Okay, I'm lost. What's Whoopi want to have happen? She seemed to totally contradict herself at the end.
I know. I couldn't stomach getting into all of that. It was exactly the same way with my friend that called me a racist. The reasoning is so difficult to get a handle on and right when you think you understand, they switch it all around.
Pretty pathetic debate if you ask me.
That wasn't a debate that's why. The first rule of debate is to define your terms, they were doomed from the start. Hasselback found out too late that what she was under the impression that the n-word was derogatory no matter who used it, but to Whoopi it's only negative if a white person uses it. Blacks use it among themselves a term of "endearment." I'd like to know if Obama thinks the same way.
Actually Whoopi is definitely correct. My roommate in college was black and she and her black friends used it all the time (yes, as a positive) with each other. I do not think that they believed in using it publicaly or as an attack against another black person...My understanding is that it was used in a way to take back control of the word.
And, no, it would not have been (and is not) ok for me (as a white person) to use it.
I don't see a problem with this as the connotations are completely different. I am sure that I am not explaining it well, as I was not raised in a black family (and yes, I am sure that there are many black families in which is NOT ok to use it). But I do know that the uses are completely different.
Then by all means if that is the case then someone needs to tell people like Elizabeth and myself. And someone needs to tell the whole American public so that we aren't confused about this issue. I'm right where Ms. Hasselbeck is and that's what I'd teach my kids. But that is what PC talk will do to you.
I had a similar experience to Stephanie. In college, my black roommates and their friends would use the word to playfully insult each other, but I did not hear them use the word seriously.
Oh, I know exactly what she's talking about, in general. I don't live in a closet. 
That doesn't mean I agree with it (see below) but what I was talking about was at the end of the clip -- Whoopi contradicts herself, because she seems to be saying what she told the other lady wasn't right. It was bizarre.
Anyway, sure, people can playfully "insult" each other, depending on the people and the situation and so forth. People do that all the time.
But this is more than that, it's a weird badge to wear just to make sure to drive a wedge between people, and *that* is why I don't agree with her. It's a shield that forces a distance to everyone of a certain group, not just those who would seek to hurt you, but those who would be your friend as well. And that's why Elisabeth is crying -- Whoopi is basically saying to her, that no matter how good a friend she is, she can never be a close friend because she is white. (And same for her daughter).
It's a symbol, and it's a bad one.
Silvermine hit it on the head. This is what I was trying to say to DH last night. How can we "ignore color" and be "colorblind" when words, and esp that word, serve to remind us that we are different? How can the African American community expect to be treated equally when they separate themselves.
If you are going to "take back the word so it loses it's meaning", then why would it be a big deal to hear a white person joke the same way? I would laugh is someone called me a "cracker" and DH says "spic" doesn't bother him a bit. But oh no. Can't even think of saying *that* word. If it's just a term of endearment, why can't I use it too? (I don't want to, but like Elizabeth, I'm just saying...) And really, Jackson was not using it as a "term of endearment".
Oh, and I call BS! Whoopi says that her mom was not allowed to vote - huh? Women gained the right to vote in 1920, and um... hello Ms. Goldberg - African-Americans got that right in 1870! So don't try to tell me it was cuz she was black. I can't find anywhere how old Ms. Goldberg's mother is, but her father was born in 1930, and was 19 when their first child was born. I can't imagine he'd have shacked up with someone 30 years older then him, which she would have to be if she wasn't allowed to vote. I call BS!
This is so frustrating, and really, it's this kind of attitude (the "It is different world for us!") that makes it incredibly hard for us to make any progress.
Exactly Silvermine. Whoopi actually said this is "my culture" and when Hasselback tried to say but we're all Americans things deteriorated even further. It's an unnecessary wedge to put between people.
"it's a weird badge to wear just to make sure to drive a wedge between people,"
...and the race hustlers are counting on that wedge, nurturing it, expanding it, pouring salt in the wound. Without it, they no longer exist - much like a union boss.
Too many so-called reverends in the race-hustling business that seem to deny the Bible teaching there is only one race.
Unfortunately, most of their sheep cannot see through "Hymietown" Jesse, his ilk and their repeated hypocrisy.
"How can we "ignore color" and be "colorblind" when words, and esp that word, serve to remind us that we are different? How can the African American community expect to be treated equally when they separate themselves."
So true. That what was so frustrating about talking with my friend that called me a racist. In one of her emails she said to me this,
"Racism is fueled by a demonic spirit. When you are forced to exist in a world that is not like you and your skin prevents you from hiding, you will know what I know. That day is coming
.
The experience will benefit you."
But now we have Whoopi telling us that they want to be different and that its okay to create different rules based on skin color. Maybe that's the world their hoping to create her in America. I've grown up around people of all skin colors my whole life, but I have to honestly say the racial tension seems to be getting a bit more tense lately.
I wonder how long it will be before someone says that if you don't vote for Obama it's because you're afraid of a black man for President.
Oh My Goodness. Thank you for posting this. Very informative. I wonder if there is somewhere we can email Elizabeth and give her a little encouragement. She really takes a beating and even Barabra seemed to want her to be quiet.
Spunky - I've already heard it said. Sadly. And it's not that I don't want a "black man" as president. It's that I don't want that man as president. His views and platforms scare me. If Micheal Steele ran for President, and made it through the nominations - I'd vote for him. If Condi Rice ran, I'd vote for her! It's not about skin color or gender. It's about who can best lead this country.
