<p>I have known plenty of opinionated jerks but am able to understand that even they often have something valid to say. </p>
<p>“But you know, a lot of how we respond to things is based on personal experience. My relevant personal experience is that I remember guys just like Fortgang from college. In my experience, they are opinionated jerks who like to spout off insensitive stuff to get a reaction–but although they can dish it out, they can’t take it. The fact that Fortgang happens to be the conservative version of this particular kind of jerk is irrelevant–to me, anyway.”</p>
<p>Though you should recognize that your experience with “guys like Fortgang” from college is completely irrelevant. You don’t know him, not have you ever spoken with him, correct? We all tend to make snap judgments about people we don’t even know, categorize them, put them in a little box of–“Oh, it’s THAT type of person”, based upon past experiences. But when we think about it, most of us know it’s wrong to do that, even to rich white guys.</p>
<p>
Its not a “belief” about the connotation of the vulgar word, it IS the connotation of the vulgar word. Its a “privilege” (and I am growing to dislike this word more and more) if a person is in the majority and doesnt experience this term as a vulgar term, which it is to the ears, of some minoritys. Or it just that insensitive jerk who doesnt get it, like the saslesclerk who used the expression" jewed me down". Ignorance.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t suggest that you are biased against white males. I pointed out that you said you would give a black woman a pass (unless she was wealthy) on the same opinion that you wouldn’t give a white male a pass on. That is treating people differently based upon their race and/or gender, and could easily be interpreted as indicating that you <em>assume</em> that black women <em>need</em> a pass on something that white men don’t. Paternalistic, at least, to put it nicely.</p>
<p>
Are you suggesting that he didn’t mean the things he wrote in his article? I’m basing my opinion about him on his own words. I will allow that as a college freshman, perhaps he didn’t realize just how jerky he would seem from what he wrote.</p>
<p>And while maybe it’s off-topic (or maybe it isn’t), I’m interested in the question of whether it’s offensive for non-Jews to use the term “schmuck” to refer to jerks. Is it a “bad word” in English? I’ve always thought it was on the harsh side, perhaps on a par with @$$ hole, or perhaps $h it head (a term applied to Fortgang in a Salon article, incidentally). I think it’s educational to learn that words that are common in the United States may not be acceptable in other countries, or perhaps among some groups here (I know there are some words used casually in the U.S. that have different, offensive, meanings even in the U.K.). So, is the objection to “schmuck” that it is a really bad word that people are using without realizing that–or that using it is a misappropriation of a word from another culture?</p>
<p>“Are you suggesting that he didn’t mean the things he wrote in his article? I’m basing my opinion about him on his own words. I will allow that as a college freshman, perhaps he didn’t realize just how jerky he would seem from what he wrote.”</p>
<p>Interesting how people have different takes on that article. I didn’t find anything jerky in it at all. Perhaps I should read it again a couple of times. I think this is one of those issues that people can read the same thing and see something entirely different, based upon what their personal biases are. Some read it and seem to think, “No kidding, he is so right!” Others read it and think, “Man, what a selfish jerk!” I’m curious as to exactly what the jerky words in it were.</p>
<p>The connotation of a word is the emotional valence of the word. You can make categorical statements about the derivation of “schmuck,” but you can’t make categorical statements about the connotation among the people I know unless you have taken a survey of the people I know. I believe you when you say that among your family and friends, “schmuck” is a curse word. It is not a curse among my friends and acquaintances, including my friends who have grown up in Yiddish-speaking households; rather, it’s about like calling someone a “jerk” or an “idiot,” insulting but not a curse. Different people use language differently.</p>
<p>How is my not having known that you are offended by “schmuck” a privilege? It didn’t confer any advantages on me. A privilege confers advantages: it’s an advantage to have money; it’s an advantage not to be followed around the store when shopping, or stopped for no reasonable reason when driving; it’s an advantage to be more highly ranked than those of the opposite gender, or another race, when your otherwise unlabeled resume or work product comes across their desk. It’s not an advantage to use a word differently.</p>
<p>I didn’t know that some people consider “schmuck” to be a curse word. Now I do. I’m glad to have my ignorance lessened, but I see no privilege here.</p>
<p>As I mentioned upthread, its akin to calling someone a pr<em>ck or a d</em>ck. . If you wouldn’t call them a pr<em>ck or a d</em>ck, don’t call them either of the other two terms ( I am gonna stop writing them as my parents are probably rolling over in their graves). And it is NOT a term for polite company. Lets please stop using it, ok?</p>
