Most racist thing someone has said to you?

"HO HO SLANTY EYES, I NUKE YOUR COUNTRY HO DISHONOBRU FAMURY" My friend does this shit to me and it's hilarious.

I was in 7th grade. I just moved to Portland, Maine from Fresno, California. I was alone during an assembly. A group of boys threw mechanical pencils at me... That I didn't care about. What hurt me is when they said, "You should have been gassed to death, you filthy Jew!" Way to make someone who already hates themselves hate even more... For something they can't control nonetheless.

...what the FUCK. I want off this planet sometimes.

Amezuki: At the time, I didn't see much point to it. An old woman, whom was likely raised in a country where Gypsies are seen as criminals or animals, is not likely to learn any kind of lesson. All it would do is create a hassle for me. When you get right down to it, there's a great deal of racism we are either ignorant of or ignore when we do know about it. I'll give an example: The word Gypsy. Gypsy was tagged onto the Traveller tribes by Europeans because they thought they had originated in Egypt, rather than northern India. It was derogatory, and yet it's "okay" to use it now. Some Traveller families use it to describe themselves, and most kids these days don't even know it describes an ethnic group, they think it's a job title. It's turned into such a commonly used word that when it IS used in a derogatory fashion, or when someone takes offense to it, they're told to lighten up, or are argued with. That strikes me as a little stupid.

I find that eugenics is a good idea, and i'm intolerant of people's ethnicity. Ethnicity is an umbrella term that includes a person's race, beliefs, behaviors, and geographical origins. It would be considered irrational to assess a person by their somatic state as in the color of their skin, but what about practices? Practices and beliefs are changeable things, they are learnt qualities. When we look at cultures around the world, we see; rites of passage, body modification, grotesque penal solutions, and gender elitism. Now these things are not good or bad, but they a certainly with due criticism. On the subject of eugenics. When we look at history - we see genocide, yet this is crude and terribly exemplified act of eugenics. The idea here is that through eugenics, we could actually remove hereditary ailments of a population in generations to come through sponsored gene screening of fertilized zygotes or gametes. We could curb recessive alleles that cause sickle-cell anemia, reduce the cost of healthcare in time, and have everyone live longer, healthier lives. It would be entirely voluntary, and people will ultimately get healthier. Being if it is a free service, than we could notice significant changes in four generations. I should clarify, "When in Rome, do as the Romans".

The problem you run into with even the "idealized" kind of eugenics to which you're referring is this: who decides? Any program to improve the gene pool of the general population necessarily involves some form of one or both of the following: genetic modification, or reproductive control. Put simply: modifying their bodies, restricting their ability to have children, or both. These things require consent. The right to control our own bodies is one of the most fundamental human rights. Moreover, you're going to run into broad disagreement about what kinds of "hereditary ailments" ought to be eliminated. Sure, it's easy to point at something like sickle cell anemia. But what about Asperger's? Some Aspies are quite happy with the way they are; it is a defining part of their personality. What about hereditary deafness? Many will surely argue that this is a physical disability that ought to be eliminated, but to most people in the deaf/HH community, they feel no loss of something they've never had, and their deafness is an indelible part of their shared culture. You yourself may or may not be sympathetic to their arguments, but you can't guarantee that the people making the laws or decisions about this will be. This sort of thing can only go so far without running into huge ethical roadblocks--roadblocks which are impossible to bypass without giving up the kind of enforcement regime that is required for such an endeavor to be successful. The moment you cross the line between saying "I really wish people didn't have to die of cancer" and "anyone who carries a genetic disposition to cancer either can't have children or must be treated for it", you've crossed the moral event horizon into violating the basic medical and reproductive rights of your citizens.

It wouldn't be an enforced procedure, no sterilization, no repression on any person's reproductive rights'. The idea is that a couple wanting a child can go into a clinic, have blood work done, get an entire genetic portfolio presented, be consulted on possible hereditary diseases, and than select what genetic expressions they DON'T WANT (added emphasis). It would be an elective process, in that people with theological or religious reasons can go about doing what they want to do. This technology would allow for widows or even same sex partners have children as well. I'm not saying if certain genetic expressions are good or bad. That would be a subjective assertion of morality. It's not mandatory, but in time a population will socialize genes. I think of this as an ethical and reasonable practice. People can go about having cancerous, autistic, deaf babies... My own concerns/criticisms here is that we will have lesser genetic diversity, which could potentially backfire with a population being more prone to a pathogen. Yet, those concerns fall moot unless we get to the point where we are clones. Yet, a modest application here would merely improve the quality of life. To an extant humanity can go with genetics. We might be able to engineer feedback mechanisms to our genome, in where our immune and metabolic systems could rapidly change to allow for us to adapt in the most toxic of environments. We have already turned regular cells into stem cells. We could make a ooze of sorts, become a walking, talking, macro-leveled organism. Our planets history in a few days. The future can be so terribly beautiful.

I got a list but most noticable to high points are, - *Speaking Random Chinese to me* - Do you eat dog/cat. - Are you smart? - Can you do my homework. - Do you have a small dick? - Make me some chinese food. - Yellow Belly - You Jap - O NO! GODZILLA! - You like that cartoon shit? - Don't eat my dog/cat! - *People speaks slowly in English thinking I don't speak English* I got plenty more including variety of stories.