It's never a "debate" with Goldberg. It is nothing more than a convenient double standard. "We use it the way we want to use it". " We live in two different worlds, this is the way it is Elizabeth." Their world is not "balanced" & it is doubtful to ever be when attitudes such as this are acceptable. Pardon me, Ms.Goldberg what are the "huge problems that still affect us" ????
Excuses, excuses, excuses. Those who "claim" to be the most tolerant are the most intolerant.
It is simply nice manners not to use "bad" words and it is something that is(or should be)taught from an early age. Sorry, I don't buy the excuse that one group can use it and another can't. One group "owns" it and another does not. Excuses, excuses, excuses.
Pathetic when that we don't know the difference.
Pathetic to see these folks given a daily platform to continue spew this divisive attitude.
Pathetic to see this as national news.
Refreshing to see Joy with nothing to say....
Anyone who really wants to figure this out might read Eric and Spunky's comments about how some folks keep the conflict going even when a word obviously has different meanings to different people, and then reflect back on the destructive, divisive arguments over who is a real homeschooler and who gets to use the words "homeschooling" and "home education."
And how it's always wrong for the majority to use that word in any way at all -- it belongs to us in the minority and WE are the only ones who get to use it or say what it does (or doesn't) mean. . .
Oh, and I call BS! Whoopi says that her mom was not allowed to vote - huh? Women gained the right to vote in 1920, and um... hello Ms. Goldberg - African-Americans got that right in 1870! So don't try to tell me it was cuz she was black. I can't find anywhere how old Ms. Goldberg's mother is, but her father was born in 1930, and was 19 when their first child was born. I can't imagine he'd have shacked up with someone 30 years older then him, which she would have to be if she wasn't allowed to vote. I call BS!
I guess the Voting Rights Act of 1964 was redundant then.
Yes, the meanings of words change depending on who says them: when I use the word 'I' it means something different than when you use it. Likewise the N-word whose meaning varies depending on who uses it: in the mouth of a white person it is almost always a vicious slur, not so much in the mouth of a black person.
Why does the meaning vary from person to person? Because the meanings of words in general are at least partly made by the way they were used in the past: the N-word went from being a relatively obscure Latin word to being an explosive slur because of the way it was used. We all know the history by which the word came to be such a vicious slur. In using it, one invokes the weight of that history. Its use by black people does not have the same meaning as its use by white people because they have a different relation to that history. (This should be easy to see: 'mad' has a different meanings in contemporary UK English than it does in US English precisely because the users have different histories.) FWIW, I think it shouldn't be used at all, since even black people can and do use it in a derogatory way. But it's pretty clear that it has a different meaning for different people.
The N-word isn't a special case. Kaiser Wilhelm called General French's British Expeditionary Force a 'contemptible little army.' General French's men's reclamation of the term took so well that to this day the battalions which served in the BEF call themselves 'The Old Contemptibles.' When the Kaiser (or a German) said it, it was a crude slur; when the British soldiers used it, it wasn't.
(Oh, and I feel for Hasselbeck, she was doing her best in a difficult situation, which wasn't helped by Whoopi's not-very-clear explanation.)
I can understand that words have different meanings at different times. But consider the commissioner in Dallas who took offense when his fellow commissioner used the term "black hole" to define the budget. That's a commonly accepted term in our society. But now we can't use it because of the reference to "black?" That's just ridiculous.
Many words have different meanings to different people. I read a lot of old literature to my children. The word gay used to mean simply a happy person. I had to explain at some point that this would no longer be the best choice to describe a happy person today because of its ambiguous meaning. The n-word had a derogatory connotation for all who used it. The blacks have now made it both positive and negative depending on who says it. And they seem to be the only ones to determine when it is positive and when it is negative and it's largely based on race. The very distinction they at one time wanted to avoid.
I did not take it that way at all. It has nothing to do with being friends or respecting each other. It is just that no matter how much she says that she understands, Elizabeth does NOT know what it was/is like being black...not because there is anything wrong with her, just that she did not grow up with the same issues, so her understanding and perceptions are not going to be the same.
As someone who is white, I don't take offense to that as it is the truth. I certainly do not truly understand (having never experienced it), but that does not mean that I can't empathize or be friends. It does not mean that I am racist or part of the problem, it just means that I have not walked in their shoes and I truly do not and can not know what it is like to grow up black.
Personally I don't think that the goal should be "color blindness". It should be color acceptance, with all the differences that entails. We are not all the same and that is a good thing!
As far as Whoopi's mom being able to vote...just because they had the right, did not mean that they could. Jim Crow anyone? I am currently re-reading To Kill a Mockingbird which I am pretty sure was set during Whoopi's mother's lifetime. Things definitely were not "equal" for blacks even up through the 1960s and beyond when the Civil Rights Act was passed. And that has been within my lifetime.
As a white person, the n-word debate is a no-brainer. I don't use it and I teach my kids not to use it. The fact that some blacks use it within their community does not bother me at all and it does not change how I explain it to my kids. It is not my place to tell them how to use it. I do feel that keeping it's use out of the public sphere is pretty much agreed upon. I don't have to completely understand it to accept it (nor can I since I have not walked in their shoes).
Point taken. Honestly, I forgot about that, thanks for reminding me.
