Bill Maher and the n-word

[Ford]

Isn't the idea of there being words that only people with a certain skin color are privileged enough to say, racist by the very definition?

This is one of the only times I agree with you.

The N-word is horribly offensive, and I might be fine with people suffering great consequences for using the word if there wasn't this double standard. But there is this double standard and it's even more offensive.

Again, context is important.

The word is offensive because of the long history of its use as a racial epithet. At some point some among the black community attempted to reclaim the word by not just using it, but using it in a different context.

The old usage was satirized by Mel Brooks:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZrmp9tXGb0[/YOUTUBE]

The sheriff is near!

It would be easy to pick an NWA video to represent the reclamation of the word, but it happened before that:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCFN3RrfaUk[/YOUTUBE]

Petey came along at a transitional period for the N-word, but part of the reason he used it so freely was to normalize it. To take the wind out of the sails of the word. Having Howard Stern in blackface was a nice touch.

Then of course there's Dave Chappelle:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIVh-3TdUIY[/YOUTUBE]



That's a lot of n-words, I know. But the point is that there isn't really a double standard. The transitional period for the word isn't finished yet. White people can use it in certain circumstances but not in others, and that's okay. Maher misjudged the circumstance.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Ironically, I don't think Mel Brooks could make 'Blazing Saddles' today.

 

[NightSky]

There are criticisms one can validly make of Bill Maher, but racism is not one of them. Misjudgment? Yes.

I seem to remember watching a segment in which Bill Maher seemed to defend and even sympathize with the jury's decision in the case of O.J. Simpson to not convict. I very much doubt a racist man would defend that jury.

I don't think Bill Maher should have used the word even in the context he did, but that is because I question his judgment, not whether he is a racist as I don't personally think he is one.

However, Bill Maher, more than many on the liberal side, have reason to know that people in this political climate have heightened sensitivities to words or actions that can be construed as racist or bigoted due to the current presidency having emboldened the real racists and bigots; and he should have minded his language in awareness of that unfortunate reality.

Peace.

 

[marc]

There was a George Carlin bit where he said there is nothing wrong with the word in and of itself. It is the racist asshole using it that you need to watch out for. After all, no one gets offended when Richard Pryor or Eddie Murphy use it.

That said, my opinion is that no one should be using it. Using a slur as a term of endearment, while at the same time denouncing the use of the slur in any context for some people, leads to some rather nonsensical situations. Think of how it looks from the racist's point of view: "Those stupid N's are calling themselves N. At least they know what they are." It is not discouraging the use of the slur, it is giving it some cover. The other side of the problem was actually pointed out in the series 'Dear White People'. In one scene, a white guy was at a party with his black friends, playing games, dancing, having fun. He was singing along with the song that was playing, as was everyone else, when N came up in the song. All of a sudden everyone got upset because a white guy used the N word, even though he was just singing the same song everyone else was singing.

 

[ZiprHead]

When did the left become the censors and the right become the free speech advocates? I'm still confused by that switch. I remember not too long ago when it was the left pushing the boundaries and pushing for free speech. Now the worst of anti-free-speech is on the left.

Who knows who is behind all this alleged outrage?

People are calling and writing to HBO.

Maybe nothing but right wingers.

That's where I suspect most of the "outrage" is coming from. Right-wingers are very pissed off right now about the Fox News shake up over O'Liely being canned and Hannity losing advertisers and blaming it on left wingers (even though most of the women who are the accusers are RW themselves). They've already set their sights on Rachel Maddow and are gunning for her.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Carlin had it right. It is a word; a sound made by the mouth and nothing more. It is the intent and sentiment of the speaker that matters. Even my dog knows this. You can make any word a horrible one of you say it the right way, in the right tone and can't call context.

 

[zorq]

That's a lot of n-words, I know. But the point is that there isn't really a double standard. The transitional period for the word isn't finished yet. White people can use it in certain circumstances but not in others, and that's okay. Maher misjudged the circumstance.

