic people who spend a disproportionate amount of time playing with dogs, and it appears that they are used on these boards in a joking sense which, as I view it, makes light of people who like girls who can argue the merits of one brand of trucks versus another

Nick_Comstock wrote: I will go to my death bed firmly believing that 99.8% of the people who regularly post on the GRM message boards are dead wrong and completely delusional about what constitutes a hatchback. Call me a bigot if you want to.

It's called a liftback, you bigot.

bigiocracy

tuna55 wrote:

bgkast wrote: I say we use it more to remove the R card connotation.

Did you know that humans don't technically have more than one race?

Do dogs only have one breed?