But, yes. The voting act of '65 was redundant. Needed, very much needed, but redundant. They had the rights. Those impedeing those rights were in violation of the law, including the Supreme Court, who was upholding the State's laws. Thing is, it wasn't just blacks that had trouble with voting laws. Read the article. Poor whites were also disenfranchised - not all, but "many." If we enforce the laws we have instead of creating new ones...
It's like gun control. Why do we think that by creating yet another law, we will solve the problem? Are the criminals going to sit back and say, "Oh, well, I was all for breaking those other 20 gun laws, but now that there are 21, I'll lay down my guns and stop." No. It's not until the law is enforced, until the Government puts some muscle behind it that it means anything more then the paper its written on.
The Voting Rights Act didn't give anyone a "federal right to vote". It just re-iterated the amendments that said discrimination wasn't allowed. It wasn't the Act itself, it was the enforcement of the Act that fixed things.
Brown Vs Board of Education was in 1954. It wasn't until 1957 that it was enforced in Alabama. Laws don't mean much until they are enforced.
Back to the topic though - It's a powerful word. One I don't use. One I don't want to use. But you can't tell me that you are "taking back the word so it loses it's meaning", then say that it still means something when a white person says it. If it's lost it's meaning, it's lost it's meaning. You can't tell me it has lost any meaning when a white person can't even say a word that sounds similar (see the case of David Howard, DC Mayor Staffer).
Yes. The word has power. I don't know what it's like to be black, and never will. Thank the good Lord for people like Martin Luther King, and Susan B. Anthony, and Sojourner Truth who stood up and fought for the voting rights we hold so dear.
I agree with Stephanie, and also it can get even more complicated. Sometimes it is offensive NOT to use that word, to insist on purging it artificially and absolutely from the sincerest of motives, which I think comes closer to what EH apparently doesn't quite have the life experience or education (yet) to understand and articulate.
Some homeschooler blog examples with comments:
"Ignorance Makes the N-Word Even Scarier Unspoken"
"Ancient History Lessons for Homeshcool Hegemonists"
"How the Oscars Offended Me Today"
Elisabeth doesn't know what it's like to be black and Whoopi doesn't know what it's like to be white. No one knows what it is like to live in another person's skin whatever color it is.
My heritage own heritage is marked by bigotry against my paternal grandfather. He was a Ukranian immigrant that arrived here at 17 (by himself) to start a life away from the tyranny that was destined to be his life if he remained in soon to be Russia. He was mocked in the city where he settled because His accent was thick, his english poor, and his country of origin different. But he married and took a job on the auto line. The ridicule was so strong that when my grandmother gave birth to my father she translated his Russian surname to a Polish one with an "ski" ending with the hopes that her son (my dad) would not grow up to know the same ridicule. They were not wealthy and my father was denied many privileges given to others in his town. But he managed to provide for his family without bitterness always believing that despite its fautlts America was the best place on earth. He inspired my dad, who in turn instilled in me, that all men are equal and must be treated with dignity and respect - no matter the color or country.
My own home was completely vandalized with racial and religious slurs. But the police wouldn't prosecute because we were white Christians.
So Stephanie, you're right we can't know Whoopi's experience, but that doesn't mean that a white person doesn't know what it's like to be hated but choose to love instead.
But people like my friend seem to be saying something totally different. They are saying accept that the way I see it is the right perspective and that your perspective is flawed because your not me and will never know what it is like to be me.
The truth is that both perpsectives might contain a bit of truth and are possibly a bit flawed. Acceptance means being able to receive the truth when it is spoken no matter what color skin delivers the message and overlooking the imperfection.
"when you think you understand, they switch it all around."
Who do you mean by "they?" do you mean to tell me you honestly think MOST black people use the "n" word? So, you hear a few people saying it, you seem to think of "black people" as a whole using it. NO, most don't. Most find it downright awful. That word to me is so terrible. Just hearing it is enough to remind me of lynching and beatings, human beings being bred like cattle. NO I don't use it. I don't no many that do. They tend to be youth that tend to listen to degrading rap music in general. When you say "they" are you somehow insinuating that blacks are getting together trying to stump, divide and separate ourselves from whites?
"it's this kind of attitude (the "It is different world for us!") that makes it incredibly hard for us to make any progress."
I hope you are referring to the use of the "n" word and not referring to the fact that there is definite difference to the way blacks are treated in this country. I have had (on numerous situations, had whites argue that "racism" is a made up excuse that doesn't exist. These are the same people that will go on to tell a story of something awful happening and always end it with "and they were BLAAAACK" Black spoken with a repugnant guttural throat sound to convey the atrocity of whatever heinous incident occurred. Truthfully, How would you know? If blacks are discriminated against, how would you know unless you, yourself was black? Obviously you wouldn't see it if it wasn't directed to you specifically. Alida
Alida
Alida asked "Who do you mean by "they?" do you mean to tell me you honestly think MOST black people use the "n" word? "
Not at all. In fact it wasn't even in reference to the N-word. I was referring to my friend (see link in original post) and Whoopi Goldberg when I used the pronoung "they." Whoopi (and my friend) seemed to contradict their own words because words can switch meanings even during the same discussion. Sorry for the any confusion if a reader didn't follow to read that link it might be a little confusing. Comment boxes are great but can be ambiguous at times, I appreciate your note asking for clarification.
