Now, Dr. Laura has apologized, both for saying the word all the way out and for not helping the caller. The caller, Jade, was a black woman married to a white man whose friends and family make "racist comments" in front of her, which her husband ignores. Voicing her suspicion that "sometimes people are hypersensitive," Dr. Laura asked Jade to giver her 2 good examples of these "racist comments." Jade says:
OK. Last night -- good example -- we had a neighbor come over, and this neighbor -- when every time he comes over, it's always a black comment. It's, "Oh, well, how do you black people like doing this?" And, "Do black people really like doing that?"Of course, Laura didn't think that was racist, but instead of inviting Jade to contemplate why a well-meaning person might say something like that or how Jade might take a more active role to get the neighbor to stop addressing her that way, Laura opened up the stream-of-consciousness:
... Well, listen, without giving much thought, a lot of blacks voted for Obama simply 'cause he was half-black. Didn't matter what he was gonna do in office, it was a black thing. You gotta know that. That's not a surprise. Not everything that somebody says -- we had friends over the other day; we got about 35 people here -- the guys who were gonna start playing basketball. I was going to go out and play basketball. My bodyguard and my dear friend is a black man. And I said, "White men can't jump; I want you on my team." That was racist? That was funny.Jade then says: "How about the N-word? So, the N-word's been thrown around..." Here, Laura needed to determine whether the husband's friends and family are saying the word. Laura keeps riffing about general things happening out there in the culture:
Black guys use it all the time. Turn on HBO, listen to a black comic, and all you hear is n*gger, n*gger, n*gger.The friends and family in question aren't black guys (and neither is Jade), so what is the point? That Jade should put up with the n-word, said in her presence? People on HBO say "fuck" all the time too, but if the neighbors come to your house and say "fuck" all the time, you have a legitimate complaint. "Don't be so sensitive" is like saying "Be a doormat." But that lapse of Laura's — the failure to recognize what is special about a person's home — hardly gets any attention, because her saying the word "n*gger" was such an immense distraction. Why on earth would Laura do that? Media tweak.
Yeah, that makes me a tweakee. But there's no tweakee defense for the blogger. We bloggers live on tweaks. Mmmm. Yum.
पोस्ट्स
१९१ टिप्पण्या:
I have trouble believing there are 35 people on the planet who would want to go to her house.
My partner is an African American hip-hop artist. He sometimes refers to me as "my nigga" but I still cringe, even though it's coming from him.
My cringing signifies that society has trained me well.
Schlessinger should make most of us grateful that we don't have Jewish mothers.
There is a double standard for white vs. black racism.
N-word indeed.
She's right. Many of my black friends say "nigger" frequently with impunity, and here you are like a frightened church mouse with your N-word.
The Gramscian rot is so deep into our cultural fabric I don't think we'll ever recover.
I can't see what Schlessinger said that was so bad. What she said was accurate. The black Crack has used the n*gger word before, and you let his comments stand. Care to answer why? Schlessinger apologized because she understood that there is a double standard. A different set of rules for blacks and everyone else.
Schlessinger should make most of us grateful that we don't have Jewish mothers.
There were only eight people on the Arc. Don't we all technically have Jewish mothers? lol
There seems to be comfort among African Americans spicing up their banter among themselves with the N word using it like Elvis used the word hound-dog in his first hit...it connotes a lazy male that gets by using others who are seduced by his cool style. It is a complement. But whites who use the word are still fair game for a free attack in retribution for their bigot whiteness.
There is a double standard for white vs. black racism.
There is a double standard for male vs female sexism too. Throughout my professional career I've seen females say things that would have gotten my muscular buttocks fired in 5 seconds.
It isn't about achieving equality or fairness and I don't think it ever was. It was all about getting even.
I listened to Dr. Laura for the first time in years the other night. She blasted two callers in a row - one Christian, one Jew - for using their religious beliefs as an excuse for forgiving transgressive behavior in their lives. Her tone was strikingly harsh and adamant.
Seems to me, she has gotten more than a little tired of hearing so many of the same social tropes RE: race, religion, sex, etc. and is lashing out.
Also, she's tweaking the media and us.
"There is a double standard for male vs female sexism too."
All part and parcel of the aforementioned Gramscian damage inflicted upon us by the radical egalitarians who have seized control of the media, academia, and the Democrat party.
Serious question -- Is it ever OK for a white person to use the all-out N-word?
What if the white person in question is doing karaoke to Snoop Dogg?
Poll please...
There is a double standard for white vs. black racism.
You'll notice that our hostess only bans racial slurs directed at blacks. The other races aren't protected.
Love you Ann, but I'm glad you're not on the bench.
Here's a radical thought: maybe Dr. Schlessinger was just being honest.
"Why did Laura do that?"
Probably induced by the sheer exhaustion of having to walk on her tiptoes these 40 odd years.
We're all pretty exhausted.
Woman is the nigger of the world.
I refuse to say "N word". Context is everything. I will say "nigger" when it is appropriate under the circumstances. In other words when the context makes it obvious that my intent is not couched in racist sentiment, usually in humorous banter with racially mixed band mates.
But I will never submit to the leftist pressure to be politically correct. Just the idea of "political correctness" in all it's Marxist stupidity fills me with disgust.
I don't care.
Geoff Matthews said...
I don't care.
Are you a n-word?
The South Park episode on this issue is the definitive statement.
Randy is on a Jeopardy type game, and the answer is: "People who annoy you."
The letters on the board are n * g g e r s.
Of course, the correct answer is: "naggers." But dumb Randy, blurts out the forbidden word on national TV.
The only solution, of course, is to apologize to Jesse Jackson. Jackson demands that Randy kiss his naked ass.
Dr. Laura must, likewise, apologize to Jesse Jackson, who is officially in charge of receiving all such apologies.
This bigot thing is all there is to life, isn't it? All things are about bigotry.
Bigots cannot be allowed to vote on substantive issues. Bigots cannot be allowed to speak on the public airwaves.
Bigots must be rooted out and destroyed!
The Great Bigot Hunt is the sum total of all contemporary intellectual life.
Question: Should bigots be executed?
I guess I failed at being tweaked here.
wv: fluck (no shit) - portmanteau of flying and fuck. "I don't give a fluck that Dr. Laura used the word 'nigger'"
@palladian: Did that thought eminate from that Japanese woman, or her now-deceased husband?
wv: snotize
Michael Richards had a Seinfeld to come to his rescue..
Who does Dr Laura have?
When I was young and new to this country, I was advised to leave the room immediately if I ever heard a black person call another black person "niggah."
I guess times have changed.
random thoughts:
- you linked to a Media Matters post? (A subtly wingironic search for analysis?)
- is humble ideologue an oxymoron?
- When did offensiveness become entertainment (let alone enlightenment)?
- Why is the statement
"I'm white; you're black" a de facto racist statement but
"I'm black; you're white" not
Gotta wonder about the caller's husband. Seems like he's allowing his neighbors to come in and gang-bang his black wife. Me, I'd put the dogs on all of 'em.
It's just so exhausting to go through life wondering if and when you're going to be tripped up saying the N word. Sigh.
garage,
Once you're retired, you can use it a lot more often.
- is humble ideologue an oxymoron?
I think you could view things through a single lens, but remain humble about it. Not that it's common, but certainly possible.
- When did offensiveness become entertainment (let alone enlightenment)?
Seriously??? Have you not been paying attention to pop culture for the past 20 years? I will admit, though, this particular facet of American culture will be en flagrante Sunday night when Comedy Central does the Hasselhoff roast. Can't wait to see if it tops William Shatners.
- Why is the statement
"I'm white; you're black" a de facto racist statement but
"I'm black; you're white" not
I like Daniel Tosh's observation of the phrase, "What's with all these fags getting married...it's okay, I can say that. I'm black." He asks why that second part softens the first.
Question: Should bigots be executed?
That just happened in Connecticut. A black man called those he murdered racisss so that justified their murder...according to the AP.
Seriously??? Have you not been paying attention to pop culture for the past 20 years?
Scott, I have been paying attention. Maybe my recent 35th high school reunion put me the mindset of continually asking "When did ________ start?"
Did Lenny Bruce start it or did Jerry Falwell?
Maybe all white people should use the n-word and all non-whites should use words like cracker,honkey and white trash.
