yolland said:
I agree the thread could've done without the back-and-forth (and it was definitely in both directions at times) as to who holds the moral high ground, or monopoly on reason, where language is concerned. But unfortunately it's difficult to debate a question like this without sliding towards that, as there isn't really a whole lot of middle ground here--though I think that may have been the position Kieran, amy and a few others were trying to take. There is something a bit discomfiting about one ugly incident behind the scenes at one workplace getting blown up into an international media spectacle (due to gossip columnists originally, I presume), as if one could somehow put the conscience of millions on trial and heal social fissures through it. On the other hand, ridiculing the impulse to have any reaction at all seems likewise holier-than-thou and appears to suggest unconcern for social equality, which language is certainly one expression of. It's the kind of issue that really requires a lot of nuance (from both sides) to debate effectively, and an Internet forum isn't always the best place for that; it can get pretty tiring trying to coax debating points out of sweeping hyperbole and many are going to get defensive or settle for simply responding in kind at that point.
I agree with most of what you say, and I even understand the limitations this type of forum places upon a healthy give and take....but that, to me, does not excuse how it sometimes spirals downwards to a name calling contest, or to a blatant dismissal of other's thoughts, or to being insulting in a passive aggressive way. But, as you say, maybe that's just an unavoidable circumstance in this type of medium. I'm sure I've had that impulse, and probably acted on it, too, somewhere in here.
As for the thread topic, I suppose I'll stick my 2 cents in and just say that while I find Washington's behavior inescusable, I don't think he should be fired unless he violated ABC's corporate policies. If someone uttered that word out loud at my job, in any context, I'm fairly sure that if HR got wind of it they'd be heavily disciplined or perhaps terminated..but that's where I work. Someone mentioned earlier on that if what he said was good for ratings, he'd not be in trouble at all with ABC, and truer words have never been spoken. Hollywood loves the phrase "there's no such thing as bad press"...but, when it draws the ire of powerful lobbies or interest groups, and might dent ratings, then all of a sudden the network will rise up with much indignation. As insane and hypocritical as American society and government can be, it's double in the Hollywood corporate community.
For the record, I've never seen this show.
Lastly, I'll say that I do not like that word, but am not going to sit there and pretend like I've never used it in my life. And, it's hard for me to get up in arms about some Hollywood dimwit using it, it just is. I agree, the power of words is strong, maybe immeasurable, but to me sometimes it's power is mitigated by who uses it, and in what context. Some actor on some show I've never seen using that word at a self-promoting Hollywood event just does not bother me all that much. But, I can see how it would bother others, and that's how a thread like this is born. And, sure there are bigger issues out there, maybe even issues centering on this very topic that are a lot more concerning than this example, but that should not preclude people from discussing it here or anywhere else.
Ok, I'll really truly slink back to where I came from and revert back to lurker status. Sorry!!!