No one is arguing that racism doesn't exist. I know racists and it disgusts me. But not everything that is labeled racism, actually is racism.
I was sent a video by black comedian Chris Rock and the way he talked about some black "n's" made me disgusted yet the audience (mostly black) was laughing hysterically. I'm glad blacks can laugh at their own, but when a comedien tells you it "almost wants to make you join the KKK" it is something so much more. As Chris Rock said, racism exists black and white. I'd link to the video but it contained some much profanity that I didn't feel it was appropriate here but it is on You Tube.
Alida,
Respectfully, Whoopie was making the "us/them" distinction pretty clearly in her rant. That's what is being discussed here.
You lump whites together in your comment in the same way you react to blacks being lumped together. And that makes it hard to know what to say in response.
Many of us who are white feel like we're assumed to be racist. The reality is that many of us would like to be humans, not white/black. But according to Whoopie, white people don't have a right to say that because we just don't understand.
Doesn't it go both ways?
I actually was watching the show and turned the channel as Elizabeth was trying to force her idea of how it should be and was way too over emotional.
Whoopi tried to explain it from her perspective but EH was not willing to listen.
Personally, I remember my father explaining to me that there were things you did not say. I was taught not to call a black child "boy". This was because of the years of being called that in a derogatory way.
As a little girl, I was able to understand this.
I don't think it is my business what black people call one another.
It is my business to teach my children to respect and love others and to speak kind words.
Jesse Jackson is a hypocrite tho. He is the one who wanted the word buried...and then he uses it.
Not cool.
When someone is not "allowed" to use a certain word or express certain ideas because of the color of their skin, isn't this racism?
A few months ago, I could might have thought Elisabeth was too emotional about it as well. But now, I'm not so sure. This is an emotional issue because what Whoopi was basically saying is that we live in two separate worlds even though we share the same space.
"GOLDBERG: We do live in different worlds. Im sorry. Im sorry its the way it is Elisabeth. This is the way it is. This is how I grew up. My mother could not go and vote in the United States of America, the place of her birth. We, go- wait, wait."
Perhaps she grew up in a world that was separate, but is it still that way for her now? Has Whoopi moved forward in her own understanding that not everyone thinks negatively about a black person?
Steve makes the point very well, that we're assumed to be racist simply because we're white. That's the problem I encountered with my friend. She said I was a racist, but there was no reason given for why she believed this to be true. When I asked my friend how she discerns the difference between rudeness and racism she did not answer. Yet, she "knew" from our first meeting that we were racists. It was true because she said it was true. Period. Case closed. Her final response was "pray and God will reveal the true condition of your heart to you."
But yet, if I said to her that she might actually be making a racial stereotype because she decided I was a racist on our first meeting, I'm sure that would have met with cries of I am not stereotyping you based on your skin color. But yet, without any evidence of actions to show why she believes is true, that is the only logical conclusion.
" When someone is not "allowed" to use a certain word or express certain ideas because of the color of their skin, isn't this racism?"
That's the exact point I was trying to make earlier, only you said it much more succinctly. Thanks.
And the point that Elisabeth Hasselbeck was trying to make was that what was once perhap a private term of endearment among blacks is creeping into pop culture and the mainstream vocabulary of many blacks. And that is is just as distasteful for many white people to hear that word as it is many black people.
Despite what Whoopi says, we don't live in separate worlds and what is said by a late night black comedian is heard by white people and black people. And when a black comedian like Chris Rock starts talking down to certain types of blacks and calling them "n's" then it's going to leech its way back into the culture and whites are going to start using it for certain types of blacks too. Whoopi wants to contain it to just blacks, but we're not living back in her Grandma's time. In the interactive world we live in, what is said by someone is heard by all. If blacks don't want white using it negatively, then they better stop using it negatively. Whoopi should have condemned Jesse Jackson's remarks and ended it there.
Back to the point about assuming to be racists,
Obama describing his grandmother in his major speech on race:
...my white grandmother ... a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.
Obama later clarified it, but that only made things worse...
The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity, but that she is a typical white person.
Obama is making a racial stereotype by saying a typical white person has a fear of black men and occassionally utters racial or ethnic stereotype.
Steve,
I am biracial, part white. My mom is white, as is my stepfather and siblings, so NO, i wasn't and don't lump whites together. What I have read on here is that just about everyone on here that posted as if we ALL walk around calling each other the "n" word. Some asking why "they can't use the word themselves. How foolish. The obvious reason because it doesn't glorify God, no matter WHO says it. I don't care who says it, it's disgusting. I am not inclined to do ANYTHING just because a certain group wants to. I am a Believer. God's word says that I shouldn't speak bad language.. Shall I begin griping about why I can't say something that non believers can? Lord, why the double standard? What about the fact that some would feel deeply wounded to hear people saying it? Whoopi doesn't speak for all blacks and just because she is speaking her opinion doesn't make it true to reality. Jesse Jackson doesn't really speak for anybody. Most blacks I know wish he would just step out of the spotlight and go far far away.
My grandmother too -- she was a typical white person, leery of all male strangers and to her, urban black males were strangest. And sometimes she said things that in her small town Blue Ridge Mountain upbringing were polite and even genteel (a nice "nigra" woman is renting that house etc) but nevertheless made me cringe.
That doesn't make me or my grandmother a racist, how silly.