<p>Its not just me and my family, though thats my immediate experience base. A quick perusal on the good ol’ www shows, when looking up the meanings or comparisons, that they are listed a “vulgar”. Perhaps you might think of it as similar to an ethnic slur. And whens someone of that ethnicity asks a person to stop using it, the polite thing to do is to stop. Isnt that what this is generally about? Civil discourse.?</p>
<p>Here’s a pretty good article essentially rebuking both sides of this debate: <a href=“Checking Privilege Checking - The Atlantic”>Checking Privilege Checking - The Atlantic;
<p>Back in 2010 this movie poster was on billboards across America and in many movie theatres in every state. </p>
<p><a href=“https://www.google.com/search?q=dinner+for+schmuck+poster&client=safari&hl=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=YwF1U6S8Kem-sQTs54LgAw&ved=0CFgQ7Ak&biw=484&bih=585”>https://www.google.com/search?q=dinner+for+schmuck+poster&client=safari&hl=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=YwF1U6S8Kem-sQTs54LgAw&ved=0CFgQ7Ak&biw=484&bih=585</a></p>
<p>I think language has coarsened in recent years–perhaps partly because of the unfiltered nature of the internet. I know I’m seeing (and hearing) the “F” word much more often than I did in my youth, and I don’t think we need to debate whether that’s an offensive word or not. I guess there are still plenty of words that are more offensive to some groups than others, and it’s helpful to know that.</p>
<p>And the movie was as tasteless as the name, sax. It was dreadful. So “Meet the Fockers” is less tasteless, I suppose.</p>
<p><a href=“Watch: Billy Crystal and Jimmy Fallon’s ‘Schmuck Dynasty’”>http://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/features/leisure/entertainment/article_35b8a6bc-4d63-11e3-bf41-001a4bcf887a.html</a>
And billy crystal and jimmy Fallon clip from Cleveland Jewish news</p>
<p>The point I am obviously trying to make is the term has gone mainstream enough to be on billboards.</p>
<p>I do appreciate knowing that certain people find it vulgar as I did not know this.</p>
<p>And some subgroups use the “N” word in lyrics or conversation, seen on videos, and tv… It does not make it ok. </p>
<p>Comedians often use profanity in stand up comedy or satire. Doubt they would use the same vocabulary in polite conversation.</p>
<p>If there happen to be any Mormons on this thread, it would be interesting to hear what you thought of “Book of Mormon”. The one article I found that interviewed folks on the street in SLC, near the Temple Square, seems most hadn’t seen it. Some felt it was mocking, and they seemed to try to put a positive spin on it, saying at least it gets the religion more exposure. I would agree with that, on several levels Oh, and the author of the article was politely escorted away from the area, but he was complimented on his jacket
<a href=“What Do Mormons Think About 'The Book of Mormon'?”>http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/i-asked-some-mormons-what-they-thought-about-the-book-of-mormon</a></p>
<p>"So, is the objection to “schmuck” that it is a really bad word that people are using without realizing that–or that using it is a misappropriation of a word from another culture? "</p>
<p>God, I hope not the latter. I pride myself in teaching my (non-Jewish) business partner to refer to the “whole megillah” when she’s discussing particularly complicated projects with our clients. It’s hysterical. LOL. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Another factor is how the article’s author admitted in his own words how his comments on issues like “government debt” have caused him to be compared to members of the Tea Party and he’s writing for the Princeton Tory, a staunchly conservative campus publication. The “moderate” part of their marketing seems to be in the same vein as the “Fair and Balanced” slogan of a certain news network who are also fellow political travelers. </p>
<p>With the exception of those who identify as Tea Party themselves and their sympathizers…especially in my generation and his, to many others…that comparison means a fair number of classmates he’s encountered perceived his comments as being among the extreme fringe of right-wing US politics and the frequency and manner of voicing them to be highly obnoxious, demeaning, and in no way an exemplar of respectful discourse in polite company. </p>
<p>SF writer James Nicoll had the following famous comment about the prevalence of borrowed words in English:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course our language is a blend of words and expressions form other languages. Duh. But there is a difference between using a relatively harmless expression, the derivation of which others might not know, vs using profanity, especially after they’ve been told its vulgar, and offensive to some. It still amazes me how satire is able to get away with what it does, </p>
<p>Cobrat, “Check your privilege,” is an expression used by the extreme college left and it has nothing to do with discourse. Geez, it means shut-up.</p>
<p>I’m no fan of the Tea Party myself, cobrat, but you don’t see the problem with assuming “well, this guy thinks some things that the Tea Party thinks, and I don’t respect / agree with the Tea Party, so therefore I will assume / stereotype him into something he may or may not be, and refuse to give his ideas a fair hearing because of that”? </p>
<p>Because frankly that’s what you do all the time. You stereotype just as badly as the people whom you wish wouldn’t stereotype. It’s just that your stereotypes are of the Tea Party and Preston Weatherby IV. </p>