Support NeoGAF

[hey_monkey]

Let's talk about this idea of a double standard. I haven't close-read every single post in the thread because I've had a busy weekend, so maybe this has come up, but if not, why not.

Starting with the definitions, plural, from MW:


: a set of principles that applies differently and usually more rigorously to one group of people or circumstances than to another; especially : a code of morals that applies more severe standards of sexual behavior to women than to men

: a situation in which two people, groups, etc., are treated very differently from each other in a way that is unfair to one of them

MW is such a great resource because it not only provides a baseline, but they tend to write really strong definitions that address context. Here, there's some really good information layered in - we can compare these two definitions and gain some cultural understanding as well as study the meaning of the phrase.

Base: in an equal situation (as much as any can be), a double standard is treatment of one group that is very different and unfair relative to the other - that is, a rubric applied more rigorously to one group over another.

So we can't look at just n*****, because there is already no fairness there - it is a word applied differently in different circumstances and there is never an equal situation between a white person's usage and a black person's usage. Double standard can't apply because the phrase does not fit the situation. The closest cognate is actually racially charged words used to identify another group - and in that case, I'm guessing that in most situations, due to white supremacy, POC would still be disadvantaged.

But regardless, all this is to say that we can't say that "allowing" black Americans to use n***** while white Americans can't is a double standard; the situation is never an equal one in the first place, and the word is charged with far different connotations and cultural baggage in these relative situation.

Anyway, of course it's not like anyone can snatch the word out of another's mouth; there's been some reductive discourse in this thread about how no one can ever stop white people from saying it, etc. Of course not. That isn't the issue. The issue is that saying it can have real consequences and it's not a double standard to recognize that.

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

killer mikes move to get people to do local black owned banking to diffuse cash checking and multi national banks is a fantastic thing.

But, killer mike voted for jill stein and urged people to do so.

So fuck him.

 

[L Thammy]

Sorry, kind of rambling. tl;dr I don't know if it's productive to play the "this is ours, not yours" game because 1) language doesn't work that way and 2) it avoids the real issue underlying the word's continued ability to do harm.

I feel like your whole post falls apart with one point: the word is still being used in the hateful sense. It's not hard to find. Go to any site founded by someone who still frequents 4chan, really.

So "the language has evolved" is a weak excuse. You can't say "this isn't really about the n-word, as much as it is the fact that American society hasn't sufficiently divorced itself from the pain captured by the word" because it absolutely is about the word. It's about the word because it's about a meaning that the word still has. Society hasn't divorced itself because it's still used in that sense.

 

[BenjiGAF]

killer mikes move to get people to do local black owned banking to diffuse cash checking and multi national banks is a fantastic thing.

But, killer mike voted for jill stein and urged people to do so.

So fuck him.

This made me laugh so hard

 

[Future]

To those complaining About double standards...that's life son. Just like a Jew making Jew jokes, or a homosexual making gay jokes, or a Latino making Latino jokes: there are things you can say that are better received if you are a member of the affected community. If you are not a member of said community, then you are walking on eggshells. You may come out free of burns, but the next time you might get burned

Bill Maher got burned, and he knew it

 

[Pinko Marx]

killer mikes move to get people to do local black owned banking to diffuse cash checking and multi national banks is a fantastic thing.

But, killer mike voted for jill stein and urged people to do so.

So fuck him.

I have a problem with this type of attitude of when Black Leaders or even Progressive Leaders in general do something this some may see as wrong so they can go fuck themselves.
There aren't many people out there who you're going to agree with 100%. It doesn't mean that there opinion is trash or they aren't real allies. I mean, I certainly disagree with Mike on somethings but that don't mean I'm going to discredit the man on all accounts. Especially considering how much good he does out there.

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

I have a problem with this type of attitude of when Black Leaders or even Progressive Leaders in general do something this some may see as wrong so they can go fuck themselves.
There aren't many people out there who you're going to agree with 100%. It doesn't mean that there opinion is trash or they aren't real allies. I mean, I certainly disagree with Mike on somethings but that don't mean I'm going to discredit the man on all accounts. Especially considering how much good he does out there.

Did I discredit him? I applauding him for the good he's doing.

But fuck him for being a buster.

e: shit he's not even a buster, sitting out would have been better.

