Defining the term 'Thug'.

[Arctish]

We have a minor issue in another thread in which people are discussing the term 'thug' and how it is used. I think having a clear, mutually agreed upon definition would be helpful. So, what do you think the term 'thug' means? How would you define it?

 

[LordKiran]

Do you know what a euphemism is? If you do, then you also understand why this thread is not necessary.

 

[Arctish]

Do you know what a euphemism is? If you do, then you also understand why this thread is not necessary.

euphemism

eu·phe·mism

/ˈyo͞ofəˌmizəm/

noun: euphemism; plural noun: euphemisms

a mild or indirect word or expression substituted for one considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant or embarrassing.

So, 'thug' is a euphemism for ni**er? Is that why some posters don't use it to describe whites?

 

[LordKiran]

euphemism

eu·phe·mism

/ˈyo͞ofəˌmizəm/

noun: euphemism; plural noun: euphemisms

a mild or indirect word or expression substituted for one considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant or embarrassing.

So, 'thug' is a euphemism for ni**er? Is that why some posters don't use it to describe whites?

A euphemism can be anything as a stand in for anything else. For this reason, the exact definition isn't important so much as what certain people are trying to imply when they use such a euphemism.

But pretty much. I'd argue that if we go by pure definition of the word "Thug" then this would apply to plenty of police officers over the past few years. Yet it's hard to consider such people "Thugs" when you're rushing to their defense in any given situation, purely on the principle that they are cops and deserve to have their knobs sucked off.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I've always thought "thug" meant violent dumb criminal, typically in gangs or associated with organized crime. Pretty much like "mook". Never occurred to me a racial component to "thug".

 

[Derec]

I've always thought "thug" meant violent dumb criminal, typically in gangs or associated with organized crime. Pretty much like "mook". Never occurred to me a racial component to "thug".

A thug can also be independent, but the defining quality is street level, usually violent crime. Your muggers, your robbers, your drug dealers, your drive-by shooters.
And yes, usually not too bright.
Like this guy:

 

[Arctish]

I've always thought "thug" meant violent dumb criminal, typically in gangs or associated with organized crime. Pretty much like "mook". Never occurred to me a racial component to "thug".

A thug can also be independent, but the defining quality is street level, usually violent crime. Your muggers, your robbers, your drug dealers, your drive-by shooters.

Okay, so a person with a documented history of violence qualifies as a thug. That would be especially true if he's been arrested and convicted or pled guilty to crimes of violence on more than one occasion, right?

What about someone who has a documented history of using the threat of violence to intimidate others? Is that thug behavior or something else?

 

[thebeave]

Well, let's not forget. President Obama used the term "thug" to refer to the Baltimore rioters. Does he think "thug" is synonomous with "nigger"? You tell me.

I like the Doctor of Common Sense's take on the use of the word "thug":

 

[Arctish]

Well, let's not forget. President Obama used the term "thug" to refer to the Baltimore rioters. Does he think "thug" is synonomous with "nigger"? You tell me.

I like the Doctor of Common Sense's take on the use of the word "thug":

The guy in that video said thugs were:
"frikking idiots tearing up the city"
"frikking fools burning down the city, rioting, hitting people in the head"
"acting like a bunch of farm animals"
"hitting white folks for being white"
"acting like a bunch of hooligans"

So basically his definition of thug is someone who commits crimes of violence, damages property, riots, behaves like a farm animal, and exhibits racism.

Everything except the 'acting like farm animals' and 'exhibits racism' is in line with what we already have. Anything else you want to add to our working definition?

 

[RavenSky]

I've always thought "thug" meant violent dumb criminal, typically in gangs or associated with organized crime. Pretty much like "mook". Never occurred to me a racial component to "thug".

A thug can also be independent, but the defining quality is street level, usually violent crime. Your muggers, your robbers, your drug dealers, your drive-by shooters.
And yes, usually not too bright.
Like this guy:

Note: Derec posts a video of a black man he considers a "thug".

Despite multiple threads discussing Derec's long history of equating "thug" with "black man", he couldn't even take a few extra seconds to find a video of a white guy he considers a "thug" if only in an attempt to disprove our opinions of his intent.

Nope. He was true to form yet again. When Derec uses the word "thug", he means "black man". What anyone else defines the word as really doesn't matter because that was never the point of the other discussion.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The word thug is nothing to do with whether a person is an African American or not as it defines this as a violent person especially a criminals which was borrowed from Hindi which referred to a particular type of criminal.

Our modern language has expanded this to mean any person who acts in such a manner.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/thug

1.A violent person, especially a criminal.
‘he was attacked by a gang of thugs’
More example sentencesSynonyms

2 historical A member of an organization of robbers and assassins in India. Devotees of the goddess Kali, the Thugs waylaid and strangled their victims, usually travellers, in a ritually prescribed manner. They were suppressed by the British in the 1830s.

Dictionary.com
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/thug?s=t

Word Origin and History for thug Expand
n.
1810, "member of a gang of murderers and robbers in India who strangled their victims," from Marathi thag, thak "cheat, swindler," Hindi thag, perhaps from Sanskrit sthaga-s "cunning, fraudulent," possibly from sthagayati "(he) covers, conceals," from PIE root *(s)teg- "cover" (see stegosaurus ). Transferred sense of "ruffian, cutthroat" first recorded 1839. The more correct Indian name is phanseegur, and the activity was described in English as far back as c.1665. Rigorously prosecuted by the British from 1831, they were driven from existence, but the process extended over the rest of the 19c.

