I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know what my own viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the reactions of a larger population.
I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how they can hurt people. I took up the position that words are only words and the only power they have is that which we choose to give them.
One person on the other side of the argument describes himself as "queer". I made the following statement:
"Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has lost its power as an insult."
An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
"Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to hate you?"
A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into the thread and posted:
"Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say can be "how did I end up on the floor?""
/* end neutral commentary */
Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any use of the word is racist.
My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
Opinions?
-- Brother Blaze The Unintentional Monk Order of St. Brendan, Navigator
> I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know what my own > viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the reactions of a larger > population.
> I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
> In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how they can > hurt people. I took up the position that words are only words and the > only power they have is that which we choose to give them.
> One person on the other side of the argument describes himself as > "queer". I made the following statement:
> "Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel > head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has lost its > power as an insult."
> An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
> "Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to hate > you?"
> A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into the thread > and posted:
> "Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say can be > "how did I end up on the floor?""
> /* end neutral commentary */
> Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any > use of the word is racist.
> My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
> Opinions?
I'm with you, but then you are arguing from the POV that the word only has as much power as the hearer chooses to give it. They are clearly coming form the other position: that it has an intrinsic power that no amount of context can remove. To someone who holds that position, there *is* no non-insulting use, the very existance of the word is an insult.
I think that the truth is somewhere between the two positions; there are a very few words that are so contaminated by past usage that they have acquired a certain level of power that context can, at best, reduce but not do away with completely.
<bl...@geekniche.com> wrote: >I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know what my own >viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the reactions of a larger population.
>I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
>In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how they can hurt >people. I took up the position that words are only words and the only >power they have is that which we choose to give them.
>One person on the other side of the argument describes himself as >"queer". I made the following statement:
>"Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel >head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has lost its >power as an insult."
>An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
>"Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to hate you?"
>A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into the thread >and posted:
>"Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say can be >"how did I end up on the floor?""
>/* end neutral commentary */
>Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any >use of the word is racist.
>My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
>Opinions?
In the context of the USA, I understood it to be racist. One could argue a case that discussing the word itself is not racist per se, but applying it to a person to be so. In that context, you usage would not have been racist.
However, the problem with words is not what we mean by them, but what our listeners mean by them. There are some people who invest some words with so much power that they cannot hear the word without reacting.
We have had some discussion (and at least one court case) about the "Nigger" Coombs Stand at one of our sporting venues. "Nigger" Coombs was a brilliant rugby player for Queensland. He was white, almost albino - in typical Aust reverse slang, he was nicknamed "Nigger" at an early age, from I might add the name of a popular brand of shoe blacking.
I understand that there is also some discussion going on about a remake of the movie, the Dambusters. The head of the squadron had a black dog named "Nigger"; it figures in the book and in the original movie. However, there are those who want to rewrite history & either leave the dog out, or give it another name. To me, that is PC rampant.
> I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know what my own > viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the reactions of a larger population.
> I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
> In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how they can hurt > people. I took up the position that words are only words and the only > power they have is that which we choose to give them.
> One person on the other side of the argument describes himself as > "queer". I made the following statement:
> "Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel > head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has lost its > power as an insult."
> An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
> "Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to hate you?"
> A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into the thread > and posted:
> "Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say can be > "how did I end up on the floor?""
> /* end neutral commentary */
> Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any > use of the word is racist.
> My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
> Opinions?
> -- > Brother Blaze > The Unintentional Monk > Order of St. Brendan, Navigator
I agree with you, and next time a black asks you that, ask them if all the young black people running around using that word hate black people.
With that said, you have to realize that there is an "in" group that can use words like that and get away with it. You are not a part of the in group that can use "the N word" without getting into trouble for it.
My belief is that that particular word has become shorthand for a certian type of black person. If we were talking about the same kind of white person "White Trash" would be the phrase we use.
On Nov 4, 3:11 pm, M Blaze Miskulin <bl...@geekniche.com> wrote: <snip>
> Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any > use of the word is racist.
> My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
> Opinions?