 

[Lothar]

I like Ice Cube but come on.... he used the word "faggot" and other homophobic slurs to condescend people in his songs.

When did he last do that and do you think his stance on the use of that word has evolved over the last couple of decades?

He was on this very show rereleasing an album with the word "faggot" on it. http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/icecube/novaseline.html Did he delete that word from it or issue an apology on the rerelease?

 

[Future]

I have a problem with this type of attitude of when Black Leaders or even Progressive Leaders in general do something this some may see as wrong so they can go fuck themselves.
There aren't many people out there who you're going to agree with 100%. It doesn't mean that there opinion is trash or they aren't real allies. I mean, I certainly disagree with Mike on somethings but that don't mean I'm going to discredit the man on all accounts. Especially considering how much good he does out there.

That's the theme of this entire thread though. Hell, potentially the theme of last years election. Liberals in particular have a hard time letting things like that go

If someone makes an error in judgement, it is a permanent stain on their record. A record that may be filled with tons of positive shit in addition to those errors...but that doesn't matter. When people read on this person, they start with the stained record and probably don't even see the positive info. If they do see it, then it is easily ignored due to he prominence of the stain. So to some people, that's it. Fuck them forever. You can see this attitude for bill maher at times, along with Hillary Clinton last year during the election progress

Somehow, republicans are often better at seeing through errors and mistakes to support an overall theme orngoal they may have. Liberals send them into the fire at a moments notice

 

[Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!]

He was on this very show rereleasing an album with the word "faggot" on it. http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/icecube/novaseline.html Did he delete that word from it or issue an apology on the rerelease?

Not to mention that the song "black korea" was also on that album lol

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

He was on this very show rereleasing an album with the word "faggot" on it. http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/icecube/novaseline.html Did he delete that word from it or issue an apology on the rerelease?

Do historians censor literary works because they are offensive?

His Release isn't some random money grab.

This shit is timely.

Writers shouldn't hide from their intent in a piece, even if it's offensive. They do have to weather it and I'm sure if cube is taken to task he will expound on it.

 

[WiiredShawn]

Let's talk about this idea of a double standard. I haven't close-read every single post in the thread because I've had a busy weekend, so maybe this has come up, but if not, why not.

Starting with the definitions, plural, from MW:


: a set of principles that applies differently and usually more rigorously to one group of people or circumstances than to another; especially : a code of morals that applies more severe standards of sexual behavior to women than to men

: a situation in which two people, groups, etc., are treated very differently from each other in a way that is unfair to one of them

MW is such a great resource because it not only provides a baseline, but they tend to write really strong definitions that address context. Here, there's some really good information layered in - we can compare these two definitions and gain some cultural understanding as well as study the meaning of the phrase.

Base: in an equal situation (as much as any can be), a double standard is treatment of one group that is very different and unfair relative to the other - that is, a rubric applied more rigorously to one group over another.

So we can't look at just n*****, because there is already no fairness there - it is a word applied differently in different circumstances and there is never an equal situation between a white person's usage and a black person's usage. Double standard can't apply because the phrase does not fit the situation. The closest cognate is actually racially charged words used to identify another group - and in that case, I'm guessing that in most situations, due to white supremacy, POC would still be disadvantaged.

But regardless, all this is to say that we can't say that "allowing" black Americans to use n***** while white Americans can't is a double standard; the situation is never an equal one in the first place, and the word is charged with far different connotations and cultural baggage in these relative situation.

Anyway, of course it's not like anyone can snatch the word out of another's mouth; there's been some reductive discourse in this thread about how no one can ever stop white people from saying it, etc. Of course not. That isn't the issue. The issue is that saying it can have real consequences and it's not a double standard to recognize that.

I'm not sure I agree with where you're going with this.

The assumption is that a Black person would always use the n-word in a "friendly" way and a White person would always use the n-word in a "demeaning" way. That is, their "contexts" for using the word are unchanging and fundamentally distinct. Thus, they'll never be on "equal footing" and thus it can't be a "double standard."

But it's easy to imagine that being wrong. A Black person could call another Black person a n**** to demean them. A White person could call his/her Black friend a n**** in a friendly jest that is not offensive. I've personally seen instances of both.

In short, the word is offensive when it is used offensively. The person using it is a secondary consideration.