Although, hmmm, I was quite taken aback talking with Favorite Daughter recently, when I referred to something as Oriental and she clucked at me, said I'd embarrass myself if I didn't eliminate that word from my vocabulary and learn to say Asian instead.
(I guess that's what I get for letting her go to NYC and see "Avenue Q" on Broadway with the puppets singing, "Everyone's a Little Bit Racist" including the Oriental Wife Puppet.) 
I use the language wired into my brain from when I was little, in context, learned as the right and polite words. Just like grandma, we must be typical. And then times change around us.
I recommend trying to laugh instead of bristle and point fingers and make everything all about US so much, the better to enjoy what's left of our exponentially obsolescing time on earth -- my grandmother was a great listener, come to think of it, one of her finest and most redeeming qualities and why we all loved being with her, to her very last day (she was 96.)
"If blacks don't want white using it negatively, then they better stop using it negatively."
The problem I have with that is there are folks that are for whatever reason, still going to use it, both white and black. So you are saying whites are justified to use it BECAUSE blacks do? By golly, if blacks can do it we should too?
That is crazy reasoning, not right thinking for a believer to have at all. I am so glad that I don't need to look to the world and unbelievers to determine how I should walk and talk.
Alida, again respectfully, I don't think you're getting the point that's being made here.
I pointed out that the "us/them" distinction was being touted by Whoopie. It was not something that is a product of this thread.
I feel like you're reacting very defensively to my respectful reply to you, and that saddens me.
You continue to make generalized comments about people, even just referring to this thread. Could you cite specific examples of where people here have said that all black people use the "n" word? I have re-read the thread and I don't see that at all here. But Whoopie talked about it as if it was a widespread thing and as if it was a "right" that a certain group of people have.
So when will we know the n-word has been reclaimed by African-Americans? When this is no longer a topic of racism but of history to socially responsible citizens?
Call me what you will. It is only my own self-identification with words that upset me.
The country I came from 13 years ago, didn't have black people there, maybe some that came to college then returned back home. There was never, ever a issue for me with blacks when I came here. Never gave a second thought. Then it came... I was discriminated against because I was white. Couple of times.
I realized that people like Jackson and Sharpton want to keep the racial fights up front, otherwise they will loose their jobs.
If Elizabeth and Whoopi both read through this conversation, wonder if they'd "see" it the same way?
"So you are saying whites are justified to use it BECAUSE blacks do?"
No. I'm saying that blacks who seek to make it a black only word (like Whoopi) are going to have a hard time doing doing so. They worked hard to get it out of common language usage, it should stay buried.
FeFe asked, "So when will we know the n-word has been reclaimed by African-Americans?"
Good question.
I'm a black woman of West Indian descent. I am first generation American. For the life of me, I could NEVER understand how ANY black person could justify using "nigger" (or "niggA"...what the hell ever) as a term of endearment. There is absolutely, positively NOTHING endearing about it!! Elisabeth is dead-on when she says that "the N word" is derogatory no matter what. In my family (yes, we do use the word in my family), when we refer to someone as a nigger, it is intended as a put-down. Black people who have no couth, no decorum, Black people who are ignorant, are the ones that would be referred to as "niggers/niggas." So maybe Whoopi has never met or interacted with niggers, but I have. I see a lot of them on T.V. today, as a matter of fact, masquerading as "artists." I am a social studies teacher, and I vividly recall having to stop a lesson in my high school classroom to explain to my students the history behind the word "nigger/nigga." Taking the N word from the hands of "The White Man" and making it our own?!?? What?? Sorry Whoopi, but the N Word Movement is NOT like the Black Power Movement. I'll be black and proud, but there is no way in hell that I'll ever "a nigger/nigga" and proud.
Judi,
Very well said.
Thank you,
I agree with Amelia, that was a very helpful perspective and well said, Judi. Thanks for taking the time to share it.
Frankly, I don't care who uses the word or for what reason. All I know is that the word of God says, "Let no unwholesome talk come out of your mouths but only what is helpful for building up others according to their needs that it may benefit those who listen." (Eph. 4:29) I guess I have to ask myself, "was this silly debate of any use to anybody? Who did it benefit?" Too many viewers listening to a whole lot of empty words...
Kelly, in a strange way debate was helpful to me. I'm struggling with how to communicate effectively to a person who seems to believe that my skin color alone determines the motive of my heart. A rude or insensitive action on our family's part is because we are racist at heart, not because we were insenstive or careless. But if a black person does the same rude or insensitve action, there is no racism involved because they are both black. I'm not saying white people don't act in racists ways, but not every negative action by a white person to a black is rooted in racism. The benefit of the doubt should be given that they are not a racist.
Whoopi's exchange with Elisabeth showed me that blacks seem willing to excuse behavior in blacks that they wouldn't excuse in whites. In Whoopi's case it was the n-word, in my case it was an action (still unknown) done to her by our family.
[I]n my case it was an action (still unknown) done to her by our family.
Somehow I missed in all that you wrote about this that you didn't even know what it was that was perceived to be racism. I'm so sorry!! 
If she claims to be a follower of Christ and won't even tell you in what way your family offended her, that is so sad. I can't imagine how much that hurts, Spunky, and I'm sorry you have to deal with that.
