Shadowed
05-17-09, 04:51 AM
If you’ve ever seen Clerks II, you know what I’m talking about. Randall, one of the characters, believes that the term ‘porch monkey’ signifies anyone who is lazy, rather than simply black people. As such, when he finds out his belief is mistaken he attempts to take back the term to his desired meaning. While some may be surprised to find wisdom in a juvenile comedy, that particular subplot has very specific real-world implications; it is something that should be done everywhere.
To put it simply, a word is a word is a word. It is an arrayed collection of letters intended to describe something that requires description. There is nothing inherent in a word that makes it ‘bad’ or offensive; many words have multiple meanings, further complicating the scenario when an arbitrary belief is placed upon the word. Therefore, logic dictates that there is nothing inherently negative about any word, regardless of its modern connotations. Yet even in this day of reason and understanding, uttering the wrong word in the wrong place or time may have dire consequences.
As a man of refined taste and utter verbosity, it is apparent that I have run into situations where my desired choice of epithets does not fit the requirements of the scenario as far as political correctness is concerned. Furthermore, as one who is amused by language in and of itself, I have had occasion to alter common phrases by substituting various words; where an ordinary curse is desired, a new level of inventiveness is possible by mixing and matching. One of my personal favorites is the term ‘mother niggering’ – a play on ‘motherfucking’, to which I am certain the majority of readers have had cause to utter at one time or another. Now, this desire of mine runs contrary to the general will and understanding of the population, as a white male using the word ‘nigger’ is outrageous and insulting, and obviously proof that the said individual is racist.
To make myself clear: I do not feel the need or desire to recognize any inherent differences, real or imagined, between myself and any other race, nationality, or skin color. With the exception of Michael Jackson, we did not choose our skin color, and as such, its meaning is purely what we make of it. The blanket term ‘black’ means absolutely nothing, as there are people with dark skin who are akin to Stephen Hawking, while others are reminiscent to 50 Cent. My own lineage is Irish and German; since coming to America in the 1600’s, my ancestors have resided in the Northern provinces, and have had no affiliations with any pro-slavery groups. There is nothing inherent in who I am or where I came from to suggest racism, and nothing in those who fall under the blanket term of ‘black’ to support such claims, regardless of intention.
So then, why is it that using the word ‘nigger’ will get me shot in certain areas? Using the word at my place of work will get me fired, and using it at school will at least result in a number of raised eyebrows. Yet for the same word, a black man may use it at will, without anyone batting an eye. Two distinct cases of the same word being used, likely in the same manner, yet one is acceptable while the other is not. If a word is permissible due to situational concerns, what are the boundaries? Why do they apply to one group yet not the other? Allow me to pontificate on that question.
There is a sociological theory concerning this topic; in short, it suggests that the power of words is in the meaning assigned by society, and that ‘out-groups’ such as the African American culture within the United States can steal the inherent power by circumventing the desired meaning. If the word ‘nigger’ strictly means an ignorant or lazy black person, the black community can negate this pejorative by adopting it as a term of endearment, so that when it is used in anger it does not have the same psychological effect. Therefore, if the usage of this negative term became so widespread as to pervade common speech, absent any insulting components, the result would be to utterly rob the word of its intrinsic pejorative.
This will not happen overnight. To some people, the very fact that a person is using the word at all is offensive; the intended meaning is irrelevant. Yet society has shown a marked ability to alter the perceived meanings of words through nothing but repetition; ‘bad’, ‘sick’, and ‘bomb’ all meant good at one period in time; even completely irrelevant words like ‘tubular’ have been positive, suggesting that there are essentially no boundaries on what a word can mean. Whether the process takes months, years, decades, or generations, repetition becomes the norm; if that norm becomes a word with no inherent negative component, then language benefits. So spread the word, and take back porch monkey; we don’t care for yesterday’s beliefs of hatred and senseless pejoratives. Goddamned motherniggering right!
To put it simply, a word is a word is a word. It is an arrayed collection of letters intended to describe something that requires description. There is nothing inherent in a word that makes it ‘bad’ or offensive; many words have multiple meanings, further complicating the scenario when an arbitrary belief is placed upon the word. Therefore, logic dictates that there is nothing inherently negative about any word, regardless of its modern connotations. Yet even in this day of reason and understanding, uttering the wrong word in the wrong place or time may have dire consequences.
As a man of refined taste and utter verbosity, it is apparent that I have run into situations where my desired choice of epithets does not fit the requirements of the scenario as far as political correctness is concerned. Furthermore, as one who is amused by language in and of itself, I have had occasion to alter common phrases by substituting various words; where an ordinary curse is desired, a new level of inventiveness is possible by mixing and matching. One of my personal favorites is the term ‘mother niggering’ – a play on ‘motherfucking’, to which I am certain the majority of readers have had cause to utter at one time or another. Now, this desire of mine runs contrary to the general will and understanding of the population, as a white male using the word ‘nigger’ is outrageous and insulting, and obviously proof that the said individual is racist.
To make myself clear: I do not feel the need or desire to recognize any inherent differences, real or imagined, between myself and any other race, nationality, or skin color. With the exception of Michael Jackson, we did not choose our skin color, and as such, its meaning is purely what we make of it. The blanket term ‘black’ means absolutely nothing, as there are people with dark skin who are akin to Stephen Hawking, while others are reminiscent to 50 Cent. My own lineage is Irish and German; since coming to America in the 1600’s, my ancestors have resided in the Northern provinces, and have had no affiliations with any pro-slavery groups. There is nothing inherent in who I am or where I came from to suggest racism, and nothing in those who fall under the blanket term of ‘black’ to support such claims, regardless of intention.
So then, why is it that using the word ‘nigger’ will get me shot in certain areas? Using the word at my place of work will get me fired, and using it at school will at least result in a number of raised eyebrows. Yet for the same word, a black man may use it at will, without anyone batting an eye. Two distinct cases of the same word being used, likely in the same manner, yet one is acceptable while the other is not. If a word is permissible due to situational concerns, what are the boundaries? Why do they apply to one group yet not the other? Allow me to pontificate on that question.
There is a sociological theory concerning this topic; in short, it suggests that the power of words is in the meaning assigned by society, and that ‘out-groups’ such as the African American culture within the United States can steal the inherent power by circumventing the desired meaning. If the word ‘nigger’ strictly means an ignorant or lazy black person, the black community can negate this pejorative by adopting it as a term of endearment, so that when it is used in anger it does not have the same psychological effect. Therefore, if the usage of this negative term became so widespread as to pervade common speech, absent any insulting components, the result would be to utterly rob the word of its intrinsic pejorative.
This will not happen overnight. To some people, the very fact that a person is using the word at all is offensive; the intended meaning is irrelevant. Yet society has shown a marked ability to alter the perceived meanings of words through nothing but repetition; ‘bad’, ‘sick’, and ‘bomb’ all meant good at one period in time; even completely irrelevant words like ‘tubular’ have been positive, suggesting that there are essentially no boundaries on what a word can mean. Whether the process takes months, years, decades, or generations, repetition becomes the norm; if that norm becomes a word with no inherent negative component, then language benefits. So spread the word, and take back porch monkey; we don’t care for yesterday’s beliefs of hatred and senseless pejoratives. Goddamned motherniggering right!