MERGED--> all discussion of Sen. Allen incident - Page 8 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-16-2006, 12:01 PM   #106
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:11 AM
The distinction raised by Salome was one of intent. Cultural changes in colloquialisms are different that imputing intent on an individual based on a choice of words.

When you say "it was once okay to say a word, now it is not" - does that reflect a change in the intent of a speaker, or does it reflect a change in political argument. It seems that there is little effort to determine what a speaker meant by a comment, and far more effort placed on political posturing as "I'm offended - you must apologize".

In most cased of uttering "Oh my God" there is no intent to offend. If that is the case, why does the standard change for other words? Do you want to use the "most people use the word" standard for determining what is offensive and what is not? A might makes right standard? Or is there another way to evaluate speech?
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 12:20 PM   #107
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 01:11 PM
For those of you who believe he didn't know the meaning(which I don't understand), that's fine but please don't vote for him, we really don't need another Republican who uses words he doesn't understand.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 12:20 PM   #108
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 08:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
In most cased of uttering "Oh my God" there is no intent to offend. If that is the case, why does the standard change for other words?
What other words are you thinking of? How often does someone say "nigger," "faggot," or "bitch" outside a context of consciously disparaging the person(s) thus referred to?
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 12:23 PM   #109
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 01:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader

When you say "it was once okay to say a word, now it is not" - does that reflect a change in the intent of a speaker, or does it reflect a change in political argument.
I think it reflects a change in understanding.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 12:27 PM   #110
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland

What other words are you thinking of? How often does someone say "nigger," "faggot," or "bitch" outside a context of consciously disparaging the person(s) thus referred to?
Those are kinda harsh, but I sort of see what he's getting at. The other day someone commented on me always being on the porch and I said "yeah, everyone at my house are real porch monkeys" and they were like "I can't believe you said that!" Seriously though, I was the only white kid on my block for 12 years and EVERYONE used that term. Until a week ago, I had no idea it had a racial undertone. We always called each other "porch monkeys" because we'd climb/sit on railings and junk on the porch, not because a monkey is black. So yeah, I will definitely not use that term anymore, but I had no clue the "monkey" referred to skin color rather than us acting like monkeys.
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 12:27 PM   #111
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Justin24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,716
Local Time: 12:11 PM
I would not vote for him. I would hope you wouldn't if a Democrat,or any political party said the same.
__________________
Justin24 is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 12:29 PM   #112
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 01:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Justin24
I would not vote for him. I would hope you wouldn't if a Democrat,or any political party said the same.
I wouldn't vote for any politician who I thought was a racist or stupid enough to use words they didn't know the meaning of...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 12:29 PM   #113
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
The distinction raised by Salome was one of intent. Cultural changes in colloquialisms are different that imputing intent on an individual based on a choice of words.


what intent does one have other than to offend when using words like "kike," "n*gger," "faggot," and "macaca." these words are culturally loaded with intent, and it would take careful decontextuatlizing of the word in order to use it devoid of harm. Quenten Tarantino, for example, feels as if the word "n*gger" in his movies is decontextualized enough, and devoid of cultural context, that it is meaningless. while that is debatable, at least an effort has been made.


[q]When you say "it was once okay to say a word, now it is not" - does that reflect a change in the intent of a speaker, or does it reflect a change in political argument. It seems that there is little effort to determine what a speaker meant by a comment, and far more effort placed on political posturing as "I'm offended - you must apologize".[/q]


yes, i know it seems this way to you.

once words were okay, now they're not -- this is usually a reflection on the changing cultural status of the word. one example: where once "manifest destiny" was considered a righteous national calling, now it is associated with the genocide of the Native Americans, a genocide that the nation has only come to grips with even in my relatively short lifetime. this is what i mean by being culturally aware. the same thing with "faggot/fag." language is as much a reflection of social mores as it shapes them.



