Being butthurt at the thought that anyone would say “fag” for cigarette, “faggot” for (a specific type of) meatball or “niggardly” for mean with any kind of hidden agenda is just about as goddamn stupid.
Of course. However, being butthurt because somebody else is butthurt about a word choice that is objectively perfectly valid is not stupid.
We all know Huckleberry Finn is full of racial epithets - far more jarring to today’s reader than a single word, no matter how ignorant the person hearing it is. Should schools stop teaching it? After all, there are a thousand other works of English literature they could teach instead where nobody says ni**er.
You know, for everyone complaining about the loss of this vital word, it hasn’t actually been lost. It’s still in the dictionary, and you are legally free to use it whenever you see fit. If you care more about your freedom to use a given word than communicating in a clear and respectful manner, have at it!
In fact, if you are ever in Washington DC and happen to be taking the B2 bus through Anacostia and you feel the driver is going too slowly, I urge you to yell “Don’t be a niggard with the gas, driver!” Report back on what happens.
Sounds like Steve is pissed because he never, ever wins at Scrabble.
Regards,
Shodan
No, because presumably the teacher will explain in advance that word “nigger” in the text should be understood as part of the historical context of when it was written. And that understanding that racist historical context is part of the reason you’re reading the book in the first place.
How about this. If you absolutely feel that communicating what you want to communicate is impossible without using a form of the word “niggard”, you could do something similar. You could preface your utterance with a disclaimer:
“By the way, I’m about to use a word that sounds a lot like ‘nigger’. However, I don’t mean anything racist. Unfortunately it’s the only word that does the job.”
That is stupid. Why would you care enough to get upset because someone misunderstood an outdated word that sounds similar to a slur? Get some perspective. Sure, it would be nice if everyone had expansive vocabularies, just like it would be nice if everyone could change a tire, hem a pair of pants, reduce fractions, and know all the world capitals, but not everyone has this knowledge. And perhaps it’s not the end of the world if they don’t.
You do realize no one here is putting forth this argument, right? Of course you do, seeming as you’re literate enough to participate regularly on this board. All we’re talking about now is whether people should be immune from judgement for using “niggardly” in causal speech. We’re not talking about book banning or any other extreme absurdity you can offer up to support your position.
On one side of the debate are those, like me, who say it is perfectly reasonable to judge someone as being an obnoxious fucktard for being insensible about their word choices. “Niggardly”, “faggot”, and “bitch” are words with innocuous meanings that are too distracting to be used with the flippancy we use other words. People who understand that the primary purpose of vocubulary is to communicate ideas and facilitate mutual understanding get this intuitively, so they adjust their speech to their audience. They DON’T demand carte blanch to say whatever they feel like.
On the other side of the debate are posters who apparently think speakers should be able to use whatever words they want to get a point across, and then, when the inevitable happens, call other people stupid when they are misunderstood or negatively judged. These people fail to understand that the noises that come out of our mouth (speech) serve an actual purpose, and if that purpose is derailed by one’s desire to use touchy language that can easily be substituted for something else, its the speaker’s fault.
Just curious, but why have you gone through the trouble of tying ni**er instead of nigger? It seems as though you have taken such care not to offend our eyes by self-censoring yourself in this way, as though you actually care how your words might come across to others. But at the same time you defend “niggardly” and only find fault in those who are bothered by it.
Referring to “nigger” in a meta discussion is perfectly innocuous and everyone here knows that. So if you can see a good reason to modify your language even in this particular context, surely you can see a reason why “niggardly” might be a poor word to use on the street.
I haven’t used the word niggardly in a coon’s age.
Thanks for providing a perfect example of the real-word problem with the word: crypto-racists think it passes for clever humor to use a word that sounds racist but that they can justify as not being racist. It’s one baby step removed from “I’m not touching you!”
Some of my best friends are crypto-black; so it’s cool.
(seriously, it’s a crack no different than one a Daily Show correspondent would make)
Actually, it’s the same issue. Someone is confused about the word. In one example, the confusion brings offense; in the other, snickering (presumably).
What good faith attempt should there be for someone who asserts that the term niggardly is akin to a racial slur? The words are not the same. An educated person should realize that. As mentioned earlier, not just by me, the way to “unconfuse” the person is to educate them.
You know no such thing.
Someone’s confused about something, all right, but that someone is you: nobody currently discussing the issue is confused about the word, yet many people think avoiding the word is worthwhile and would like the word to be avoided around them.
Oh, irony. Nobody in the thread asserts any such thing. The good faith attempt you ought to be making is to understand what people in the thread ARE asserting.
You are correct, however, to chastise me for calling you superstitious. I made that allegation on the assumption that you understood what the arguments against the word’s use were. You apparently don’t understand even that.
I get that you aren’t confused aobut the word’s meaning. What I disagree with is pandering to the ignorant who remain confused or simply just may be confused.
I know what certain people are advocating in this thread: pandering to the ignorant.
This comment of yours is utter bullshit.
A hypothetical, for Bricker especially, but others can play along:
Let’s say you’re defending a client during a jury trial. It’s closing statement time, and you’re looking at a jury with a few black people on it, and you think the verdict’s gonna be pretty close, but there’s one black person in particular you suspect is going to hold out for a not guilty verdict for your white client.
During your closing statement, you need to admit the defendant’s stinginess. “Niggardly” is the best word for his behavior, in your opinion.
Do you use the word?
My suspicion is that, of course you don’t. Because the potential misunderstanding may have a consequence, and even if there’s no misunderstanding of the word, there may be a misunderstanding of your intentions behind using the word, and you have a professional duty to communicate clearly.
If you wouldn’t use the word under these circumstances, why would you use it under other circumstances? Are you normally okay with having either your words or your intentions misunderstood?
Cite?
On the contrary, you continue, as in the quote above, to demonstrate your misunderstanding of the arguments in this thread. Nobody in the past ten years has advocated pandering to the ignorant. Find a post that you think makes such an advocacy, and I’ll explain it to you.
@lefthandOD
Of course I would
Most black people aren’t idiots or trolls,
ENOUGH!
Everyone back away from the personal sniping and veiled insults.
Stick to the actual discussion or take it to The BBQ Pit.
[ /Moderating ]
The word is so bloody archaic the only reason anyone would go out of their way to use it would be to troll. Yes it’s petty to make a big deal out of it, but it’s even more petty to make a big deal about your right to use it. Sure you have the right but you don’t have the need or lack of alternatives.
About the only time I can imagine it being reasonably used other than to troll would be in a historical context, or a novel written in deliberately archaic prose to set the time (which I have seen done). Or maybe a joke or pun, but I can’t imagine it’d be very funny.
Also, for fuck’s sake, in elementary school? That’s pretty much giving the hick kids a new weapon against the black ones, and license to use it that way. Any teacher should know better.
Actually, yeah, I afree with this… Once you’ve jumped on the euphemism treadmill you can’t get off.
I’m not sure what to think. Should one go out of their way to use the word, knowing the drama it’ll cause, purely as a matter of principle?
No.
You’re welcome.
Well, I’m opposed to just automatically changing or stopping something because it offends someone. And what words are “in” changes on a regular basis. There was a time “negro” was the preferred term, including by black people. So when “black” goes out of fashion, should we all just change the words we use? What about when whoever influences what words are PC right now decides that new word is now wrong?
I’ve changed my answer. Yeah, it’s acceptable for the teacher to use the word. That’s not to say any use of it by the kids to bully other kids shouldn’t be stamped out though.