Censorship or Sensibility?

[Jason]

The legal position in England & Wales is around stirring up racial hatred. If "nigger" is used in a context where it is intended to stir up racial hatred then it is wrong, but the noun in itself is not wrong. I don't think we in the UK would ever censor HF!

 

[NumberTwentySix]

It's sort of like how people of Hispanic origin can refer to each other as "ese" but if someone of another race called them that it'd be "their ass"... you know?

There are several opinions about the origin of "ese" none of which occur outside Mexico. One version I have heard is that southerners refer to one another as "ese"s to acknowledge that they're compatriots or whatever from southern Mexico.

Another version relates to a specific type of fancy shoes called S.A.s that were a high status item back at the turn of the 20th century. Calling someone an S.A. (pronounced ese) was a mark of respect acknowledging their status (a rich boy in really shiny shoes).

Back to the topic at hand, censoring a book about racism makes about as much sense as banning fights at hockey games. It's too integral a part to remove and have it still be itself.

I've heard the argument made that gays back in the day used "queer" in a similar fashion to blacks using (i feel like an idiot for writing it this way) "the n-word" :rolleyes2: amongst groups of friends as a way to take the sting out of it.

What I think we all have to remember is that the sentiments behind derogatory terms still exist regardless of whether society attempts to ban or stigmatize actually using any one word. If one says "nigger" too loudly in a public setting, one gets yelled at or beaten up, but if one says "Canadian" and means "nigger", one still feels and expresses the same sentiment without the consequences. The word changed, the person didn't. Not much progress there in combating racism. Better to work on the attitude than the vocabulary.

 

[midlifebear]

As a gabacho who is fluent in imitating several Spanish dialects, I've never had any trouble with using ese. Although the etymology is something that escapes me. It's not as easy to trace as hijole and horale. Nor is the etymology very clear on the origins of the word gabacho, which is used almost exclusively among chicanos and native Mexicans to mean "white person who may or may not speak spanish." But I'm certain there are Ph.D.s in Chicano Studies and linguistics who are working on it. Beginning in the mid 20th Century to now the only people regularly using the word gringo were and are, well . . . gringos. Use that same word in polite conversation in the middle of Mexico City and you'll notice most of your native Mexican friends turn red-faced and embarrassed for your lack of civility and edjumacashun. Chicanos in the Los Angeles Basin? Not so much.

And if you do speak Spanish, it's always fun to amuse one's gabacho friends by explaining to them the real definition of words such as alamo, fresno, tonto, loma linda, and for our special gabacho friends in Southern California, El Chino. I had a secretary from El Chino who insisted, in fact would have bet the lives of her children, that El Chino referred to a style of pants that were once manufactured there. True story. Of course, god forbid that any Arizonan, Texan or Californian pick up a Spanish/English dictionary and look up the common Spanish place names where they live.

Even better is stopping to phonetically dissect "Yippee cayay cayow!" as sung in the lyrics of a rather bad Hollywood Roy Rodgers song.

But back to the N word. Doesn't anyone remember the famous "excuse" speech repeated by Governor George Wallace as he campaigned to be president in 1968, wherein he tried to convince everyone -- in his best patrician southern drawl -- that he "never" used the N word. And that it was the inability of Northern Yankee ears to hear how the good folks of Alabama were accustomed to pronouncing "negro" as "nigrah"? That's right . . . "nigrah." Therefore, in former Governor Wallace's world there was no N word. Nope. No flies on him. Fortunately, his disingenuousness is committed to recorded tape AND film. I'm sure there has to be a clip of him trying to pull off that hat trick on Youtube. G. Wallace's lecture on US southern dialects was as incorrect in 1968 as it still is today. As President Clinton was fond of saying, "That dog won't hunt."

As for removing/changing the original language of Huckleberry Finn, find the clueless bastards behind such stupidity and ship them back to Liberia! Or is it Libraria? I know it's something!

 

[maxcok]

The term nigga is pretty much allowed if you're from the same upbringing. I've seen whites, blacks, asians, latinos all say it.

It's not "allowed", it's accepted by certain individuals among their peers. Major difference. Whereas some of my friends know they can be more loose lipped around me (since I know they don't mean to be harmful contextually), outside of historical or societal artistic expression I do not appreciate the N-word being directed at me by total strangers or my adversaries.

It's largely about context, intent, and knowing your audience. Words like this may be acceptable in a closed context where the individuals know each other, where there is clear understanding that it's in no way serious, and there is also clear understanding that using them in a broader context where they might be misunderstood is completely inappropriate. Because of all that, often they're used in that closed context with an appreciation for absurd humor and irony.

It's the same with "girl talk" that some gay men engage in, that can easily be read as perpetuating effeminate gay stereotypes as well as trivializing women. The problem comes when the repetition of this language desensitizes the speaker and the listener to the inherent offensiveness, creating a sort of unconscious "acceptability" within the group that often spreads beyond. Then people outside the group, outside the closed context, think it gives them license to use it as well, and it becomes in their minds "acceptable".

Many times I've heard people say with incomplete understanding, "Black people call each other 'nigger' (gay guys call each other 'fag'), so what's the big deal?" It is a very big deal, unless you are very, very sure of the context, the intent, and the audience. MercyfulFate's post illustrates this. He and the people he references think it's acceptable and "excused" in this broader context - and it clearly is not. It is not cool at all for anyone outside the black community to unconsciously refer to anyone as "nigga", whether it's urban slang or not.

I tend to err on the side of caution. I will on rare occasions use language like this in closed context where I very sure the person I am speaking with knows my philiosophy and politics, and I am likewise very sure of theirs, where it is understood it's only being used for comic or dramatic effect. I am equally aware that using such language is a concious and very specific act, that the usage will NOT desensitize me or the listener to the offensive nature of it or make it any more acceptable in any broader context, not for me or for anyone else.

 

[B_Marius567]

Censorship in Italy

 

[B_VinylBoy]

All that and no link... *SIGH*