Warning: language used in the following post might make people uncomfortable.
Further warning: this topic has been discussed before.
In this Pit thread basting Beeruser over a nice warm can of Sterno, goboy claims, regarding the word “nigger,” that
He goes on to say
What’s to debate? How’s this for starters:
Am I no longer a “decent person” in your book because of my reference to the “N-word” above?
Secondly, shall we begin purging literature of instances of the “N-word” since it’s “beyond the pale of civilized society?” Buh-bye Mr. Twain and Ms. Stowe? Seeya Maya Angelou and Richard Wright?
Me, I find “cunt” to be extremely offensive, and yet many people seem to feel it’s use is acceptable in the Pit. Shall we eliminate that one too? How about “nazi?” Or “redneck?”
Words are just words–it’s their usage that can harm. I maintain it’s possible for the word “nigger” to exist without being inherently bad, and without my being a pariah for typing that particular combination of letters.
I see your point adros but even in literature the “n” word is still percieved as being bigoted is it not? But I do not think it should be removed or anything but it still bothers one to hear it.
But one thing I can’t figure out is why one black person would call another one that. It seems like even in jest or sarcasm they would be sick of it by now.
I think what goboy meant was, that one shouldn’t call someone a nigger. I don’t think he objected to its use in quoting someone, if that is what they said, or in literature, if you are depicting a certain era, incident, etc, etc.
Andros, I think you’re going a bit to far. The problem I have is calling someone a nigger. I don’t think another person should call someone that vile word. I don’t care if the person saying it is Black, White or purple.
For the record, I think that word has it’s place in literature, movies, plays, etc.
Let’s use common sense, shall we? First of all, the use of that word in literature is for a specific point to show the bigotry of a character, or to show the depth of ignorance of a character. Only a mindless bluenose would censor “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” when the point of the book i against bigotry!
That said, that word has no place in decent people’s discourse. It is a vile word that is used to show utter contempt for a class of people. It is an ugly word, and no amount of special pleading will clean it. It carries a legacy of hate that cannot be separated from the word itself.
Perhaps you were reading too much into his words? Did anyone actually advocate burning books and such? I would agree that in most cases no decent person uses such a word to describe someone. Since I am new here I don’t want to get too presumptuous but I really didn’t read that much into what he/she wrote.
And the reason many blacks use that word is to disempower it. It has been a very hurtful word. If you can take back a word and give it a new meaning then it takes away the attached power that such a word has. Anyways, that is my opinion on the subject.
Oh come now, you’re not “in trouble for defending literacy”. You’re being criticized because you turned a rant about one movie critic’s erroneous description of a Homeric character into a general whine about the downfall of American society due to our inablity to identify select quotes from your favorite authors.
No one in that thread is against literacy. That’s like accusing someone of being "pro-world hunger:
andros, I agree. However, I don’t think we’ve reached that point yet.
That said, I think that the context of the use of the word “nigger” can indicate whether the speaker/writer is a bigoted pissant (Beeruser, e.g.) or something else. The word in itself is not “bad”, but you have to admit that it’s freighted with negative connotations. Would I use it? No. Would I automatically shun someone who did use it? No - it would depend on the context. As for censoring literature, etc., I can think of few things more frighteningly Orwellian than to impose our polite-speak onto expressive works written long before any of us was born.
Interestingly, I read a few years ago (no cite, although I can probably come up with one if necessary) that words associated with disfavored groups tended, after a time, to come to have a negative connotation. For example, it was not too long ago considered polite to refer to someone as a “Negro” or as “colored”. Of course, both of those terms are not in common use anymore. Similarly, many people are now using “African-American” to refer to any black person. IIRC, the article postulated that this change occurred because, in their turns, “Negro”, “colored” and “black” have come to have negative connotations. Which just goes to show that prejudice works in mysterious ways. sigh
Once, in Junior High School, I pondered out loud the origins of the word “nigger”. Nobody heard the conversation, nobody heard HOW I was using the word, they just heard “THE WORD”. The teacher had to give me a little lecture outside of class.
A word isn’t harmful. The way it’s used is. As far as I’m concerned, a “faggot” is just a bundle of kindling. “Nigger” is a word that, although it has derogatory and ignorant origins, can be used in casual discussion without the discussion itself being hateful.
Also, I’ve noticed a trend among “black culture” (I shudder from using that term, FWIW) to use “THE WORD” to refer to “each other” (Chris Rock calls other blacks “nigger”, for example). This is indicative of an attempt to overcome the inherent “hatred” of “THE WORD” by adopting it and trying to turn it into a positive thing rather than a negative thing.
Anyway, while it may be difficult to use the word “nigger” without riling up hostility, it’s not impossible.
A word only means what you want it to mean. I can be offended by the word “popsicle” if I choose to be. Words are simply soundforms, the meaning of which you assign. If you choose to find a word vile and reprehensible, no matter what it is, that’s your choice, but there is no such thing as a word that “is outside the pale of civilized society”. It’s all simply sounds. Do with them what you will.
I am SO down with you on this one. Seems to me this was suppposed to be one of those “untouchable” words, now people throw it around as thought it were no more unpleasant than “bitch” - well, I disadamngree.
Deconstructionism of the english language seems to be the major pastime of the socially conscience these days. On a message board this isn’t surprising.
It seems to me that in the real world saying the right words has become a substitute for proper action to a large degree due to this trend.
The language you use says more about the environment you’re in than the person you are.
I try not to worry to much about the the particular words and more about the intent and my opinion of the person behind them.
I think getting angry at particular words is silliness bordering on stupidity. Others take it quite seriously though, so I generally try nowadays to be careful and ignore the hypocrisy inherent in these attitudes.
The general acceptance of the “c” word was inevitable once the male specific type terms like “dick”, “prick”, “dork”, and “cock” became more acceptable in everyday language. If someone uses those words to describe a male, they should not be surprised when “cunt” is thrown back at them. I’m not defending it, I consider it to be extremely offensive also, but it does seem to be inevitable that its usage will grow more acceptable.
How about “Nazi”? People throw that around quite easily, especially with cute prefixes, like femi-nazis. I can imagine that would be considiered quite obscene in the Jewish community (as bad as n-----?) but I don’t know. It makes me wonder if that was considered a much worse term back in the 40’s when it actually meant something personal to people. If so, will the words of the OP be thrown around nonchalantly by our grandchildren 50 years from now?
I though I was, in saying that there are no such things as words that are in and of themselves “beyond the pale” of civilization.
But . . . but . . . so it’s ok if I’m using “nigger” in a literary sense? It’s ok if I’m using it to speak out against bigotry? So, then, it can be used constructively. QED.
As a descriptor, in general conversation, yes, I agree completely.
NO. It is a vile word when it is used to show utter contempt.
So does nazi. So does witch. So does Christian.
I’m sorry you feel you’re “in trouble.” My intent was not to persecute you for “disliking a word.” And I’m trying not to be insulted by that implication.
(disclaimer: non-US poster, so I’m missing a lot here)
Nice first post eBathory. In some ways not unlike andros’ taking of beeruser’s ugly post and making something useful from it. Shit-heaps can grow fine roses.
What about reclaimed words? “Faggot”, “dyke”, “queer”, “bitch” and “cunt” have been appropriated by some of the people those words used to describe insultingly. It’s not self-hatred, it’s ironic pride. Can’t “nigger” be used in the same context? This doesn’t mean that it’s not still an insult (and scary) to hear someone use the word at you threateningly, but within the group it can be acceptable among those who’ve reclaimed it.