 

[fast]

Aggressively pushy in getting ones way.

 

[Arctish]

Aggressively pushy in getting ones way.

That describes about 1/3 of the population of the US.

2/3 if you ask Canadians.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Aggressively pushy in getting ones way.

That describes about 1/3 of the population of the US.

2/3 if you ask Canadians.

A thug is defined as a violent person inferring criminal. How can this relate to 1/3 of the US population?

 

[LordKiran]

The word thug is nothing to do with whether a person is an African American or not as it defines this as a violent person especially a criminals which was borrowed from Hindi which referred to a particular type of criminal.

Correct! Derec simply uses the word as a euphemism for black people, while disingenuously asserting that this isn't the case by pointing to the one time he didn't.

That describes about 1/3 of the population of the US.

2/3 if you ask Canadians.

A thug is defined as a violent person inferring criminal. How can this relate to 1/3 of the US population?

Words can't "infer" anything.

 

[Arctish]

That describes about 1/3 of the population of the US.

2/3 if you ask Canadians.

A thug is defined as a violent person inferring criminal. How can this relate to 1/3 of the US population?

"Aggressively pushy in getting ones way" is fast's definition, not mine.

I don't think it's useful. It's overly broad and subjective, and ignores the criminal aspect most people think is a defining trait.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Correct! Derec simply uses the word as a euphemism for black people, while disingenuously asserting that this isn't the case by pointing to the one time he didn't.

That describes about 1/3 of the population of the US.

2/3 if you ask Canadians.

A thug is defined as a violent person inferring criminal. How can this relate to 1/3 of the US population?

Words can't "infer" anything.

Taking the origin of the word see one of the definitions of infer below.

Dictionary.com
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/thug?s=t

Word Origin and History for thug Expand
n.
1810, "member of a gang of murderers and robbers in India who strangled their victims," from Marathi thag, thak "cheat, swindler," Hindi thag, perhaps from Sanskrit sthaga-s "cunning, fraudulent," possibly from sthagayati "(he) covers, conceals," from PIE root *(s)teg- "cover" (see stegosaurus ). Transferred sense of "ruffian, cutthroat" first recorded 1839. The more correct Indian name is phanseegur, and the activity was described in English as far back as c.1665. Rigorously prosecuted by the British from 1831, they were driven from existence, but the process extended over the rest of the 19c.

I am using this definition

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/infer
to hint; imply; suggest.

 

[LordKiran]

Correct! Derec simply uses the word as a euphemism for black people, while disingenuously asserting that this isn't the case by pointing to the one time he didn't.

That describes about 1/3 of the population of the US.

2/3 if you ask Canadians.

A thug is defined as a violent person inferring criminal. How can this relate to 1/3 of the US population?

Words can't "infer" anything.

Taking the origin of the word see one of the definitions of infer below.

Dictionary.com
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/thug?s=t

Word Origin and History for thug Expand
n.
1810, "member of a gang of murderers and robbers in India who strangled their victims," from Marathi thag, thak "cheat, swindler," Hindi thag, perhaps from Sanskrit sthaga-s "cunning, fraudulent," possibly from sthagayati "(he) covers, conceals," from PIE root *(s)teg- "cover" (see stegosaurus ). Transferred sense of "ruffian, cutthroat" first recorded 1839. The more correct Indian name is phanseegur, and the activity was described in English as far back as c.1665. Rigorously prosecuted by the British from 1831, they were driven from existence, but the process extended over the rest of the 19c.

I am using this definition

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/infer
to hint; imply; suggest.

Interesting quote from that same page:

Infer has been used to mean “to hint or suggest” since the 16th century by speakers and writers of unquestioned ability and eminence: The next speaker criticized the proposal, inferring that it was made solely to embarrass the government.Despite its long history, many 20th-century usage guides condemn the use, maintaining that the proper word for the intended sense is imply and that to use infer is to lose a valuable distinction between the two words.
Although the claimed distinction has probably existed chiefly in the pronouncements of usage guides, and although the use of infer to mean “to suggest” usually produces no ambiguity, the distinction too has a long history and is widely observed by many speakers and writers.

So I dunno..Agree to disagree?

 

[untermensche]

In my lifetime the biggest thugs were the Bush administration who lied and distorted and misrepresented and strong armed and bribed and then attacked another nation massively and deliberately. Thugs on a scale too large for most people to fathom.

Large thugs with a lot of resources do fine in the US.

Street criminals arise usually because of economic conditions combined with either alcohol or some other kind of drug.

It's usually the last stage of a life begun with hardship spiraling downward.

Certainly you want to rid yourself of street criminals.

Which brings us back to the real thugs that spend trillions for useless wars but won't spend anything to improve conditions in the many many US slums, usually segregated by race.

 

[fast]

In my lifetime the biggest thugs were the Bush administration who lied and distorted and misrepresented and strong armed and bribed and then attacked another nation massively and deliberately. Thugs on a scale too large for most people to fathom.

Large thugs with a lot of resources do fine in the US.

Street criminals arise usually because of economic conditions combined with either alcohol or some other kind of drug.

It's usually the last stage of a life begun with hardship spiraling downward.

Certainly you want to rid yourself of street criminals.

Which brings us back to the real thugs that spend trillions for useless wars but won't spend anything to improve conditions in the many many US slums, usually segregated by race.

Did you just say street criminals are not real thugs?