Some obviously Euro-American people have the audacity to talk about double standards over a word, when the American society permeates with institutionalised double standards from the school system to the court system.
Almost,
Well, yeah, how stupid is the neighbor to think blacks are monolithic in tastes, etc?
OTOH we do only have the caller's word for it that this is what's happening...
well i think that is qualitatively different from, say the gibson tapes. she was saying it solely to discuss the issue of whether to say it.
I remember watching a movie called Down to Earth. In it, Chris Rock plays a comedian who dies and then is allowed for some reason to take over the body of a rich old white guy. I came in the middle so I don’t know the full set up, but you know what you need to know. So he decides to try to revive his comedy career and goes into a club and starts doing one of those “black people do this, white people do that” routines.
So he gets up there and says, “when a white person dies, they have a will. When a black person dies, he leaves a bill.” Mind you, to his audience he looks like a fat old white guy saying this. It doesn’t go over well.
And I think Chris Rock was actually making a point. I think he was saying, if its racist when a white guy says it, it is racist if a black guy says it, too. And certainly to judge the meaning of your words by the color of your skin, ignores Dr. King’s injunction on judging by the content of one’s character.
Either everyone should be able to say it, or no one should.
Not that I get all wound up about it. But the principles seem pretty clear to me on this point.
wv: browele. When your eyebrows, and only your eyebrows, are wet, you should dry them off with a browele.
This thread is not complete until Crack Emcee shows up.
lance said: "Some obviously Euro-American people have the audacity to talk about double standards over a word, when the American society permeates with institutionalised double standards from the school system to the court system."
You must be talking about the fact that an African American with an SAT score of 1100 has the same chance of being accepted into most universities as a white student with a 1400.
Specifically, the following ethnicities yield the following SAT bonus points, roughly (IIRC):
African American: +300 pts
Hispanic: +200 pts
White: 0 pts
Asian: -100 pts
There's some audacity for you.
South Park and Daniel Tosh references in one thread?
Best. Thread. Ever.
Pastafarian.. is this some referrence to the rastafarian movement ?????
if Non whites are for some reason attending the worst schools in the country?????
Corporate and Accadmeic America rejects applications based on names like Jamal or Hakeem. How do you level the playing field ?????
Why don't you talk about the harder judicial punishments handed down to non-whites as compared to whites???
I guess those things are a level playing field for you...its amazing how Americans talk about the Land of the BRAVE and the FREE and yet the most american American wants everyting stacked to his/her own side so much that if one game leveler is introduced its an abomination to your "morals"
So, where are you from, lance?
Does this mean that Amos and Andy re-runs will come back to TV now?
Couldn't find the original so this will have to do
Scott:
I believe @Palladian's quote was from Audre Lorde.
On the main topic, I once had an HR expert witness tell me that if a manager heard two black employees using the word in question with each other, the manager would have no discretion but to initiate disciplinary procedures. Gotta love those HR consultant folks.
lance said: "Pastafarian.. is this some referrence to the rastafarian movement ?????"
Very funny, lance. You and I both know that those rastafari bastardized the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (s.b.u.h), replacing the P with an R, the FSM with the emperor of Ethiopia, and incorporating really bad haircuts and bong-toking.
Sons of bitches.
But back to the topic at hand:
Lance said: "Corporate and Accadmeic America rejects applications based on names like Jamal or Hakeem."
Um, no. Not sure what decade you're from, my time-traveling friend, but in this one, it's quite the opposite. At many fortune 500 companies, and in many positions, being African American is a huge advantage, as departments try to fill their diversity quotas. I seem to remember a recent Althouse post on this. I'll try to find it.
My solution to this is to just not say it in either form. Since I don't think it in the first place, this isn't much of a hardship. If there is a rare academic situation in which I use the word "nigger", I am completely guilt-free and non-tentative in its use and I've never gotten pushback. IOW, it's not hiding an emotional punch of reverse grievance or guilt that I haven't expressed. In my opinion, that's what causes the majority of the reaction. Clean that up on an inner level, and the problem disappears.
An even better solution is to not refer to blackness either - that means not obsessing over and fondling the racial issue. This is a little harder for me because it's been a form of filler since my school days. I was part of a very diverse group of friends and we spent hours, days, months, years on this stuff - not in a political way, just talking about ourselves and our newly-minted identities as adolescents do. In school, it was a very easy way to write papers and get approval for all of us as well, when really all it showed was that we had fucked up and didn't have time to do any research on a real subject.
I do the same thing now as an adult, but I'm trying to quit. Even reading this is a time-waster - like reading the astrology section. And once again the only ral solution is to not only to stop talking about it, but stop playing with it completely in my head and get on to other things.
... we were told we could then have a dialogue about race, but when we do have a dialogue we are called racists??
Yes. The same thing happened back in the Clinton Administration when we had the Dialouge which ended up turning into the Lecture.
Being the 'melting pot' that is the USA, it may take a millenia, maybe a bit less, but through inter-marrying between races and ethnicity we will eventually dilute the racial pool and there will no longer be any necessity to have a Dialogue.
Then we'll find something else to whine and complain about. That's the part of human nature I don't think you can breed out.
It's unfortunate that Jade has to put up with such ignorant family. I am sorry for her.
It's unfortunate that Jade has to put up with such ignorant family. I am sorry for her.
I'm not. She doesn't have to put up with anything she doesn't want to. There are specific in-laws that I refuse to associate with. Mrs. Hoosier doesn't like it but she knows what the alternative is too. Marriage is about compromising and doing things you may not like out of deference to your spouse but to paraphrase Harry Callahan; a man does have his limitations.
And if Jade's hubby's friends and family are dropping the N-bomb in her presence and hubby isn't beating the shit out of them then maybe Jade needs to find someone who has a tad more respect for her.
My guess is Jade ain't who she says she is. I know more than a few African-American women and I'll lay even money they wouldn't be calling Dr. Laura to whine.
if the neighbors come to your house and say "fuck" all the time, you have a legitimate complaint. "Don't be so sensitive" is like saying "Be a doormat."
You're right -- people shouldn't be saying "the N-word" to others, and they shouldn't be saying "the F-word" to others. We would all do well by a greater level of civil discourse.
Nevertheless, it is far past time to rob that "N-word" of its power to offend. And it is past time to stop using that offense, or potential offense as a sword or club to bash others over the head with it.
It is far past time that we got over this "offense of the day" bullsh*t, where we are constantly being outraged at something that someone has said.
It is an uncivil word. It is a rude word. But it has no power in itself. It is just a collection of sounds when spoken out loud. It is nothing more than a collection of symbols when written out.
The "N-word" is not a stick. It is not a stone. It cannot break your bones. It is only a f***ing word! GET OVER IT.
I'm offended on a daily basis by the cesspool that this society has become. And I'm not alone. Does anyone give a rat's ass that we are offended??? No.
It is only a word. If you are the target of that word, please do yourself a favor and do not allow yourself to give that word power to hurt. It is nothing but sounds and symbols.
Get beyond the offense. And then, as a matter of civility, let's learn how to engage in public discourse without peppering it with profanities in every other sentence out of our mouths.
Jade's husband chose poorly.
To show how absurdly silly this is --
Can we have everyone identify themselves as to whether they are Anglo-white or black or Latino or Asian?
I would like to know so that, if you actually write that word out in full, we can know whether to be offended by it or not, or whether you are one who is allowed to use the word.
Like you, Paul. I don't know if you are white or black. Should I be outraged or not?
All I can say to this whole Post is
"Niggah Please!"
And note that I said niggah, and not n*gger. Niggah, is gansta, and deliberately misspels and mispronounces the word so as to get around the offendability. It was originally done by black so don't blame me, probably after being chastisted by Cosby types who wondered why black comedians needed to curse and resort to the n word in their acts (and to that I say "Niggah, please!" too) PLus, I'm speaking the vernacular, yo!
I once tried to write a joke about the time when Northwest Airlines began just putting "NWA" on their planes' liveries.
I wondered if it stood for "Niggaz With Altitude."
No one wanted to do that joke.
It's generally excepted that if you are of a certain race you can make jokes about your race. As in "I can say that because I'm black". But what if you are multi racial? Suppose, like Barack Obama you have a white mother and a black father. Does that allow you double the joke quotient of someone who isn't so blessed, or can you not make jokes about either because making a joke about one half of yourself might offend the other half.