Take the example I put on the previous page. You could try and argue that White people and Black people have different "contexts", historically, surrounding the phrase "cake walk" - the former were the plantation owners who had slaves participate, and the latter were the slaves who participated. You might say it's "not a double standard" to tell White people they can't use "cakewalk" and that Black people can.

But no one is bothering with that argument. Everyone can use the phrase cake walk. The phrase is sanitized. Despite its racially charged history, it would seem like a double standard right now to "allow" one group to use it and forbid another.

The problem is that the n-word is not sanitized like cakewalk. Rather than get repurposed as a harmless metaphor, it got transformed into a "community code word." You can use the word if you're in the community; you can't use the word if you're not. It's a word specifically intended to maintain a group boundary.

This is why I think some white people are genuinely confused about the use of the n-word. They listen to rap music where it appears constantly. They hear their Black friends say it to each other. For them, it seems to be a word divorced from its historical baggage, that is simply a marker of a community they'd like to participate in. But then they're blocked from doing so and it feels like a double standard. The logic is "They're using any of the words I can use, why can't I use the words they use?"

If those same people had a better understanding of history, and how the baggage encapsulated in the n-word still permeates today's race relations, then they might appreciate the line better. But as I said on the last page, talking about the word itself is rather missing the point. We should deal with the problems that give the word potency.

But there is inevitably a problem with trying to maintain a word as a tribal boundary while simultaneously advocating for more social unity and empathy. It would, pragmatically, be similar to women telling men they aren't "allowed" to call themselves feminists, due to how men have historically treated women. While technically true, it's socially counterproductive. It just fuels the growth of other tribalistic boundaries and prevents people from actually discussing the things that matter.

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

I'm not sure I agree with where you're going with this.

The assumption is that a Black person would always use the n-word in a "friendly" way

You already fucked up.

 

[L Thammy]

Somehow, republicans are often better at seeing through errors and mistakes to support an overall theme orngoal they may have. Liberals send them into the fire at a moments notice

A big part of that is that Republican's goals are often less about ethics and more around doing whatever possible to keep themselves in power. If you're willing to toe the line then there is no problem it all; you can e a cannibal on the side.

 

[WiiredShawn]

I feel like your whole post falls apart with one point: the word is still being used in the hateful sense. It's not hard to find. Go to any site founded by someone who still frequents 4chan, really.

So "the language has evolved" is a weak excuse. You can't say "this isn't really about the n-word, as much as it is the fact that American society hasn't sufficiently divorced itself from the pain captured by the word" because it absolutely is about the word. It's about the word because it's about a meaning that the word still has. Society hasn't divorced itself because it's still used in that sense.

I think you've misunderstood me. I didn't say "language has evolved," I said "language evolves". That's true - if it didn't, we'd still be upset about a phrase like "cakewalk" and we're not. Nonetheless, I also acknowledge, in what you quoted, that society hasn't moved on from the racism inherent to the n-word:

And in another way, this isn't really about the n-word, as much as it is the fact that American society hasn't sufficiently divorced itself from the pain captured by the word. I feel like that's the part white people often don't understand - for them, it's just "why do Black people want to feel included in society, and then exclude us from their language? That's not fair". But the ongoing prevalence of racism means that Black people can't get away from the negative connotations of the n-word. It hasn't become like words like cakewalk or loophole - sanitized of its past, converted to harmless metaphor.

But as I said, this isn't about the n-word itself. If we dealt with the racism that galvanizes it, the word would die off or lose its bite; it might just get converted into something more metaphorical or general. But focusing on the word, and trying to create rules about "who can and cannot use it", is just devolving into tribal politics. It's not productive. That's what people like Maher need to understand - it shouldn't be about transgressing some group boundary, but about dredging up a pain that is still very real for a lot of people.

I don't think we're disagreeing as much as you suspect that we are.

 

[hey_monkey]

The assumption is that a Black person would always use the n-word in a "friendly" way and a White person would always use the n-word in a "demeaning" way.

I never assumed the former - you are in turn assuming from what you think you read -though I certainly will say the latter will carry that impact regardless of intent. I'm arguing that different groups have different connections to the word regardless of usage, so the situations will not be equal, thus there can be no double standard.

