.luckily I had quoted your post in my next response to you and it SHOWS that you edited yours,
Show me where. I edit my posts right after posting sometimes (as do you), but I certainly have not gone back again and edited anything that I then linked to in my last post.
What about my second link?
And my third?
Do you even have a leg to stand on?
That is popular usage, sorry. Your argument would be that the BBC, dictionary.com, wiki and urbandictionary.com all have an interpretation of the term that is at odds with popular usage. Show something else that has your meaning only as the popular usage. Even if it were the case that in the ghetto "wigga" is also understood to mean emulating ghetto asians, the circles in which the term originated don't have a monopoly on the term as it is understood by the majority of people outside of it.ps. that is NOT what it means in popular usage, thats what it means to some rich white guy writing a book... you are missing the point I was making entirely, that its a miss-perception of the upper class, not indicative of how its used within the circles the term originated in and is used in.
ETA: Your quote of my quote in the first link reads:
Who's editing, exactly, Curator? LOL! Desperate indeed.
If I hadn't written "poor urban blacks," why were you refuting my "poor urban blacks claim"? Did you really go to edit out "poor"??? damn, it's not that deep. [smh]