OR are you limited to making jokes that are offensive to both blacks and whites at the same time in the same joke ("I can say that because I'm black AND white")
IT sounds like someone, somewhere is getting screwed out of the ability to tell jokes, and I'm wondering if it's a free speech issue. Should people be denied the ability to tell racist jokes based on their race, or should the be restricted from telling jokes based on their race?
What if you hate your race? Like, Colin Powell or black conservatives in general. Are they allowed to tell black jokes, considering they hate their blackness? Isn't that then racism?
On a more serious note: great example of the double standard. Blacks can do white face, jew face, yellow face, any kind of face (ie dress up as the race you are making fun of and then mimic them stereotypically. "Ah, honolable glandson, you want beef wif Brocorri?" (see that was me doing yellow face, but it's ok, because my grandmom is Asian (not Oriental type Asian, just Asian). Don't blame me if a lot of ethnic groups are in Asia. Shouldn't have made such a big deal about the word "oriental". Yet whites can't do blackface. Remember Eddie Murphy's coming to America where he dressed up like an old white Jew and started speaking in his jew impersonation (Oy Gavolt!) or in Norbitt (understandable if you didn't see it, nobody did) where he dressed Asian and played a guy who owned a Chinese Restauarnt. His name might have been Mr. Wu or something. That's ok. Black comedians, in nearly every one of their acts do their white voice, where they get very uptight sounding and proper. Yet remember Ted Danson doing black face for Whoopi Goldberg's Bday? Oh no, racism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Time to teach some new words to your Dr. Laura Talking Doll.
I generally encourage free speech (as well as funny and concise digressions). Other than that, don't use the "n-word"
Allen,
No.
I still don't care.
@Pastafarian.. advantage
Couldn't agree more. I have worked in a hiring capacity at a Fortune 100 company and was explicitly told that I should look to hire both female as well as black or hispanic candidates because this satisfied the diveristy requirement.
I don't understand why more middle class black or hispanic people are not encouraged to just get through any BA program. If they did, they could literally write their own ticket in the Fortune 1000.
Unless someone with an opposing viewpoint can come up with something quickly, maybe via SNL, Jon Stewart's "the card is maxed out" is going to have a bigger impact than I think anyone yet realizes.
Why is racism the biggest sin in America today?
Because it was the biggest flaw in American society the Soviets felt they could exploit.
Through their useful idiots in the CPUSA, and the CPUSA's useful idiots everywhere within the American left they unleashed their propaganda campaign of political correctness to successfully tear apart American society from within.
This is Gramscian, or "cultural", Marxism in all it's pernicious, corrosive brilliance.
The ghosts of the Soviet communists roam freely in our academic institutions and media spreading their cancer long after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Even Althouse is within their thrall to some significant degree. That's how insidiously effective their tactics have been.
Google Yuri Besmenov, a high level KGB defector, for an insiders look at the components of the strategy they used to undermine America through cultural means.
The NY Jets coach Ryan is a big deal in today's sports world for giving an uncensored George Patton speech to his team on camera. The language police are dumbfounded, but the men are saying to themselves, "We finally have a leader who knows what our war is about and not another school teacher". There is a time for profanity, about 1% of the time.
Nevertheless, it is far past time to rob that "N-word" of its power to offend
Won't happen. The reason you can spew "redneck" here and not "n-word" is a result of the Bigotry of Low Expectations. Well-meaning liberals expect offended blacks to resort to violence and riots. But they hold the other races to a higher standard.
In short, the "n-word" gets special protections because "blacks are not as civilized as the other races"
I don't have a problem with people using that word regardless of their color. When did America become hypersensitive to words? Oh yeah, when political correctness and multiculturalism started taking over our lexicon.
I didn't know she was still on the air.
Here's the rule: If you self-identify as black*, you may use the n-word. Otherwise, it's impossible to use the word without throwing off some amount of racism. Doesn't necessarily make you a racist but it does make you stupid in the way of Michael Richards or Laura Schlessinger.
*Black, meaning you claim at least one African-American ancestor who lived at least part of his life as as a slave.
Here's the rule: If you self-identify as black*, you may use the n-word. Otherwise, it's impossible to use the word without throwing off some amount of racism. Doesn't necessarily make you a racist but it does make you stupid in the way of Michael Richards or Laura Schlessinger.
I hope your meant your separate but equal rule designating who is allowed to say "nigger" as a joke, Meade.
*Black, meaning you claim at least one African-American ancestor who lived at least part of his life as as a slave.
See, this parody of the one-drop rule makes me think you were joking, but your earlier specific name-checking of Richards and Schlessinger makes me worry you might have been serious.
The uncut, uncensored Blazing Saddles may still be the funniest movie of all time.
wv: surogra - viagra's surrogate?
Meade said...
Here's the rule
There are two separate rules. We've already discussed this.
Can a non conservative call a conservative a racist since conservatives call each other racists? "Racist!". "We're all racists!".
garage: It isn't necessarily racist for a liberal to call a conservative a racist.
But it is projection.
Doesn't matter, Garage. Didn't you hear? The race card has been maxed out.
Corporate and Accadmeic America rejects applications based on names...
Well, I can think of a few reasons they'd reject yours.
Doesn't matter, Garage. Didn't you hear? The race card has been maxed out.
Okay then! So we call all call each other racists, and nobody should really be offended.
Okay then! So we call all call each other racists, and nobody should really be offended.
I know I ignore it when I see it here.
1. "Racist!". "We're all racists!"
That was truly funny, garage.
2. When I used to listen to Dr. Laura, I wondered if the callers were victims of practical jokes: Guy abandons his wife and four small children, moves across the country to live with his three girlfriends, who support him. When his wife wants child support, he needs some advice. His practical joker buddy says, "Call this number!"
3. The Althouse rule against using the N-word...I think it's odd that n*gger is the one and only word she prohibits. But if I had a blog, I think I would prohibit the word *ss. That word just sets my teeth on edge. N*gger doesn't, particularly. Maybe because I grew up reading Huck Finn. Not that I use the word myself, of course. But how crappy is it that I have to proclaim that?
Don't have to proclaim anything to me.
Geoff Matthews said...
I don't care.
8/13/10 9:42 AM
My sentiments exactly.
Meade... your definition means that Mr Obama cannot use THE word. Unless I missed something, he does not qualify.
Rialby: You are correct.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQl_6buUggM&feature=related
http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx?id=18447641-ccf9-4de1-b051-a72b64e1ced4
Odd! Althouse appears to have deleted the comment I left here earlier, although it might have been a technical glitch. So, let's assume the best and try again.
There's actually a Dr. Laura Talking Doll, although she probably doesn't say the "n-word". Includes a bonus kinda SFW of Dr. Laura when she was young and free-spirited.
"Scott said...
My partner is an African American hip-hop artist. He sometimes refers to me as "my nigga" but I still cringe, even though it's coming from him."
Well it is a hell of a lot better then when he calls you snookums!
Meade: Speaking only out of curiosity regarding the definition you offered: What if your family came to the U.S. after slavery but before Jim Crow laws were dismantled? (I don't think this would affect Rialby's point, with which you expressed agreement.) Is it correct to surmise that the latter excluded from the "allowed" group due to their families not being forced to come to the U.S.?
Meade said: "Here's the rule: If you self-identify as black*, you may use the n-word. Otherwise, it's impossible to use the word without throwing off some amount of racism."
Meade is among a very large crowd of people who plainly never learned the distinction between use and mention. Hence all this ado about nothing.
Kirk Parker said...
OTOH we do only have the caller's word for it that this is what's happening...
True, but it doesn't change the premise.
3. The Althouse rule against using the N-word...I think it's odd that n*gger is the one and only word she prohibits. But if I had a blog, I think I would prohibit the word *ss. That word just sets my teeth on edge. N*gger doesn't, particularly.
Fine but thats not the point. If you're going to ban racial slurs, you cant play favorites. Why does she allow Spic Wetback Redneck Kike but not N-word?
Hell, we're not even spell the word out when discussing why it shouldnt be used.
I wish Ann would explain her position. Because she really DOES champion free speech, except in this instance.
That's a good question, reader_iam. Designating individuals based on race as either fully human or subhuman is the essence of racism. Inasmuch as Jim Crow laws continued those designations, I suppose my rule would include all who experienced it.
