Link
I'm pretty much a First Amendment absolutist, but some words may try to stretch the First Amendment too far, I believe.
What about the "N" word (racial hate word epithet to some, but historical language to others)?
Read about how this word can be taken (or not taken) in an editorial in The (Rock Hill) Herald.
5 comments:
I read this editorial. I think banning the word is a good first step - but why is it that we even bother to address a "racial epithet" used, by the race that is is supposed to be insulting, as a term of endearment?
Glad you read the editorial. Don't really have a good answer for your question.
The ramifications of banning a word are enormous. I cringe at the ripple effect such an act would produce. Can't imagine a world in which Huck Finn is removed from high school curriculum (a potential ripple mind you) for the issues so artfully presented are critical in building tolerance and awareness.
The cartoon South Park ran an episode where one of the characters continually said the "f" word (being the word the FCC will most likely never allow on television) to demonstrate its loss of effectiveness the more it was used. Possible one reason such an epithet is used as a term of endearment - desensitization.
Someone who does not want a name attached to this comment shared with me the following:
Too bashful to blog, but here’s my viewpoint:
My mother never allowed it to be spoken in her house, the ‘N” word. Even then, her practices were “fair and balanced,” for she never uttered the equally offensive term used to describe the dominant race in our community in the small rural town of York, SC. You might have noticed that I am still hesitant about using terms to identify the races. I suppose my upbringing is showing.
Earlier this week a chatty little substitute teacher, who is a retired elementary teacher in her late sixties or early seventies, decided to join me in my long walk to the office to check my mailbox. On our way, she made comments about who was gay, and who was racist. I tried to silence her, especially since the alleged gay person was within hearing distance.
“I’m just bitter,” she said. “Honey, I’ve seen so many things.”
I nodded as we continued our trek to the office mail box. Then she began to tell her story. During her youth, she recalled, someone threw a firecracker at her cousin, causing the young girl to lose her hearing in one ear.
“Oh, honey, I’m just bitter,” she said again.
I quickly shared with her my story—how I had spent the Friday night before my SAT at my Upward Bound counselor’s home and how she had driven me, along with my grandmother, to college and enrolled me; and how I lived with a family in the suburbs of Rochester, NY, as I completed my student teaching experience. Instead of being bitter, I had a debt to pay: to be a model of fairness and equality and to eliminate the name calling even in the absence of those whom it could offend.
Many years ago I studied linguistics at what is now Clark-Atlanta University. One fascinating topic focused on how words and our perception of them change over time. The “N” word maintains its pejorative value in most communities, I believe. Sometimes, however, reversals occur. Who would have thought that in secret societies, at social gatherings from the elite to the vulgar, and in the composition of pseudo-music that the word would have enjoyed such an uplifting in meaning? Linguists call it amelioration.
Of course, the word hurts when hurled with spiteful intentions. Yet, I am opposed to banning the word.
mainah woman makes an interesting point regarding the much maligned "F" word.
Sometimes it would seem that that word expresses more--in different ways, depending on context--than any other word in the English language.
One thing's for sure: It will never go away in everyday "normal" conversation; and, sometimes in "passionate" encounters, folks utter it, or, maybe more accurately, blurt it out. How could it ever be banned in that setting? Not likely.
Post a Comment