As I posted in the Pit thread about this lawsuit: Not only is it frivolous, it is also damaging.
There is racism in this country. Racism that is injurious-- even physically dangerous-- and each petty lawsuit (this one being a prime example) undermines the legitimacy of all minorites when they claim an actual act was perpetrated against them.
Not to point out the obvious, but the main problem here is oversensitivity, as you suggest in your own comments. If you can’t take a jibe when you’re holding everyone up, how would you ever leave the house?
from Celyn: “an old counting system used by shepherds?”
I saw a counting method described that way. It went:
(1 to 10)
yan tean tither mither pip
teaser leaser catra horna dick
(11 to 15)
yan-dick tean-dick thither-a-dick mither-dick bumper
(16 to 20)
yan-a-bum tean-a-bum thither-a-bum mither-a-bum jigger
Here’s my question:
Now that it’s come to light to many that this ditty has racist origins, does it now make it insensitive to continue to use the more modern version? Generations of children, self-included, grew up knowing only the sanitized version. There were absolutely no racist overtones when I recited this to my children. But if I were to do so now, do I become a racist. Does the fact that Mom and Grandmom are black/native american make any difference?
No. Why should it? This is one reason I think the lawsuit is frivolous. The SWA attendant never got as far as using the epithet, and changed the wording so that even the “tiger” (or other) substitution was omitted.
We can find lots of things in the language that started as slurs or were converted to slurs at one time or another. (Bets on how soon “-challenged” becomes a taboo modifier?) I also think more people should be aware of the background of various words or phrases so that they can avoid giving unintentional insult (gypped, white trash, and so on). However, the idea that once tarrred by the brush of intolerance, a word or phrase can never be redeemed is silly. I’m simply not going to punch someone in the nose for calling me a mackeral-snapper (or even a papist) and I think such expressions are quaint, rather than offensive.
The n version is the one I learned as a child in the '70s on Canada’s east coast. It and the “my mother and your mother” one mentioned by Hamlet were pretty much interchangeable for us.
I’ve heard the t version more and more as the years have passed.
I’ve never really thought about it much before today. Hmmm, until recently, I’ve never thought of my home town/province as particularly racist but things like this are illuminating; gives a perspective on just how insidious racism in particular, and language in general can be.
Do I believe the stewardess was being racist when she used the rhyme? No, I don’t.
Do I believe the rhyme itself is racist? One version is.
Words, language (and I include body language and touch), are the only bridge we have from ourselves to others. It’s a perilous and shaky bridge. Because it’s perilous, we often take the most familiar path across it, the path we can travel without thinking. And so we miss the danger to others; that our every footstep, heedless or not, has an effect on that bridge and to everyone else on it. It’s never a mistake to think about what we’re saying and how we’re saying it.
On preview:
I agree with tomndebb that language can be redeemed, that words and phrases can be refurbished. That is part of what I was trying to get at above.
While unintentional, I believe the lady passengers were legitimately humiliated. SW should have immediately apologized, banned the phrase and given the ladies some free tickets.
It’s not a million dollar offense either.
It’s my understanding that many “eskimos” in Canada now consider the word a racial slur.
I’m also in the “tiger” camp (although we said “hollers” instead of “squeals”, but neither of those really make sense). I didn’t know that there was such an ugly version until yesterday. It does kind of add a new, completely unwanted light on the concluding rhyme, “My mother said to pick the very best one and you are (not) It,” in my opinion.
I do think the lawsuit is frivilous, especially when it can be easily demonstrated that the flight attendant, who is even younger than I am, knew only the clean version. Like Biggirl said, there is real, damaging racism out there, and to sue over something that so many people will see as ridiculous takes merit away from the real cases, in their eyes.
It’s not so much that eskimo is a slur, as that it identifies a different people to the west and the Inuit and others prefer not to be lumped in with them. Of course, hurt feelings and folk etymology being what they are, there are individuals who actually believe that it is a slur (much as some persons object to the use of squaw on the wholly inaccurate premise that it was an obscene word, rather than on the more legitimate premise that it is dismissive–and thus insulting–in the manner of Jewess or Negress).
Using Eskimo in place of Inuit (or other pertinent name) is more akin to a Brit calling a true son of Dixie a Yankee because because he’s from the States than it is to using nigger or spic or some other epithet.
(Just for the pedantic: the word eskimo did originate in Eastern Canada from European corruptions of various dialects of Algonquin and, at one point, was thought to have been related to a word or phrase indicating “eaters of raw flesh,” however, the word has been adopted/accepted by the Aleuts and some other Alaskan groups and linguists now believe the original word referred to users of snowshoes.)
I’m 29 and never knew of the old version until well into adulthood, and then only because I read it in a book someplace. I’m not at all surprised the attendant had never heard it.
An apology for a tactless way to get somebody into a plane is perfectly in order. A million dollars in damages is not.
**I’m amazed that people even think this phrase was “tactless” and worthy of an apology. Bullshit. It was a cute phrase, and what’s more it’s the kind of thing Southwest is known for. They built a reputation for having cheery-but-sharptounged fight attendants, and it’s made them good money. If you’re bugged by it, don’t fly Southwest. They don’t owe an apology to anyone.
– Dewey, who likes his Southwest flight attendants sassy, thankyouverymuch.
I’m with you, Dewey. My first response when someone thinks I’ve been offensive (when I wasn’t trying to be) is generally “grow a thicker skin or return under the blankets never to come out”. If these women were holding things up, people were already looking at them, only they weren’t snickering. They were probably giving the same dagger stares we NYers usually give to people holding train doors.
The offended is 40 years old and by the time she first entered grade school, the “Great Civil Rights Act” was the law of the land. Throughout her life she’s actually witnessed a bettering of the the relationship between the races – the separation of the races has slowly diminished during her life.
If hearing a light-hearted parody of a rhyme where ONE possible variation contains an objectionable word causes her this much discomfort, she is entirely too thin skinned.
Remeber the Constitution folks. It grants us the right to free speech. It does NOT give us the right to not be offended by those exercising that right. If it did, Geraldo Rivera would have been muted long ago.
I’m 29, and I’ve never heard of any version of the song other than the “tiger” version until I read this thread.
My initial reaction is to say that the plaintiffs in this case are over-reacting. I wonder if they have considered the possibility that the flight attendants were genuinely unaware of the alternate versions of this rhyme.
Well, I heard that the “ring around the rosie” rhyme actually refers to the plague - if I have emotional issues because a relative died of the plague, and I get seizures when I hear that rhyme, can I sue anyone who uses it?
Insults must be intentional in order to have sting. A system which allows evertyone to define for themselves what is insulting is wide open to abuse by scam artists and attention seekers - which is what I judge these ladies to be.
[And if I insulted anyone out there, I didn’t mean to! Honest! ]
Well, I heard that the “ring around the rosie” rhyme actually refers to the plague - if I have emotional issues because a relative died of the plague, and I get seizures when I hear that rhyme, can I sue anyone who uses it?
Insults must be intentional in order to have sting. A system which allows evertyone to define for themselves what is insulting (and thus actionable) is wide open to abuse by scam artists and attention seekers - which is what I judge these ladies to be.
[And if I insulted anyone out there, I didn’t mean to! Honest! ]
]