First of all you can't deny a double standard. There are two standards right now no matter how temporary you insist that will be. (So far "temporary" has lasted longer than my entire life span)

Secondly, are you sure it was Mahr who misjudged the circumstances? What if it is the objectors who misjudged the circumstances? How can the word ever get passed its "transitional period" if non racists who happen to be white are never able to use the word in ways that aren't meant to insult?

If there is a conscious effort to deflate the inflamatory use of the word then white people using it in jokes NEEDS to be one of the steps along that path. But at this point the double standard is so codified that moving past it is likely inconcieveable for many.

 

[dismal]

Carlin had it right. It is a word; a sound made by the mouth and nothing more. It is the intent and sentiment of the speaker that matters. Even my dog knows this. You can make any word a horrible one of you say it the right way, in the right tone and can't call context.

But sounds matter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_the_word_"niggardly"

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Carlin had it right. It is a word; a sound made by the mouth and nothing more. It is the intent and sentiment of the speaker that matters. Even my dog knows this. You can make any word a horrible one of you say it the right way, in the right tone and can't call context.

But again, there's the point that you don't have to go out of your way to offend people at every possible opportunity. That kind of person is called an asshole.

 

[braces_for_impact]

I don't understand the "it's just a word" argument. Words do matter. Word choice matters. Word context matters. If they didn't, I doubt there would be so much discussion surrounding free speech and political correctness. There is a balance to be struck between someone's freedom to say something and someone else's freedom to dignity and not being denigrated, I think. Even one's location can change what's considered acceptable or not. Politeness greases the gears of society, and I think we all know that at times people hide behind the concept of free speech in order to express a bigoted position, denigrate another group, or just be an asshole.

There's a line, and that line moves. Sometimes, it's hard to tell where the line is until one has already inadvertently stepped over it. I don't think that setting expectant standards of civil behavior limits freedom all that much, although I do think that people can take the concept too far in order to shut down the conversation. However, in my experience and limited research, I don't think the left really shuts that down as much as people may think it does. I think the extremes are getting undue attention.

 

[starwater]

I was in the presence of a State Employee about 2 years ago that during a discussion on how to proceed in a field situation he used the "N-word". There were no black people around. I found it extremely offensive in the context it was used. I reported him to his supervisor and he was fired immediately. I watched Bill Maher live on Friday night and was shocked that he used the word. I turned to my husband and asked "Did he say what I think he said?" I never have that word in my vocabulary, and was surprised that Bill could make this kind of mistake. He was referring to himself, and in this context I will forgive him, but he should really remove the word from his internal thoughts and vocabulary.

 

[untermensche]

I was in the presence of a State Employee about 2 years ago that during a discussion on how to proceed in a field situation he used the "N-word". There were no black people around. I found it extremely offensive in the context it was used. I reported him to his supervisor and he was fired immediately. I watched Bill Maher live on Friday night and was shocked that he used the word. I turned to my husband and asked "Did he say what I think he said?" I never have that word in my vocabulary, and was surprised that Bill could make this kind of mistake. He was referring to himself, and in this context I will forgive him, but he should really remove the word from his internal thoughts and vocabulary.

It's part of your vocabulary.

You are just like many people. You feel no need to express every word in your vocabulary.

The real question is not what people say trying to be funny. It is how do they they feel.

I am not in the business of judging souls.

I have seen no signs of racism in Maher. He brings black people on his show and treats them the same as anyone else. I have seen Cornel West countless times on his show. I don't see West in too many other places in the corporate media.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I don't understand the "it's just a word" argument. Words do matter. Word choice matters. Word context matters. If they didn't, I doubt there would be so much discussion surrounding free speech and political correctness. There is a balance to be struck between someone's freedom to say something and someone else's freedom to dignity and not being denigrated, I think. Even one's location can change what's considered acceptable or not. Politeness greases the gears of society, and I think we all know that at times people hide behind the concept of free speech in order to express a bigoted position, denigrate another group, or just be an asshole.

