Quote:
Originally Posted by blindreper1179
Why not? He's a person just like the rest of us???
|
I've heard Xel's argument many times, and my response boils down to three points.
1) It is hard for white people (me included) to understand the stigma tied to the N word, and thus a natural response is to treat it like a normal expletive. The N word is not "fuck", it is not "shit", it is not "piss." Those words do not (to the best of my knowledge) have a history associated with the subjugation of an entire race of people. Your argument about the destigmatization of bad words makes sense to me in a general sense, but it is not clear to me that this same reasoning can apply to racial slurs. I am not really aware of many historical examples following this reasoning. (Whereas words like "darn" and "damn" have had diminishing offensive value over time.) Racial slurs are often historically tied to systematic mistreatment of entire populations. You can't escape that, and saying that "we should get over the N word" has some sinister undertones if you consider this connected history.
2) To paraphrase how I'm understanding one part of this argument, you say "if the N word appears in popular music, that signifies its diminishing offensive value". There is implicit argument being made that since the N word appears in popular music, soon I will be allowed to say it.
This is, in a sense, related to the notion of "ownership" of words. In a strictly literal sense, nobody owns words -- you can say them, they belong to a language. However, this thought isn't really meaningful. The meat of this particular argument is the notion of appropriation --- who can appropriate words, culture, etc.
I think that certain people can "own" words, and that words can "belong" to a group of people. Again, in a literal sense, this can't be true, but I think the white majority should be willing to relinquish just a fraction of its absolute demographic power to (not in a legal sense, but a social one) not use certain words. This is a matter of courtesy. In a strictly legal sense, I can visit a soup kitchen and demand food --- but really, if I did this, I'd be a total dick. At some point you have to acknowledge the dynamic of power and privilege between groups of people in this country and, ideally, be willing to not visit the soup kitchen "just because you can"... and leave the soup kitchen to those that better benefit from it.
3) I don't want to put words in your mouth here, so this is just a general thought that I associate with this kind of discussion. When I made my initial post in this thread, my rationale was more or less "even if you have an argument justifiying the use of the N word, that doesn't entitle you to use it." It is not your decision whether or not you should use the N word. (To be precise, the morality of your action is not dictated by your reasoning of it.) It is up to society, and, specifically, the affected population (the black community). This point is more about the philosophy of ethics, but simply speaking, it's not your choice whether or not "the N word is OK". It is decided by public discourse, with proper representation by the affected parties.
Again, this point is not directly related to your post, but I thought I'd share anyway.
-------
Xel, this is not intended to be a slight against you, but I'm kind of tired of seeing this as a response to discourse about the N word.
Anyway, I'm posting in this thread because I'm a piece of shit.