Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[freeformschooler]

I thought what he meant was that if a person is white, and they say the N word they're automatically assumed by the general public to be saying it in an insulting way even if they aren't.

If you don't want people to assume you're saying an insulting thing then say it without using a clearly very insulting word, or at least keep it firmly inside inverted commas.

Yes! However, the key word is "white". Let me contrast:

what he meant was that if a person is white, and they say the N word they're automatically assumed by the general public to be saying it in an insulting way even if they aren't.

what he meant was that if a person is darker skinned, and they say the N word they're automatically assumed by the general public to be not saying it in an insulting way even if they are.

Or at least I think that's what Siquo was getting at. Remember: it was my suggestion that everyone just stop saying the word.

[The Doctor]

Admittedly I didn't do a big google for it (I have to leave soon), but I thought I'd show this to you guys. The relevant part that TJ is talking about is around 0:30 to 1:15 minutes into the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ

[Vector]

Wait, speaking of "race", I have my own progressive rage.

Why is it that so many applications I fill out ask for my ethnicity and then only present two options:

No fucking clue =/


Some mild steps to move against misogyny.

[Leafsnail]

Or at least I think that's what Siquo was getting at. Remember: it was my suggestion that everyone just stop saying the word.

I don't see the problem at all.

if person Y says that person X is an idiot, he's assumed to be offensive

If person X says that person X is an idiot, he's assumed not to be offensive

Using a slur when you're not a member of the group implies you feel that they're beneath you, an implication that just isn't there if you're a part of that group.  It could still be offensive in a different context (if they go on to say how much better they are than the rest of their group, say), but the immediate cause of offense ("I'm much better than those people") is eliminated and you may assume they're being self deprecating.

[SalmonGod]

I also think that taking exclusive ownership of a word that was once used to demean you is a very strong gesture of independence... like decorating your house with a whip that gave you scars before you had the right to own a house...

[Vector]

I also think that taking exclusive ownership of a word that was once used to demean you is a very strong gesture of independence... like decorating your house with a whip that gave you scars before you had the right to own a house...

Yes.  Reclamation should absolutely be permitted.

I don't engage in it myself, because I tend to knee-jerk recoil from any usage whatsoever, but I believe it's necessary for those who can use it.

[freeformschooler]

Or at least I think that's what Siquo was getting at. Remember: it was my suggestion that everyone just stop saying the word.

I don't see the problem at all.

if person Y says that person X is an idiot, he's assumed to be offensive

If person X says that person X is an idiot, he's assumed not to be offensive

Using a slur when you're not a member of the group implies you feel that they're beneath you, an implication that just isn't there if you're a part of that group.  It could still be offensive in a different context (if they go on to say how much better they are than the rest of their group, say), but the immediate cause of offense ("I'm much better than those people") is eliminated and you may assume they're being self deprecating.

I also think that taking exclusive ownership of a word that was once used to demean you is a very strong gesture of independence... like decorating your house with a whip that gave you scars before you had the right to own a house...

Yes.  Reclamation should absolutely be permitted.

I don't engage in it myself, because I tend to knee-jerk recoil from any usage whatsoever, but I believe it's necessary for those who can use it.

My biggest problem with this: we shouldn't NEED to "group" ourselves, even if only through the difference in use of the word, no matter the color of our skin. This is the kind of thing that keeps "group A as opposed to group B" in the public mind. The divide between the meanings of the word when used by different peoples creates the othering that I would hope by the 21st century we would see the end of.

I think this is my problem though, as I just want everyone to be labeled "human". Not black, or white, or latino, or exotic mexican platypus dancer. It's one thing to label yourself, but a different thing entirely to have the rest of the country doing the labeling for you.

But otherwise yeah I agree. Reclamation is great if people are enjoying it.

[Siquo]

Siquo's just going down the route of denying that any problem of discrimination could possibly exist.

Yep, that's about it. Because some white people are racists, suddenly all white people can't use the N word. Fuck that.

Ah, so heterosexual people are not given power over gays (and other folks on the queer spectrum) by simple virtue of having been born straight?