 

[D i Z]

The songs are still being circulated regularly. He just released a 25th anniversary edition. Unless I'm wrong, he was never apologetic about it. Sorry, it's just hard to take Ice Cube of all people seriously when he's made asinine comments himself.

He went on Oprah to face the heat for that decades ago. It's a little disingenuous to suggest that he hasn't been held accountable nor stepped up to face those issues.

 

[Pinko Marx]

Did I discredit him? I applauding him for the good he's doing.

But fuck him for being a buster.

e: shit he's not even a buster, sitting out would have been better.

That's what I'm talking about though. Voting for Jill Stein is dumb as hell in my opinion, but Mike still has a lot of good to offer towards the fight. It shouldn't be "fuck him". We don't need to have this aggressive attitude towards legitimate allies, at the very least we should be having discussions with them because we /know/ they're open to pretty ideas. And if after talking to them we see that maybe they weren't what we thought after all, then we can see about moving on to "fuck you".
But this idea that like... He did something you may very much disagree with means that he and his ideas suck.

 

[KevinRo]

25 years ago when saying that shit was fine and acceptable, what does that have to do with 2017

So being openly racist against Koreans was acceptable because that's how it was?

This forum is amazing. Openly celebrating a racist and a homophobic bigot. Look up 'Black Korea'. I wish I could see the gears turning in everyone's brain while they attempt to wrestle with the fact that Ice Cube is a bigot and a racist.

 

[WiiredShawn]

I never assumed the former - you are in turn assuming from what you think you read -though I certainly will say the latter will carry that impact regardless of intent. I'm arguing that different groups have different connections to the word regardless of usage, so the situations will not be equal, thus there can be no double standard.

You said there's "never an equal situation between a white person's usage and a black person's usage." That means there's some fundamental difference between the two groups' contexts. Practically speaking, what is that difference if not "for this group, it's inflammatory, and for this group, it's not"?

And I get where you're going with this on a semantic level, but I'm still skeptical on a practical level. What criteria make two groups sufficiently similar enough that a double standard applies? People don't practically think of double-standards that way; it's much more loose than that.

Again, I come back to my point above: If a woman told me, a male, that I wasn't allowed to call myself a "feminist" because of how men, as a group, have historically treated women and women's rights, what would you think? Or to use a more crass term, what would you say to women wanting to call themselves a "bitch" in a cheeky way, but then tell men they couldn't do the same, because of how men have historically used the word "bitch"? Even if the men wanted to participate in their cheeky usage? Would you support blocking men from this usage because there are some shitty men who continue to use the word in a harsh, demeaning way?

As I said, I'm talking about more broad principles of language, and the use of language to mark boundaries, and whether that's healthy or effective or not. I'm well aware that the n-word itself has a lot of historical baggage and is emblematic of racial problems in America, and I'm not really invested in "returning it to white people". I'm concerned about focusing all of our discourse on the word itself rather than the social issues that keep the word relevant.

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

That's what I'm talking about though. Voting for Jill Stein is dumb as hell in my opinion, but Mike still has a lot of good to offer towards the fight. It shouldn't be "fuck him". We don't need to have this aggressive attitude towards legitimate allies, at the very least we should be having discussions with them because we /know/ they're open to pretty ideas. And if after talking to them we see that maybe they weren't what we thought after all, then we can see about moving on to "fuck you".
But this idea that like... He did something you may very much disagree with means that he and his ideas suck.

It was discussed at the time it was revealed he voted that way, and he was like "yea clinton/corporate shill etc".

 

[darkistheway]

He went on Oprah to face the heat for that decades ago. It's a little disingenuous to suggest that he hasn't been held accountable nor stepped up to face those issues.

Sure.

 

[Roufianos]

One racist educating another.

 

[Pinko Marx]

It was discussed at the time it was revealed he voted that way, and he was like "yea clinton/corporate shill etc".

I don't feel like that's a super terrible opinion. I can't blame Mike for disliking Clinton enough to vote for someone else. It's not like he voted against the things he discusses. It's pretty much in line with everything I've heard from him.
I get that everyone has their line and maybe that crossed your's but... I feel like "he didn't vote Clinton" is a weak criticism.

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

One racist educating another.

The conference is about to start in an hour, scoot back.

 

[D i Z]

Sure.