I think Whoopi is dead on. By taking the word and making it your own, you get rid of it's power. We are currently doing the same thing. We are running a comedy in NYC, "feminazi" (the n-word for women). By taking this word and holding it up to the light for what it really is, we are breaking it down and making it powerless.
If a word is powerless then it wouldn't matter who said it. Clearly, the word still holds power or Jesse Jackson wouldn't have apologized to Obama or the nation.
Redefining a word can reduce its power if the new definition replaces the old definition for all who use it. Clearly, that's not what is happening to the n-word as there seem to be quite a few black people who find it an offensive word no matter who uses it.
Giving someone else the ability to make you angry or offended because they use a certain word gives them control and power. Real power comes when you can hear a word no matter who says it and not get offended. Given how much people get offended over the smallest slight, that's something few people black or white seem to understand these days.
When I was younger, I was teased a lot. I was small, skinny, and smart. A bad combination in junior high. I was frequently picked on. It really bothered me and hard to hear. I frequently went home crying. My dad gave me the best advice a father ever could. He said not to let them control my emotions and ruin my life. He told me to smile at the one who was picking on me and walk away. It didn't work the first time. Nor the second. They kept teasing. But by the third time one of the kids turned to his friend and said, "she's no fun to tease anymore." They wanted a reaction and when they didn't get the attention they wanted, their words lost their power.
It's a simple story but the effect on me was profound. People only have power over you if give it to them.
So Elizabeth has no problem then, she can just relax and let people say what they will, with or without that word!
And nothing Whoopi says should have any power to make her frustrated or sad or offended (nor should anyone mind being called racist?)
Spunky, have you seen the latest news on the supposedly racist janitor, and how would you fold that into your thinking on all this?
Whoopi didn't call her specifically a name. As Hasselbeck said in the transcript, they were having a philospophical discussion over the use of a word in our culture.
Her emotions were not because she was personally offended but because the topic itself can be emotional.
I'm white. My son-in-law is African American. My grandson is beautiful-but I digress...
I understand what Whoopie meant. Whether we like it or not, we all belong to little subcultures, and these little subcultures have their own norms. Having said that, the n word is NOT okay with all black people when used in a casual way by other black people, but for many, it's a much different context than when a white person says it. Even when the white person is known not to be racist. The word just has way way too much baggage when it comes out of a white mouth.
And for the record the word was used at ME when I was a small child and the word has a pretty emotional impact to me when I hear it. An impact that does not exist when the speaker happens to be black. Go figure.
"The word just has way way too much baggage when it comes out of a white mouth."
In other words, the hearers are racists.
Are we back to square one?
"Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self-confidence." -Robert Frost
Be a life-long learner.
Aristotle also reportedly said, "It is the marked of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Touche, Spunky
http://tinyurl.com/675olb
The End of White Flight, WSJ
So what do I do as a parent when we are sitting in Ben's Chili Bowl and my children overhear a group of African-Americans use the n-word?
If anyone uses the f-word or such, I gently remind whoever that children are present. Is this OK? Am I being a good parent or rude? Mostly the people are young and understand, and it reinforces to my children cursing shouldn't be used even outside of parents earshot.
However, when words have a double standard, do I need to execute the lesson then and there that it is OK for people of the same race to call each other racial slurs? But if I teach my children it is a bad word, why must they be subjected to it?
FeFe, you should have been on The View helping Hasselbeck, that's the exact point I think she was trying to make.
This stunned me!
Seriously, you go tell a group of strangers' children what they can say or not say in public?
We may be onto something important then, about identifying our true differences in experience, education philosophy and social behavior. I can't IMAGINE doing that!
It truly is a conundrum - this freedom of expression. Really, no one supports it fully - even libertarians. Everyone is eventually offended, just at different thresholds. Many of our American ideals work well if society is like-minded (i.e., agreeing on what is offensive), otherwise, not so much. So who decides what speech is offensive or unprofitable? If your standard for behavior is our founding documents, then really about anything goes. If you hold to a different standard for religious reasons, you may not necessarily share that same liberty. As a believer, you can appeal to one's conscience regarding their language in a public place. As an American you are free to spew profanity if you choose, but you cannot censor the believer in defense of free speech.
The differences Eric is in how one handles it when they are offended. We've moved past the notion of turning the other cheeck and going to them specifically. Now, every offense is met with the threat of a lawsuit. Sadly, even Christians are playing that game.
Eric, that's ridiculous. Freedom of speech does not mean I have to agree with you. It means you are allowed to say it and not taken off to jail. But I can disagree that it's a bad word, or your ideas are wrong or stupid or whatever. Um, I mean "one's ideas", not your specifically.
In addition, while you are granted freedom of speech, you cannot force me to put your speech on my property, including the newspaper I publish, and so forth. You are not guaranteed your platform of choice.
I support everyone's legal right to say the n-word as much as they want, and to try to tell me if and when I can or cannot use it, and who they think can or can't without being fined, cited, arrested, etc.. They can talk about it until they are blue in face. But I can also disagree with them. I can be offended by it.
I don't remember the Bill of Rights giving me the freedom to not be offended. :D
Silvermine -- all Eric said was that social conflict comes from disagreeing about what's offensive, and then what to do about it. Seems this whole conversation (from tv to here) evidence to that is evidence to that effect!
And then he says "believers" may adopt personal standards of behavior over and above our founding "legal" ideals.
