Is calling someone a bigot technically an action of bigotry?

Asked by: xhammy
  • Yes, It's a very general term encompassing all of humanity.

    "A bigot is someone that is intolerant towards another's opinions" is one definition which makes it a little less of a generalizing term. Basically, If you've ever argued with someone or didn't approve of their views and opinions, You're a bigot. It's always amusing to be called a bigot, Because majority of the time it's by someone who has lost emotional control from their intolerance of your statements.

  • Hypocrisy is Hypocrisy

    Saying that someone is a bigot because they think and do, “something bigoted, ” is saying you do not tolerate their views or actions. You are intolerant of their views of the world, Making you a bigot. Just because you are a bigot, Does not mean you are wrong, But calling someone a bigot because you disagree with them and want to prove your point through name calling rather than by presenting facts, Or getting answers does in fact make you both intolerant and prejudiced.

  • Read a Dictionary

    Unwillingness to endure differing views, Opinions, Or beliefs, Or people is bigotry.

    Bigotry is neither good or bad. It all depends on what you're being a bigot about.

    - Bigotry can be good if you refuse to endure paedophilia


    - Bigotry can be bad if you refuse to endure a certain group of people

  • Read a Dictionary.

    Unwillingness to endure differing views, Opinions, Or beliefs, Or people is bigotry.

    Bigotry is neither good or bad. It all depends on what you're being a bigot about.

    - Bigotry can be good if you refuse to endure paedophilia


    - Bigotry can be bad if you refuse to endure a certain group of people

  • Yes, better ways to voice your opinion in most cases.

    Calling someone a bigot is a strong fighting word mostly used to insist "I'm right you're wrong so there" without giving a calm, rational line of reasoning. It's the equivalent of calling someone a homophobic. How are you going to get people to understand your perspective if all you do is ridicule and insult them, especially online?

  • This is a terrible question

    This all depends on the definition of Bigot being used.

    Websters dictionary defines it as "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance"

    Dictionary.Com defines it as "a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion."

    Calling someone a bigot, generally, coincides with an intolerance of their views or, phrased differently, their creed/belief/opinion. Thus by dictionary.Com, you are bigoted about their opinions because it doesn't align with your own (which is why you are calling them out).

    However, by the Webster definition, bigotry may be specifically about members of groups- which bigoted people aren't really considered to be a group. Except the KKK.

    Still, based on the diverse definitions of the term, it seems that if a "yes" or a "no" had to be chosen, "yes" would be more accurate than "no" for this question, as even webster's (though implying its about racial/minority/group discrimination) does say a bigot is "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices," and calling someone a bigot ultimately displays an intolerant devotion to your own opinions.

    This all being said, if someone is being racist call them out for being a bigot. I'd be fine with being told I'm bigoted about racism because I most certainly am. But unlike being bigoted about race, being bigoted about racism isn't a bad thing.

  • Catachresis and Acyrologia.

    Calling someone a bigot is by definition the exact same thing as being a bigot. It shows intolerance toward the opinions of others. I suspect this is a classic example of a catachresis where people want to use a word, but use it based on what they think it means, not what it actually means. The actual act of choosing the incorrect word is acyrologia. If you look at the opinions of those who disagree, several of them agree but try to explain it away. When you know the meaning of a word and try to use it to mean something else it creates gibberish, not a logical argument.

  • Yes, the way it is most commonly used, but not if it is used correctly.

    A bigot is someone who is not tolerant of opposing opinions, and to be tolerant is to allow opposing opinions to exist. Allowing them to exist means you are not actively trying to destroy or disallow them, even if you discourage or disagree with them. The only way you can disallow an opinion is to punish those who openly display it.
    Therefore a bitgot is one who is actively trying to punish people who do not hold certain opinions/beliefs. If you call someone any insult ever, you are displaying intolerance and you are trying to socially punish them. If this is because of their opinion, you are the bigot. However, if it is because of their actions, then you are simply not tolerating certain actions which is both expected and required of anyone and everyone, and is no way being bigoted. This is because we can all at the very least agree everyone should be intolerate of serial killers. Therefore it is acceptable and expected to be intolerant based on someones actions. Trying to punish people for their opinions is an action, so being intolerant of bigots is acceptable. I said yes because again, most people dont call others bigots for thier actions, and in trying to punish an opinion they prove themselves bigots.

  • It's circular reasoning

    It appears to be a statement that said to someone else's as a statement of their own intolerance and hence bigoted in itself. In the end people should be allowed to believe what they want and essentially "agree to disagree". I think best use of "bigot" is properly used in the context of ethnic intolerance, i.e. Hating someone purely on skin colour. It's a quality that cannot be changed. Bigotry as is commonly referred to in a religious context or opinion relating to social, philosophical, or political arenas is an expression of the person who calls another a bigot, their own bigotry and in tolerance.

