[lostalex]

It was ridiculous. he didn't call someone the n-word. if he had called someone the N-word then i agree he should be cautioned, but he was just explaining his feelings about it as a black man. if i was talking about the use of the word ****** or gay i wouldn't think it was fair to caution me.

Although the way they cautioned him seemed like the producers knew it wasn't really a big deal, and they didn't give him an official warning so, I guess that's okay. They were just worrying about the over sensivitve idiots that will complain to ofcom over any thing.

[Northern Monkey]

Anyone else would have got warned for it so it's only fair that Scoop did.One rule for everybody.

[Ammi]

..I thought that the whole conversation was one of the most interesting BB conversations..and so often we don't get that anymore in HL's/just all of the drama, conflict and argumenst etc..and then they gave him a warning/caution or whatever it was...just silly really...

[rubymoo]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..I thought that the whole conversation was one of the most interesting BB conversations..and so often we don't get that anymore in HL's/just all of the drama, conflict and argumenst etc..and then they gave him a warning/caution or whatever it was...just silly really...

I completely agree, i really enjoyed listening to the conversation, and i do get where Scoop was coming from, it was silly to remind him of the rules, because in all fairness he was just answering a question, we're going to get to the stage where everything is censored, i think perspective is needed.

[JoshBB]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

Anyone else would have got warned for it so it's only fair that Scoop did.One rule for everybody.

1) he is black.
2) he was explaining exactly why it is okay for black people to use the word but not other people.

It's called reclaiming a word.

[bots]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

1) he is black.
2) he was explaining exactly why it is okay for black people to use the word but not other people.

It's called reclaiming a word.

1. it makes no difference. As he was explaining, much has to do with the intention when using the word. Its actually quite ridiculous to say someone black can't be racist as there are many different sub categories within every race that can then be further targeted.

2. He was explaining why he used it. Doesn't stop it being racist, and his explanation backed up the fact that it was being used in a derogatory fashion.

3. That's what anyone who is racist would say, although I know that's not what you meant.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

1. it makes no difference. As he was explaining, much has to do with the intention when using the word. Its actually quite ridiculous to say someone black can't be racist as there are many different sub categories within every race that can then be further targeted.

2. He was explaining why he used it. Doesn't stop it being racist, and his explanation backed up the fact that it was being used in a derogatory fashion.

3. That's what anyone who is racist would say, although I know that's not what you meant.

1. it does make a difference. i agree a black person can be racist, but he clearly wasn't being racist when he used the word. he even said before he used the word out loud..."i'm going to use the word, because i am black", so he was warning people before he used it, to understand he was only using it in an appropriate way so that he could explain his feelings. he wasn't actually calling anyone specifically that word. he was talking about the word in a general sense.

2. it wasn't racist. he basically said the same thing that chris rock has said hundreds of times in his act, do you think chris rock is racist?

3. he's clearly not racist.

[bots]

Originally Posted by lostalex

1. it does make a difference. i agree a black person can be racist, but he clearly wasn't being racist when he used the word.

2. it wasn't racist. he basically said the same thing that chris rock has said hundreds of times in his act, do you think chris rock is racist?

3. he's clearly not racist.

I wouldn't necessarily say that he is racist, but I would say he was bigoted - don't get me wrong, he is actually a favourite of mine, but in explaining he was describing target groups that these things can apply to and why it was OK. That has undertones if one is being pedantic.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

1) he is black.
2) he was explaining exactly why it is okay for black people to use the word but not other people.

It's called reclaiming a word.

I don't care what colour he is.If it's a racist word then it's a racist word.Either everyone can use it or nobody can.BB can't start being selective about who obeys which rules.

[JoshBB]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

I don't care what colour he is.If it's a racist word then it's a racist word.Either everyone can use it or nobody can.BB can't start being selective about who obeys which rules.

I'm sorry, but stop being ignorant and listen to my point. This is why people don't bother explaining things to people like you.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

I'm sorry, but stop being ignorant and listen to my point. This is why people don't bother explaining things to people like you.

People like me?

Not agreeing with your point is not ignorant,It is a difference of opinion.

[Northern Monkey]

Saying black people can say 'x' word but white people can't is discrimination based on colour in itself.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

Saying black people can say 'x' word but white people can't is discrimination based on colour in itself.

not really, because words exist in a context. the world is not a dictionary where all words are separate and exist on their own.

words exist in a context, and especially a word that has an emotionally value for black people means there is a different meaning when a black person uses it.

words do not exist in a vacuum the way that numbers do. language is about how words are used and what the intention of the speaker is, they are not all just individual entities the way numbers are. a number has a certain value, and nothing can change that single number's value. but words are meaningless without context, so context does matter.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by lostalex

not really, because words exist in a context. the world is not a dictionary where all words are separate and exist on their own.

words exist in a context, and especially a word that has an emotionally value for black people means there is a different meaning when a black person uses it.

words do not exist in a vacuum the way that numbers do. language is about how words are used and what the intention of the speaker is, they are not all just individual entities the way numbers are. a number has a certain value, and nothing can change that single number's value. but words are meaningless without context, so context does matter.