But that rule aside, the smart thing, regardless of one's racial characteristics, is to eschew the n-word.
Fen said: "I wish Ann would explain her position. Because she really DOES champion free speech, except in this instance."
Ann, like Meade, doesn't understand the difference between using a word and mentioning it. With Meade, I can understand. But when someone trained in law glosses over that distinction, it's more than surprising.
If, by chance, our professorial host does understand the use-mention distinction but prohibits even the mention of the forbidden word, then we're up against political correctness in its most mindless form.
You call that a "lapse"?
Schlessinger and Althouse. Oh boy.
wv: obarme.... Hmmmm.....
"Meade is among a very large crowd of people who plainly never learned the distinction between use and mention."
Peano has a good point. But I would argue that Schlessinger was not simply mentioning the word. She was also using it.
It seems you were being serious with your one-drop rule and the separate but equal acceptable use proposal, Meade.
That turns it from an exceptionally witty parody into a rather disgustingly racist policy.
Deciding what people are allowed to say based on the color of their skin: Ick.
My rule is don't write out the n-word. It's a simple rule and it's my blog. Follow it and quit your bitching about it. It's boring and it's off topic. I've already discussed in other threads why I have the rule, and it's a thread hijack to try to make that the subject here. Plus, it's boring.
Ha. I said "it's boring" twice.
pw;
But if I had a blog, I think I would prohibit the word *ss
You mean you're the only guy left who doesn't have a blog?
Stop the presses
She was also using it.
No doubt, and that's the point. (And BTW, thanks Meade for realizing the distinction between a black person using it and someone else using it).
The point is whether or not a word has a certain power and arrogance associated with it, as did "boy" at one time. And that's exactly what Schelelsldsksdinger was demonstrating - the fact that it does.
If blacks want to appropriate a symbol of their own oppression (and language is the most most ubiquitous form of symbolic expression that we have), so that they can make the word and that symbol feel less threatening to them, more power to them. If they want to react differently to a white person who doesn't understand that usage, that's their right.
And screw any white idiot who doesn't understand that.
You know its an amazing phenomenon. A comment thread gets above 100 and Ritmo comes in to impart his wisdom.
And screw any white idiot who doesn't understand that.
And so now we have been enlightened...
and in a gentle multi-cultural sort of way
Though it's nice to know some are so sensitive to this issue, it's still bogus, and (as many have pointed out) upholds a glaring double standard. I dislike the PC manipulation involved as well - where's it written Americans have to wipe out all remnants our history because it makes some uncomfortable? It doesn't make the history go away, nor does such linguistic fascism confer any special moral status on those supporting it - it just makes them look like fascists.
I don't personally know one black person who says "the n-word", it's only white people and celebrities, forcing the rest of us into line - a form of cultural manipulation I despise, because it runs counter to reality of my life, all of our lives. Also, if you're not a racist, why do you have to keep doing stupid things - like insisting everyone kow-tow to these nonsensical made-up rules - to prove it?
And - this is the kicker - when real racism/discrimination, etc. occurs (especially in the newer subtle or nuanced styles available) those same people are either nowhere to be found or don't recognize it for what it is.
The whole thing is a mean, nasty, ahistorical NewAge joke - and anyone who says so is a target for all the proponents can dish out, without fear of being called on the wrong they themselves initiated and/or perpetuated. I know racism, and have lived with it in my life, but I'm not bitching as badly as these white folks who have never had anything of the kind infecting their lives. For the last time:
I - the black man - am not here to make you feel good about yourselves, and to pretend that's not what's happening is a lie.
I want to be free - and that includes to talk as I want without white folks telling me different.
Nice try, AC245. My rule is one of etiquette and it has nothing do with skin color.
Here's another rule of etiquette for you: Don't hijack conversations. Ick.
Follow it and quit your bitching about it. It's boring and it's off topic. I've already discussed in other threads why I have the rule, and it's a thread hijack to try to make that the subject here. Plus, it's boring.
When Momma ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.
You know its an amazing phenomenon. A comment thread gets above 100 and Ritmo comes in to impart his wisdom.
Well, what can I say, c3? Some of us care more about what we do at our jobs than about being able to mentally masturbate all day long.
And screw any white idiot who doesn't understand that.
And so now we have been enlightened...
and in a gentle multi-cultural sort of way
And the fact that different cultures and subcultures share ownership over America will make you cringe until you go the way of every other arrogant former majority.
Is this really the way you want your culture to be remembered? Wimpering and moaning as the lights went out? So weak. So weak.
Fine but thats not the point. If you're going to ban racial slurs, you cant play favorites. Why does she allow Spic Wetback Redneck Kike but not N-word?
Yeah, I got your point, Fen. And it's a good one. (Though off topic! Ha.)
c3, I'm a woman without a blog, if it matters. I have enough trouble keeping up with the stuff I read online, let alone writing something.
Exit question for Ritmo:
So what words can't blacks say? Hispanics? American Indians? Jews? And to who, exactly?
By the way, I'm at work right now, and my boss (a hispanic gentleman) just said, "I thought I saw your customer out there but I'm not sure: these white people all look the same to me." Now, what do I do with that? Get him fired? Act all offended, attracting attention to myself for my squeaky-clean anti-racist insight? What? I'll tell you what I did:
I laughed, thought it was stupid, and carried on.
You're tripping on nothing but yourselves.
Get him deported Crack.
Oh wait you don't live in Arizona.
Tough luck buddy.
Who cares, Crack? The fact that you're either offended or ashamed by black-American history, by your own history, says all I need to know about you.
Yes, history is not destiny. But if you weren't so ridiculous as to fall all head over heels for the conservative cause you'd have figured that out by now.
Meade: Thanks for the clarification!
---___
Entirely unrelated to the above, but for comment-efficiency's sake:
FWIW (and with some trepidation, as I'm in no position to speak for Althouse and have been guilty of being boring myself), "bored" is not a great thing to bring out in Althouse, in my experience. See here.
I don't know reader. The tolerance for boring has really gone up around here lately. Just sayn'
Great link, reader_iam!
Nice try, AC245. My rule is one of etiquette and it has nothing do with skin color.
That's a lie. You commented at 8/13/10 2:45 PM: "Here's the rule: If you self-identify as black*, you may use the n-word."
Here's another rule of etiquette for you: Don't hijack conversations. Ick.
That's another lie.
I didn't hijack any conversation, Meade. I responded to what you wrote.
If you and your wife want to start dictating that people aren't allowed to point out when you're wrong on this blog, that's fine.
It's her blog and her prerogative to suppress those points of view.
There's no need to resort to blatant lies.
Jeeez dude calm down. It looks like Meade tweaked your nipples or something.
He is only supposed to do that to the blogger lady. So to speak.
By the way the most famous nipple tweaker of all time was the Adorable Adrian Adonis of the WWF who often resorted to tweaking the nipples of his opponents to drive them into an incoherent frenzy. He once made Rowdy Roddy Piper pee his kilt when he did that to him before a match.
A word to the wise my friend.
Ritmo,
i never said I was ashamed of anything - I said you are.
You were never ashamed ofanything?
I find that hard to believe.
We are all ashamed of something.
I just went over to Instapundit and found this - which sounds awful familiar to what I said about European Americans here:
"Brooding over its past crimes (slavery, imperialism, fascism, communism), Europe sees its history as a series of murders and depredations that culminated in two global conflicts. The average European, male or female, is an extremely sensitive being, always ready to feel pity for the world’s sorrows and to take responsibility for them, always asking what the North can do for the South rather than asking what the South can do for itself. Those born after World War II are endowed with the certainty of belonging to the dregs of humanity, an execrable civilization that has dominated and pillaged most of the world for centuries in the name of the superiority of the white man. Since 9/11, for example, a majority of Europeans have felt, despite our sympathy for the victims, that the Americans got what they deserved. The same reasoning prevailed with respect to the terrorist attacks on Madrid in 2004 and on London in 2005, when many good souls, on both the right and the left, portrayed the attackers as unfortunate people protesting Europe’s insolent wealth, its aggression in Iraq or Afghanistan, or its way of life."
i said it the other day: white men (especially) have watched one too many episodes of All In The Family, never recognizing that Archie was better than the Meathead.
