VW actually wants to unionize its American factory; Republicans freak out.

[Felch]

To me it's like the old Chris Rock spiel about ******s. Not all blacks are ******s, and not all Pakistanis are Pakis. But some are, and there's cause for a word to separate the decent black folk from the Michael Vicks of the world, just as we need to distinguish Malala Yousafzai from the cowards who shot her.

[regexcellent]

But pouring acid on a girl is practically a rite of passage over there. It's an integral part of their culture. You can't expect them to change something like that so quickly when everyone is doing it.

We need to preserve this way of life because all cultures are precious and it would be a shame if it died out, furthermore

[kentonio]

Not that I recall. Didn't realize Paki is dirty over there

My apologies for being sharp about it then.

[MrFun]

Also states rights ain't a dog whistle. Sure, it's a useful policy position for those that wish to bring back Jim Crow, but that's a vanishingly small number of people, and the remainder simply think the feds are too powerful.

Dog whistle is generally what MrFun-esque liberals say when they want to turn an opponent's argument into a strawman. "I don't wanna talk about complicated, multifaceted issues like how powerful should the federal government be--so I'm just gonna say you're secretly a KKK member who wants to mass murder poor people".

Can you quote me where I have said or implied that "states' rights" always has to be used, or can only be used, as a dog whistle term?

[Aeson]

No, they're not the same. A dog whistle is a coded message that only the target audience is expected to perceive. A euphemism is just a more pleasing word used to avoid saying what you really mean. A euphemism is not necessarily a code though.

A euphemism is definitely a code.

[Felch]

I think of a dog whistle as being more subtle than that though. Dog whistles take advantage of esoteric insider knowledge and codes. As an extreme example, a cryptoracist speaker might pepper his speech with the number 88, which is a neo-nazi code number, or emphasize those numbers when they come up (e.g. "..back in nineteen-EIGHTY-EIGHT"). An outsider wouldn't pick up on it, but the neo-nazis in the audience will.

[Hauldren Collider]

It can't be a code unless it's meant to obfuscate meaning to a third party. Euphemisms are intended to impute meaning, not obfuscate it. "Pro late term abortion" has a fairly negative emotional charge to it. By going around calling yourself pro-choice, you're not making any secret of what you believe, yet the way you say it imputes the notion that you view it favorably and others should too.

The problem with "dog whistles" is that there's no way to actually produce such a code in American politics. There isn't some underground Closet Racist Convention where they all get together and say "okay, Voter ID Law is how we're gonna say 'black people need to be hanged' without everyone knowing! Muahahaha!"

[Felch]

And no euphemisms are not code, unless you mean in the extremely broad definition by which all spoken language is a code. Codes are meant to protect a message from unintended recipients. Euphemism is just using a more pleasing word in place of what you might otherwise say, like "yogurt" instead of "rotten milk."

[Aeson]

That's not what the term "dog whistle" means. "Pro-choice" can be considered a euphemism because it sounds more positive than "pro-legal-abortion" but it's not a dog whistle because a politician who claims to be pro-choice is not sending a coded signal that only a small subset of the electorate will pick up on. If you claim all euphemisms are "dog whistles" you are ruining the metaphor and skullfuсking it.

edit: x-post

The term dog whistle doesn't have to mean only a small subset of people will understand it. You could be surrounded by dogs, or only have a few. Doesn't change the mechanics of it.

[Felch]

No, the dogs are the intended audience, the rest of the public are people. Jesus, did you really not grasp that metaphor?

[Hauldren Collider]

[MrFun]

It can't be a code unless it's meant to obfuscate meaning to a third party. Euphemisms are intended to impute meaning, not obfuscate it. "Pro late term abortion" has a fairly negative emotional charge to it. By going around calling yourself pro-choice, you're not making any secret of what you believe, yet the way you say it imputes the notion that you view it favorably and others should too.

The problem with "dog whistles" is that there's no way to actually produce such a code in American politics. There isn't some underground Closet Racist Convention where they all get together and say "okay, Voter ID Law is how we're gonna say 'black people need to be hanged' without everyone knowing! Muahahaha!"

Not all pro-choice people support or agree with late-term abortions.

The other thing I find unfairly misleading is how the other side have co-opted "pro-life" for themselves, as if to imply that pro-choice people are anti-life, or that they are enthusiastic about killing fetuses. Pro-choice people are not "anti-life."

[Aeson]

And no euphemisms are not code, unless you mean in the extremely broad definition by which all spoken language is a code. Codes are meant to protect a message from unintended recipients. Euphemism is just using a more pleasing word in place of what you might otherwise say, like "yogurt" instead of "rotten milk."

Euphemisms are a code. Euphemisms also are meant to protect the meaning from a specific sort of comprehension, and they actually work that way.

Which is why some lady will blanch at "****" and think "poop" is cute ... even though at some level she surely understands that both mean the same thing ... part of her brain is interpreting it different.

[Hauldren Collider]

MrFun, once again you are awarded with the Apolyton Daily Missing the Motherfucking Forest through the Trees award.

Not all pro-choice people support or agree with late-term abortions.

The other thing I find unfairly misleading is how the other side have co-opted "pro-life" for themselves, as if to imply that pro-choice people are anti-life, or that they are enthusiastic about killing fetuses. Pro-choice people are not "anti-life."

I'm going to address this, though I'm not confident you have the necessary brainpower to understand me. Pro-life people believe they are not anti-choice. Pro-choice people believe they are not "anti-life". That doesn't change the fact that there is nothing misleading about describing yourself as pro-life in the sense that everyone knows exactly what you mean. We mentally translate these euphemisms to pro-abortion and anti-abortion. The adoption of pro-choice and pro-life is simply draws attention to what they feel is the central thesis to the reasoning behind their policy position. Capiche?

[Ben Kenobi]

The other thing I find unfairly misleading is how the other side have co-opted "pro-life" for themselves, as if to imply that pro-choice people are anti-life, or that they are enthusiastic about killing fetuses. Pro-choice people are not "anti-life."

How are pro choice people 'pro choice', when they support the individual mandate portion of Obamacare? If they were truly 'pro choice', wouldn't they support waivers for everyone who opposes abortion?