On Whites Who Think It’s Unfair That They Can’t Call Blacks “Nigger”
| July 20th, 2008Ta-Nehisi discusses why race matters when people address Blacks as “nigger”:
I never thought that because Toby Keith made a record called White Trash With Money, that somehow gave me the right to address random white people in the fashion. I never thought the fact that there was a magazine called Heeb gave me the right to address my Jewish buddies as such. More to the point–I never wanted to. So this is what I don’t understand–What’s the big beef? Why is that in “Blackworld” the normal laws of human interaction somehow don’t apply? I don’t get white people who have a hard time with this–you call your mother “Mom,” I call her Ms. Phillips–same deal here. Nigger means one thing when used amongst a group of people with similar experiences, and something else when used by people outside of that experience.
In a follow-up, Ta-Nihisi quotes one of Megan’s comment-writers:
The only reason the word “nigger” is such a taboo — and yet is used freely among blacks — is because keeping it a whites-only taboo is a way for blacks to intimidate and dominate whites.
All this reminds me of this cartoon of mine, from years ago:
(Larger version of cartoon here.)
July 20th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
“Nigger means one thing when used amongst a group of people with similar experiences, and something else when used by people outside of that experience.”
No nigger means the same thing no matter who is using it. The meaning of a word cannot change because of the person who is saying a word. if a white man says cat it is a cat and if a black man says cat it does not suddenly turn into a dog.
This comment was written by Renee.Report this comment to the moderators
July 20th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
“Why can’t we say that word when you people can?”
“Well, why would you want to?”
“Well, but… if you… it’s the principle of the thing… fucking… not me, you know, I have many Black friends… ”
Fine, it’s good or bad depending on who says it. A father who calls his daugher “my little princess” is in a different boat to a strange man in the park who calls her same thing, regardless of linguistic similarities. Didn’t you read the linked article? What’s being proposed is that “nigger” is exactly the same as these words - there’s nothing special about the word, only anti-Black racism.
From glancing at your blog, Renee, it’s obvious that you’re Black and I’m not, so you obviously have a perspective I don’t. But I’d apply the same to my own racial minority as well. We don’t have a word that carries the same stigma as “nigger” - “chink” comes close but no one I know has been called that, “gook” sounds like something only an old Green Beret with PTSD would say, but we do have a series of cultural tropes that fulfill the same role. We are allowed to make fun of the accent and make dog-eating jokes, you are not. Why, you ask? Because fuck you, that’s why.
This comment was written by sylphhead.Report this comment to the moderators
July 20th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
If a gay person addresses a friend as “queer,” is that the same thing as being called a “queer” by a drunk homophobe trying to provoke you?
This comment was written by Matt Bors.Report this comment to the moderators
July 20th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
The meaning of the word doesn’t change, but the meaning of the sentence it contains (even if the sentence is itself but one word) does. Words have one (or a small set) of discrete meanings; statements can have infinite nuance.
It’s awfully nice to see a bunch of liberals arguing for intentionalism, I have to say. ;)
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 20th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
“the sentence it contains” should be “the sentence in which it is contained”.
Stupid lack of edit function.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 20th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Well if you are fine with being addressed by a racial hate word that is your business. I however will not tolerate being called niggerby any living being without letting them know that they have crossed a point of no return for me. The fact that the person happens to be black does not make it any less offensive to me. In fact coming from a black person it is even more offensive as it means that they have internalized racism to such a degree that they have devalued not only myself but every single black person walking this earth.
You cannot reclaim words that were never yours to begin with. Nigger was fostered on blacks to reduce our humanity and by willingly taking on this mantle blacks are saying that they agree with this label. If we need to take ownership for something it should be the positive aspects of black history, and or culture not some hate label that reduces our humanity.
If one is truly an anti-racist or espouses anti-racism it should not be possible to support in language or deed a label that reinforces inequality. We cannot speak about equality while using the language of our oppressor for it is in the words of Audre Lorde to use the masters tools. As blacks we have a vested interest in racial equality due to the systemic nature of racism, and the way in which it impacts our lives, and therefor for us to continue to collude through language and behavior with those that benefit from our marginalization is a form of racial suicide. Is it really any wonder that when black children were presented with dolls they overwhelming chose the white doll as beautiful. Self love begins with relinquishing the ugliness that society has chosen to construct around the body.