Ritmo (while misunderstanding the conversation) just said "History is not destiny". I'd advise him, and those like him, to stop acting like it is.
Accusing people of hijacking conversations is a way of expressing grief over being unable to control them. I tend to agree AC on that, though - not that I have a problem disagreeing with him on everything else. But if someone doesn't like the answer, why ask the question?
As for Crack's newest incoherence, why bother? His discomfort/shame/inability to discuss something doesn't require his admission for me to notice it. And it didn't. I picked up on it long ago; try though he might to piggyback onto this with some kooky new reverse-shame counter-charge of his own.
Geez Crack, those easily offended whites really taught you well!
What is it about cons that forces them to imagine feelings of their own when they are blindsided by the authentic feelings of others that don't want to acknowledge or comprehend? Try being more original.
Ritmo (while misunderstanding the conversation) just said "History is not destiny". I'd advise him, and those like him, to stop acting like it is.
How am I "acting like it is", you discombobulated twerp? I don't "brood" over history. I recognize where and how it is relevant - even to the present day - and where it isn't.
You, OTOH, wouldn't recognize the meaning of history if it smacked you in the head.
Nice on the Glenn Reynolds bullshit, BTW. Accusing the left of obsessing over history when the mere mention of "Cordoba" makes the right-wing crowd's blood seethe with five hundred years of resentments.
What an utter mess of a mindset.
Crack, you'll have to be gentle with Ritmo right now. He is just very disappointed in you because he thinks you're not being a credit to your race. Maybe if you wear a dashiki or something it would help.
Yep. I'm sure that's what Norman Lear had in mind.
What a way to fuck up one's understanding of history. Just listen to the crap that Archie rambled on about. And let's nevermind the fact that he represented the crowd that Nixon claimed.
All in the Family was all about the education of Archie. To pretend that his personality or antics vindicated his ignorance just makes television critic another one of the many, many roles that Crack fails at.
If blacks want to appropriate a symbol of their own oppression (and language is the most most ubiquitous form of symbolic expression that we have), so that they can make the word and that symbol feel less threatening to them, more power to them.
And more power to the people who respond to sexual abuse by sleeping around a lot? :)
Honestly, the idea that the use of that term within the black community is about self-empowerment is silly. It is an affirmation of outsider status, and a sadly self-fulfilling one. It is not an attempt to feel "less threatened".
Anyway, the people defending use of the term by saying "but some black people use it and nobody cares" are being silly. Just because some people have chosen to be uncivilized doesn't mean you should be too.
Crack's not a credit to intellectual honesty, period. This has nothing to do with race.
wv: ingrat. hah.
Ritmo,
"Crack's discomfort/shame/inability to discuss something doesn't require his admission for me to notice it."
For the last time: you misunderstood what I said. I was referring to your feelings and what you're trying to do to make up for them. Black history is no shame to me - quit insisting it is just to give yourself a talking point.
You're mistaken - about me, the word "nigger", and this whole conversation.
"Crack's not a credit to intellectual honesty, period."
But you are a symbol of extreme confusion.
And more power to the people who respond to sexual abuse by sleeping around a lot? :)
Who knows? And maybe so. (And WTF is with your fricking cutesy winks at me all the damn time, anyway? Not sure that flirtatiousness is what you wanted to convey with this idea but oh well).
For just once in my life I'd like to hear the argument for how prudery is a respectable demonstration of anything, but no matter. I realize the premise is its own conclusion in your mind.
Honestly, the idea that the use of that term within the black community is about self-empowerment is silly. It is an affirmation of outsider status, and a sadly self-fulfilling one. It is not an attempt to feel "less threatened".
More opinions and assertions without evidence. Which reminds me...
Honestly, the idea that Miller Lite tastes great is silly. It is an affirmation of corporate insignificance, and a sadly self-fulfilling one. Blah blah blah.
Anyway, the people defending use of the term by saying "but some black people use it and nobody cares" are being silly. Just because some people have chosen to be uncivilized doesn't mean you should be too.
Here we have "Revenant's" little musings on what constitutes civilization. Next he's going to give us the folksy wisdom version of calculus and nuclear physics.
Oh well. It's the only way he's capable of attempting a point: Rhetorically. Actual arguments just aren't folksy enough, folks.
All in the Family was all about the education of Archie. To pretend that his personality or antics vindicated his ignorance just makes television critic another one of the many, many roles that Crack fails at.
You've confused what the creators wanted out of the show with why the show was actually successful. People liked Archie Bunker because he was funny and politically incorrect; the latter trait was a rarity on television.
Revenant,
"Just because some people have chosen to be uncivilized doesn't mean you should be too."
What, exactly, is uncivilized about using any word?
I really don't know where you guys get this stuff from,...
For the last time: you misunderstood what I said.
On the contrary, I understand perfectly well what you lack the willingness to say anything about, Mr anti-Oprah.
In America, we don't figure things out by ignoring them and refusing to discuss them, Crack. Unless we want PTSD.
Nor does any other healthy society.
Stop being a foolish little girl.
"In America, we don't figure things out by ignoring them and refusing to discuss them, Crack."
And I'm refusing to talk about,...what, exactly, Ritmo?
People liked Archie Bunker because he was funny and politically incorrect; the latter trait was a rarity on television.
That wasn't all he was. Unlike you, he was educable.
But I digress. The will of the people is being declared before my very eyes (despite the passage of 30 years and the impossibility of knowing precisely what every one of millions of viewers "liked" and the ridiculousness of claiming that Norman Lear's show had anything to do with political correctness. It was controversial for simply talking about controversial subjects and using them as honest subject matter - something that conservatives always seem to have a problem with).
And I'm refusing to talk about,...what, exactly, Ritmo?
Duh. Racism, you dork. It's your sacred cow of topics. It can't be touched. Ever.
It must be kept in a showcase in a museum devoted to... whatever. It's like a stuffed taxidermy specimen to you.
In those Blogger threads in which I participate as a commenter--to repeat, in specific,, in those threads in which I participate as a commenter, which means I can really only speak to those, with some sense of surety--I almost without exception have all responses from the original point of my entry into the thread sent to my reader_iam gmail account. (I say almost without exception, because sometimes I get distracted and f-up; for example, on this one, I didn't go through what I have to in order to able to select the box in my original comment to Meade.) Everyone who makes use of that feature does as well.
What that means in practical terms is that almost without exception I see every comment made after my initial (or even only) comment in any given thread. I can also see when commenters have deleted and reposted comments [and the changes made therein, if applicable]. I can also compare what popped up in the e-mail thread with what actually appears in the thread on the blog. Worry not: I almost never find that to be the worth the bother, so much so that I can pretty much remember the rare, rare times I've bothered.
I have been utilizing this feature and seeing these things for years now. (And I absolutely have referred to this before, and here on this very Blogger blog: No attempt at nondisclosure.)
All that is to say that sometimes there are deletions. And sometimes there are claims of deletions when the evidence doesn't appear in the gmail thread.
I think this *mostly* means that Blogger was hiccuping in such a way that it mislead the comment poster (I've absolutely experienced that myself, more than a few times, and not just here). Another possibility is that a commenter mistakenly thought a comment had finished posting before closing a tab, window, application, whatever.
It's also possible that there are methods of deletion out there, amazing scripts and apps and all of that, about which I'm completely ignorant. Wouldn't be the first time. Couldn't be the last.
Still, the basic thing I mention has proven to be overwhelmingly reliable over time: If it appeared in a comment section AFTER I've posted a comment AND when I had that box checked from the start, there's pretty much a virtual trail via e-mail.
Just something to note, ponder, whatever. FWIW.
"People liked Archie Bunker because he was funny and politically incorrect; the latter trait was a rarity on television."
That's why I liked him.
"That wasn't all he was."
But if you focused on the rest, you missed his humanity - which appears to be a problem for you, even now:
"Unless we want PTSD."
I'm just sayin'.
More opinions and assertions without evidence.
The only person in this thread who might be in possession of direct evidence for why some black people use that word is Crack Emcee. Whom you are welcome to sit quietly and listen to, if such evidence interests you.
As for indirect evidence, I'll simply note that use of the term within the black community blossomed even as actual threat of racism faded. In the age of Jim Crow it was relatively rare; in the age of Obama it is ubiquitous. So obviously it isn't about the "threat" of racist language. The point is to affirm racial identity and separateness from other ethnicities.