All I'm saying is that dude got a lot of clap back for his messaging for a whole lot of years. Maybe people weren't paying attention, but in the black community it was a hot topic. Also tell Latasha Harlins about Black Korea and what it was like in those days, if anyone wants to bring that up.

 

[Myths]

In all honesty nobody should be using it.

Just my 2 cents.

Should've ended here tbh.. 👌🏿

Edit: And despite its history, we turned it into such a strange term of endearment but sometimes to mean stranger. Usage is everything if you take the time to think about words.

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

I don't feel like that's a super terrible opinion. I can't blame Mike for disliking Clinton enough to vote for someone else. It's not like he voted against the things he discusses. It's pretty much in line with everything I've heard from him.
I get that everyone has their line and maybe that crossed your's but... I feel like "he didn't vote Clinton" is a weak criticism.

The criticism isn't he didn't vote clintion.

It's that he decided to partake in clinton is shit compared to trump.

 

[Dynomutt]

The biggest mistake that some people make is assuming were in this shit together. Unfortunately were not. Not by choice by by a standard that was set long ago. Were applying ideal concepts to a non-ideal world. We were split long ago along socio-economic lines. Nigga, is the "word" people want to fight to be able to say. No, you can't say it so what. SMFH.

Yo I start to flinch, as I try not to say it
But my lips is like the oowop as I start to spray it
My lips is like a oowop as I start to spray it
My lips is like a oowop as I start to spray it

 

[Alexander DeLarge]

Nah, (#notall) white people never have patience when we're trying to explain our side. Oh noes, not 10 minutes on this topic. If he was really sorry, he'd have at least pretended like he wanted to hear what cube had to say and not visibly shut down when it was obvious he wasn't hearing what he wanted.

It wasn't just ten minutes, it was ten minutes taking up an hour on a political talk show with a panel. I doubt his audience tuned in to listen to him get chastised for 15 minutes on air and that was the primary concern, it's a show. Ice Cube's thing could've been done in a minute on air saying "don't get too comfortable just because you have a black girlfriend" but even that I think is a case of preaching to the choir. A lot of this could've been done on Overtime or in the green room.

 

[hey_monkey]

You said there's "never an equal situation between a white person's usage and a black person's usage." That means there's some fundamental difference between the two groups' contexts. Practically speaking, what is that difference if not "for this group, it's inflammatory, and for this group, it's not"?

And I get where you're going with this on a semantic level...

It's not a matter of semantics. It's a matter of relative cultural, social, and historical positions. Of all the things I've ever said on GAF, I never thought I would have to defend saying white and black Americans have different intrinsic relationships to the word n*****.

 

[darkistheway]

All I'm saying is that dude got a lot of clap back for his messaging for a whole lot of years. Maybe people weren't paying attention, but in the black community it was a hot topic. Also tell Latasha Harlins about Black Korea and what it was like in those days, if anyone wants to bring that up.

So what?

Do you think it's ok to release an album in 2017 with hate words contained within?

Even with the historical context, Ice Cube is profiting now.

 

[D i Z]

So what?

Do you think it's ok to release an album in 2017 with hate words contained within?

Even with the historical context, Ice Cube is profiting now.

What do you mean "so what"?

Take the shots all you want, just put it in context. Don't omit the fakes of the situation just to make a case. Talk about what he's had to say about his sexist lyrics. Talk about the Korean/African American tensions that erupted and was one of the major factors in L.A burning for weeks. Keep it real.

 

[krazen]

So what?

Do you think it's ok to release an album in 2017 with hate words contained within?

Even with the historical context, Ice Cube is profiting now.

Regardless its widely regarded as a classic album with think pieces on the political climate that spawned it etc. To act like it was an album of just racism for racisms sake is disingenuous. Historically problematic pieces of art are exist/get re-introduced/restudied all the time.

 

[4 is a cutie]

He went on Oprah to face the heat for that decades ago. It's a little disingenuous to suggest that he hasn't been held accountable nor stepped up to face those issues.

Link to the Oprah interview/news of him stepping up?

 

[Messofanego]

But there is inevitably a problem with trying to maintain a word as a tribal boundary while simultaneously advocating for more social unity and empathy. It would, pragmatically, be similar to women telling men they aren't "allowed" to call themselves feminists, due to how men have historically treated women. While technically true, it's socially counterproductive. It just fuels the growth of other tribalistic boundaries and prevents people from actually discussing the things that matter.

