Is the term "r*****k" offensive?

[onejayhawk]

This is a short article posted in the news section of AL.com:
The reason I am asking about this is because a person I respect implied that the term was one of terms that was fine for people who are members of the group to say but was offensive when said by people outside the group. I can appreciate this concept because I am black and there are obviously some terms that black people feel that way about. But for this term in particular, I think it is not just a matter of race. I think it might even be offensive for whites to say it, if they aren't members of the group.

I have maintained that I think its up to the group, ethnicity, etc that the term, symbol etc has been used to degrade, oppress, dehumanize etc, to decide whether the thing is offensive. I would like to hear others thoughts.

It is not the N word, but belongs in the same group.

I'm white and I have been called the n word. I have met black RNs. Both are literally inappropriate, but context means a lot. Neither should be used lightly and never regarding another ethnicity.

J

 

[Pangur Bán]

@Valka D'Ur, I didn't see any of your posts. Why am I supposed to have noticed what you said regarding Alberta? Also, I didn't make the map, but you seem to have misunderstood the author's intent.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Yes, Americans will not recognize it as an ethnic group. In my experience, they are most likely to process it as 'class' in an urban setting (ethnic groups and class frequently overlap in urban settings), or regionality elsewhere. But an ethnologist, esp. one from outside America, would define it as an ethnic group. This was my original point, it being unrecognized as an ethnic slur is itself part of how that cultural group are dominated and marginalized.

Whether or not Appalachia is recognized as a separate ethnic group will probably depend upon how one defines 'ethnic group'. I grew up on the East coast and spent over 20 years in NC and lots of time visiting the mountains of western NC and VA. Without a doubt, the people of the region are very different from those living outside of Appalachia. The farmers of the coastal plain and Piedmont that make up much of the "redneck" population in the area are no where near the same as the 'Hillbillies'. I would certainly classify traditional Appalachia as a separate culture.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

@Valka D'Ur, I didn't see any of your posts. Why am I supposed to have noticed what you said regarding Alberta? Also, I didn't make the map, but you seem to have misunderstood the author's intent.

Forgive me for thinking that you might have read other peoples' posts besides the individual with whom you're carrying on an argument.

If the mapmaker's intent was to make people roll their eyes and snicker, he/she succeeded.

 

[Pangur Bán]

@Birdjaguar When I was an undergrad, the Scottish ethnology department ran an honours course (i.e. a course for juniors and seniors) on Appalachia.

Another user here made the point about the redneck / hill billy distinction. Yes, the 'hill billy' is the core mountain man Appalachian, but the point about Greater Appalachian schema is that the hill billy represents a sort of core to a dependent but larger group that has a similar but diluted (or at least less ecologically specific) version of the same culture. The point about redneck or hillbilly being an ethnic slur is that the New Yorker or Seattlite or Californian using these terms (and he/she does use them interchangeably!) to describe, for example, a southern politician's views on guns, is utilizing pre-existing bigotry towards a weaker culture to denigrate that politician and those views. It's not something people are gonna be comfortable hearing, but it is pretty similar in dynamic to using racist terms to denigrate, say, Obamacare. Main difference is that it's acceptable.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Color version:

Black & white version:

This map is just a redo of Nine Nations of North America from 1981.

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebat.../nine-nations-of-north-america-30-years-later

Old people and books used to be the keepers of history. Now it is Google.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Forgive me for thinking that you might have read other peoples' posts besides the individual with whom you're carrying on an argument.

I often do, but in this case I didn't. So why does Alberta matter?

If the mapmaker's intent was to make people roll their eyes and snicker, he/she succeeded.

Your only complaint was that the map had information loss, but it wasn't designed to show all groups in the territory. It was designed to present the author's idea of very loose cultural subregions to North America:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ch-of-the-11-american-nations-do-you-live-in/

 

[_random_]

This story is about 3 ultraconservative county commission members who are likely at least reasonably affluent. It really has nothing to do with income level as it is now commonly used by many. In the South, it is frequently used to describe bigots and racists now - the sort of person who wants to oppress others for their own financial gain and feelings of superiority instead of the other way around.

Not to defend the commission members, but just because the slur doesn't describe everyone it's used against doesn't mean it's not a slur like that. If somebody calls a brash and ignorant white person the n-word, it's still offensive to black people because it's associating negative traits with blackness. If somebody calls a wealthy dimwitted bigot a redneck, it's offensive to poor people because it's associating those traits with poverty. The word doesn't lose its connotations just because it's being applied differently.

Obviously, it's not on the same level, but it's still kind of a crappy thing to say.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I often do, but in this case I didn't. So why does Alberta matter?

First, because this is where I live. There are other CFCOT members from Alberta as well, and yes, we damn well do matter.