This comment was written by Renee.Report this comment to the moderators
July 20th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
For my part, Renee, I tend to agree with you … but I also think that the use of the n-word by black people is a discussion and argument that needs to occur within and between black communities. It’s inappropriate for me to take a strong stance on this.
What I feel that I can say is that whether or not it’s ‘okay’ for black people to use the word, it in no way makes it okay for white people to do the same.
—Myca
This comment was written by Myca.Report this comment to the moderators
July 20th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
Here’s how I look at this: under some circumstances my brothers and I speak to each other using various names and terms that would probably cause people unaware of any of the context (such as the fact that we’re brothers) to think that we were sworn enemies. We trade back and forth in all good humor, but any of us would take deep offense if anyone else spoke to us in such a fashion. It seems to me that the use of this term between two black people has a context similar to that between my brothers and I - whereas the use of the term by a white person to a black person in general would have a context similar to that between a family member and an outsider.
This comment was written by RonF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 3:37 am
That is your right, Renee.
This is not.
If you actually read the post, I went to great pains to say that I completely respect–and honor–the preferences of black people who don’t want to addressed as “nigger” by anyone, at any point. I have no issue with that. But you don’t then get to turn around and tell me how I should want to be addressed or even why that’s my preference. Especially, after I’ve already stated what it is. Trust me I’ve internalized a lot of awful things in my lifetime–Mad Dog 20/20, nicotine, headache weed–but racism isn’t one of them.
I think sylphead basically has it right–I don’t get to make dog-eating jokes. More importantly, I don’t actually want to<.
This comment was written by Ta-Nehisi Coates.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 5:21 am
I think Myca has the right of it–it’s a debate the community needs to have. I am not fine with white people arguing about it.
This comment was written by Megan McArdle.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 5:45 am
However, when discussing the use of the word “nigger”, am I the only one who’s bothered by adults who, in conversation with other adults, refer to it as “the N-word”? I don’t say “Michael Richards lost his temper and shouted the N-word at his hecklers” unless I’m talking to six-year-olds.
Obviously, there’s really no reason to say “nigger” unless you’re discussing somebody else’s use of the word… but when you’re doing that, why revert to kiddy-speak?
This comment was written by Silenced is Foo.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 5:59 am
There was a storm over this in the blogosphere around the time I started reading blogs. I had the same perspective as you did, until I read someone saying something like “Jesus, I’ve read more white people using the word n-word to defend their right to say it in full over the past few days than I’ve ever in my life heard people actually use the n-word.”
I was also in a graduate course on slave narratives in which the radical black members were very firm on teh point that they wanted to hear n-word used in class discussions, and in quotations.
Fine with me. Seriously, what’s my stake in this? If, as one woman said, every time she hears that word in full, she feels the full history of it calling for blood — then I’m not going to say it. She has the historical and current history of oppression to back her up. She has the potential to be hurt. And since she’s the person with the most legitimate potential to be hurt, I’m going to let her make the call.
This comment was written by Mandolin.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 6:26 am
@Ta-Nehisi
Do you tell a drug addict that they are a drug addict or sit silently by while they kill themselves? Owning a label that constructs you as less than is internalized racism. Tell me one positive thing that is associated with Nigger? Just one … Even colloquially blacks often use the word nigger to address someone in the community that they feel is a “shame upon the race”. I am thinking of a famous bit right now by Chris Rock about how the niggers have got to go.
This comment was written by Renee.With all of the issues we as a people have to deal with taking on a word or a label that was designed to create us as less than is not only fool hearty it is detrimental to our cultural self esteem. So you know what I will tell you that when you use that word not only do you demean yourself you demean every single black person on this planet. We are not niggers and we should not encourage such an association.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 7:32 am
Presumptuous much? I’m pretty sure that this is the end of the debate. I don’t really know how to respond to the idea that my argument is analogous to a drug addict’s. If that’s what you truly think, then there really isn’t much to say. You think that my argument isn’t the work of a sane black person, but one afflicted by “internalized racism.” If that’s the case, than anything I say about black people will be the result of racism. So why even debate? I’m only The White Man’s pawn, anyway. What do I know.
It’s worth adding that the “internalized racism” line is little more than an ad-hominem attack. It doesn’t actually make an argument. My argument is simple and goes like this:
The meaning of words differ according to context and intent.
Nigger is a word.
The meaning of Nigger differs according to context and intent.