Ummm, no? If so, please tell me so I can tell my colleague who sits next to me that I've got power over him, next monday. I can already imagine the look he'll give me

[Truean]

Ok, here's the standard for reclamation:

I never do but if I did say the word "faggot" it wouldn't be in derogatory manner, because I am GLBT. People do not typically seriously insult themselves in a vile manner. Here, my use of the word "faggot," would be insulting myself in a vile manner if I used it derogatorily. I do not insult myself in a vile manner and derogatory use of that word by me would be to vilely insult myself, thus I do not use it derogatorily.

Even in the event I did use it derogatorily, I would be insulting myself and thus paying a price for saying it that way....

That's just CRAC logic (Conclusion, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion). It explains a lot and you can substitute out the nouns and adjectives to apply to nearly all classifications.

A person who is a member of a class can use an otherwise negative word for their own class, because of the above reasoning which indicates that they are not doing so in a derogatory way or are doing so in a self depreciating way.

Conversely, those outside a historically persecuted classification are presumed to be using negative references to that classification derogatorily because there is a longstanding precedent of that happening. It has happened 1000 times before. Care to guess what will happen on time 1001? This is why it is just and proper that white people cannot say the N word. History. Don't like it? Deal with it.

Until the problems of bigotry are ended, this is the only remedy we have....

[SalmonGod]

I don't have a problem with grouping.  It's just as demeaning to ignore people's differences as it is to discriminate based on them, and the world would be boring without them. 

What people lack is the ability to maintain awareness that all subsets of human being are still grouped under the same overarching set -- human beings -- and that there are basic qualities (and thus rights and respects) to that set that remain present in all subsets.

[Leafsnail]

Yep, that's about it. Because some white people are racists, suddenly all white people can't use the N word. Fuck that.

How could you pick up on the one statement I made that's completely irrelevant to this point?  I'm impressed.  It allows you to skip all the points I and everyone else made explaining to you what the difference between a black person saying the N word and a white person saying the N word is.

It's got nothing to do with "because some white people are racists" and noone suggested that (as far as I tell you're concocting that to paint your opponents as overgeneralizers).  The fact is that the N word is inherently offensive to black people, and if you say it outside of inverted commas you will be seen as being offensive because you're implying that black people are beneath you.  I don't see why you're having so much difficulty processing that.

[Vector]

SalmonGod, you sound like a mathematician.  This is, by the way, one of the highest compliments I tend to pay (well, okay, as well as one of the most grievous insults >_>).

[Truean]

SalmonGod, you sound like a mathematician.  This is, by the way, one of the highest compliments I tend to pay (well, okay, as well as one of the most grievous insults >_>).

At first I didn't understand what you meant until I read it again and saw "subsets," "overarching set," and "present in all subsets."

Yeah I can kinda see it now.

[freeformschooler]

I don't have a problem with grouping.  It's just as demeaning to ignore people's differences as it is to discriminate based on them, and the world would be boring without them. 

There's a difference between differing from another physically or in other such ways (dark skin, light skin, african origin, european origin - everyone has these things and it would indeed be demeaning to not recognize it) and being a person that is labeled "black" or "white" or "african" or "british", just because this creates an identity for you in the mind of the unknowing, based entirely in generalizations, and as it stands, for some reason it always seems to sustain the generalization and bigotry that labels are want to do. Further, having the labels tends to lead to

What people lack is the ability to maintain awareness that all subsets of human being are still grouped under the same overarching set -- human beings -- and that there are basic qualities (and thus rights and respects) to that set that remain present in all subsets.

^this.

Also SalmonGod you are indeed a fishematician.

[ECrownofFire]

Yep, that's about it. Because some white people are racists, suddenly all white people can't use the N word. Fuck that.

How could you pick up on the one statement I made that's completely irrelevant to this point?  I'm impressed.  It allows you to skip all the points I and everyone else made explaining to you what the difference between a black person saying the N word and a white person saying the N word is.

It's got nothing to do with "because some white people are racists" and noone suggested that (as far as I tell you're concocting that to paint your opponents as overgeneralizers).  The fact is that the N word is inherently offensive to black people, and if you say it outside of inverted commas you will be seen as being offensive because you're implying that black people are beneath you.  I don't see why you're having so much difficulty processing that.

But why does it imply that they're beneath you? Because somebody else that's a racist used it too? But calling people "black" is just as bad then. After all, racists call them black too.