I Hate Non-Words

Beware the jabberwock, my son,
The claws that bite! The jaws that catch!
Beware the jubjub bird and shun
The frumious bandersnatch.

He took his vorpal blade in hand
Longtime the manxome foe he sought.
So rested he by the tum tum tree
And stood a while in thought.

And as in uffish thought he stood
The jabberwock with eyes aflame
Came wiffling through the tulgi wood
And burbled as it came... -- Lewis Carroll

 

I think you miss the point.
The object is not to spread the kind of hatred that caused the word to be used in the first place; the object is to expose the hatred behind the usage. There simply isn't enough exposure when we soften the words to the extent that no one is offended by their usage. I suspect you already knew that, though.

As far as writing and language skills are concerned, precision won't make up for having nothing of worth to say. Conversely, people who may lack skill frequently have many worthwhile things to say. Shall we neglect those worthwhile things in favor of vapid and worthless writings that are technically proficient? I'm certainly not going to discount a brilliant thought, simply because the author was not learned in the art of writing.

 

So, it's important that the horror be duplicated? That the same level of anger and resentment be incurred with a far greater number of Jews, Gypsies and gay men than the incident managed to offend on its own?

Perhaps we should never speak of the Holocaust again. Let such atrocities be forgotten. Deny that they even occurred.

Foget the horror that the Nazi's perpetrated upon millions of humans. In fact let us never utter or write of them again. Replace that despicable regime with "N-Word."

 

I didn't miss any point. If you read that post you should have clearly seen that the section you've highlighted was a response and that I went on to say that it was off-topic in terms of my original point, which is to question just why shale feels compelled to decry the editor's choice to refrain from saying '******' when it's wholly unnecessary to do so.

Secondly, to what brilliant thought are you referring? I see no evidence of a brilliant thought in the original post - just a highly questionable complaint of '******' being replaced by 'n-word'.

 

If you had time to write that you had strayed from topic, then you also must have had the time to remove that comment, if you didn't mean to go there. You're not allowed to write it and then claim that it has no validity, simply because you said it was off topic - so I felt the need to address it. It *is* your comment, regardless of how far it went from your intended topic, is it not? That you put it out there illustrates how you have missed the point of Shale's post. Fortunately, the validity of what he says is not predicated on your understanding.

My remark about brilliant thoughs expressed by unskilled writers was not directed at anyone in particular, but rather a comment on my notion that wisdom is wisdom, no matter how skilled or unskilled the writer may be.
However, my remark about vapidity being expressed with proficient writing skills was directed. Apparently, you've missed the point again.

 

I believe that words only have as much power as people give them. Word sare only offensive if people make them so...

Take for example- Bitch is ocnsidered a bad word, isn't it? It just means a femail dog, people have given it this offensive and degrading meaning.

I hope you get what I'm trying to say here.

 

Apparently, this codifying words is quite old and goes beyond political correctness.

Where I work we write annual plans for our clients. I noticed on one recently, where our case manager asks a list of questions, such as "Do you want to go to church or temple?" The client responded "Church of God."

Our case manager is very Jewish and wrote it as "Church of G-d." I proof read and type out the final report so I changed it back to the correct name of the congregation, but it brought home the verbal/writing semantics that some go thru to avoid saying or writing certain words.

From About.com

God's name is treated with unusual care in Jewish tradition. The divine name, YHWH (spelled with the Hebrew letters yud, hey, vav, hey) is never pronounced. Traditionally, Jews read the word "Adonai" (often translated as "the Lord") whenever reading God's holiest name in Torah or in prayer. However, "Adonai" is not God's name.

Among some traditional Jews, speaking even the word "Adonai" is avoided outside of worship or study. This "stand-in" for God's name is itself replaced by "Ha-Shem" ("The Name"). The practice also has been extended to other Hebrew words associated with God. For example, the Hebrew word "Elohim," which means "God" (the title, not God's name), is pronounced "Elokim" outside of prayer and study.

In recent years, some Jews have carried the practice even further by abstaining from writing the English word "God" and substituting the spelling, "G-d" or "Gd." However, there is no prohibition in Jewish law from writing "God" in any language other than Hebrew.

 

Here's a perspective from one of my favorite shows. Please take the time and watch the whole 22 minutes.
http://my.spill.com/video/947994:Video:109511
Peace Out,
Rev J

 

Thanx for the study in absurdity. I really like Boondocks. Didn't know it was a TV show. The Herald quit running the comic strip some time ago.