I can't be sure which ideal is behind FeFe's attempt to impose White Flight speech standards on everyone in her local Chili Bowl, probably she can't clearly sort it out herself. But the important issue is recognizing that such social conflict and culture clash surrounds us all, whether our kids go to school or not. It's taken a thousand different forms in my generation, and it will take a thousand more in the next.
So what we all need to "teach our children" is much more than a certain censored vocabulary. It's how to understand and HANDLE such culture clash, if they're to live free and pursue happiness as future citizens of the modern world. But scolding each other as if our own social standards rule everyone, is nothing more than a recipe for the culture clash between Whoopi and Elisabeth. . .
http://cosmicvariance.com/2008/0...metry-breaking/
How a physicist discussed it. Well, I enjoyed it anyway.
Nance
JJ, you don't strike me as someone with no imagination but let me assist. A group of kids in the next booth speaking, "That f***ing b****," "Check out her t**s," "N-word, I'm getting h***," etc. One need not get up but simply lean over and remind them children are present. If they get it, cool. If not, sometimes they move or ask that we do. Fine. I sit where the management or staff direct us but I am more than willing to ask to be moved. However, isn't it part of a civil society to speak to someone who may be giving offense without knowing it before singling them out?
How do you turn the other cheek? Let me speak of a great movie, "Gentleman's Agreement" with the superb Gregory Peck.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gen...man'
s_Agreement
Do I fake laugh at a joke or ignore it when it demeans Jews or say I find it offensive and move on?
And JJ you are right, I find the culture clash over and over and seemingly less equipped to deal with it in the discourse it provides today. Speaking one's mind is the truest form of free speech. What lesson is taught to my children if I only exercise it in private?
In the interest of social symmetry or equal opportunity:
Marketers Find A Sound That Draws A Crowd
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/0...dia/
09adco.html
FeFe, I LOVE that movie!
Here's what my now-in-college unschooled daughter learned from that movie and wrote more than a year ago, about civil rights and tolerance and the names we call each other, and how we hatefully make each other "Other" even while professing to love each other (as Gregory Peck's girlfriend did in that movie) --
"Obama, Superman, the F-Words, and Bigotry"
JJ, that post (your daughter) Rawks!
Hmm... my link to the movie has been changed or I got it wrong.
PROFESSOR FRED LIEBERMAN: Millions of people nowadays are religious only in the vaguest sense. I've often wondered why the Jews among them still go on calling themselves Jews. Do you know, Mr. Green?
PHIL GREEN: No, but I'd like to.
PROFESSOR FRED LIEBERMAN: Because the world still makes it an advantage not to be one. Thus it becomes a matter of pride to go on calling ourselves Jews.
Would you say "Jew" has been re-appropriated and given to the world?
Would you call it pride when you keep something for only your race to speak?
P.S. Let me give a shout out to Dorothy McGuire. And John Garfield is no slouch either.
Thanks FeFe, we're very proud of her (though not because of her race or class, and we know we can't keep her for only our family!)
You might enjoy something I blogged about "Jew" and other human labels including homeschooler: "History of Identity: Our Insecurities and Need to Belong"
And re: black identity words, Favorite Daughter and I watched "Black in America" last night. One theme was how we don't have words and labels polite or not that fit anymore, not even within families much less communities.
One black woman was so overwhelmed by racial confusion causing her two precious little children to be rejected even by some older family members never mind neighbors and strangers, that she now doubts she and her white husband would have married and brought those babies into the world at all. She thought she could handle it but it turned out they never truly understood how dubious cultural identity would hurt them all.
Then a biracial young man said his personal reality was living as only partly accepted in two different worlds, but never fully anywhere. (If he can't fully fit, it makes sense if neither Whoopi nor Elisabeth can cross over to the other.)
Oh, about Whoopi -- we learned last night she was raised by a hardworking nurse-teacher single mom abandoned by her father, and then she was a single black mother on welfare before her acting career, which might help explain what she was trying to explain on the View. The n-word like so many words is about class warfare, not just race, and full of complex, subconscious value judgments, no matter who uses it?
You may say classism, racism and sexism are a matrix of oppression. But are they equivalent and interrelated when you include in-depth discussions of capitalism?
Motivation can be pure, through greed, fear or guilt.
What is the motivation to re-appropriate the n-word and who is oppressed by sole race ownership?
-Need to belong
-Nurture vs. nature
-Born into identity
-Parent vs. state
-Defined by profession
-With age comes wisdom
-Lifestyle
-Cultural identity
-Politically correct
-Professional development for current and future (school) leaders
All of this speaks of character. Using the n-word, no matter who you are, may be more a reflection of courage than character.
Isn't the most unifying homeschooler identity the desire that no government, state or federal, make (more) money off of us?
Susan B. Anthony started her efforts in reform with the abolition of slavery, 1849. Once she realized women could not be effective reformers without the right to vote, she became the noted women's rights and suffragist we teach our children about. She died 14 years, 5 months and 5 days before passage of the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote, 1920.
50 years after she went to her friend, Frederick Douglass, to ask for his support including a woman's right to vote along with black males in the 15th Amendment, 1870. It was not the time for universal suffrage over their momentum, he felt.
2 years later, Anthony was arrested and convicted for voting, while Douglass' bank failed, 1872.
14 years later, the National Woman Suffrage Association annual convention praises Wyoming as the first state to give women the vote, while Douglass marries his second wife, a white woman, 1884.
