It only has 'power' when given. Like any word. It has always been a 'political' term, but now its power serves the opposite of its former use as epithet. And as such, the distinction btwn use and reference is patently clear to EVERYONE. Which is exactly the intent of still imbuing the word with power.
Noted. And also in agreement. Also why we get nowhere. Black Americans, for the most part, dont want to give up that power. And that is unsustainable. Redemption/Reconciliation....or Retribution/Retaliation. Cant have both.
A. I don't see it as power whatsoever. Not real power. A kind of meaningless leverage at best.
B. Most African-Americans would not freak out over the way Jon used the term. I'm 99% certain about that. The academic world is something unto itself. There are a lot of rules that people can't relate to; a lot of students would agree.
But just for the record, I think race is a bs concept that too many folk bought into centuries ago. Thus, it's never about "us" vs "them" to me--it's about logic and being reasonable.
Unfortunately, far too often, people get used to the illogical, and no particular so-called race is immune.
Fair enough. I just don't want to exaggerate the importance of a word.
In Germany, you can't have a swastika. That might seem extreme here in America, but they have a deep history with the swastika as we do with the so-called n-word, Confederate flag, etc.
Granted, the inconsistency of its use is annoying and the consequences that can fall on some and not others is bizarre. But in the end, we are literally talking about a word. It's just as easy to not say it as it is to say it.
Anecdotal reply to yours above re: something changed~2010s. I'd say that 'change' been around for awhile now.
Mid 80s, at a notoriously 'left' University in SF,Ca, I was among a group of friends, all of mixed backgrounds: AA, Asian (Japanese & Viet), Pacific Islander, White, Latino, et al. All males. The word was being used inconspicuously among all parties, much like your club anecdote. I was somewhat surprised, but it was also very clear there was zero venom involved, and it was being used as colloquial slang among all, no 'hard r', etc. Until i slung it (no hard r!). I was told as a white dude, not cool. Even as other white dudes in the group got a 'pass'. To be clear, I suppose I was on the fringier part of the group more than others (we all knew each other and hung out, but they were acquaintances more than sincere friends, I suppose). I brought up blatantly, when and why was the word used as a bonding term, and when/why was it a policing word. It was decided instantly that it was a cultural thing, which was wholly unconvincing. Its real utility as a policing tactic was solely for ingroup/outgroup status. I misread the situation, and was summarily 'reminded' to pay attention. Which I did. And have ever since. I consider it a fairly potent learning experience of my youth, tbh. 'Read the Room', so to speak.
You're spot on, Charles, the word has crazy power...it gets dodgy, tho, when that power seems often to be liberally arbitrary. Its definitely interesting.
It only has 'power' when given. Like any word. It has always been a 'political' term, but now its power serves the opposite of its former use as epithet. And as such, the distinction btwn use and reference is patently clear to EVERYONE. Which is exactly the intent of still imbuing the word with power.
"It only has 'power' when given. Like any word." Exactly.
We are not in disagreement. Yes, it's ridiculous. That's not the issue.
Rules/Laws don't always makes sense. They don't have to. But they're there.
I am only saying that Jon had to know what was likely to follow (even if it was a slip). He's not first to go through this.
Noted. And also in agreement. Also why we get nowhere. Black Americans, for the most part, dont want to give up that power. And that is unsustainable. Redemption/Reconciliation....or Retribution/Retaliation. Cant have both.
A. I don't see it as power whatsoever. Not real power. A kind of meaningless leverage at best.
B. Most African-Americans would not freak out over the way Jon used the term. I'm 99% certain about that. The academic world is something unto itself. There are a lot of rules that people can't relate to; a lot of students would agree.
But just for the record, I think race is a bs concept that too many folk bought into centuries ago. Thus, it's never about "us" vs "them" to me--it's about logic and being reasonable.
Unfortunately, far too often, people get used to the illogical, and no particular so-called race is immune.
We are talking cultural power here. Nothing else.
Fair enough. I just don't want to exaggerate the importance of a word.
In Germany, you can't have a swastika. That might seem extreme here in America, but they have a deep history with the swastika as we do with the so-called n-word, Confederate flag, etc.
Granted, the inconsistency of its use is annoying and the consequences that can fall on some and not others is bizarre. But in the end, we are literally talking about a word. It's just as easy to not say it as it is to say it.
Anecdotal reply to yours above re: something changed~2010s. I'd say that 'change' been around for awhile now.
Mid 80s, at a notoriously 'left' University in SF,Ca, I was among a group of friends, all of mixed backgrounds: AA, Asian (Japanese & Viet), Pacific Islander, White, Latino, et al. All males. The word was being used inconspicuously among all parties, much like your club anecdote. I was somewhat surprised, but it was also very clear there was zero venom involved, and it was being used as colloquial slang among all, no 'hard r', etc. Until i slung it (no hard r!). I was told as a white dude, not cool. Even as other white dudes in the group got a 'pass'. To be clear, I suppose I was on the fringier part of the group more than others (we all knew each other and hung out, but they were acquaintances more than sincere friends, I suppose). I brought up blatantly, when and why was the word used as a bonding term, and when/why was it a policing word. It was decided instantly that it was a cultural thing, which was wholly unconvincing. Its real utility as a policing tactic was solely for ingroup/outgroup status. I misread the situation, and was summarily 'reminded' to pay attention. Which I did. And have ever since. I consider it a fairly potent learning experience of my youth, tbh. 'Read the Room', so to speak.
You're spot on, Charles, the word has crazy power...it gets dodgy, tho, when that power seems often to be liberally arbitrary. Its definitely interesting.