Jump to content

Why is blacklist not racist?


Recommended Posts

Presumably kelly4danny your students possess sufficient emotional intelligence to be able to appreciate contextual references and the three dimensional discussion that is taking place here??

 

I grew up in a time where 'wog' and 'sambo' were common epithets used to describe black people, in fact they were words which were part of casual conversation, even in the mainstream media (eg Love Thy Neighbour).

 

The words are offensive, however that should never be used as an excuse to avoid discussion of them or their use to endorse a well conceived (anti racist) argument.

 

If that were the case BF, then you could say that its actually white people who are most offended by these words, and that the people that these words are aimed at don't actually mind them.

I can understand that most things in life do need discussing, but it would be wrong for me to agree that there is any need whatsoever to keep exaggerating the words and phrases in question over and over again, like they were actually in mainstream conversation. I have been actively involved in this discussion, yet I have always chosen my words and descriptives with the empathy of the people who may not enjoy seeing them, time and time again.

There is another thread that could be merged with this one, and that the Freedom of Speech thread. A very important human right, but one to be used with thought about others too. :)

 

Ooh, and just to be straight with everyone, they weren't my students. They were my fellow students!. xx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand that most things in life do need discussing, but it would be wrong for me to agree that there is any need whatsoever to keep exaggerating the words and phrases in question over and over again, like they were actually in mainstream conversation.

 

Your use of 'exaggerating' is an exaggeration. The words in question have been referred to and occasionally repeated, that's all. That's what happens in a discussion about language use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your use of 'exaggerating' is an exaggeration. The words in question have been referred to and occasionally repeated, that's all. That's what happens in a discussion about language use.

 

Wouldn't say it was an exaggeration Alice. Far from it. Certain sentences have been written and are there, or have been there for all to see. I did try to put my last post in a concise and rational way because I feel most people are rational, but if you truly believe that just because yourself and a handful of others don't see how these posts can offend people, then i'm afraid that it appears you cannot see it from the perspective of the people that are offended by it.

The thing is with particular words is that they are aimed at one group of society, which makes it very easy to brush it off as just a discussion, if you yourself are not in that group :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't say it was an exaggeration Alice. Far from it. Certain sentences have been written and are there, or have been there for all to see.
Just because 'certain sentences have written' does not mean that words have been exaggerated. You are not making much sense, I'm afraid.

 

I did try to put my last post in a concise and rational way because I feel most people are rational, but if you truly believe that just because yourself and a handful of others don't see how these posts can offend people, then i'm afraid that it appears you cannot see it from the perspective of the people that are offended by it.
If there are people who are genuinely offended and upset by an academic discussion of how language operates in social contexts, then I suggest they are oversensitive and should simply avoid forum threads on the issue. They should also avoid listening to Radio 4 or embarking on an A level English Language course since discussions of this nature feature in those contexts, too.

 

The thing is with particular words is that they are aimed at one group of society, which makes it very easy to brush it off as just a discussion. :)
A discussion about particular words does not 'aim' them at anyone; it merely analyses their impact. More often than not, people are saying 'It's not OK to use this term as a referant or descriptor for x group of people'.

 

It is rather like looking at your medical notes, seeing the word 'anus' and concluding that the doctor is being disrespectful towards you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because 'certain sentences have written' does not mean that words have been exaggerated. You are not making much sense, I'm afraid.

 

If there are people who are genuinely offended and upset by an academic discussion of how language operates in social contexts, then I suggest they are oversensitive and should simply avoid forum threads on the issue. They should also avoid listening to Radio 4 or embarking on an A level English Language course since discussions of this nature feature in those contexts, too.

 

A discussion about particular words does not 'aim' them at anyone; it merely analyses their impact. More often than not, people are saying 'It's not OK to use this term as a referant or descriptor for x group of people'.

 

It is rather like looking at your medical notes, seeing the word 'anus' and concluding that the doctor is being disrespectful towards you.

 

OK Alice. Im afraid we will have to agree to disagree my dear:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After speaking to a few of our afro caribbean students regarding this subject, it became clear that all of them hated the "W" word with a passion

 

Out of interest. How did you "speak to them" about this word, without actually saying the word?

 

Did you mime it, write it down, or speak little asterisks into the air?

 

You had to say it, right, at least once. And you didn't personally offend all your students by saying it, because of the context, of a discussion about the word.

Rather proving our point I think.

Edited by Cyclone
added a comma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, and one of them's obviously a doctor. It depicts a happy looking black person in a top job. I just don't see what's racist about that at all!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blackboard.

 

I don't get to inhale the chalk dust though.

 

 

Even the chalk wasn't chalk, it was gypsum. :(

 

And ye gods people - words are just words. Noises made when you flap your jaws and meanings made when you punch glyphs into computers. It's the intent behind the transmitter that counts, not the symbols being used.

 

Kelly's a teacher?

 

Jesus Wept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.