Quote:
In most cased of uttering "Oh my God" there is no intent to offend. If that is the case, why does the standard change for other words? Do you want to use the "most people use the word" standard for determining what is offensive and what is not? A might makes right standard? Or is there another way to evaluate speech?
again, please show me the historical context in which "oh my god" was used to terrorize and intimidate a group of people causing the word to be culturally loaded with intent to do harm.

there really isn't a methodology for "evaluating" speech. not everything lends itself so easily to rules and boxes.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 12:40 PM   #114
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland

What other words are you thinking of? How often does someone say "nigger," "faggot," or "bitch" outside a context of consciously disparaging the person(s) thus referred to?
That is my question. In today's climate, you cannot ask that question. The conclusion is automatic.

All your examples are spoken everyday without inferring negative intent. An African American can use "nigger" with disparaging intent, where a non-African American cannot use the term at all.

My paralegal's teenage son (who is Hispanic) was playing with African American kids at his school. The word nigger was traded freely among all the kids. No consciously disparaging intent existed. When he got home, he was cautioned (likely forbidden) from using the word at all.

"Nigger" becomes the A-Bomb word. Other words get some breathing room. Words like "macaca" need an explanation.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 01:07 PM   #115
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


That is my question. In today's climate, you cannot ask that question. The conclusion is automatic.

All your examples are spoken everyday without inferring negative intent. An African American can use "nigger" with disparaging intent, where a non-African American cannot use the term at all.

My paralegal's teenage son (who is Hispanic) was playing with African American kids at his school. The word nigger was traded freely among all the kids. No consciously disparaging intent existed. When he got home, he was cautioned (likely forbidden) from using the word at all.

"Nigger" becomes the A-Bomb word. Other words get some breathing room. Words like "macaca" need an explanation.


first, i think you misunderstand today's climate as these kinds of questions are asked all the time. just look at Eminem and his defense of using the word "faggot."

doesn't the historical intent of the word, which is to cause harm, that both Yolland and i have pointed out, become uprooted from it's historical meaning when used by african-americans? doesn't the word derive its historical meaning precisely because it was used by white people to denigrate black people?

lastly, simply because the word is used amongst some black people doesn't mean that others might not find the word quite offensive coming out of anyone's mouth, black or white.

much like some Christians are offended by "oh my god" and others use it all the time.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 01:11 PM   #116
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
what intent does one have other than to offend when using words like "kike," "n*gger," "faggot," and "macaca." these words are culturally loaded with intent, and it would take careful decontextuatlizing of the word in order to use it devoid of harm. Quenten Tarantino, for example, feels as if the word "n*gger" in his movies is decontextualized enough, and devoid of cultural context, that it is meaningless. while that is debatable, at least an effort has been made.
Don’t you see the huge inconsistency here? Intent is automatic unless you allow the speaker an exemption. We are faced with a guilty until proven innocent (or granting of a specific defense) analysis for the speaker.

You haven’t set up a structure for clear definition of speech, but a process by which you can justify inconsistent application of inferring intent.

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
again, please show me the historical context in which "oh my god" was used to terrorize and intimidate a group of people causing the word to be culturally loaded with intent to do harm.
I think it is disingenuous to suggest that the "terrorize and intimidate" is the principle by which you are operating. There is certainly no consistent application of this as a standard anywhere here. Was Allen "terrorizing and intimidating" with the use of "macaca"?

Wouldn't be more honest to simply say "I don't care if you are offended by 'Oh my God' "?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 01:12 PM   #117
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 03:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by sulawesigirl4
Whether or not he "knew" what the word macaca meant disturbs me less than the "welcome to America" crack being aimed at a non-white participant.
Thank you! I've been to busy to post but am glad someone finally focused on this. Let's suspend logic for a moment and pretend that an educated adult routinely makes up words--the "Welcome to America" crap is enough to glean Allen's views on race and the US of A.