Very true.So when Ken Morley described a story in his past about when he jokingly called his friend(who happens to be black) Frank Bruno's music 'negro rythyms' the context there there was that there was no malicious intent to it,He was'nt using it as an insult to anybody and he was just retelling a story from his past and if i remember correctly he was warned for it just as Scoop was warned for using the other and arguabley slightly worse 'N' word.BB have to be consistent or viewers are gonna start calling BS on the rules and the show will suffer.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

Very true.So when Ken Morley described a story in his past about when he jokingly called his friend(who happens to be black) Frank Bruno's music 'negro rythyms' the context there there was that there was no malicious intent to it,He was'nt using it as an insult to anybody and he was just retelling a story from his past and if i remember correctly he was warned for it just as Scoop was warned for using the other and arguabley slightly worse 'N' word.BB have to be consistent or viewers are gonna start calling BS on the rules and the show will suffer.

well no it's not the same thing, because that person you are taking about was using it as a word to describe someone else. Scoop never used the word to describe another person, he was using the word to talk about the word itself in a general context.

Scoop didn't call anyone a ****** or a negro.... he used the word ****** because he was taking about the word ******, he wasn't calling another person a ******.

[Northern Monkey]

A

Originally Posted by lostalex

well no it's not the same thing, because that person you are taking about was using it as a word to describe someone else. Scoop never used the word to describe another person, he was using the word to talk about the word itself in a general context.

Scoop didn't call anyone a ****** or a negro.... he used the word ****** because he was taking about the word ******, he wasn't calling another person a ******.

Neither was Ken though,He was describing a style of music as "negro rythyms".Technically Scoop was actually describing people as ******* when he said white trailer trash people can also be *******.

I don't care about Scoop saying it,It does'nt offend me personally and yes he was just talking about the word itself but i'm just saying that there should be some consistency and BB should not discriminate between different races as far as the rules are concerned.

Supposing in this convo that Scoop was having that he never got that warning but in the same convo a white person had said the word ****** in the same way Scoop did,Totally harmlessly.Should the white person have got a warning?

I think no as i also think in a perfect scenario Scoop should'nt either but white people have previously been warned for it so BB have set there own bar on what words are acceptable and have no choice but to be consistent.

[Gusto Brunt]

if they were so concerned, why didn't BB stop him after he said the word twice.

Why did they let him go on and on.

And on?

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Gusto Brunt

if they were so concerned, why didn't BB stop him after he said the word twice.

Why did they let him go on and on.

And on?

they didn't even call him into the diary room until the next day, and this conversation was in the morning the day before, so it took them 24 hours to call him into the diary room. and it sounded like the producers didn't even really want to, i think they did it just to cover their butts for Ofcom.

you can tell when the producers are mad and upset with a housemate, and they clearly were not upset with him over it. and good for him for not making a big deal over the caution.

[Gusto Brunt]

Originally Posted by lostalex

they didn't even call him into the diary room until the next day, and this conversation was in the morning the day before, so it took them 24 hours to call him into the diary room. and it sounded like the producers didn't even really want to, i think they did it just to cover their butts for Ofcom.

you can tell when the producers are mad and upset with a housemate, and they clearly were not upset with him over it. and good for him for not making a big deal over the caution.

BB really is clueless.

[Slevin]

i had no problem with it and i agree with others it was one of the more interesting real conversations recently. i also cant stand saying the n-word as well. as long as its not used in a malicious way. like relaying it back that someone was saying it without getting their panties in a bunch.

[Robodog]

It was the most pathetic warning ever.

Scoop gave the most interesting, considered and intelligent view on the n word that we have seen on tv for a long time.

It was the total opposite of racism, yet he was 'cautioned' like he was being racist!!

Eammon calls Farrah 'nasty' and 'thick' and gets a huge round of applause for his harmful intent.

Scoop has an adult and reasoned conversation about black people reclaiming power in light of the n word and gets cautioned - when there is nothing but GOOD intent in his discussion.

Shows you just how dangerously stupid this show has become when bad intentions are rewarded with applause and good intentions are punished with cautions.

.

[Liam-]

Did they actually give him a warning though? I thought they just told him to not say that word again

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Did they actually give him a warning though? I thought they just told him to not say that word again

i think it was just a caution, not an official warning. i don't think it counts towards the whole "3 strikes and you're out" rule.

When big brother gives an "official warning" they make it clear and use a totally different tone of voice.

[Robodog]

Yeah you are right, not an official warning, but still he was warned/cautioned whatever when all he was doing was being actively anti-racist with mature debate.

He should be applauded, not punished.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Robodog

Yeah you are right, not an official warning, but still he was warned/cautioned whatever when all he was doing was being actively anti-racist with mature debate.

He should be applauded, not punished.

This ^^^