Ritmo,
"Duh. Racism, you dork. It's your sacred cow of topics. It can't be touched. Ever."
You're still confused. It's not that it can't be spoken about - it's a stupid topic. I read that a few days ago they held a rally for Civil Rights Act and the only person who showed up was a single white girl. Not one black person appeared. Do you know why?
Because it's over, Ritmo.
If I need protection from anyone, now, it's from people like you who won't shut up about it. I'm typing this at work, where I work under two hispanics, with a bunch of white guys - what's there to bitch about? That someone will say something that's not PC? Who cares? I don't support PC anyway. In recent years, it's been a bigger pain than racism, to me.
The only person in this thread who might be in possession of direct evidence for why some black people use that word is Crack Emcee.
No thank you. I will go with what the majority of blacks think about that usage; not what your token conservative "minority" black thinks about it. He's just here to humor you when it comes to the issues you pretend to want me to think deeply about.
Whom you are welcome to sit quietly and listen to, if such evidence interests you.
I've heard as much of his silent non-thoughts as anyone can bear. At the end of the day, you just have to admit that not having much to say actually means that he doesn't fucking have much to say about it, least of all anything that most other blacks disagree with him on.
As for indirect evidence, I'll simply note that use of the term within the black community blossomed even as actual threat of racism faded. In the age of Jim Crow it was relatively rare; in the age of Obama it is ubiquitous. So obviously it isn't about the "threat" of racist language. The point is to affirm racial identity and separateness from other ethnicities.
Whatever.
Ritmo,
"The only person in this thread who might be in possession of direct evidence for why some black people use that word is Crack Emcee."
But Scott M said:
"My partner is an African American hip-hop artist. He sometimes refers to me as "my nigga" but I still cringe, even though it's coming from him.
My cringing signifies that society has trained me well."
Ritmo, you're confused, man.
I believe I posted my just previous comment on the wrong thread. I apologize for that, and will post it on the correct one. I'm undecided about deleting it from here, because perhaps it might be of use? But it's long. So may be deletion would be better.
Sorry, I attributed Revenant's comment to Ritmo:
My bad.
BTW - "my bad" - do I have permission to say that? Who do I go to, to get permission? If someone - say, Ritmo - decides I can't, do I have to do as they say? Is this my mouth, or are these my fingers, or his?
I ask again: where are you guys getting this stuff from? Do you ever ask yourselves that question?
Because it's over, Ritmo.'
And so is history, right?
That was my entire point, all along.
Crack is the reason blacks became jealous of Jews in America. Whereas everyone has a clear idea of exactly what the Holocaust was and the moral lessons of it (see how Glenn Beck can't refer to any other point in history, for instance, if you want evidence on that one), the mere mention of anything having to do with black history or racism in America makes Crack feel underwhelmed with mediocrity and want to bury his head in the sand.
But it's me who has to get over things. Right.
Because as Crack says, "it's a stupid topic." I guess so is genocide.
Newsflash, genius: Even if you said it was irrelevant, American history (with all its warts) would still be relevant.
It might not be relevant to a blogger who hides his profile (even though we all know where to find his blog) and has a troubled personal past filled with all sorts of things that keep him too overwhelmed to discuss such esoteric things. But it is to America.
So "PC" invented discussions of racism and black history, now? Now I know your head is cracked. You cannot discuss anything without seeing it through your own, modern-day politicized lenses. The right-wing talk machine has taken you for an idiot and you prove that they have every right to.
That wasn't all he was.
That's why people liked him, though. That's the reason why the character still ranks highly on lists of favorite TV characters, and his enlightened daughter and son-in-law don't. Lear repeated the same schtick with "Sanford and Son" and "The Jeffersons", with lesser but still considerable success.
The notion that the American public made a sitcom #1 because they just wuvved seeing that wascally wacist get educated is silly. If life worked that way, after-school specials would trounce "Jersey Shore" in the ratings.
"No thank you. I will go with what the majority of blacks think about that usage; not what your token conservative "minority" black thinks about it."
Because you like the monolithic image of blacks, maybe? Sorry, but we're not all walking in lock-step - even on this - so appealing to the majority view won't help you:
You're wrong.
No thank you. I will go with what the majority of blacks think about that usage
You think the majority of blacks believe black use of the term is about making it "non-threatening"? That's cute. Have you ever actually met a black person? :)
Ritmo,
"The mere mention of anything having to do with black history or racism in America makes Crack feel underwhelmed with mediocrity and want to bury his head in the sand."
Wow - just "wow". After all the time I've been on this blog - screaming other people are stupid and what a great musician I am - I doubt anyone, but you, would ever accuse me of feeling like I'm mediocre in any way, shape, or form.
You're wild, dude.
"Crack says, "it's a stupid topic." I guess so is genocide."
Um, Ritmo, you're discussing American history - not whatever remnants of racism exist today - which is a stupid topic, because there's so little of it to make a big deal about. Like I said, when it does pop up, I don't see you anywhere around. So what gives?
"It might not be relevant to a blogger who hides his profile (even though we all know where to find his blog) and has a troubled personal past filled with all sorts of things that keep him too overwhelmed to discuss such esoteric things. But it is to America."
Just as I posted about Europe - it's an obsession rooted in self-hatred, when no one alive did a damn thing to contribute to it. It's nuts.
"The right-wing talk machine has taken you for an idiot and you prove that they have every right to."
Yea, I know: all those people screaming Rush is a racist when his producer is black. They're the geniuses I had to get away from.
Because you like the monolithic image of blacks, maybe? Sorry, but we're not all walking in lock-step - even on this - so appealing to the majority view won't help you:
You're wrong.
Your inability to differentiate between a majority view and a variety of other views won't help you either.
As it stands, I would listen to and consider even the least popular view of something if it had some merit. But yours don't. Saying that you don't want to -- can't bear to -- discuss something doesn't only NOT make any point, it's the stupidest way of conceding that your own incompetence in making ANY point fails you.
Sorry Crack. You'll earn the right to shut up and tell everyone else to shut up about something with you, when you first opine intelligently about said topic.
At that point, then we'll all praise you and fall in line. And never again speak a word about it. Not before.
Now go back to your "pop culture" blog, why don't you? Complain about how you can't get Jennifer Aniston out of your consciousness, or somesuch other gibberish.
Go be a producer on Rush Limbaugh's show, Crack. I'm sure it will make you feel very proud.
I think of all the little black kids who dream of one day becoming Rush Limbaugh's producer.
On Christmas they beg their parents to get them dolls of Rush and his producer.
Never before has being a hapless sidekick felt like less of a consolation prize than when Crack tells me about how wondrous it is that Rush Blimpbaugh's producer is black. It's kind of like MLK's dream come true or something.
It's quite an accomplishment.
I don't want to get into the topic-substance of this post nor do I want to get too far into an argument which, admittedly, does not involve me and nor is really my business, because it's now obviously between two people, but I do want to say this:
An obsession with majority views, in and of themselves, as a trumping point in a free society is alarming, and an obsession with individual experience as a trumping point of view is a prescription for anarchy.
Or something like that.
People like to fit you into their ideas...into their lives...not so much. That's why I always figured it's often white guys who sermonize about the "n" word. IN music there's genuine fellow feeling, but feeling's not all there is in life.
When I listen to NPR, I listen for the Putumayo diplomacy.
When I listen to Ritmo, I let his deep elusive intellect wash over me like sweet Hall & Oates melodies...even if he falls far short of understanding the moral truths he wants to preach so that other people may see.
That's progress baby.
Well then our "Christian majority nation" (or however FOX NEWS likes to phrase it) should be thrilled to know that I am an antichrist!
Anarchy is under-rated.
So is anything that ever came out of Johnny Rotten's mouth.
When I listen to Ritmo, I let his deep elusive intellect wash over me like sweet Hall & Oates melodies...even if he falls far short of understanding the moral truths he wants to preach so that other people may see.
To wit:
Gingrich's second of three wives, Marianne, gives blockbuster access to Esquire's John H. Richardson in a 8,300-word profile of the former Speaker. The following passage is making the most waves:
"There's somebody else, isn't there?" She kind of guessed it, of course. Women usually do. But did she know the woman was in her apartment, eating off her plates, sleeping in her bed?