I understand where they are coming from, but I agree with you. I suppose you could have said something about the "n-word", but the use of that particular construction always seems to be a bit of a cop-out to me. I suppose this is like sexual harrasment - legally, it doesn't matter what your intent was, it's all about how it was seen by the person on the other end. That being said, are your correspondents as equally upset about the casual use of the word between two homeboys, as in "hey nigger, what's up?" Personally, my view is that if it is to be a "bad" word, then it has to be a "bad" word all the time and can't be used in a non-racist sense some of the time, depending on the speaker's skin color and/or intent.
> I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know > what my own viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the > reactions of a larger population.
> I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
> In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how > they can hurt people. I took up the position that words are > only words and the only power they have is that which we > choose to give them.
> One person on the other side of the argument describes himself > as "queer". I made the following statement:
> "Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel > head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has > lost its power as an insult."
> An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
> "Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to > hate you?"
> A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into > the thread and posted:
> "Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say > can be "how did I end up on the floor?""
> /* end neutral commentary */
> Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; > that any use of the word is racist.
> My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
> Opinions?
We are each responsible for our own reactions. In the context you used, you were not slinging insults around, you were making a valid attempt to put a word into correct context.
But you can't choose how someone else decides to react. All you can do is say "I'm sorry you chose to interpret my statement that way."
This fellow has chosen to let certain words dictate his world; it's sad and even pathetic, but there's not much one can do.
On Nov 4, 3:45 pm, Canth <kwar6...@bigpond.net.au> wrote: <snip>
> I understand that there is also some discussion going on about a > remake of the movie, the Dambusters. The head of the squadron had a > black dog named "Nigger"; it figures in the book and in the original > movie. However, there are those who want to rewrite history & either > leave the dog out, or give it another name. To me, that is PC > rampant.
I remember my grandmother telling me that when she grew up (in turn of the last century Canada) that the family had a black cat that they called "Nigger" and that they used to stand on the porch and call the cat by yelling "Here, Nigger, Nigger, Nigger" I can't imagine the pandemonium that would result if that happened today!
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:11:07 -0600, M Blaze Miskulin > <bl...@geekniche.com> wrote:
>>I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know >>what my own viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the >>reactions of a larger population.
>>I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
>>In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how >>they can hurt people. I took up the position that words are >>only words and the only power they have is that which we >>choose to give them.
>>One person on the other side of the argument describes himself >>as "queer". I made the following statement:
>>"Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel >>head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has >>lost its power as an insult."
>>An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
>>"Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to >>hate you?"
>>A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into >>the thread and posted:
>>"Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say >>can be "how did I end up on the floor?""
>>/* end neutral commentary */
>>Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; >>that any use of the word is racist.
>>My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
>>Opinions? > In the context of the USA, I understood it to be racist. One > could argue a case that discussing the word itself is not > racist per se, but applying it to a person to be so. In that > context, you usage would not have been racist.
> However, the problem with words is not what we mean by them, > but what our listeners mean by them. There are some people > who invest some words with so much power that they cannot hear > the word without reacting.
> We have had some discussion (and at least one court case) > about the "Nigger" Coombs Stand at one of our sporting venues. > "Nigger" Coombs was a brilliant rugby player for Queensland. > He was white, almost albino - in typical Aust reverse slang, > he was nicknamed "Nigger" at an early age, from I might add > the name of a popular brand of shoe blacking.
> I understand that there is also some discussion going on about > a remake of the movie, the Dambusters. The head of the > squadron had a black dog named "Nigger"; it figures in the > book and in the original movie. However, there are those who > want to rewrite history & either leave the dog out, or give it > another name. To me, that is PC rampant.
People are trying to ban Huckleberry Finn for its language.
M Blaze Miskulin wrote: > I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know what my own > viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the reactions of a larger population.
> I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
> In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how they can hurt > people. I took up the position that words are only words and the only > power they have is that which we choose to give them.
> One person on the other side of the argument describes himself as > "queer". I made the following statement:
> "Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel > head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has lost its > power as an insult."
> An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
> "Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to hate you?"