That’s my argument. I may–or may not–be a victim of “internalized racism.” But that really has nothing to do with the actual argument.
This comment was written by Ta-Nehisi Coates.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 7:43 am
“ Even colloquially blacks often use the word nigger to address someone in the community that they feel is a “shame upon the race. ”
“ But you don’t then get to turn around and tell me how I should want to be addressed or even why that’s my preference. “
“ It seems to me that the use of this term between two black people has a context similar to that between my brothers and I - whereas the use of the term by a white person to a black person in general would have a context similar to that between a family member and an outsider. “
“ What I feel that I can say is that whether or not it’s ‘okay’ for black people to use the word, it in no way makes it okay for white people to do the same. “
“ The meaning of a word cannot change because of the person who is saying a word. “
a small sampling of the discussion this morning.
let me ask the obvious question: when a white person is hesitant to enter a discussion about race and cites the apparent lack any system of rules regarding appropriate communication or lack of guidelines for appropriate conduct or ambiguity regarding nonoffensive racial language to include specific words and phrases, intent of said words and phrases as reason for their hesitation; is it legitimate criticism to insist that the white person fears nonwhites, or carries latent racism, or is indifferent to the plight of folks who suffer from oppression.
for those who think that I am simply seeking permission to be offensive you would be incorrect.
This comment was written by roger.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 8:08 am
Funny I just posted on this very issue this morning on my blog. I believe that whites have an obligation to state their opinion on this issue.
This comment was written by Renee.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 9:49 am
I suspect that many white people who get worked up about whether or not they can use the word conversationally are using it as a proxy for other issues.
Like Mandolin, I don’t have a big conversational investment in the word. If people who do have a big investment have a preference, basic politeness requires that I give that preference weight. If there’s a conflict between those people, then I’m going to go with the preference of whoever I like more.
There’s an exception for art. If I write a novel set in 1963 Alabama, then the word is going to have a prominent place, because it had a prominent place then and there. Other than that, I have no legitimate need to use the word that overrides the feelings of the people around me.
This comment was written by Robert.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 11:33 am
The difference is that when a black person uses the word in a group of black people, the group can be reassured that it is not being used to signify that black people generally suck. I think this would be true of any ethnic slur: my Italian American friends called each other dago affectionately but certainly did not like being called dagos by anyone else.
What can be a turn off about such usage is that it is meant to demarcate whether one is in the group or not (in other words, a way of excluding someone by talking in language that they cannot share). Let’s all have three seconds of silence in sorrow for the whites who are thereby excluded.
However, I can imagine that if a black and a white person were very good friends, they could develop a set of mutually offensive insults that caused no rancor because it was understood by both that they were not actually intended to be insults.
I honestly don’t see why this is so subtle or difficult.
This comment was written by Barbara.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 12:26 pm
” Let’s all have three seconds of silence in sorrow for the whites who are thereby excluded. ”
it isnt that a white person would be excluded from conversation or participation as a result of not having the blessed and sanctified benefit of pronouncing such verbal sewage. the issue as i see it is that actual precise and honest communication about race is discouraged when the avenue to this communcation is strewn with so many landmines that it is not in the interest of the white person to risk offending a person of color.
This comment was written by roger.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Roger, I have a hard time seeing, “Don’t use the n-word” as a complicated and confusing rule or verbal landmine that discourages communication.
We’re not talking about, “don’t discuss affirmative action except on Tuesdays in months that contain the letter y,” we’re talking about, “don’t use the n-word.”
It’s pretty basic.
—Myca
EDIT: Also? If white people don’t understand that, it’s because they want to not understand it.
This comment was written by Myca.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 1:43 pm
I’m in full agreement w/ Myca. It’s really really not hard for me as a white person to understand that unless directly quoting or in some historical context sort of way that word is off limits to me. It’s not a difficult concept. And everytime someone brings up the argument my statement is always, “But why do you WANT to be able to say it?” and it typically creates a stuttering um, well, I didn’t say I wanted to, it’s just the principal of the matter. Total crap.
I also tend to err on the side that it’s a difficult word to reclaim like queer, crip, etc have been reclaimed. But I also agree that as an outsider to the black community it’s not my place to argue. I will admit that I cringe when I hear it - regardless of who says it - but I’d be unlikely to admonish a black person who was saying it to another black person. I would however be quick to say something to a white person who said it.
