I’d need to see a lot more context for this discussion before I made a call either way. I very much doubt that the objection was simply to the use of the expression, but rather, it had more to do with when and how it was used. For example, if they’d just done a segment on the underground railroad, and Sawyer ha said something like, “I could have used that this weekend. I was slaving away in the kitchen the whole time!” That I could see as legitimatly dismissive of the experience of African slavery in the US.
If it was a more prosaic situation, then I’d say Roberts is just being whiney. Either way, I think the OP is vastly over estimating the effect of Good Morning America on the national discourse. One person on TV throwing a hissy fit over a bit of innocent (or even insensitive) verbiage does not equate to a national movement to censor the language.
At college, we had an incident back in 1977 over the use of the word slave.
I went to Binghamton University (New York State) and the residence hall I lived in had this tradition called a “Slave Auction”. In it, RA’s (resident assistents) were temporarily sold to the highest bidder; they had to do menial stuff for the winner for an afternoon, like get a pizza, change records on the turntable, get soda/beer.
The money raised went to some local charity.
Someone (never identified) complained to the Resident Director about the term Slave Auction. They felt it demeaned the real victims of a real slave auction.
A dorm meeting was called and the Director announced that the “tradition” could continue but the name had to change. You could hear a pin drop. I think the RD felt this was bs (by the odd look on his face) but he still had to take it seriously. I forgot the new name they came up with. As far as I know that name change was made permanent.
I’m still uncertain if we were demeaning real slaves by that tradition. But what do I know?
Let me re-clarify the OP then: I was merely bemused that Roberts was carrying on about the word “slave”–that’s no big deal, that an airhead on TV was making a BFD about nothing. But I was blown away by Sawyer’s total cave-in, apologizing for her insensitivity, the whole “I never realized…” routine, the “You learn something every day” attitude. It wasn’t absolutely necessary that she bitchslap some sense into Roberts’ head on national TV, though of course I would have relished the spectacle (“You fucking condescendingly superior cunt, Robin,[slap!] I’ll use any fucking word I like, and if it bothers you, then write me a goddamned note [backhand bitchslap when Roberts comes up for air] but dont you ever [frontslap] EVER [backslap] think you can embarrass me on TV again for being a fucking guilty white blonde again.” That would be totally uncalled for, though it would be great morning TV, but to endorse Roberts’ loopy pov just amazed me.
Even that would be okay, I suppose, but where are the viewers writing in to GMA to protest this bowdlerization? I didn’t watch anything beyond that 2 minutes yesterday, but it’s kind of amazing that they just moved on after Sawyer vowed to remove such gross insensitivity from her vocabulary. Maybe she did and I didn’t catch it. I’m thinking it will be a while before Diane Sawyer refers to a slave again.
If anyone saw it, and I didn’t get the context of conversation, of course, I’ll be glad for the correction.
I don’t know about being offensive, but even as a white male, I would have found this to be extemely tasteless, to say the least. This is even leaving aside the possibility of one of the RA’s being black.
and before anyone gets outraged, it is a historically accurate term especially in an academic environment.
Alternatively it might have been a ‘Helot Auction’, but that could be a bit drastic if it fell on the wrong day.
The Spartans called their slaves ‘Helots’, and on one day of the year they were permitted to commit any atrocity on them with impunity, which is interesting as it implies that on the other 364.25 days there were strict rules.
Christ… I can’t be the only one repulsed by the idea of selling people, even as a joke? How is that remotely tasteful?
There’s a reason we don’t refer to really lopsided sports victories (like that team that was blasted 201-78 in basketball) as “holocausts” or “genocides.” Ever “murder” isn’t commonly used. These are words that evoke a certain level of reflection over the value of human life, and one would think people would have the good sense to use more apt words. I still find this activity quite objectionable, but perhaps if it was a “valet for a day” I’d be less bothered.
I intensely dislike the use of “master” and “slave” drives and refuse to use that terminology, preferring “primary,” “secondary,” “tertiary”, “quaternary”, “quinary” or "primary and label the other drives by letter designation.
While I certainly understand the motivation, don’t “master” and “slave” have a connotation (at least as far as setting the jumpers for the drive channel) that is not quite synonymous with primary, secondary, etc.? E.g., it’s possible to have four drives configured as a a primary master and slave and a secondary master and slave.
(Not that you couldn’t make yourself understood… just wondering whether use of the terms is sort of unavoidable in some situations.)
True; but it’s jolting when you’re suddenly reminded of the historical reality. I was startled once by a black woman of my acquaintance saying she wanted to “be my slave” in a particular context.
[QUOTE=betenoir]
But as for African Americans, what else are you going to call them (when they were slaves)? Servants? They weren’t. Amounts to airbrushing history. Like taking “nigger” out of Huckleberry Finn. I suppose you could use enslaved person butseem a little unnecessary. It’s not like it’s an insult. Just a tragedy.
[QUOTE] (Slight editing on my part.)
True; “servants” was used as a euphemism at the time by plantation owners – as if their slaves had chosen that line of work, looked at job advertisements, applied for the position, and accepted an offer of employment. In the home of a Southern Belle I used to see, I found a pamphlet explaining how much happier the dark-skinned “servants” were back then, with all their needs taken care of, cradle to grave. Just like being in prison your entire life (except without committing a crime).
Depending on what definition of the word you use, there may be more slaves around the world now than at any previous time in history. Cheers.
As I recall, the RAs weren’t “forced” to do this. They volunteered their services; to be “sold”, for charity. We didn’t have a black RA in that dorm that year, but your point about that possibility along with the complaint might have been enough to push the RD into the change.
I guess it was just a sign of the times. I can’t speak for all the folk who lived in the dorm back then but all the people I hung out with never once thought of this as denegrating in any way. The RA’s got a kick out of it; bragging rights for whomever commanded more money.
As I think about it more, I think that it was renamed to “Servant Auction”. The main complaint was not that people were auctioned, but that the word “Slave” was being used in conjunction with the auction.
I find someone auctioning their services no worse than people who auction off a “date” for charity.
Probably correct, but thats my way of being both PC and showing off my fabulaous ordinal vocabulary at the same time. Plus, NONE of the computers I’ve owed has ever had anything more complicated than a single primary drive with lesser drives, usually a second or maybe a third and that’s it.
So IMHO, the connotative meanings are usually superfluous 'cuz they don’t apply to my configurations, anyway.