> A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into the thread > and posted:
> "Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say can be > "how did I end up on the floor?""
> /* end neutral commentary */
> Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any > use of the word is racist.
> My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
> Opinions?
The trouble is that a conversation is a two way street. You tried to make it clear that you did not take those words seriously as insults but the problem there is that their take on it is just as valid as yours in a discussion.
Sure, they have the option to take control of those words and their meanings so that the words are not insults even in a world that has trained them otherwise. But, besides me of course, who the hell is perfect? :-P
I would suggest that you explain that you don't see those words, for your own reasons, to be insults and that you mean no insult to the people involved because you don't consider being homosexual or black to be an insult because it's not a bad thing. That could smooth the waters enough to be able to discuss this meaningfully. Or it may not. But when you are hitting peoples hot buttons, those are the chances you take.
Also remember that when someone uses an insult toward themselves or a close friend/family member, there is an automatic understanding between the giver & reciever of the insult as to what it means. That is not there between strangers of course so one is more polite with strangers. I realize you were not calling anyone names in this conversation but since they didn't realize it, and it hit a hot button, it's time to pull out "stranger level" politeness.
]Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any ]use of the word is racist. ] ]My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
If African-Americans can use it, so can anyone else. Otherwise, African-Americans need to stop using it as well.
D.J. wrote: > On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:11:07 -0600, M Blaze Miskulin > <bl...@geekniche.com> wrote: > ]Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any > ]use of the word is racist. > ] > ]My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
> If African-Americans can use it, so can anyone else. Otherwise, > African-Americans need to stop using it as well.
> D.J.
Haven't you ever used language toward yourself that you would never allow someone else to use toward you? If so, I'm impressed because most people are very good at insulting themselves and bringing themselves down. It's very different for me to have called my dad an old fart or something that I would not say to a stranger because they don't know me well enough to judge how much I really mean it.
I've said before to people: "You bitch! I like it!" in response to something but those are friends who will know how I mean it and not take offense therefore. I would not call anyone that if I didn't know that they would read me correctly.
So words that can be used in a particular context can be anathema in another. I think the big thing is that, if in doubt, be respectful.
On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 18:36:02 -0600, The TheatrElf <xj...@netscape.net> wrote:
>People are trying to ban Huckleberry Finn for its language.
And it's merely the most scathing condemnation of racism ever written.
-denny- -- "...our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: 'Our country--when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.'" - Carl Schurz, in 1899
On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:56:44 -0500, Ree <g...@teksavvy.com> wrote: >The trouble is that a conversation is a two way street. You tried to >make it clear that you did not take those words seriously as insults but >the problem there is that their take on it is just as valid as yours in >a discussion.
Well, no.
If I observe (in conversation with you) that "bitch" and "slut" are insulting to the women called by the terms, have I insulted you?
That's an apples-to-apples comparison.
It's not even, "if I were to call you 'slut' it'd be an insult,"--which could be misheard as actually calling you by that term.
They have the right to take offense if anyone uses whatever term to describe them, or even others. Blaze did no such thing.
-denny- -- "...our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: 'Our country--when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.'" - Carl Schurz, in 1899
<bl...@geekniche.com> wrote: >I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know what my own >viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the reactions of a larger population.
>I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
>In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how they can hurt >people. I took up the position that words are only words and the only >power they have is that which we choose to give them.
>One person on the other side of the argument describes himself as >"queer". I made the following statement:
>"Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel >head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has lost its >power as an insult."
>An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
>"Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to hate you?"
>A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into the thread >and posted:
>"Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say can be >"how did I end up on the floor?""
>/* end neutral commentary */
>Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any >use of the word is racist.
>My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
>Opinions?
Unfortunately, words (as you've found out) DO carry baggage. And words DO have power (consider a name - lots of power in that word...)
I realize you were only trying to make a point, but since we are human, especially those who HAVE been hurt or been close to someone who has been hurt, they are like daggers in one's soul.