She called a minister they both trusted. He came over to the house the next day and worked with them the whole weekend, but Gingrich just kept saying she was a Jaguar and all he wanted was a Chevrolet. "'I can't handle a Jaguar right now.' He said that many times. 'All I want is a Chevrolet.'"
He asked her to just tolerate the affair, an offer she refused. He'd just returned from Erie, Pennsylvania, where he'd given a speech full of high sentiments about compassion and family values. The next night, they sat talking out on their back patio in Georgia. She said, "How do you give that speech and do what you're doing?"
"It doesn't matter what I do," he answered. "People need to hear what I have to say. There's no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn't matter what I live."
Ritmo: Surely you don't think I was accusing you of anarchy. Do you?
I"m talking about your reasoning, Ritmo, no one's else's.
Why should I care enough to take your snide comment personally, chr1? I mean, I know commenting is a spectator sport for those who don't ever take a stand. But Crack's self-serving "race/racism is only relevant because lefty PC types declare it to be so" is so worthy of refuting I don't mind taking him to the ends of the earth to prove that even if there were an iota of merit to what he states, he's certainly taking a petty and wrongheaded stance. And missing the point.
When I listen to Ritmo, I let his deep elusive intellect wash over me like sweet Hall & Oates melodies
You're saying Ritmo is like Hall and Oates? Well, I don't go for that.
No can do.
I'm really not completely sure what you're trying to say R.I.A. I'm usually not.
All in the Family was a way of making America realize that the conservative kooks and racists weren't necessarily threatening. They could be likened to any family's crazy uncle: Harmless, cute, and on display. Like a zoo animal.
All right. Revenant owes me a dinner in Atlantic City.
Ritmo,
You're loopy, dude. I'm done here.
Laterz.
Ritmo, The left's pc moralism might have something right, namely a moral truth regarding how we ought to treat one another, but once politicized it's used for all the reasons (many of them for naked political interest) people use politics. There's race and race hustlers. There's well intentioned people whose livelihood depends on maintaining racial categories.
Crack is free to his view, and he's advocating that others are free to theirs.
Ultimately, I'd argue the thinking on such issues are deeper than race and politics, but certainly have consequences in both areas.
In this instance, he likely has more experience in the matter, but he's also pointing out that once we play the morally authentic game, maybe no one wins, and the social and political harms that come are not worth the cost.
I wish you'd spend more time making good arguments on clear thinking.
Ritmo:
OK.
R.I.A.
P.S. What a boring riposte, and at this point, and specifically in this case, an example of it officially having been overused. ZZZZZZZ.
Did Althouse come up with "tweakee defense" before or after the rest of the post?
Ann: My rule is don't write out the n-word. It's a simple rule and it's my blog. Follow it and quit your bitching about it.
I do follow it, and I'm not bitching about it. I just want to understand why you dont see it as a double-standard. Why do you ban one racial slur but not the others?
It's boring and it's off topic.
The topic of this thread is the use of the n-word.
I've already discussed in other threads why I have the rule,
Could you at least link to that? Because now you're sounding like Robert Gibbs.
and it's a thread hijack to try to make that the subject here.
No, its not. The topic is about the use of the word. And you could have easily explained your logic with the 50 words you just used to dodge the question.
Other than that, don't use racial slurs and don't attack non-famous individuals who aren't here participating in the dialogue.
/fixed
See? How hard was that?
I'm sorry, R.I.A. Were you trying to say something?
I quite literally have no idea what you are trying to say, so no need to take it facetiously. Folks here say it of me all the time.
You may have a point, chr1. But it's hard to see how CRACK's "I don't want to talk about anything but what I want to talk about, and it's not this!" stance amounts to anything other than a tantrum. IN this, I think even hustlers have an edge over him. At least they don't have a problem making a point out of their tantrums. Crack's just having a tantrum about his right to not make any point.
In my book, moral authenticity isn't a game, and silence is complicity in either the struggle or the outcome. If you reduce moral sentiments to a game, then you're already declaring your lack of authentic sentiment about them. Pacifists like "Crack" have every right to their belief. What they don't have is a right to tell others how to fight. Their lack of a stance and non-participation doesn't grant them absolution over the outcome. Isn't that always the problem with pacifists, though? Claiming a stake in the outcome while absolving themselves of responsibility for how we get there? What a convenient (i.e. candy-ass) approach to moral superiority.
I do my best to make sure the clarity of my arguments matches the clarity of the thoughts that my opponents present me with.
Paul wrote:
Why is racism the biggest sin in America today?
Because it was the biggest flaw in American society the Soviets felt they could exploit.
Through their useful idiots in the CPUSA, and the CPUSA's useful idiots everywhere within the American left they unleashed their propaganda campaign of political correctness to successfully tear apart American society from within.
This is Gramscian, or "cultural", Marxism in all it's pernicious, corrosive brilliance.
That is so true. And not just for racism, but sexism, environmentalism and charges of american imperialism. All of these movmement essentially arose out of communist attacks on the US. It's sad that those who buy into being a liberal these days are not even aware of the sources. But it's a regurgitation of old rhetoric, applied to newer issues, but at it's source it's always an attack on the US and it's systems.
You can also hear it in Rev. Wright's attacks on the racist system, where he also talks about his anti capitalism and even Sharrod who has, at least as per the talking points, moved past her racism, but still is preaching communism.
Ritmo wrote:
She was also using it.
No doubt, and that's the point. (And BTW, thanks Meade for realizing the distinction between a black person using it and someone else using it).
Actually, She was saying that blacks (specifically black comedians use it all the time. If you turn on any show it's n*gger, n*gger,n*gger. IS that not true though?
Especially on HBO's Def Jam Comedy Hour. Even someone more mainstream like Chris Rock has a bit about how he Loves Black people but hates N*GGERS. Richard Pryor had some brilliant monologues about his experiences with the word. Only Bill Cosby seems to shy away from it's usage, but he's going for clean comedy, and he often scolds other comedians for using the word.
There is something to the idea of defaning the word by using it constantly, deprving it of it's power. But that's a two way street. If a rap song is going to become a hit, and uses the word, and people start rapping the words because they like the song and they happen to be white, perhaps it's hypocritical to hold the person rapping the words along to the song to task, considering they may feel that the word is similarly defanged.
"Here, Laura needed to determine whether the husband's friends and family are saying the word."
That's your opinion.
Jade asks Laura about usage of the N word. Laura give Jade her opinion about usage of the N word.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.
Moral of the story? Blacks can use the word n*gg*r anytime they want. White people? Not. I'm white, so obviously I have to throw in the * substitutions.
There is something to the idea of defaning the word by using it constantly, deprving it of it's power. But that's a two way street.
The word n*gger will no longer be offensive to blacks at all the day they declare it so, and not before. If you don't like the double-standard, try being black for a year and then get back to me.
I know that being conservative allows you to think that instead of walking a mile in someone else's moccasins before judging them you can just declare how they should be, and that personal experience is irrelevant to passing personal judgments. But not all of us think those precautions obsolete. Maybe it has something to do with some quaint pretension to avoiding what Revenant referred to as "uncivilized".
Hey, Ritmo,
Just caught this, which includes this:
"Racism is dead, and its killers were heroes. Nostalgia for racism lives on in the imagination of liberals who only wish they could be so heroic."
That sounds an awful lot like what I was getting at,...
"If you don't like the double-standard, try being black for a year and then get back to me."
I have done just that - and you're still wrong.
Sounds pretty self-congratulatory. But if there's anything that conservatives excel at, it's putting themselves at the heroic centerpiece of their own epic, moral struggle. So everything they just said about liberals sounds like a good projection. Whatever makes you guys feel happy.
Regarding your own, self-experiment: Your opinion on the majority of one person has already been amply noted. You are more important than anyone else, Crack and no one else's opinions matter. Or at least you'd want to convince everyone of that. We've already been over this.
Now go set up the DJ table, crank out some 70s porn soundtracks, and continue to jerk yourself off to the theme of how wonderful you are and a backdrop of a perfect (and perfectly humane) America 'til your heart's content. Staying here and arguing with me over petty things like history is clearly a distraction to that much greater goal.
The content of your own character has singlehandedly overcome any of America's ills - past, present or future. MLK would have meant as much, even if he forgot to say so. Individually naming the "Crack Emcee" in his speeches would have just given too much away.
