Why Is N*gger Such A Taboo Word?

[Whitedragon]

Words are not just words. They have the power to evoke a memory. A single word can tell a story. One word, ex. Hitler, brings to mind bitter things for some and for others something else. It has the power to injure ; it has the power to uplift. Like Jesus, or Buddha, encompasses as whole religion, so does n*gger encompasses a whole history, personal to each man. If a Nazi calls a Nazi, so then, he/she feels honour, but call a Jew by such a name, and a history, even a personal life is injured. It is also a matter of intent and familiarity.

No one gets familiar with a stranger. If someone you met just five minutes ago calls you pally, some might find it offensive. An African American calling another n*gger makes his shame and trails into a word of power and those who oppressed them must be invited into that circle of familiarity and, so that intimacy cannot be assumed by a white man.

[Gary S]

What is a shame is that some have such low self-esteem that mere words crush them.

[Sy Borg]

What is a shame is that some have such low self-esteem that mere words crush them.

Maybe it's because words are not "mere"? Words can start wars. They represent another's stance and can be indicative of threats, and the use of "n1gger" by unsympathetic others does imply a threat - a person who will stand against your efforts to be treated equally and respectfully.

How would you like to be called a f-a-g-g-o-t* to your face? Would you feel annoyed at the disrespect and threatened/challenged by the implied aggression? Just as black people will be far from crushed by being insulted, so would you. So your comment presents a straw man misrepresentation of black people.

* this was the only way I could write the word without being asterisked out. Too bad if I was talking about a bundle of sticks :)

[Gary S]

How would you like to be called a f-a-g-g-o-t* to your face?

Wouldn't bother me in the least. I invite anyone to say whatever they please.

[Wilson]

Obviously no one should use a word in speaking to someone who finds it offensive, except for a discussion of the word itself, where it should be okay. You certainly shouldn't call someone a name regardless.

[Steve3007]

A fun fact: I was watching the classic old movie "The Dam Busters" on TV the other day. At the end of every commercial break the continuity announcer solemnly warned viewers that the film contained language that some may find offensive. This is a 1950's film, so I was surprised. Then I realized that it's because one of the central characters of the film is a black dog with a name that reflects its colour. And they seem to use the name very often. "I say n*gger. Chin-up old chap." and that kind of thing.

Quite funny.

-- Updated Mon Apr 04, 2016 5:10 am to add the following --

An experiment: fag.

-- Updated Mon Apr 04, 2016 5:11 am to add the following --

OK good. I can use a colloquial word for a cigarette even if I Greta is not allowed to mention bundles of sticks or meat balls.

[Burning ghost]

Gary -

Words have immense power.

They should change the saying to stick and stones may break my bones, words can change the world.

[Ormond]

Why is it that "black" people can call each other n*gger whilst everyone else cannot?!

If I, as an anonymous stranger, call you a jerk, it's offensive.

But if one of your friends calls you a jerk while joking around, it's a bonding experience.

[Gary S]

Gary - Words have immense power.

At a person to person level, words have only the power that the person on the receiving end allows.

Person 1: "Person 2, you are a ^&*%$##%!!"
Person 2: "Whatever dude." <continues on his productive endeavors while dismissing Person 1 and his comments>

[Steve3007]

Gary:

In world war II when Hitler's propaganda machine referred to Jews as rats, do you think that it was only as harmful as they allowed it to be? In Rwanda in the 1990s a very similar propaganda campaign was waged by some Hutus on the Tutsi. They even used similar comparisons with animals like rats. Perhaps you could argue that it wasn't actually being systematically referred to as rats that caused the Jews and the Tutsi to be murdered en masse. Being called a rat never did actually kill anyone in itself, did it?

But if a concentration camp survivor was stopped on the street and called a rat now, do you think they could just say "whatever dude" and continue on their way?

[Gary S]

Steve, you make a really good point. I appreciate that. The dehumanization that occurs when group 1 systematically derides group 2 via words is a serious matter and can certainly lead to catastrophes such as the Holocaust. The issue isn't so much the affect of the words on group 2, it is the emboldening of group 1 that group 1 is superior and group 2 is less than human.

Still, today, in the modern world, person to person, the concentration camp survivor can render his antagonist's words powerless by saying "whatever dude." If Person A can cause Person B to have emotional distress, then Person A has power over Person B. In that sense, Person A is superior to Person B, but only because Person B is allowing it.

[Burning ghost]

Gary -

It is completely the use of words that does this. The words used in such cases as Nazism, and in the Soviet Union during the rise of communism, are twisted to dehumanise there targets.

Also if everytime I saw you I insulted you no matter how mentally resilent you are it would plant a seed in your head. The associative power of words on cognitive functions are often underestimated. Of course some people are more susceptible than others.

Words can inspire, cause hatred, make us question, demean, uplift and touch every emotion we have.

It has very little to do with turning the other cheek because the person inflicting harm doesn't necessarily do ot for pleasure, they do it because to you they are just an animal and they don't even consider how you feel. So if you were in a concentration camp and said "what ever dude" nothing would change because your qords and opinions have been deemed worthless and you would still suffer because of the racism instilled by the use of words.

There is also the very apt saying of the pen is mightier than the sword. Language is simply one of the most powerful things at our disposal. Its use causes us to do equally brilliant and stupid things.

[Gary S]

So if you were in a concentration camp and said "what ever dude" nothing would change because your qords and opinions have been deemed worthless and you would still suffer because of the racism instilled by the use of words

Agreed, it wouldn't work in the setting you propose. Something just occurred to me. Where group A already has power over group B, the dehumanizing words serve to further the power of group A and further the weakness of group B.

But in a first world country with constitutions and rights and freedom of speech and laws and police protection, derogatory words can only have effect if the "victim" allows it. This is where the "whatever" works. If person 2 allows person 1 to hurt their feelings, person 2 has to accept some, if not all, of the blame.

[Sy Borg]

Yes, Steve and BG, context and repetition/reinforcement are critical. It's the constancy of the insults - and the exclusions that come with the attitudes behind the insults - that does the damage.

Anyone can shrug off a single insult that has no practical import, especially when there's no historical baggage.

[Gary S]

In the first world, is there a constancy of insults and exclusions with attitudes behind the insults? Do you, the readers of this forum, see it in your everyday lives?

I do not see it and am glad to live and work where there is minimal racial strife and plenty of opportunity. Equality has advanced by leaps and bounds. Will humanity ever see a point where an insult has no practical import? Will humanity ever get to the point where historical baggage is just history? My opinion is that the first world is coming darned close already. I understand that your opinion may differ.