This comment was written by Kate L..Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 1:49 pm
” we’re talking about, “don’t use the n-word.” ”
i am in full agreement.
if only the game were that simple:
Wilmington, North Carolina incident
In late January or early February 2002, a white fourth-grade teacher in Wilmington, North Carolina was formally reprimanded for teaching the word[7] and told to attend sensitivity training.[8]
The teacher, Stephanie Bell, said she used “niggardly” during a discussion about literary characters. But parent Akwana Walker, who is black, protested the use of the word, saying it offended her because it sounds similar to a racial slur, the Wilmington Star-News reported.[8]
Bell’s union, the North Carolina Association of Educators, told her not to speak about the situation, so her son, Tar Bell, spoke to the newspaper. Tar Bell said his mother received a letter from the school principal stating that the teacher used poor judgment and instructing her to send an apology to the parents of her students, which was done. In the principal’s letter, she also criticized the teacher for lacking sensitivity.[8]
from wikipedia: niggardly
This comment was written by roger.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 1:51 pm
why will this not let me put a link in the text.
This comment was written by roger.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Roger, that’s a hell of a straw man you’re whacking away at.
Why would you bring up the use of the term ‘niggardly’ in this discussion? General communication or miscommunication between black and white people is not the topic of this post or the topic of discussion.
There is disagreement within the African-American community as to whether or not the n-word has a valid use between black people or not. There is no significant disagreement that it has no valid use by white people.
It’s not a game.
It is that simple.
—Myca
This comment was written by Myca.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 2:28 pm
” Why would you bring up the use of the term ‘niggardly’ in this discussion? ”
vocabulary and intent. for a white person the n word is off limits as this word is deeply offensive and violent to persons of color. the teacher apparently follows the rule, apparently having no intent to offend, and still commits offense.
often it is much simpler to not enter discussions about race at all, as it is much too easy to offend.
as i was saying: landmines.
This comment was written by roger.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Sure, Roger, but that doesn’t make this discussion any different than any other discussion you can have on any other topic.
Yes, the ‘rule’ is not to use racial/sexual/religious/etc slurs.
That doesn’t mean that anyone gets a free pass in which everything else they say is immune from causing offense, and to expect that somehow is silly.
—Myca
This comment was written by Myca.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Roger, the “niggardly” story doesn’t show that it’s a bad idea for white people to discuss race at all. The teacher wasn’t discussing race at all at the time.
It’s an unfortunate, freak story — but it’s far from a typical example of what happens when people use the word “niggardly.” You’re like someone arguing that it’s a terrible idea for people to have glass doors in their house, because the drummer for ABBA died in a freak accident involving his glass patio door. Yes, it’s unfortunate; no, it’s not typical.
The problem with your participation on this thread, imo, is that what you want to talk about — that it can feel very risky and upsetting for White people to talk about race — has no relevance to what this thread is about, which is White people who feel discriminated against because they can’t call black people racial epithets without criticism.
That said, it’s my thread and I’m prepared to allow a little off-topic drift.
So: I agree with you, to a degree. It can be hard for white people to talk about race and racism. (This is not something unique to white people, of course).
You are taking the risk of being told that something you say, or think, is racist. That can really hurt your feelings. I understand that.
Here’s what I’d ask you to consider:
1) Many things that are worth doing, that are the right thing to do, are not always easy.
2) Being told that something you said is racist is not the end of the world. Really.
This comment was written by Ampersand.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Ya know, sometimes I wonder if you are all reading the same stuff I am, or walk in the same spheres?
It is not the end of the world. And it may go over with no effect at all. But not necessarily.
In certain sections of society, such an accusation can certainly cause extraordinary damage to one’s career. I am not saying that this should prevent people from talking about racism entirely, but I think it is ludicrous to suggest that the efforts to avoid the minefield are unimportant.
It is, also, an unusually difficult (if not impossible) accusation to disprove, which makes it even more difficult to deal with when
Actually, there are interesting parallels between racism and sexual assault:
1)accusations usually correct; though sometimes wrong (I’m going on the assumption that most sexual assault accusations are correct and that most people who get accused of being racist were actually racist.)
2) society assumes accusations are false; likelihood of consequences of act are small. (with sexual assault and racism, people tend to disbelieve the accusations and favor the accused. most rapists don’t get convicted; most racists don’t get censured.)