 

All kinds of efforts being made to misdirect the topic of this thread.

Whatever, if you're all comfy seeing and hearing the word used in the media, go ahead and encourage it. Forget that 'black' people are hurt, angered amd resentful of it. Forget what a 9-year-old, when gathering news items for a current events assignment, feels when seeing the word spelled out in a public newspaper. The important thing is that you get to see it rather than be annoyed by seeing a more considerate alternative.

And by all means, go ahead and write a diatribe about how you are being robbed of the opportunity to see it printed in newspapers nowadays and how lamentable that is.

 

Methinks you have a larger agenda here than my original complaint against timid editors euphemizing actual words with code-words, which everyone knows. Unless, of course there are more words for one code, such as F-word and N-word (Yeah, we Nudists have used that).

Either you are black and have some personal trauma associated with the word "******" to the point of not even being able to see it in print outside of, or as a demonstration of its hateful context, or you are one of those white liberals with some sort of "black-guilt complex."

I have seen 9-year-old black boys deal with seeing and even hearing "******" used around them. My grandsons are based in the reality of the world - and while we will not let some bigot get away with calling them a ****** in hatred, the word itself used in conversation or historical context does not bother them.

And, all the black people I know personally are not traumatized by seeing the word "******" written in any context. In fact many of them do use it in conversation just as many gay men use the word "faggot" in jest. They and we own those words now and while white ppl can't call black ppl ****** without ensuing conflict, or str8 ppl can't call gay men faggot (unless they have some really close relationship), that only shows the words themselves change context with the intent of their utterance.

Ironically, 30 years ago when I was playing father to an 11-year-old black boy in New Orleans, I had to admonish him for using the word "******" in conversation. I told him I found it demeaning to black ppl. But, it actually is a black cultural staple. I guess I was trying to get him to realize that his black colloquialism was not accepted in all social situations.

So, my complaint is not acceptance of using "******" but to the silly games we play to avoid using it. It's an old Hippie philosophy called "Tell-it-like-it-is."

 

This thread has taken a few off-topic turns as it evolves, so let me add another dimension to it.

FEMALE CIRCUMCISION

That is a word I see in print and other news media and it is a lie, a euphemism of the more drastic term FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.

Actually, regular guy circumcision comes under that definition of male genital mutilation but it is correctly named because it describes cutting around the prepuce of the penis.

"Female circumcision" is not a cutting around of the clitoral hood, but is in fact a clitoridectomy, or the removal of the clitoris. In males it would be analogous to a penectomy, or removal of the penis.

So, every time the media refer to "female circumcision" the full impact of the mutilation to the girl is not seen. People relate it to the less damaging male circumcision. And, whenever I have seen it used I have contacted the authors and editors to complain. Some have told me that is the common usage (probably since the euphemistic 19th Century) and I tell them it is still a misnomer.

In 1995, Ellen Goodman did a column on the barbaric religious practice from Africa and some parts of the Middle and Far East. She correctly called it female genital mutilation and even made reference to "...so called 'circumcisions'..."

Again, words have weight, whether written or spoken. By incorrectly calling female genital mutilation "circumcision" it removes the brutality and life altering reality of what is being done to these girls. That is why we should strive to tell it like it is.

 

I'd like to expand on the concept of sanitizing language a little bit then get back to the task at hand.

Have you notice how words got changed during the recent Gulf War. The word Mercenary has been replaced with "contractor". To the average American that nice man who drinks alot of beer and remodeled their bathroom is a "contractor". We do not "torture" detainees since that is against international law we "interrogate" them. "Interrogation" to the average American is something that the police do to criminals. We no longer "Dry Drown" suspected terrorists that sounds like torture. We "waterboard" them. "Waterboarding" sounds like a sport done behind a boat.

So in the newspaper it says, "Contracter's interrogated detainees by waterboarding them." It almost sounds pleasant. That nice guy Joe who remodeled our bathroom got some detainees to talk by taking them up to the lake on his boat.

The actual translation of that sentance is "Mercenaries tortured detainees by dry drowning them." Doesn't sound nearly as pleasant.

I'd honestly like to see society reach a point where we realise it isn't the word it is the intent. There is a big difference between Tom Metzger saying, "All niggers are stupid and deserve to die." And John Witherspoon and Regina King having this exchange on Boondocks: "We never use the word ****** in this house." "Grandad you said it 47 times yesterday. I counted."