AFAIK "nigger" still carries (as it should, imho) really heavy negative baggage. The word you're looking for, I believe, is "nigggah" Still too close for me, and it seems a lot of my older African-American fiends and acquaintances, one of whom ROUNDLY chewed out a young black male for using it in front of her.
Yes, words are words are words - but people have to interpret those words... --
>> On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:11:07 -0600, M Blaze Miskulin >> <bl...@geekniche.com> wrote:
>>>I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know >>>what my own viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the >>>reactions of a larger population.
>>>I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
>>>In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how >>>they can hurt people. I took up the position that words are >>>only words and the only power they have is that which we >>>choose to give them.
>>>One person on the other side of the argument describes himself >>>as "queer". I made the following statement:
>>>"Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel >>>head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has >>>lost its power as an insult."
>>>An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
>>>"Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to >>>hate you?"
>>>A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into >>>the thread and posted:
>>>"Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say >>>can be "how did I end up on the floor?""
>>>/* end neutral commentary */
>>>Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; >>>that any use of the word is racist.
>>>My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
>>>Opinions? >> In the context of the USA, I understood it to be racist. One >> could argue a case that discussing the word itself is not >> racist per se, but applying it to a person to be so. In that >> context, you usage would not have been racist.
>> However, the problem with words is not what we mean by them, >> but what our listeners mean by them. There are some people >> who invest some words with so much power that they cannot hear >> the word without reacting.
>> We have had some discussion (and at least one court case) >> about the "Nigger" Coombs Stand at one of our sporting venues. >> "Nigger" Coombs was a brilliant rugby player for Queensland. >> He was white, almost albino - in typical Aust reverse slang, >> he was nicknamed "Nigger" at an early age, from I might add >> the name of a popular brand of shoe blacking.
>> I understand that there is also some discussion going on about >> a remake of the movie, the Dambusters. The head of the >> squadron had a black dog named "Nigger"; it figures in the >> book and in the original movie. However, there are those who >> want to rewrite history & either leave the dog out, or give it >> another name. To me, that is PC rampant.
>People are trying to ban Huckleberry Finn for its language.
<str...@carpedementem.org> wrote: >Yes, words are words are words - but people have to interpret those >words...
AND their context.
-denny- -- "...our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: 'Our country--when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.'" - Carl Schurz, in 1899
Wes Struebing wrote: > Yes, words are words are words - but people have to interpret those > words...
And ignore the context?
So, I'm at the mercy of everyone? I have to sit down with every person I ever meet to ask them what words they find offensive, and then make sure I never use that word in their presence--regardless of the intent or context?
I must be a slave to the insecurities of every person I meet?
-- Brother Blaze The Unintentional Monk Order of St. Brendan, Navigator
<str...@carpedementem.org> wrote: >On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:11:07 -0600, M Blaze Miskulin ><bl...@geekniche.com> wrote:
>>I've run this situation past friends, and I certainly know what my own >>viewpoint is, but I'm curious to hear the reactions of a larger population.
>>I'll try to relate the events as unbiased as I can.
>>In a BDSM forum, a thread was talking about labels and how they can hurt >>people. I took up the position that words are only words and the only >>power they have is that which we choose to give them.
>>One person on the other side of the argument describes himself as >>"queer". I made the following statement:
>>"Queer used to be a serious insult, along the lines of "towel >>head","nigger", or "kike". But it was co-opted and now has lost its >>power as an insult."
>>An acquaintance of mine IMed me saying:
>>"Do you hate all black people? Or do you just want people to hate you?"
>>A friend of hers (who is (at least partly) black) came into the thread >>and posted:
>>"Please say that in my presence so that the next thing you say can be >>"how did I end up on the floor?""
>>/* end neutral commentary */
>>Their position is that my use of the word "nigger" is racist; that any >>use of the word is racist.
>>My position is that the context of the usage says otherwise.
>>Opinions?
>Unfortunately, words (as you've found out) DO carry baggage. And >words DO have power (consider a name - lots of power in that word...)
>I realize you were only trying to make a point, but since we are >human, especially those who HAVE been hurt or been close to someone >who has been hurt, they are like daggers in one's soul.