3) But, accusations are difficult to disprove. (even if the accused is innocent, there will always be a set of people who believe them guilty due to the accusation. The accused will never get out from under this label, which sucks for them.)
4) Effects of false accusations can be large, though rare. Many people “know” someone they believe to have been falsely accused. (I don’t know anyone in the sexual assault arena, but I”m always hearing about some “friend” whose pissed off girlfriend cried rape, yadda yadda. Racism is easy; see this very thread. But one really CAN get in a lot of trouble with a false accusation.)
5) Because consequences of actual act are minimal, and because false accusations are widely discussed, people believe the false accusations to be more prevalent than they really are. (actually, I am not so sure about racism. I don’t think women throw the “rape” label lightly, but “racist” is much less of an insult: I can’t help but believe it’s not thrown out there more often. The milder the insult, the more common it gets.)
6) which doesn’t make sense, really.
This comment was written by sailorman.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Ampersand:
A while back, I was taken to task by pheeno for using the word “black” as a noun. I agreed that it was inappropriate, and undertook to use “black person” in future. You probably remember that discussion, since it was you who had the unenviable task of moderating it.
IIRC you didn’t express a view back then about whether you concurred with pheeno and myself on that specific point, so I’m now wondering if your use of the word “Black” above as a noun indicates that you don’t agree with us, or that you think capitalising the word makes a difference, or if you were just being lazy.
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Roger
See the paragraph immediately above the “Name” field above the “submit comment” box.
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Has there been any discussion about such people, other than complete agreement that their complaints are baseless?
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Okay, I get that. Someone makes a clumsy comment, and it gets blown out of proportion. But are those certain sections of society, those tight-collared places where things get blown out of proportion anyway? Apply the “dirty joke” test. If you’re at a forum where a misfired joke could potentially destroy you, then don’t talk about racial issues. Actually, the socially intuitive person wouldn’t be discussing anything political at all in such a place.
Also, in the cases I’ve seen or heard about, it was never just about making a clumsy comment. It was about making a clumsy comment then a refusal to apologize afterward. This is where it can get ugly. Some people say racial sensitivity goes too far. I say all social sensitivity goes too far. But you live in this world so learn to deal with it; I don’t see why racism should be singled out. How many people utter a genuinely unintentional racial faux pas, then refuse to apologize out of “principle”? When they wouldn’t be making the same virtuous stands with any other category of offensive verbal misstep? More than a few, I’d bet.
You can see what implications POC read into this.
Well, referring to people by adjectives is just disrespectful. If you called short people “shorties”, or bald people “baldies”, would you expect a favourable reception? A neutral one? An unfavourable one? Would you be surprised - or perhaps righteously outraged - if the reaction was the latter?
Typing up little ditties of short fiction on Word is (or was, sad to say) a hobby of mine, and whenever I wanted to signify an unlikeable bully, I’d make him/her say things like “Hey, Blue Shirt! Get over here!”.
I know you agreed that using the word “Blacks” was not good form. But the way you posted it implies that this is one of the landmines Roger spoke of. If that was your intent, then I don’t accept that at all. I think that it’s actually very obvious, and that anyone with a modicum of social sense would not use the term. Also, that 99% of the people who’d use such as term are going out of their way to use it - then feigning innocence afterward.
(The 1% left over would be people who are genuinely just clumsy with these sorts of things, and I agree life could potentially be hard for them re:potential misguided accusations of racism. Then again, I think life’s hard for these people anyway and, again, there’s no need to single out racism accusations.)
This comment was written by sylphhead.Report this comment to the moderators
July 21st, 2008 at 11:32 pm
You don’t need to be making a joke for this kind of lunacy to blow up in your face.
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2008 at 12:09 am
Will this incident cause “extraordinary damage to [Mayfield]’s” career? Will he be fired over this, or can he kiss all future promotions goodbye? Because you know, that’s the argument I was replying to.
If it turns out to be a single-shot, stupid incident at a meeting, however, the first thing that then pops into my mind is that Price may technically be right about the place being a “white hole”, if the reason they kept on losing paperwork is because piles of junk seem to accumulate out of nowhere. That always happens to me, anyway. And maybe Price was testy because it was Mayfield’s books and flyers that was causing said mess…
And while I realize both Commish Price and Judge Jones were being idiots, I can’t help but not be drawn to some of the comments. Like watching a car wreck.
