why do black people use you in the wrong context? such is "you ugly" instead of "you're ugly" I know u guys can differentiate, it's a nuisance

— Asked by Anonymous

miniprof:

rsbenedict:

prettyboyshyflizzy:

you a bitch

It’s called copula deletion, or zero copula. Many languages and dialects, including Ancient Greek and Russian, delete the copula (the verb to be) when the context is obvious.

So an utterance like “you a bitch” in AAVE is not an example of a misused you, but an example of a sentence that deletes the copular verb (are), which is a perfectly valid thing to do in that dialect, just as deleting an /r/ after a vowel is a perfectly valid thing to do in an upper-class British dialect.

What’s more, it’s been shown that copula deletion occurs in AAVE exactly in those contexts where copula contraction occurs in so-called “Standard American English.” That is, the basic sentence “You are great” can become “You’re great” in SAE and “You great” in AAVE, but “I know who you are” cannot become “I know who you’re” in SAE, and according to reports, neither can you get “I know who you” in AAVE.

In other words, AAVE is a set of grammatical rules just as complex and systematic as SAE, and the widespread belief that it is not is nothing more than yet another manifestation of deeply internalized racism.

the magic begins » A ship you like, but you think everyone else doesn’t

“She will,” said Harry. He could not bear to contemplate the alternative. “She’s tough, Luna, much tougher than you’d think. She’s probably teaching all the inmates about Wrackspurts and Nargles.” 

(via halfhardtorock)

kushitekalkulus:

When white academics and scholars make erroneous claims such as:
There is no evidence of any ancient civilization in Sub Saharan Africa
Or
There is no evidence of any writing or architecture in Sub Saharan Africa
Or
There is no evidence of any complex language in Sub Saharan Africa
You should know that you are listening to a cold blooded racist. Most black people, do not know the origin meaning or purpose behind the term “Sub Saharan Africa”. As far as archeology is concerned the most preserved elements of ancient African culture exist in or near the Sahara while the most attacked and sabotaged areas of Africa from a historical and cultural perspective are beneath the Sahara. The purpose of the term “Sub Saharan African” is to separate Black people from the more preserved elements of our history and impose a false white and pale Arab paradigm on all great things black and African.
It should be noted that most of the people in Saharan Africa are black and most of the people in Sub Saharan Africa are black.
Alik Shahadeh writes on this topic:
Sub-Saharan Africa is a linguistic vestige of racist colonialism, nested in the notion of divide and rule, which articulates a perception based on European terms of homogeneity. The notion of some invisible border, which divides the North of African from the South, is rooted in racism, which in part assumes that sand is an obstacle for African language and culture. This band of sand hence confines Africans to the bottom of a European imposed location, which exists neither linguistically (Afro-Asiatic languages), ethnically (Tuareg ), politically (African Union, Arab league), Economically (CEN-SAD) or physically (Sudan and Chad).The over emphasis on sand as a defining feature in African history is grossly misleading as cultures, trade, and languages do not stop when they meet geographic deserts. Thus Sub-Africa is another divisive vestige of colonial domination which balkanized Africa assigning everything below the “waist belt” of Africa as negative.

kushitekalkulus:

When white academics and scholars make erroneous claims such as:

There is no evidence of any ancient civilization in Sub Saharan Africa

Or

There is no evidence of any writing or architecture in Sub Saharan Africa

Or

There is no evidence of any complex language in Sub Saharan Africa

You should know that you are listening to a cold blooded racist. Most black people, do not know the origin meaning or purpose behind the term “Sub Saharan Africa”. As far as archeology is concerned the most preserved elements of ancient African culture exist in or near the Sahara while the most attacked and sabotaged areas of Africa from a historical and cultural perspective are beneath the Sahara. The purpose of the term “Sub Saharan African” is to separate Black people from the more preserved elements of our history and impose a false white and pale Arab paradigm on all great things black and African.

It should be noted that most of the people in Saharan Africa are black and most of the people in Sub Saharan Africa are black.

Alik Shahadeh writes on this topic:

Sub-Saharan Africa is a linguistic vestige of racist colonialism, nested in the notion of divide and rule, which articulates a perception based on European terms of homogeneity. The notion of some invisible border, which divides the North of African from the South, is rooted in racism, which in part assumes that sand is an obstacle for African language and culture. This band of sand hence confines Africans to the bottom of a European imposed location, which exists neither linguistically (Afro-Asiatic languages), ethnically (Tuareg ), politically (African Union, Arab league), Economically (CEN-SAD) or physically (Sudan and Chad).The over emphasis on sand as a defining feature in African history is grossly misleading as cultures, trade, and languages do not stop when they meet geographic deserts. Thus Sub-Africa is another divisive vestige of colonial domination which balkanized Africa assigning everything below the “waist belt” of Africa as negative.

(via thelimitedqueen)

I know this is ignorant so I'm sorry, but can you explain to me the negativity behind calling people g*psies? I didn't know it was a slur until recently and thought it was a lifestyle/culture. Can you explain why it's offensive and how to not offend?

— Asked by Anonymous

shitrichcollegekidssay:

To understand I think you should read this actual account of anti-Romani racism from a Romani-American, Maria Catherine Trefil. I can tell you for days why it’s offensive, but I feel it’s best to read the words from someone who actually faces this type of discrimination. 

[Warning: racial slurs below]

I see the sign at the entrance of the thrift store — “GYPSIE’S SPECIAL: 75% OFF EVERYTHING” — and, automatically, my blood is boiling, but I am silent. It’s not the first time that I’ve seen signs like it. From flat-out racism to the encouragement of well-meant, but nonetheless offensive, stereotypes I’ve already heard everything in reference to my people and, previously, there have been few instances, outside of college classrooms, where I felt safe enough to speak out against such things.

Read More

The Musketeers Meets Parks and Recreation 41/?

Doesn’t this make Aramis “I’d be lying if I said I hadn’t thought about it”? That works