  • Screaming Bigot makes you the bigot.

    Calling someone a bigot automatically makes you a bigot because you're not tolerant to their opinion. Liberals are the first ones to label someone a bigot, to shut down an argument because they don't have any facts to support their position. Next time, before you label some a bigot, you should ask yourself the question, Am I the Bigot?

  • Being intolerant of intolerance is not intolerance itself.

    This is often a ploy by people with hatred to project away themselves by accusing others that which they are guilty of.
    The racist white guy calling others racist for not tolerating his view of blacks or hispanics.
    The religious fundie call gays and gay allies as bigots for getting fed up with religion running amok with the idea of "religious freedom".
    People need to take stand against unfairness and be able to call out inequality where it exists.

  • Intolerance isn't to simply disagree.

    Solely calling someone a bigot doesn't imply that the bigot isn't tolerated, especially if the person does indeed express bigotry. That would simply be stating a fact.

    Tolerance: "showing willingness to allow the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with"

    But, is it bigotry to not tolerate intolerance? To have someone disagree with you is one thing, but for them to not allow the existence of your thoughts or behaviors is not something that should be tolerated in return. The views or actions of bigots aren't tolerated because they're personally threatening, not because they're different.

  • Actions Speak Loudest.

    Calling someone a bigot based on their acts of bigotry doesn't determine if you are a bigot too. You can call a person a bigot and still act tolerant towards said person. Even if that person is acting like a bigot towards you. I personally believe that this sounds more like a "tolerance of intolerance" point. The LGBT community is fighting this argument against people who do not wish to treat everyone equally because they disagree with them. You can disagree with me on something, and not kick me out of your store.

  • If I call a kettle black, does that make me a pot?

    Nothing wrong with intolerance. I don't tolerate a political system and media that have favored corporate interests over the wellbeing of humans for quite some time, and I think we need more bigotry against the influence of money on government. Corporations are unnatural and shouldn't have human rights. Where in any religious book is it said that corporations should be treated equally with natural persons? Hopefully future generations will have developed an intolerance for abuse of power that many in this day and age have developed against their fellow man who may look or act differently than they do. Bigotry is abhorrent when used to attempt to take away the inalienable rights of human beings, which is what certain political groups have done by conflating social issues with their designs to increase their grip on political power through corruptive lobbying and dismantling representative government.

  • Equality isn't bigotry

    In order to have a fully functioning, just society. People, particularly a minority, or group with limited representation, should have equal access to contribute to their community, while enjoying the protections and advantages of that society as equals.
    However, to deny a bigot from expressing his opinion, as odious as it may be, is bigotry.

  • It’s absolutely not

    Bigotry is not a disagreement. It is a state of mind where a person feels their opinion is the only truth and feels others with different beliefs or opinions are beneath them. And they sometimes even think others are less than human if they do not believe or think the way the bigot does

  • It does not make a person a bigot for calling out someone for what they are,

    Sometimes it makes them assess wether or not their way of thinking is actually a good way of thinking IMO it's like a splash of cold water in the face bringing a wave of clarity and thinking time on their part.

    Let's put it this way, A bigoted person has an opinion A and denies that Opinion B, C, And D has no right to exist at all, But if you as a person thinks that Opinion A is acceptable and so is Opinion B C, And D, And you explain this to them that Opinion A is an acceptable thing but so is Opinion B, C, And D,

    but because they are bigoted they will not accept this so calling them a bigot does not automatically make you a bigot, Unless you yourself find Opinion A unacceptable and find only Opinion B, C and D acceptable, Then at that point its "pot calling kettle, Black".

  • Bigot = intolerance. Stating so does not = bigot.

    If you are a bigot toward gays, For example, You are intolerant toward someone their sexual orientation. I can recognize that about you and still tolerate you. I can still accept that fact that you have this belief, And it is different than mine. In this example, You are a bigot. Based on your acts of bigotry. If you are intolerant toward gays though, You are the very person I have to worry about taking action and voting my rights away, Because you cannot accept that they're different than yours. You do not tolerate it. No part of that automatically makes me a bigot toward you for simply recognizing it about you. This isn't a "takes one to know one" situation. I can recognize that you're a murderer if you kill people. That doesn't automatically make me a murderer.

  • Calling an Orange an Orange

    This was stated earlier. Calling an orange an orange does not make you an orange. Calling out hate and ignorance does not make you ignorant. The fact that you’re calling it out shows that you are, In fact, Not ignorant. Just because you may be intolerant of an individual’s hateful words or actions certainly does not make you a bigot.

  • It’s a strawman attack.

    One can easily call out bigotry and be tolerant of it. Identifying a bigot and respecting their freedom of speech is not intolerance. If a person exhibits a position in a manner consistent with bigotry, Then “calling an orange an orange” is not bigotry. It’s situational at the very least

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.