Not to mention the sheer brain-dead stupidity of harassing the guy from the Other Team who has a camera on you.
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 01:15 PM   #118
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
doesn't the historical intent of the word, which is to cause harm, that both Yolland and i have pointed out, become uprooted from it's historical meaning when used by african-americans? doesn't the word derive its historical meaning precisely because it was used by white people to denigrate black people?
Again, that is part of the question I'm asking. “Historic intent” may not be someone’s current actual intent. Using this standard, at what point do you allow someone to have a different intent from the intent of other people from a different time? And is the application of this standard based on a clean analysis of a situation, or does it get tainted by other motives (such as politics)?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 01:36 PM   #119
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 08:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
All your examples are spoken everyday without inferring negative intent. An African American can use "nigger" with disparaging intent, where a non-African American cannot use the term at all.
OK, I should have qualified--how often does someone not belonging to whichever collective (African-Americans, gays, women) not use these terms disparagingly? Jews for example don't commonly refer to other Jews using anti-Semitic terms--but if I were to do that, how could I possibly be understood to be disparaging them as Jews? Because obviously I also belong to the collective I'm ostensibly disparaging, so unless you assume I additionally meant to convey self-disparagement--and how often is that likely to be the case--there's no way I could mean it in that sense. There would have to be a hefty dose of insider irony involved (not that this necessarily makes it unproblematic), and I suppose this interpretation *could* be extended to the case of a trusted non-Jewish friend saying it to me in private under certain circumstances, but it wouldn't be reasonable to extend it to non-Jews generally regardless of situation. What would their grounds for being ironic be?

You seem to be suggesting that assuming disparaging intent in such cases is a priori wrong--could you explain then what the other possible intentions might be? For instance, is it possible I misread the intent of some of the people--all of them non-Jews, none of them friends--who called me "Christ-killer" where I grew up, and if so, what are the other possible explanations I overlooked?

I could perhaps grant this doesn't apply so tidily to women calling each other "bitch," but then that word doesn't have widespread currency as denoting membership in some roundly disparaged collective, the way "nigger" or "faggot" does for the people those words label.
Quote:
Wouldn't be more honest to simply say "I don't care if you are offended by 'Oh my God' "?
Should there be anything beyond a purely voluntary decision to care here? God is not a person and doesn't partake of the usual civic obligations or entitlements.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 01:48 PM   #120
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:11 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/...eer/index.html

"In a four-paragraph statement issued Tuesday, Allen said, "In singling out the Webb campaign's cameraman, I was trying to make the point that Jim Webb had never been to that part of Virginia -- and I encouraged him to bring the tape back to Jim and welcome him to the real world of Virginia and America, outside the Beltway, where he has rarely visited.

"I also made up a nickname for the cameraman, which was in no way intended to be racially derogatory. Any insinuations to the contrary are completely false."

Allen said it "was certainly not my intent" to offend anyone by the remark.

"On every stop on my listening tour, I have talked about one of my missions for this country -- to make it a land of opportunity for all," Allen said. "I have worked very hard in the Senate to reach out to all Americans -- regardless of their race, religion, ethnicity or gender. And I look forward to continuing to advocate this important mission for America's future."

As for Sidarth, Allen said, "I never want to embarrass or demean anyone, and I apologize if my comments offended this young man. Even though he has signed onto my opponent's campaign, I look forward to seeing him on the trail ahead."

In an interview with CNN before Allen released his statement, Sidarth said he had introduced himself to the senator days before he made the remark.

"He was doing that because he could, because he could get away with it," Sidarth said. "I think he was just trying to, trying to point out the fact that I was a person of color, in a crowd that was not otherwise."

Sidarth later said he did not view Allen's statement as an adequate apology. "First of all, if he is going to single me out in a crowd of 100 people, he ought to apologize to me personally," Sidarth said.

Webb campaign manager Jessica Vanden Berg added, "From my perspective, if a U.S. senator wanted to directly apologize to somebody, he would do so. Sidarth has not been apologized to."

Vanden Berg said Webb's "family and roots are in southwestern Virginia," and he has lived in Falls Church "for a number of years."

During the Senate campaign, she said, he has traveled extensively throughout the state. "So to say that Jim doesn't know Virginia is a lie," she said."
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com