I especially like the pointed capitalization of “monkeys” on that last comment, thereby signalling the reader to imagine a special link between Black people and monkeys. This guy’s mastery of the subtleties of debate is only surpassed by his ability to spell.
This comment was written by sylphhead.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2008 at 12:11 am
No I wouldn’t. Neither would I expect a favourable reception if I referred to black people as “blackies” but that’s not the form we’re talking about here. “Blacks”, “whites”, “Asians”, “Muslims”, “Christians” all are adjectives accepted as nouns to a considerable degree both within and without the groups they designate.
No it wasn’t. I made no reference to Roger’s post in this comment, nor have I ever interacted with him, to my knowledge, except to point out the explanation for his disappearing comments. My purpose in posting was exactly what it purported to be - to solicit Ampersand’s views on the issue.
My view on the landmine issue is that there is nothing a white person can say on the topic which won’t annoy or offend some black people, and given the difference between Renee’s and Ta-Nehisi Coates’ respective positions, probably nothing a black person can say which won’t annoy or offend some other black people. Equally, anything you say that isn’t outright outragious will probably be agreed by some black people.
This of course is exactly the same situation that applies to people in general with respect to any controversial issue. Nobody hesitates to express a conservative political opinion, merely because some liberals might take offense, or vice versa. Roger’s dilemma only arises if you regard black people as some kind of special group whose members must not be offended at any cost, or if, as happened in the article I linked, their offence is likely to rebound on you in some serious way. The former is not my view*, and the latter is unlikely to apply as far as Alas is concerned. The worst consequence for anyone here is a ban.
*Nor is my view the opposite extreme. I do not think the feelings of black people on these matters should be disregarded entirely
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2008 at 12:30 am
Judge for yourself; the video is here.
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2008 at 12:37 am
I withdraw the remark in bold. I hadn’t seen the video when I wrote that, and misconstrued the context in which Mayfield was reprimanded. I do not think a public carpetting is a trivial matter, but it’s obviously not as serious as the formal reprimand I had misunderstood it to be.
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:26 am
Daran, I don’t believe there’s general agreement among Black people that the shorthand “Blacks” — or, for that matter, “whites” — is offensive, used in the general way I used it. (Which I don’t think was disrespectful at all). It’s common usage among many of the Black writers I read.
Now, maybe it’s one of those things that only Black writers should do. (Hey, I just said something that related to the topic of this thread — it’s a miracle!) That hasn’t been my impression, but I could be mistaken. If the blogs and books I read written by Black writers begin saying that they’re offended when whites use the term “blacks,” of course I’ll mend my language.
This comment was written by Ampersand.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Here’s another tangent to this thread, partly suggested by Ta-Nehisi’s Tobe Keith example.
My mother and I have been arguing via e-mail whether or not we can refer to our rural Southern white family roots as “white trash.” In her view, white trash refers to racist, sexist assholes who beat their wives and children. In my view, the term originates with the Southern slave-master aristocracy in reference to low-skilled working class whites who couldn’t afford slaves. This term carried on after the Civil War to refer to the Southern working poor. Given that my relatives were poor whites living in dirt floor homes on little farms in the hills of eastern Tennessee, I say the term applies. The term was certainly pejorative as used by the Southern upper classes, but it carries on as a way of stereotyping all Southerners by Northerners, and of stereotyping all poor working class whites by the Southern middle and upper classes. When I say I come from white trash, it is in part to challenge perceptions fostered by the stereotype, as well as to acknowledge the history of racist and classist oppression that affected my family.
Frankly, I don’t think there is an easy answer. My mom minds it, I don’t. But my mom has worked a lot harder to overcome the uglier aspects of her upbringing that were fortunately, and thanks to her, not a part of my upbringing. Nonetheless, I feel obliged to question stereotypical assumptions made regarding the South and Southerners by middle class Northerners, folks I grew up with and who tend to view the South as “Deliverance” en large. Moreover, I think these stereotypes work to obscure the real nature of institutional racism and its role in perpetuating exploitation.
This comment was written by Kevin Moore.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Daran,
Yes, some adjectives can be used as nouns to describe people without giving offense, while others cannot, and still others will sometimes give offense depending on the circumstance. Language is an idosyncratic tool and there’s an exception to pretty much any rule of English usage. Yes, it can be confusing to someone not familiar with the language, or not familiar with the regional varations. You know what, though? People seem to be able to learn all the other little linguistic oddities and slip up on the “PC” ones. And then not apologize even for merely unwittingly causing offense. Rather strange, that.