I'd like to see a day when the word loses it's sting. Where to quote Lenny Bruce "You can't make a 6 year old cry by calling him a ******." I don't believe that we'll see that in our lifetimes. As a matter of fact we can't even start to move toward that if we can't even say the word.

I have a Mulatto step cousin. He was brought up in predominantly white middle class America. It wasn't until his family moved into a black neighborhood when he was 10 that he was first called a ******. It was by a black kid not a stupid white kid.

If the reporter in the original post who used the un-codefied "******" in the original post was white would it be OK. I somehow doubt it. To me racism is based on fear. People are racist because they are afraid of another race. People are afraid to say ****** because they are afraid of how that other race might react. It continues that us and them mentality that prevents a true open dialogue from happening.

Peace Out,
Rev J

 

Racism may very well exist because of fear. I've postulated as much myself in thought and conversation.

The N word was invented by 'white' people, not by the people it was directed against. For hundreds of years it was used in the most derogatory, hateful sense imaginable. It not only represents the culture of regarding the African race as unequal, it actually was used to connote that that race was less than human. It was used in conjunction with enslavement, lynchings, immolations, rape and discrimination in every aspect of life - education, work, housing, even where one could stand or sit, eat or drink and to whom they could speak.

'Blacks' hate the word and what it represents to them when spoken by 'whites'. Don't believe me? Go to the South Bronx and walk around saying the word audibly. No need to holler. Just say it several times in a normal speaking voice. I dare you.

Throughout history there have been many words that have fallen into disuse, even to the point of virtually disappearing. I think it will be a long time yet before this word is gone from use but, for a start, it has absolutely no business being used by our public institutions. This is particularly true when a less offensive alternative is available - the non-word that shale hates. You think that if some asshole puts '******' on a sign and stands in front of a building that the media should repeat it. That plays rght into the asshole's agenda and moves us backward from where we're trying to get to.

I'm not black. I'm not traumatized.

I just know when someone is moved to complain about 'non-words' because of the incident that you referenced that it's asinine. One of the most poorly thought-out posts I've seen.

 

Well since you have moved to infer that I am asinine, then I feel free to say that you are obtuse, making any further discussion with you on this matter quite pointless.

However, case in point about ambiguous language, you proved why it is best to use real words instead of codewords:

I thought the word ****** was invented by white ppl.

Your first sentence here is unclear in its meaning because you could not write the correct word to which you were refering.

 

oooh, did'ja get me?

Actually, no. If I had written 'N-word was invented...etc' you might have spotted an error in my composition. But what I wrote was 'The N-word was invented...etc' which is proper.

Though you may not be as literary as you imagine, I'm sure you could find many mistakes in my posts, grammatically and compositionally speaking. But I'm not a professional writer so why bother? And you're right about me being obtuse. I've thought so myself at times, just not in this thread.

I am glad though that you've decided to stop conversing with me in the thread and I've said all (more, really) that I wanted to say.

 

I posted this in the Movie forum, but I think it works in this thread as well.

Kick Ass is a sort of vulgar name, but it is an R-rated movie and ass has been the synonymous slang for butt long enuf now that almost everyone is used to it.

Technically, ass is not a bad word in itself as long as we have burros, donkeys and Jenny & Jack.

In fact, all the local papers, even the stodgy Miami Herald ran the ads and the name as written. I noticed it of course. Made a mental note that we had become that cosmopolitan that a word familiar to 6-year-olds could actually be printed in a family newspaper.

So it was with some amusement when I saw the marquee at the Regal Cinema on Lincoln Road, Miami Beach.



Now consider that this is the movie poster hanging in the theater's lobby:




I was curious, thinking maybe their computerized system had some kind of obscenity filter like certain online sites. You know the places where you would be forced to write Kick A$$.

Today I finally ran down a manager at the theater and asked why the cryptic spelling with asterisks. He admitted that it was the theater's decision, that they thought it was more proper. I mentioned the poster in the lobby and he said that was a different company's responsibility and not the theater's. I told him it looks stupid and prudish, especially with the poster in the lobby and all the ads that have been published. I think he agreed but he's a junior manager that was accessible to the public, not the grey suit guys who are out of touch and making silly decisions.

 

^ ahaha, good one.

People don't seem to realize when they defend censorship for this or that reason, they are defending censorship.

 

I would say that obtuse is an accurate description. 'nuff said.

 

The guy who's had nothing worthwhile to add to the discussion had to get a last pointless kick in after shale and I have come to a decision to agree to disagree and move on, ay? Dude, weak.