Bitch is the word you're looking for, not feminist. As far as I'm aware, there's no pushback against males identifying as feminists by women except when they just want to disingenuously do to get into a woman's pants.

And the community boundary is for stopping the people who in the past were oppressors from using the word. White people with nigga and other racist slurs, males with bitch. It just reminds of the dark past when it comes from such a person, whether he means it in a good or bad way. You can't divorce history from some words.

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

So what?

Do you think it's ok to release an album in 2017 with hate words contained within?

Even with the historical context, Ice Cube is profiting now.

Yes? So?

Take him to task to explain them if you can't understand it.

These aren't works meant to incite hatred.

These are depictions of life during those times.

 

[WiiredShawn]

It's not a matter of semantics. It's a matter of relative cultural, social, and historical positions. Of all the things I've ever said on GAF, I never thought I would have to defend saying white and black Americans have different intrinsic relationships to the word n*****.

Perhaps I'm not being clear enough, because I'm not disagreeing you with about the different historical relationship. I'm very well aware of that relationship and am not advocating that white people just start tossing the word n**** into every sentence.

I'm disagreeing about whether there can or cannot be a double standard in usage among people in the present moment, or into the future.

I guess my point is that this relationship to the word is not intrinsic, as you say. That would demand that language cannot change, that our relationship to a word is pretty much locked in from the moment the word was invented - that individual people won't or can't "scrub" the historical or emotional baggage from a word.

But that's already false. If it were true, you would be mad about white people saying "this is a cakewalk." You're not, even though White people and Black people have historically different relationships to the word. Because individuals decided to cast off the word's baggage.

You have to maintain that the relationship is intrinsic, and that the word is static, in order to maintain the argument that "this is our word and you can't have it" and also that there's no double standard in play.

But people aren't born with a historical knowledge of a word. That relationship is not intrinsic; it's learned, passed on among generations. To some White kid, who has grown up without any experience of racism, who enjoys listening to Black musicians who litter their songs with the n-word, it's just a word that's used in a culture they want to participate in (however loosely). And then when someone tells them "You can't use it because you're White," and doesn't provide any more explanation than that, it seems like a double-standard. Because to that kid, there are no words that White people can use that Black people cannot use.

And yes, there is a historical reason for that. That should be discussed, as should the pain that African American communities continue to suffer, largely at the hands of crappy White people. But I'm also not sure that Ice Cube's argument is terribly helpful to the situation.

 

[LionPride]

So being openly racist against Koreans was acceptable because that's how it was?

This forum is amazing. Openly celebrating a racist and a homophobic bigot. Look up 'Black Korea'. I wish I could see the gears turning in everyone's brain while they attempt to wrestle with the fact that Ice Cube is a bigot and a racist.

I ain't know that Cube was still a racist and a homophobe, news to me seeing as he faced backlash for Black Korea because it was so problematic

But if you wanna bring up Black Korea talk about why the song was made and I'm talking past the amount of shops in black neighborhood, I mean the death of a young black woman over OJ

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

But people aren't born with a historical knowledge of a word. That relationship is not intrinsic; it's learned, passed on among generations. To some White kid, who has grown up without any experience of racism, who enjoys listening to Black musicians who litter their songs with the n-word, it's just a word that's used in a culture they want to participate in (however loosely). And then when someone tells them "You can't use it because you're White," and doesn't provide any more explanation than that, it seems like a double-standard. Because to that kid, there are no words that White people can use that Black people cannot use.

Unless it's Kimmy Schmidt, that's not an excuse.

 

[Future]

Bitch is the word you're looking for, not feminist. As far as I'm aware, there's no pushback against males identifying as feminists by women except when they just want to disingenuously do to get into a woman's pants.

And the community boundary is for stopping the people who in the past were oppressors from using the word. White people with nigger and other racist slurs, males with bitch. It just reminds of the dark past when it comes from such a person, whether he means it in a good or bad way. You can't divorce history from some words.