Second, because I made the point that the term "redneck" is part of the language and culture here. I also made the point that it's used in a different way than it is in the U.S. Therefore, the U.S. definition of the term is not the only one, and it would be the courteous thing if you would not pretend that it is.

Your only complaint was that the map had information loss, but it wasn't designed to show all groups in the territory. It was designed to present the author's idea of very loose cultural subregions to North America:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ch-of-the-11-american-nations-do-you-live-in/

Hm. So this map was drawn up by some reporter who is obviously clueless about Canada. I make no claims as to how valid or reasonable it may or may not be concerning the U.S., but it's wildly inaccurate as far as much of Canada is concerned.

Why do people say "Left Coast"? Do they also say "Right Coast"? Do schools no longer teach such basics as north, south, east, west, Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Why do people say "Left Coast"? Do they also say "Right Coast"?

No. The people who say "left coast" say it as a pejorative, the same way they call anything they didn't think of themselves "librul." Those who live here generally take it as a compliment since it acknowledges that we are separate from the people who say it, and they know it.

 

[Mise]

The stuff about Appalachian Americans as an ethnic group is pretty interesting. That never really occurred to me, but it makes a lot of sense.

 

[Pangur Bán]

First, because this is where I live. There are other CFCOT members from Alberta as well, and yes, we damn well do matter.

Second, because I made the point that the term "redneck" is part of the language and culture here. I also made the point that it's used in a different way than it is in the U.S. Therefore, the U.S. definition of the term is not the only one, and it would be the courteous thing if you would not pretend that it is.

I don't know what this point has to do with anything I've said.

Hm. So this map was drawn up by some reporter who is obviously clueless about Canada. I make no claims as to how valid or reasonable it may or may not be concerning the U.S., but it's wildly inaccurate as far as much of Canada is concerned.

Why do people say "Left Coast"? Do they also say "Right Coast"? Do schools no longer teach such basics as north, south, east, west, Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic?

Yeah. Most world maps make out that Greenland is the size of Africa, when actually its about the size of Algeria. Such are the problems or representing even basic info on maps! I think this one is a mostly very plausible map, evidently many senior US journalists think so too. Maybe you should email the creator and he might consider your comments.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The stuff about Appalachian Americans as an ethnic group is pretty interesting. That never really occurred to me, but it makes a lot of sense.

Other than using it to describe the region as having a separate and distinct culture in some respects from other regions, I think it is just so much nonsense. And in that case it makes far more sense to simply call it a cultural distinction. I already pointed out the major ethnic groups who inhabit the region. Are Christians in the US an ethnic group? Are midwesterners? Left Coasters? Manhattanites?

Some people try to label them as an ethnic group to try to make a silly case they are being oppressed by others as a group. If you have ever lived there it is simply not true. It is much like anyplace else in the US with some class distinctions based on affluence and lifestyle.

I frequently find it hilarious what misconceptions those from other countries develop about the US, apparently from watching too much TV and no actual experience even visiting here. They seem to be the real victims of propaganda campaigns so commonly used these days because they lack the basis to be able to distinguish them from the facts.

Not to defend the commission members, but just because the slur doesn't describe everyone it's used against doesn't mean it's not a slur like that. If somebody calls a brash and ignorant white person the n-word, it's still offensive to black people because it's associating negative traits with blackness. If somebody calls a wealthy dimwitted bigot a redneck, it's offensive to poor people because it's associating those traits with poverty. The word doesn't lose its connotations just because it's being applied differently.

Obviously, it's not on the same level, but it's still kind of a crappy thing to say.

I completely agree it is a slur. But in no way does it "degrade, oppress and dehumanise".

If someone else is offended by any use of that word other than by themselves, I'd say that is their problem for being overly sensitive. There is only one word in the English language which has legitimately been stricken from white vocabularies but not from blacks by political correctness.

This particular slang is now ironically commonly used in the South to describe those who quite frequently used of the now-banned word in the past, but now only use it when privately talking to their own friends with similar attitudes for the most part.

In this particular case, this black gentleman was referring to the treatment he received by the county commission because he was not white. The county itself wouldn't have even had to pay the expenses. It would have come out of the state budget. Yet they still refused to approve it. If he had muttered this word while exiting and I was sitting in the audience, I probably would have nodded to him. And I would have laughed at the apparent negative reaction from others.

The elimination of inherent racism in the South has come a very long way since my childhood. But it still has a very long way to go. Labeling people as racists and bigots when they discriminate against blacks helps this process along.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I completely agree it is a slur. But in no way does it "degrade, oppress and dehumanise".

If someone else is offended by any use of that word other than by themselves, I'd say that is their problem for being overly sensitive. There is only one word in the English language which has legitimately been stricken from white vocabularies but not from blacks by political correctness.

I am pretty certain that I understand what your overall point is, and I have to say I disagree.