This comment was written by jd.Report this comment to the moderators
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:18 pm
jd, I think it’s a lot more simple than that. “Asian” and “Christian” are proper nouns, the appropriate analogue to which is “African-American”, which, of course, can also be both adjective and noun. That’s just a grammatical property of proper adjectives.
On the other hand, “Black” is clearly just a colour, our ability to capitalize the “b” when in text notwithstanding. (Perhaps, for this reason, the word “Blacks” may be written much more often than it is spoken.) Drawing back to my earlier analogy, it would the same as referring to people as shorts or balds. Or Shorts, and Balds - the capitals signifying complete and utter conversion into proper adjectival nouns, with context and history totally not mattering. Let me know when “Balds” catches on.
Daran is referencing some past discussion he had with Ampersand. I mistakenly thought he was making an argument that he was in fact not making; however, this still bears saying because the broad context in which Daran brought up the topic shortly after Roger’s complaints - which turned out to be coincidental - play into “yet another way White people have to stumble on eggshells” meme. Maybe there are some idiosyncratic rules that can be hard to figure out - though I maintain that the sum of all social interaction is filled with such idiosyncracies and I’d be suspicious of someone who nags only on race - but I don’t see not referring to people as common adjectives as one of them. Or, failing that, using the word “nigger”.
This comment was written by sylphhead.Report this comment to the moderators
July 23rd, 2008 at 6:25 am
On the other hand, “Black” is clearly just a colour, our ability to capitalize the “b” when in text notwithstanding.
But shifting the meaning of a word by capitalizing it is a well-established usage in English. Consider the difference between “democratic” and “Democratic” or “republican” and “Republican”.
This comment was written by RonF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 23rd, 2008 at 8:38 am
Sylphhead:
“Black” is both a color and a race; the word is used in ways inconsistent with your color-only interpretation. First, blacks aren’t literally black—they’re brown. Furthermore, there are people of other races (e.g., South Asians and Aborigines) with similar skin colors, and we don’t call them black (at least, not in American English). The same is true of “white”—whites aren’t literally white, and there are some equally light-skinned East Asians, but we don’t call them white.
Your analogy fails because English is full of such irregularities. One may refer to an American or a Canadian, but not to a Danish or a French. One can be a racist, but not a homophobic. Commies are reds, but socialists are pinkos. There are party stalwarts, but no party loyals. If you go to a certain bar twice a week, you’re a regular, but you don’t become an irregular if you cut back to once every two or three months.
Also, I believe that there are two black people who have commented on this thread, and two people who have objected to the use of “blacks” as a noun, with no overlap between those two sets. Make of that what you will.
RonF:
This comment was written by Brandon Berg.To say nothing of the difference between Polish and polish, or Ottoman and ottoman.
Report this comment to the moderators
July 23rd, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Its propensity to cause offence is a consideration, but it’s not the reason I decided to avoid the usage. There is a tendency, among certain presumably non-black people, to view blacks, not as individual people, but as some kind of homogenous collective. That’s an error of thinking that I’ve been guilty of in the past, and I’ve seen it in the remarks of others. My use of “black person/people” is intended to be a continual reminder - for the benefit of those who need continual reminding - that blacks are people.
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 23rd, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Oh, yeah, and my views on the topic, since Renee specifically asked for them:
Where individuals have a close personal relationship, I don’t think it anyone else’s business what words they use in their private exchanges.
Other than that, I don’t think white people should use racial slurs to refer to black people or other POC. I don’t think white people have any business telling black people what words they should use to refer to other black people, and while it may well be a discussion and argument that needs to occur within and between black communities, as Myca says, that’s a matter for those black communities. I don’t think white people have any business telling black people what they need to discuss.
In respect of “nigger” vs. “n-word” to refer to the terms themselves, I find the latter, rather juvenile, but I agree with Mandolin that white people should go with the flow, which in this thread appears to be in favour of saying the word in full.
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2008 at 1:11 am
An interesting side note is that in the discussion a year or so ago in which pheeno asked Daran not to use “blacks”, and Daran agreed to be more attentive to not using “blacks” (google site:www.amptoons.com pheeno blacks” if you want the link), Daran was using the word blacks to refer to specific black people (admittedly, one of them was an imaginary specific black person, the phrase used was “two blacks” referring to who would not be on the Democratic ticket, i.e. Obama would not pick a black person for his VP).
