Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[AlohaDawg]

And now, ladies and gentlemen, please welcome LENNY BRUCE!

I wrote a post last night and I thought I sent it - (did someone delete it?) but my point was that I live in Hawaii and here, I am a racial minority. There's even a word for us - haole. Now every once in a while, a white kid will get beat up by the (usually way bigger) Hawaiians and Samoans in the schools here. And, almost always, the kicking and punching is punctuated by creative phrasing around the word 'haole'. So, some people here are sensitive to the word.

Every once in a while,. usually someone who doesn't know me, will say 'Hey haole, got a lighter' or "spare some change' or whatever. It doesn't bother me. If they said 'hey you' I might not even know they were talking to me. And if I got all indignant, it would lend artificial power to a grouping of sounds just as Lenny Bruce points out in that script excerpt.

I really believe the emotion and intention behind words are more telling than the words themselves in most cases. Racial epithets are coward's words 80% of the time - it's all they have - and not reacting at all takes the illusion of power away.and strips bare the individual using the term, usually exposing personal weakness and ignorance. Or, on Paul's case, a mere usage to demonstrate an objective point.

[Hobot]

Yeah, how come God didn't choose Lithuanians?

My incredulity at the circle explanation is why would goyim use a Yiddish word, then?  It doesn't make sense.  Maybe if they called people "circs" or something for circles, but kike? 

No, not the simplest explanation either.  Where's Ockham when you need him?

Gentiles used the word because they heard the immigrants referring to the mark as koykel or kikel, as I understand it.

[AugustWest]

Where's Ockham when you need him?

Shaving.

[Nabubrush]

BP has a relatively new initiative regarding D&I (diversity and inclusion). Basically, each employee has to consider the audience at all times. In practice, this means not calling your friend a stupid cunt if there are other people around, since you don't know what their reaction will be. I think it is always the right of the listener to be bothered by things that are said in their presence, and it is our responsibility to try not to offend people. In a cultural/sociological/whatever sense, we can probably all agree that it would be better if words didn't have such power. In practice, you know you can't call your mother a dumb bitch, even if it doesn't mean anything, and even if it is something you routinely call your close personal friends, with affection. Also, just because some people are receptive to certain words or phrases from one peer group, it's not realistic to expect them to be receptive to them from other peer groups. I might, under certain circumstances, call someone a "cock-whore" and have it be taken in the spirit it was intended, with a joyful smile - whereas someone else might call that same person that, and get a very different reception.

The beauty of the internet is that I can be all disrespectful, and not have any real negative fallout. It's important to remember that this does not necessarily translate well to the real world.

[theinevitable]

I really think the issue with some people using "nigger" and thinking it's ok because black people have been known to call themselves that is this: similar to what nabubrush said, you never know your audience. The guy you're calling a nigger may be OK with it, and he might find it really offensive. The same way I can call my friend sarah a cunt. cunt is a great word. it's a strong word. but I don't assume I can call every woman I meet a cunt. that would be rediculous. words are important, obviously. I would never censor any word. and I'm not trying to. but there are some words it is, undoubtably, better not to say.

with regards to "people of color", etc, I think it's an issue of a lost euphemism-- after long enough the euphemism becomes so linked to the meaning that it is no longer a euphemism. I mean, theoretically, saying that you're going to put something to sleep is innocuous. But you'd never say "I'm going to put my baby to sleep"-- this phrase is now permanently linked to dog-euthanasia. In the same way, "colored" or "negro" isn't offensive in itself, but it has acquired negative connotations.

[AlohaDawg]

I really think the issue with some people using "nigger" and thinking it's ok because black people have been known to call themselves that is this: similar to what nabubrush said, you never know your audience. The guy you're calling a nigger may be OK with it, and he might find it really offensive. The same way I can call my friend sarah a cunt. cunt is a great word. it's a strong word. but I don't assume I can call every woman I meet a cunt. that would be rediculous. words are important, obviously. I would never censor any word. and I'm not trying to. but there are some words it is, undoubtably, better not to say.

with regards to "people of color", etc, I think it's an issue of a lost euphemism-- after long enough the euphemism becomes so linked to the meaning that it is no longer a euphemism. I mean, theoretically, saying that you're going to put something to sleep is innocuous. But you'd never say "I'm going to put my baby to sleep"-- this phrase is now permanently linked to dog-euthanasia. In the same way, "colored" or "negro" isn't offensive in itself, but it has acquired negative connotations.

That's backward. I put the baby to sleep every night. Two weeks ago I had to ask the vet to humanely kill my very old and very ill cat. I told my daughter he gave the cat a shot that made him sleep and not wake up.

 Euphemism has it's place but should never stand in the way of correct usage.

[pmcd9]

Just for the record, 'jungle bunny' is on the do not use list.