If you don't like the double-standard, try being black for a year and then get back to me.
1) This is not the 1960's. Stop blaming everything in your life on discrimination. Try a mirror instead.
2) Your belief that perceived victims of racism get to play by a different set of rules is the reason blacks have become the most racist demographic in America [FBI Hate Crime stats].
3) All racial slurs should be treated the same. If its offensive to use one, it should be offensive to use any.
Otherwise, you're just another race-mongerer. You want to give blacks a pass because you hold them to be a tribe of uncivilized neandertals who will react to the slightest offense with violence.
Raise your expectations.
Meade said: "Peano has a good point. But I would argue that Schlessinger was not simply mentioning the word. She was also using it."
OK, here's the transcript:
SCHLESSINGER: Black guys use it all the time. Turn on HBO, listen to a black comic, and all you hear is "n-----, n-----, n-----."
If I said "Whitey isn't allowed say that," I would be using the word "whitey" to refer to white people. But if I said, "Someone called me 'whitey'," I would only be mentioning someone else's use of that word.
Schlessinger clearly is mentioning how the word is used by others on HBO. But she is not using it to refer to blacks.
The fact that "Fen" is as offended as he is at the suggestion that someone might want to experience what it's like to be black says all you need to know about him.
Ritmo, the fact that you would say what you said about fen says all anyone needs to know about YOU--as if you're not an open book already..
"Schlessinger clearly is mentioning how the word is used by others on HBO. But she is not using it to refer to blacks."
Yes, of course, on a simplistic level that is true (and Meade knows that too). But on a more subtle level, unless S is a complete idiot, she has some real intent to aim that word at people for the purpose of hurting them. I think that's why there's soooo much repetition and why she came forward so quickly with a profuse apology.
I mean, just picture a real asshole trying to upset a black person by saying something like "I think it's terrible when people say n*gger. N*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger. You hear that all the time. It's just terrible to say n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger the way those awful people do. I would never say n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger like that." He's using it. The "mention" technicality is bullshit.
Ritmo: The fact that "Fen" is as offended as he is at the suggestion that someone might want to experience what it's like to be black says all you need to know about him.
Where did I ever imply I was "offended" by it?
Damn you're an idiot.
I mean, just picture a real asshole trying to upset a black person by saying something like "I think it's terrible when people say n*gger. N*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger. You hear that all the time. It's just terrible to say n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger the way those awful people do. I would never say n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger like that." He's using it. The "mention" technicality is bullshit.
Wow.
That's an appallingly dishonest analogy to what Schlessinger actually said.
Consider the difference between someone writing "Jew" and "Jew" in a Cedarford comment.
There was a time when it was just another synonym for Negro. Agatha Christie's play "Ten Little Indians" isn't its original title.
AC245 said: "That's an appallingly dishonest analogy to what Schlessinger actually said."
Of course. Ann's position is destitute of a defense, so she resorts to dishonesty. There's no reasoning with knee-jerk political correctoids. They'll just peer inside minds, read off evil intentions, label you an "asshole," and hold their position.
@ pastafarian, tell me why the percentage of non-whites in jail is greater than percentage of non-whites in at the top of corporate America??? and what happens to the non-whites once they do get in to a fortune 1000 company? are they as likely as their counterparts to reach the top, to be the CE0s or VPs ????
regardless of quotas needed to be made to keep up corporate appearances if one is honest with ones self one cannot deny that there is maybe not an advantage to non-whites but a disadvantage to non-whites in that whites compete on a level playing field
"That's an appallingly dishonest analogy to what Schlessinger actually said."
It's an exaggerated example of my point about the distinction between use and mention. Who's claiming it's what S said?
Ann: Who's claiming it's what S said?
Ann is:
[Schlessinger]has some real intent to aim that word at people for the purpose of hurting them. I think that's why there's soooo much repetition and why she came forward so quickly with a profuse apology
Sure thing Ann, we'll all pretend you didn't intend for it to be applied to Schlessinger.
You're very sloppy today. Has someone hijacked your account?
I think my question about your racial double standard has you rattled. Its as if you know your position is wrong, but you're reacting like I've leveled some kind of personal attack on you.
Consider: "thread hijack". Really? First time I've ever seen you complain about a thread hijack. Your emotionalism has me wondering if you extend other "protections" to your students because of their race. Do you grade on a racial curve?
Ann said: "It's an exaggerated example of my point about the distinction between use and mention. Who's claiming it's what S said?"
If S is so clearly using the word with intent, why resort to exaggeration? Why imagine what "some asshole" might say rather than deal with what S actually said?
Your argument is sophomoric and defensive. Your only "point" about use-mention distinction was to call it "bullshit." Do you train your law students in this lofty art of argument?
It's an exaggerated example of my point about the distinction between use and mention. Who's claiming it's what S said?
Althouse, I never took you to be stupid, but that's the only option other than "dishonest" that explains this response to my comment calling out your offensive, inaccurate, slanted analogy.
I did not claim you were quoting Schlessinger. I pointed out that your fantasy scenario in which some asshole chants "nigger" over two dozen times to try to piss someone else off was totally unlike what she actually did say.
If you could support your case by limiting yourself to things Schlessinger said and did, you should. But apparently you can't.
(I've seen you do this sort of thing before on controversial issues where you post something that's wrong, commenters point out where and how your position is wrong, and you're strongly wedded to your original position even if reality doesn't support you. You come up with some fable wholly disconnected from the real-world event and insist everyone talk about that instead.
I suppose that tactic of dictating a different set of facts works if you're lecturing to a class of submissive students, but in a discussion between adult equals such control-freak shenanigans are inappropriate.
And boring.)
I mean, just picture a real asshole trying to upset a black person by saying something like "I think it's terrible when people say n*gger. N*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger. You hear that all the time. It's just terrible to say n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger the way those awful people do. I would never say n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger, n*gger like that." He's using it.
Let's see now. Anyone who understands English knows that you're substituting * for the letter i. Consequently, there is no moral or semantic difference between the * version and the i version of that word. (If you think there is, email one of your black colleagues and ask him, "How do you and your n*gger friends feel about Obama these days?" See if the * will shield you from criticism.)
So here's your dilemma, Ann, one of several you've contrived for yourself: In repeatedly writing "n*igger," how does your post differ from Schlessinger's repeated use? You can't hide behind the *, for reasons I just gave. If Schlessinger's repetition is blameworthy use with intent, then so is yours.
The best defense is to say that you weren't referring to anyone as a n*igger. You were mentioning the word but not using it referentially.
But that defense isn't available to you, because you've already rejected it as "bullshit."
I think you've been h*ist by your own p*tard, Professor.
Anyone who understands English knows that you're substituting * for the letter i. Consequently, there is no moral or semantic difference between the * version and the i version of that word.
True. Most website forums include "masking" as an offense in there EULA, ie. if writing "fuck" will get you the admin stick, so will trying to get around the rule by writing "f*ck" instead.
But at least she recognizes how ridiculous it would be to type "n-word n-word n-word" to make her point.
I'm done. Not going to push this anymore. I think when she cools off she'll recognize that her policy is discriminatory.
"I think when she cools off she'll recognize that her policy is discriminatory."
I would wager heavily to the contrary.
I don't take issue with the words she used, as much as I do find her use of the word offensive on a personal level, but there was indeed racism involved on her part during the exchange with the caller. Furthermore, her refusal to believe that what was going on with the caller and her neighbor was racist is the biggest part of the problem we face in fighting racism today. Not talking about the problem, denying that one still exists, and downplaying the effect it has on others are all still things we need to address as a society.
Social cynic said, "[Schlessinger's] refusal to believe that what was going on with the caller and her neighbor was racist is the biggest part of the problem we face in fighting racism today."
A bigger problem is people like you and Ann, who don't believe there are reasonable grounds for disagreeing about what counts as racism. Anyone who differs with your view is automatically branded a racist.
There is no double standard for racism. Minority's suffer from it, WASPs use it as an excuse to be racists towards blacks. Black folks are used to the white racist rants and whites are offended that blacks have the right to complain about it .
This nation was built on slavery. The capital and the white house were built by black slaves and equality is still an issue. Time to realize the discussion is not moot but the next level may show up soon.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा