Jeptha
Posts: 780
Joined: 9/18/2008 From: Portland, Oregon Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SoulPiercer quote:
ORIGINAL: OmegaG that's it-- no matter how PC we get there is not "right" terminology. ...Question: How many blacks, african americans, whichever you prefer, actually heard the Imus "nappy headed ho" comment live? My guess is some well-meaning, overly sensitive white person heard it and complained, getting the ball rolling for Al Sharpton to step in and speak for us po black folk who can't speak for ourselves. Didn't the Rutgers team register a complaint? I'm not sure on that one. I remember thinking that Imus's comment didn't seem that over the top. Offensive, somewhat, perhaps - but that's a whole entertainment genre these days. Another interesting thing was the reaction to the New Yorker magazine cover with the Obamas dressed as terrorists. It was supposed to be a satire of the propaganda put forth from some quarters to try and generate fear and suspicion that Obama might secretly have some allegiance to something that might be in some way anti-american. That was a tricky joke to tell, but I think it wound up being somewhat effective. quote:
I can fill a hundred football stadiums with black folks who wish Jeff Foxworthy would tell a black joke .. Cause damn .. he's run the "you might be a redneck" thing into the ground. He has ridden that pony long and hard! But, hey, you go with what works I guess. Terminology always seems to be in flux. I've been reading some Native American history recently, and it's interesting to see which authors will use the term "Indian" and which will studiously avoid it. Most of the university-based authors avoided it until very recently. Now, though, as some Native Americans have pointed out, anyone born in america is a Native American, and so the word "indian" is occasionally making its way back into the texts. (Also there is precedent with groups like the American Indian Movement using the word.) Just interesting to see how the cycles go.
|