~Paul

[Nabubrush]

I guess I was thinking if someone is really committed to taking the power away from these "fighting words" by repeating them over and over they ought to not only discuss it here but also discuss it at a bus station in Compton, or a lunch counter in Harlem, or Bourbon Street in NOLA, or . . . because I've heard this often, and it never seems very convincing to me. Yeah, it'd be great to defuse all these words, but I can't fault people for being enraged by hearing them. I'm sure if I grew up with the typical black experience, I wouldn't want someone to tell me that n***** shouldn't bother me because it's "just a word".

[jough]

No no, I'm not saying that it shouldn't bother you, I'm saying that I don't care if it bothers you.  Why should I change what I say just because you don't like it?

Is one person's preference for not hearing something more important than another's preference for saying it?

THIS IS THE EPISTEME, PEOPLE

[wombat]

Is one person's preference for not hearing something more important than another's preference for saying it?

Sure, lots of times.  Depends on how much bigger they are than me.  And whether they provide my paycheck.

[Doc]

Ech, Sorry Paul, I should have assumed your friends weren't dicks but I was tired and cranky.

I think invevitable has the right idea about how relatively inoffensive words get all stigmatised.
Similarly Nabrush is right about how nobody should be a dick to a stranger, but I think there are limits, for instance I wouldn't have an issue describing someone as black to a stranger but I know some people would be offended by that word. However thats a fairly basic description and, at least for me, doesn't imply any kind of judgement and there are times that to not use it would just make things more complicated.

I've never come across someone being offended by being called asian (not that it's a term I use a whole lot). Most of my friends at uni at the moment are asian (lots of international students over here) and I know many refer to themselves as such but then again since I rarely use the term I don't know how they would react if I used it. I think they'd be ok with it.

I'm with Jough on the offending people thing, people might get offended by what I say (and if I know they'll get offended by something I'm not going to deliberately do it again) but at the same time I'm no mind reader and I'm not going assume that someone doesn't want to be reminded of their race when the easy course of conversation involves pointing it out. Basically I hold this position because my white guy guilt made me worry about it for years until I realised it made things more akward and drew more attention to the issue by not mentioning it.

Oh, going way back in the topic, I believe 'Bushmen' was used to refer to certain tribes in south africa, think the guys in 'The Gods must be crazy', but I could be wrong on this.

[Nabubrush]

No no, I'm not saying that it shouldn't bother you, I'm saying that I don't care if it bothers you.  Why should I change what I say just because you don't like it?

Is one person's preference for not hearing something more important than another's preference for saying it?

THIS IS THE EPISTEME, PEOPLE

Whoops, no. Sorry. I meant someone's personal preference for being an absolute cock-mouthed screwhead is usually less important than another person's personal preference for not hearing offensive bullshit. But that's just the way I roll. However, as I said - I certainly think more of people for walking the walk by spewing offensive bullshit in front of the folks that it will offend. I mean, it's really ballsy to say N***** this and N***** that in front of a audience of electrons spewing out of a computer monitor and all.

I guess I'm saying that it would be nice if folks gave a fuck about how the next guy felt about stuff. However, I'll defend anyone's right to be a complete cock to others.

[wombat]

 it would be nice if folks gave a fuck about how the next guy felt about stuff.

This should be right up there in the Achewood Gospel with "Don't bone your neighbor's wife. That is hell of lame." (CortJstr 1:27)

[theinevitable]

nabubrush, thank you for saying what I wanted to say.
the fact that I care too much about being a cock to strangers is what kept me from accusing someone of being a cock to strangers.

in the future, there will be a party composed of internet libertarians. i called it, 3/16/2006.

I dont know what that has to do with this, but it has made me notice trends in Internet Thought.

[AlohaDawg]

Whoops, no. Sorry. I meant someone's personal preference for being an absolute cock-mouthed screwhead is usually less important than another person's personal preference for not hearing offensive bullshit. But that's just the way I roll. However, as I said - I certainly think more of people for walking the walk by spewing offensive bullshit in front of the folks that it will offend. I mean, it's really ballsy to say N***** this and N***** that in front of a audience of electrons spewing out of a computer monitor and all.

I guess I'm saying that it would be nice if folks gave a fuck about how the next guy felt about stuff. However, I'll defend anyone's right to be a complete cock to others.

That sounds right to me. No one has a right not to be offended AND no one has a right to go around intentionally offending. Also, No one has a right to offend. BUT everyone has a right to be offended.

In other words, the 'offendee' has a right to an internal reaction. They have a right to a legal and reasonable external reaction.
The 'offender' should always be prepared to bear the consequences of what might happen when potentially offending someone.(Which may include any number of illegal and painful and/or debilitating external reactions)

In other words, personal responsibility on both sides of the equation is probably more important than the perception of 'rights'.

Things happen. The real issue is whether the 'offender' is willing  to live with the consequences of words or actions.