FeFe asks:
"Isn't the most unifying homeschooler identity the desire that no government, state or federal, make (more) money off of us?"
Another stunner for me -- not once even in my imagination has my family desired this.
Think about it, JJ.
Nope, sorry. Isn't the most unifying homeschooler identity the desire that our children learn and grow in the best environments we can provide?
Yes, that is why we do it but I was relating to your view of what is polarizing in homeschool circles. Secular vs non and the notion of inclusion. In this context, we all agree less is more.
Oh, then I think I understand. The mention of "money" confused me completely!
So are we homeshcoolers of all types unified by the concept of less government is more, and no government of any type is best?
I'd be thrilled to believe this were so, but what I actually see is religious folk governing all over the place! Governing their own lives by strict rules, controlling their own circles with patriarchal hierarchies and exclusionary judgments -- AND trying to govern mine too, me and my family and our marriage and child-bearing and learning options, the books in the marketplace and the movies in the theatres, the candidates on the ballot and the judges on the bench.
Nope. Money is what I was speaking of. There may not be unity regarding the government in general be it state or federal in terms of size or ideology but when they turn to homeschoolers and say, "Show me the money!" don't we collectively say "No thank you?"
The collective cry from districts is more funding. If we are somehow counted in enrollment, they get the per pupil funding. Dept of Eds are getting very creative in new regulations and offers to take hsers down this primrose path. We are like Anwar. A great untapped natural funding resource with a somewhat easy media flash-point bias.
Take district sponsored online education. They get the per pupil cost (national average $9,435) and pay the online company an estimated $600 per pupil. Money in the bank! Toss in special education students at a national average of $18,794. Golden. Not to mention they don't have to provide sped services. Sweet.
More homeschool over-site leads to more department funding. Hence, a larger budget. Money equals power. (NEA alone spent $10 million to lobby last year.)
Need to be a certified teacher (the position of the unions and one fine legal case in CA) or the mandate to have your portfolio reviewed by a teacher, PA, with the national average teacher salary of $47,602 (2004-05 most recent data available), their ranks are increasing. [Raise not based on performance.]
It isn't enough they get our tax dollars anonymously. They want the roll call to increase the teachers to increase the schools to increase and increase because somehow smaller class sizes mean results. Not. Class sizes are 15% smaller than 20 years ago.
* $720 billion (2005) total est annual cost of US public schools. (A 190% increase in 15 years from $249 billion in 1990.)
* 69% (2007) students nationwide performing below proficiency in math.
* 71% (2007) students nationwide performing below proficiency in reading.
* -1% (2007) nationwide improvement in reading proficiency since 1996.
Feed me Seymour!
No thank you.
Though our reasons for resistance may not correspond, they all amount to a refusal at the money grab, no?
Interesting argument to read in light of what I was reading earlier today, FeFe.
It's about exploding, uncontrollable change in all our institutions, everything we share EXCEPT money.
An interesting read but I find it flawed. On the surface it hardly relates to the topic at hand, let alone the initial one these comments generated. But if this is an exercise in mind mapping, let me digress.
Access to instantaneous global communication may unleash the innate, inherent and inalienable capabilities of sociability but this is not the lever in our hands to change the world. Only the lever in a voting booth will suffice. More so in impoverished nations.
Socialization does not equal knowledge, and knowledge is power. What the collective Human Network chooses to do with their knowledge is an exercise of power but it is the individual, the self, that is the agent of change. One may embrace the chaos, choose buzz-saw defiance, or withdraw in defeat, while exercising free speech. But it is our one vote that creates substantive change. Meaning to the madness.
While institutions may distract us with shinny things and double-talk, the slight of hand does not go so unnoticed with access to instantaneous global communication. One is more apt to know when my pocket is being fleeced or my leg is pulled. However, hyperconnectivity leading to hyperempowerment can be another metaphor for culture clash. (And we have come full circle back to The View.) On this scale, one not need a pulpit or dais to pontificate. Case in point, the brouhaha from Obama Nation attacks on Clinton supporters at the DailyKos website or the Hispanic parents vs the white over selling sugary ice cream as a school fundraising tool.
As the author is Australian, I find it interesting the country is turning to a national curriculum. How will they hold the line against chaos, and will the author find Draconian behavior to critique? I find it hard to envision change within a school system, from the top or the bottom, domestic or foreign, without hypermimesis coming into play.
For good or evil, there is no longer an elite in education. Sharing is the threat. From NCLB data to new regulations for homeschoolers in D.C., the hyperempowered will continue to do as they please. Mob rule. Any pretensions to control, or limitation, or the exercise of power have already collapsed into shell-shocked impotence. From homeschoolers to parents, to bloggers, we stand before the red schoolhouse (cross optional) saying, "Physician, heal thyself and embrace the chaos." Let me in. Sounds like the new social order definition of inclusion.
Well, yes to the last for sure:
"For good or evil, there is no longer an elite in education. Sharing is the threat. From NCLB data to new regulations for homeschoolers in D.C., the hyperempowered will continue to do as they please. Mob rule. Any pretensions to control, or limitation, or the exercise of power have already collapsed into shell-shocked impotence."
And I see the same not just in School, and prescriptive Dictionaries-Curriculum-Manners but also Big Business, Church, War, Party and Government Itself.
Commenting by HaloScan
