I’m probably gonna get lit up for this but I’m honestly curious for a few reasons.
I remember in “Cryptonomicon” by Neal Stephenson it is mentioned that the during ww2 the Japanese refer(ed) to themselves as Nipponese not Japanese. Nip is a truncated version of this but it comes from a term that was not considered offensive by the Japanese themselves.
Now obviously the way American soldier in ww2 used it was meant to be offensive and derogatory. So here’s my question: Once a heretofore inoffensive word is co-opted in a racist/derogatory way does that take it " off the board" so to speak? Can it ever be brought back into the fold?
Also “Jerry” short for German seems to be the same type wordplay yet I personally don’t think of it as a racist term. Are these terms Nip/Jerry comparable or does one carry a bit more “weight” than the other?
I don’t know, but the term was commonly used on the TV show McHale’s Navy. It is similar wordplay to to ‘jerry’, it’s short for Nipponese, another term for Japanese, and more accurate if the story that ‘Japan’ is the Chinese pronunciation for Nippon is true.
Yes, it is derogatory and is intended to diminish the people it is directed towards. As far as I know, the Japanese still refer to their country as Nippon, as that is the name of the place in Japanese, but call themselves Nihon-jin.
An intentionally dismissive truncation of a legitimate word does not become “okay.”
In Japanese kanji, Japan in written 日本 and pronounced either nihon or nippon, in their native language the people are called either nihonjin or nipponjin but obviously never nipponese.
Words such as “Japs” and “Nips” are considered pejorative in America and their use is frowned on. I’m not aware of any recent racial slurs which have been rehabilitated.
A good way to answer these sorts of questions is to consult a dictionary. Jerry is typically referred to as a slang term, while Nip and Jap are noted as being offensive or derogatory.
As for why one is offensive and one isn’t, well, words are funny that way. The word “scheme” is often defined as meaning a value-neutral program or plan of action, such as how the British may talk about the Prime Minister’s scheme to improve health care.
However, in the US, a scheme is a devious plot. It’s almost only used as a disparaging term, like how Republicans talk about the President’s scheme to “improve” health care.
Why the negative connotation? Who knows, but examining where a word came from isn’t going to negate the connotations that people associate with the word.
Also I think a case could be made that the shortening of the word to “Nip” was not meant to be racist per se. “Let’s go assault that machine gun nest of nipponese, men!” being a bit of a mouthful for a sergeant in the heat of battle, I could see it getting pared down to “Kill those Nips!”
Are these terms something my parents would use, if they were to refer to people with racist terms? They’re in their 60’s and I’m 42. I’ve never heard these and would have no idea what someone was talking about if I heard them. Well, maybe after reading this thread, but I’ll probably forget about it shortly.
Will the terms drop out of the dictionary if they’re not used for a generation or two? Sorry if this is a thread hijack, that’s not my intention.
Other than the above mentioned McHales Navy I don’t recall any specific usage of ‘Nip’. ‘Jerry’ seems to be mostly limited to WWII movies. I thought those terms had already fallen into disuse. They came from my parents generation, and I’m almost 60 myself.
Why would anyone want to “bring back” a term which was invented to be derogatory?
(As a semi-related aside, my uncle Steve had a wider range of anti-Semitic terms than I had ever encountered in my life. A word like “sheeny” does not need to be rehabilitated; it can safely stay on the literary ash-heap of history as a curiosity which demonstrates the background of the user.)
From a purely academic point of view, why would you want words, even offensive ones, to be purged from a dictionary? What happens if someone sees and old movie or reads an old book years from now and comes across a term, offensive or not, that as dropped from common usage? Surely they should be able to find out what it meant.
While I agree that nip is not a polite word, nor one that I would use, it is just a word. In our world of 1984, we have gotten so incredibly sensitive that we border on the asinine. It is a shortening of Nippon, which is what the Japanese call their own country. We have just got to lose this unreasoning fear of words. Words have no value other than what we apply. Seriously, when I was a kid, there was no word skank. Now, it has value…negative value. Nonetheless, it is still just a word until it is used as a weapon.
A few years ago, the Best Actor Oscar went to Geoffrey Rush in Shine. I’m not aware of any Black leader complaining about the movie’s name. Yet the word was a strong racist pejorative in the 1940s.
Yes, MostlyUseless. Words have denotations, connotations, and meanings in context. “Nip,” in reference to a person of Japanese descent, is a slur. I do not know of any reason to use it except to try to diminish the person. I cannot think of any hypothetical situation where calling someone a “Nip” is intended to be anything other than hateful (or ignorant, but ignorance can be corrected).
The fact that it is an obsolete slur is irrelevant, unless you can provide a scenario where it is neutral or positive to call someone a “Nip.”
(If in the near future, Japanese-Americans start asking to be called “Nips” for some ironic or cultural-recovery reason, I will change my attitude towards the word. At this time, I am not even familiar with Japanese in-group humor which uses the term.)