I do think there is a subtle connotative difference between using “Blacks” as a collective proper noun to refer to black people as a class (I think this is not very likely to cause offense) and using “black” or “blacks” as a noun to refer to an individual or a group of people (this is much more likely to cause offense). It does seem to me that this difference does relate to the reason that Daran stopped using “Blacks” altogether, as using the proper noun for specific individuals does treat the individuals as though they were merely representatives of the class. Using the proper noun to refer to the class seems less problematic, since a class of people is not the same thing as simply all of the members of the class. The abstraction and the removal of individuality is inherent in the concept of the class. To talk about Canadians is to imply that there is some sense in which Canadians are alike.
I can, however, see Daran’s argument for extending the rejection of the use of the proper nouns for classes of people even when one is referring to the class as a whole, as it serves as a reminder that the class is purely an abstraction from an actual group of individuals, and makes it more difficult to talk about the class as though it were a thing.
For some categories (particularly ideological categories) this is strangely awkward. We pretty much never say socialist people or capitalist people or feminist people to refer to socialists or capitalists or feminists as a class. I wonder to what extent it would change the way that we think if we did talk exclusively about feminist people instead of feminists. My guess is some initially, but not very much over the long term.
This comment was written by Charles S.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2008 at 3:48 am
The question to then ask is, does “a Black” (or alternatively, “a Brown”) fall more under the “a Canadian” or “a Danish” part of the spectrum. There would be an easy, objective way to judge, too. Take a sample of magazines, newspapers, or established print media and see how often the article-noun combo “a Black” comes up, relative to “a Canadian (or like form)” and “a Danish (or like form)”. Hell, it could be done on Google right now, if one were so inclined.
This comment was written by sylphhead.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2008 at 4:40 am
Although not germane to the current discussion, the “two blacks” I referred to were Obama and Condoleezza Rice in a hypothetical Presidential contest between the two of them. I wasn’t referring to the VP.
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2008 at 6:17 am
There is a tendency, among certain presumably non-black people, to view blacks, not as individual people, but as some kind of homogenous collective.
That’s actually a general human behavior, wherein people see the heterogeneity among their own group but tend to consider “not us” as single-minded groups as opposed to being similarly heterogeneous. Homosexuals, liberals, conservatives, whites, Asians, athletes, Democrats, Republicans - you name it.
This comment was written by RonF.Report this comment to the moderators
July 24th, 2008 at 10:40 am
This is true of course. However 1. Black people, especially those from the lower and underclasses are subject to a particularly nasty set of stereotypes and attitudes. 2. They are particularly vulnerable to suffering harmful consequences of this, due to their lack of social privilege. 3. On a personal note, I’ve already acknowledged past “error of thinking on my own part. I don’t think I’m one of those in need of continual reminder, at least, I hope I’m not. But if I am, then who better than myself to provide it.
This comment was written by Daran.Report this comment to the moderators
August 7th, 2008 at 9:58 am
You think its unfair that you can’t call black people niggas or niggers. Why would you want to call someone this? Why do you care? You can’t say it becuase your people started using it in a derogatory way. That’s why. Simple. You’re not cool if use the word nigger/nigga. You just look like an asshole. Don’t play attention to what other people are saying and go around saying it yourself. It’s not just a word. Have some class. What non racist reasons would you want to call a black person nigger? Black people say that word referring to a friend or talking about someone whos ignorant. “Yo, look at this dumb nigga walking down the street.” “Aye, my nigga wut up I ain’t seen you in long while.” Personally I dont like being called a nigga. Even black people saying it to other black people can be a problem. There has been many times when someone has called someone else a nigga and that person got offended. Some black people don’t see the use of of the word by other black people as a problem others do. If someone calls me a nigger thats unacceptable. If someone calls me a nigga I going to get angry because to me that feels like your calling me ignorant or low class. Black people do use nigga in a derogatory way. I’m not going to lie. If you see a fight between two black people you probably will hear nigga. Do you think they mean nigga in a friendly way. NO. Just don’t use the word. Look at all the other words you can use. Just have some respect. I dont call white people crackers. Don’t call me a nigger.
This comment was written by Lenene.Report this comment to the moderators