>AFAIK "nigger" still carries (as it should, imho) really heavy >negative baggage. The word you're looking for, I believe, is >"nigggah" Still too close for me, and it seems a lot of my older >African-American fiends and acquaintances, one of whom ROUNDLY chewed >out a young black male for using it in front of her.
>Yes, words are words are words - but people have to interpret those >words... >--
>Wes Struebing
>Jan. 20, 2009 - the end of an error
Ah. And if I were an African-American woman (or better yet for this, an African-American male), I'da had some choice words for the young men I've heard referring to their girlfriends as 'bitches'.
>> Yes, words are words are words - but people have to interpret those >> words...
> And ignore the context?
> So, I'm at the mercy of everyone? I have to sit down with every person > I ever meet to ask them what words they find offensive, and then make > sure I never use that word in their presence--regardless of the intent > or context?
> I must be a slave to the insecurities of every person I meet?
No, you must be a victim to their insecurities and inability to read for content.
M Blaze Miskulin <bl...@geekniche.com> wrote in news:hK8Qk.71222$f_7.49855 @newsfe01.iad:
> Wes Struebing wrote:
>> Yes, words are words are words - but people have to interpret those >> words...
> And ignore the context?
> So, I'm at the mercy of everyone? I have to sit down with every person > I ever meet to ask them what words they find offensive, and then make > sure I never use that word in their presence--regardless of the intent > or context?
> I must be a slave to the insecurities of every person I meet?
No, but you must be aware that you are not in complete control of every interaction you have, that as long as there is even *one* person on the other end of the attempt at communication, you do not control it, and the result may not be what you want, intend, or desire.
You must be aware that what *you* meant is not the sole measure of the success of the communication.
You must be aware that sometimes, someone is going to not agrre with you, that sometimes, someone is going to react differently than you would, or than you expect.
If you refuse to recognze the interactive nature of communication, you will not communicate.
> M Blaze Miskulin <bl...@geekniche.com> wrote in news:hK8Qk.71222$f_7.49855 > @newsfe01.iad:
>> Wes Struebing wrote:
>>> Yes, words are words are words - but people have to interpret those >>> words...
>> And ignore the context?
>> So, I'm at the mercy of everyone? I have to sit down with every person >> I ever meet to ask them what words they find offensive, and then make >> sure I never use that word in their presence--regardless of the intent >> or context?
>> I must be a slave to the insecurities of every person I meet?
> No, but you must be aware that you are not in complete control of every > interaction you have, that as long as there is even *one* person on the > other end of the attempt at communication, you do not control it, and the > result may not be what you want, intend, or desire.
Ouch. True.
> You must be aware that what *you* meant is not the sole measure of the > success of the communication.
> You must be aware that sometimes, someone is going to not agrre with you, > that sometimes, someone is going to react differently than you would, or > than you expect.
> If you refuse to recognze the interactive nature of communication, you will > not communicate.
> That does not make you a slave or a victim.
No, just unlucky.
Patrick. -- Email to; 0mn1-sneaking(a)sneakEmail,com but fix the (a) and the comma first.
He who lives without folly is less wise than he believes.
<empathizingly-mischievous undervoiced comment;> Yes; they *are*... Very. (At least sometimes, e.g., in this instance)
>>>to ban Huckleberry Finn >>>for its language.
Denny Wheeler:
>>And it's merely >>the most scathing >>condemnation of racism >>ever written.
(...or at least one of 'em... I don't personally happen t' know *all* possible examples of it, y' know..;)
Xjahn/The TheatrElf:
>Word!
<grin; borrowing slang from a couple of my younger male co-workers>
"*Word UP!!*"
--Canary, offering a VR version of a happy "high-5"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The Canvas Canary" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (I love to paint, sing, am blonde & a bit flighty:)
http://www.angelfire.com/nc/canvascanary ***************************** "Creative minds are seldom tidy." --Anon. ***************************** "I'm out of bed, and dressed; what more do you want?!" --Anon.
|