Bitch is an apt comparison. Cuz how are you supposed to stop something like that. For real

Now bitch does not have the same historical pain as something like the n word. But it's a word uttered so frequently that you can't really be surprised when it's used by certain people that you're rather not hear it from. N word has a similar prevalence in that you pretty much cannot listen to the radio without hearing it. While it's no defense for grown white people using it (they know what they are doing), it isn't a point that should be easily dismissed if you really would like to strike it from all vocabulary

Homosexual slurs are similar. Some words have entered the realm of urban culture, that means that people that wish to talk like that may blurt it out from time to time, and it's almost unavoidable.

 

[FloweryMarston]

I love Ice Cube

 

[WiiredShawn]

Bitch is the word you're looking for, not feminist. As far as I'm aware, there's no pushback against males identifying as feminists by women except when they just want to disingenuously do to get into a woman's pants.

And the community boundary is for stopping the people who in the past were oppressors from using the word. White people with nigga and other racist slurs, males with bitch. It just reminds of the dark past when it comes from such a person, whether he means it in a good or bad way. You can't divorce history from some words.

To quote myself:

Or to use a more crass term, what would you say to women wanting to call themselves a "bitch" in a cheeky way, but then tell men they couldn't do the same, because of how men have historically used the word "bitch"? Even if the men wanted to participate in their cheeky usage? Would you support blocking men from this usage because there are some shitty men who continue to use the word in a harsh, demeaning way?

But then yes, I agree with you about the broader point about creating rules to "weed out" oppressors. At the same time, I maintain that no word is immune from being divorced from its history. We maintain the history if it seems relevant to do so. Of course, in modern America, it is - racism is pervasive, still. But to me, that is the problem, not the word. 100 years from now on, only a handful of people may even know the history of the n-word, just like few people know the history of most words in our language.

Unless it's Kimmy Schmidt, that's not an excuse.

You say that, but I don't know how you expect that theoretical White kid to arrive at a deep and empathetic view of history in a vacuum. And it doesn't strike me as rhetorically useful to immediately discredit their perceptions. You want to say "that's an unfair perception for X reasons," fine. But you're not going to get anywhere by telling people, especially the young, that "you should have known better", even though "knowing better" often requires specific resources, background, education, etc.

 

[mcarlie]

Bill Maher still getting a free pass for being a liberal smh.

 

[darkistheway]

Yes? So?

Take him to task to explain them if you can't understand it.

These aren't works meant to incite hatred.

These are depictions of life during those times.

Of course they are. But that doesn't make the language acceptable, then or now.

Maher's joke (and I use the term loosely) was also making commentary and not meant to incite hatred. So why does he not get the same benefit of the doubt (or whatever you want to call it) that Ice Cube does?

 

[Mr.Shrugglesツ]

Of course they are. But that doesn't make the language acceptable, then or now.

Maher's joke (and I use the term loosely) was also making commentary and not meant to incite hatred. So why does he not get the same benefit of the doubt (or whatever you want to call it) that Ice Cube does?

Because mahers joke happened this week(2017), and the piece from cube happened in the 90's?

wtf

 

[darkistheway]

Because mahers joke happened this week(2017), and the piece from cube happened in the 90's?

wtf

'Faggot' was acceptable in the 90s?

 

[moggio]

'Faggot' was acceptable in the 90s?

No.

 

[Messofanego]

To quote myself:



But then yes, I agree with you about the broader point about creating rules to "weed out" oppressors. At the same time, I maintain that no word is immune from being divorced from its history. We maintain the history if it seems relevant to do so. Of course, in modern America, it is - racism is pervasive, still. But to me, that is the problem, not the word. 100 years from now on, only a handful of people may even know the history of the n-word, just like few people know the history of most words in our language.



You say that, but I don't know how you expect that theoretical White kid to arrive at a deep and empathetic view of history in a vacuum. And it doesn't strike me as rhetorically useful to immediately discredit their perceptions. You want to say "that's an unfair perception for X reasons," fine. But you're not going to get anywhere by telling people, especially the young, that "you should have known better", even though "knowing better" often requires specific resources, background, education, etc.

When racism and misogyny become a thing of the very distant past, then we can cross that bridge of it being fine for men to say bitch and for white people to say nigga. Until then, it's a no go zone.

I don't know if NeoGAF will still be here in 100 years

 

[{insert code here}]

XBOX ONE X