First, I disagree that the term does not degrade the whites it is used to describe, even when it is used among themselves. In fact I would say that when Jeff Foxworthy uses it, it is precisely to degrade, in a humourous, inside-joke way. He identifies with the group, his audience knows this and so they appreciate his self depricating humor as "Hey let's make fun of some of the silly, backwards, wierd etc things 'we' do."

Second, I can not agree with the "there is only one word" thing. Not with the "only one" part or with the concept that only black people should be the beneficiaries of any political correctness consideration or courtesy.

 

[BvBPL]

If someone else is offended by any use of that word other than by themselves, I'd say that is their problem for being overly sensitive.

You don't get to decide what level of offensive other people take.

 

[Mise]

Other than using it to describe the region as having a separate and distinct culture in some respects from other regions, it is just so much nonsense. And in that case it makes far more sense to simply call it a cultural distinction. I already pointed out the major ethnic groups who inhabit the region. Are Christians in the US an ethnic group? Are midwesterners? Left Coasters? Manhattanites?

You would have to ask an ethnographer.

I find it hilarious what misconceptions those from other countries develop about the US, apparently from watching too much TV and no actual experience even visiting here. They seem to be the real victims of propaganda campaigns because they lack the basis to be able to distinguish it from the facts.

Yeah.... there's really no point talking to you, is there.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Other than using it to describe the region as having a separate and distinct culture in some respects from other regions, it is just so much nonsense. And in that case it makes far more sense to simply call it a cultural distinction. I already pointed out the major ethnic groups who inhabit the region. Are Christians in the US an ethnic group? Are midwesterners? Left Coasters?

Some people try to label them as an ethnic group to try to make a silly case they are being oppressed by others as a group.

I find it hilarious what misconceptions those from other countries develop about the US, apparently from watching too much TV and no actual experience even visiting here.

I completely agree it is a slur. But in no way does it "degrade, oppress and dehumanise".

If someone else is offended by any use of that word other than by themselves, I'd say that is their problem for being overly sensitive. There is only one word in the English language which has legitimately been stricken from white vocabularies but not from blacks by political correctness.

This particular slang is now ironically commonly used in the South to describe those who quite frequently used of the now-banned word in the past, but now only use it when privately talking to their own friends with similar attitudes for the most part.

In this particular case, this black gentleman was referring to the treatment he received by the county commission because he was not white. The county itself wouldn't have even had to pay the expenses. It would have come out of the state budget. Yet they still refused to approve it. If he had muttered this word while exiting and I was sitting in the audience, I probably would have nodded to him. And I would have laughed at the apparent negative reaction from others.

The elimination of inherent racism in the South has come a very long way since my childhood. But it still has a very long way to go. Labeling people as racists and bigots when they discriminate against blacks helps this process along.

Your rhetoric on this and your grasp of the argument are so out of line. Almost everything that was said has gone over your head (e.g. you still confuse ancestry with the ethnicity defined above), and you haven't even picked up on basic factual detail (e.g. 'no actual experience even visiting here'). You need to get a grip on reality, your posting is like watching an over-the-hill sumo wrestler performing gymnastics while proclaiming himself as 'the new Nikolai Andrianov'

 

[Sommerswerd]

I'm not sure what you found so startling about what I said.

Answered in a different thread, post #912 so as to avoid derailment

 

[Formaldehyde]

You don't get to decide what level of offensive other people take.

No, but I do get to decide what I think of their judgment of others based on the use of that word to describe others that have no similarity in many cases.

First, I disagree that the term does not degrade the whites it is used to describe, even when it is used among themselves.

I don't use the term to refer to that group at all, neither does most anybody else in the South anymore. The term has a new and entirely different meaning now, much as Valka described it has a similar meaning in Alberta. So it really no longer describes them in the least when used in those contexts. That is unless they too are racists and bigots.

Second, I can not agree with the "there is only one word" thing. Not with the "only one" part or with the concept that only black people should be the beneficiaries of any political correctness consideration or courtesy.

There are a multitude of other words and phrases used to disparage blacks like "welfare queen", "thug", and "blood". The list of dog whistles now used in place of that word is huge. Are we going to ban them all?

 

[Sommerswerd]

I don't use the term to refer to that group at all, neither does most anybody else in the South anymore. The term has a new and entirely different meaning now. So it no longer describes them in the least.

What group? I said "the whites the term is used to describe"... Are you claiming that you don't use the term to describe the whites the term is used to describe, because if you are then who could you possibly be using it to describe? Who else is there?

There are a multitude of other words and phrases used to disparage blacks like "welfare queen" and "thug". The list of dog whistles now used in place of that word is huge. Are you going to ban them all?

You're changing the subject. I am not talking about banning anything. Moreover, no term whatsoever has been "banned."

I was making the very specific points that

1. there is more than one term that people should avoid using
2. there can be slurs against white people that should be avoided as well