There's a line, and that line moves. Sometimes, it's hard to tell where the line is until one has already inadvertently stepped over it. I don't think that setting expectant standards of civil behavior limits freedom all that much, although I do think that people can take the concept too far in order to shut down the conversation. However, in my experience and limited research, I don't think the left really shuts that down as much as people may think it does. I think the extremes are getting undue attention.

It's like saying "if only everyone were nice to each other, there wouldn't be any problems!" No shit, but there are problems.

 

[ronburgundy]

According to ronburgundy, your post is even worse because you used the word "n-word." Agree or disagree?

Disagree. I haven't seen Louis C.K's material on this so I can't speak to his point in deeper context but I have some thoughts. Using the uncensored word unapologetically in contexts that ought be legitimate and unoffensive speaks more to the confidence of the speaker about a theoretical position that this word has legitimate uses. While I agree with this hypothetical speaker, I am torn by the rules of etiquette I was raised with which compel me to avoid causing offence even if that offence may be irrational and unwarranted.

If I have a choice to refer to a concept that I know may be repulsive in the extreme to some of my audience whom I do not want to offend, I WILL seek cover and try to avoid that offence if I can while conveying the concept in a way that does not cause confusion. Why not? It isn't cowardly, it's courtesy.

You aren't avoiding offence by using "N-word". Take the following use: "You're just a stupid, lazy, N-word."
To any remotely reasonable person, that is just as offensive and racist as saying the same thing with the full word, and infinitely more offensive than what Mahr said. Proving that the word itself is not the source of offence, but rather the sentiment being conveyed, which is determined entirely by context and not changed whether the word "nigger" is evoked directly in the speech or indirectly but just as definitively via use of a referent designed to make the word "nigger" automatically triggered in the mind of every listener.

Had Mahr, said "I'm a house N-word." that would warrant no different a reaction. Are there unreasonable people that are currently outraged that would not be had he said that instead? Sure, because being offended is a choice whose only neccessary and sufficient cause is the mind of the listener themselves. Devout theists are offended by any expression of doubt about God's existence, which illustrates that there nothing remotely unethical about saying things that people choose to react offended to and thus nothing preferable about trying to avoid offence. Whether one's actions are unethical depends upon whether the response under the listeners control is a reasonable one.

The reasonableness of the listeners choice to be offended points to another problem, which is that in culture of invented outrage, people are increasingly confusing being offended with being shocked, startled, or having some negative emotions evoked by the speech. They are not remotely the same thing. Offense is a form of feeling attacked and insulted, which when a reasonable reaction hinges entirely upon the actual intent of the speech. Various words that can be and are used as attacking insults, can be used in other ways, and even when those other ways are intended to cause some sense of shock or even discomfort in the audience that does not mean there is anything that conveys an attack or insult. Since both comedy and social/political commentary often use the rhetorical devices of shock and discomfort as rhetorical devices, this difference is critical and the current hypersensitivity to "offense" destructive both to the expression of non-insulting speech and to avoiding watering down what actual reasonable offense is and when causing it should be avoided.

 

[repoman]

I was in the presence of a State Employee about 2 years ago that during a discussion on how to proceed in a field situation he used the "N-word". There were no black people around. I found it extremely offensive in the context it was used. I reported him to his supervisor and he was fired immediately. I watched Bill Maher live on Friday night and was shocked that he used the word. I turned to my husband and asked "Did he say what I think he said?" I never have that word in my vocabulary, and was surprised that Bill could make this kind of mistake. He was referring to himself, and in this context I will forgive him, but he should really remove the word from his internal thoughts and vocabulary.

How did he use it?

Did he say, "I am tired of having to deal with niggers, don't you agree?"

Or did he use the strange phrase "nigger rig it" instead of "jury rig it"?

Good example:



How old was the worker?

I do agree with you in general, and as a person gets older and their brain decays the ability to censor self-talk that leaves your lips decreases. So playing edgy games in your head about racist terms when young will bite you in the ass when you are older.

I am doomed for sure.

 

[abaddon]

I don't understand the "it's just a word" argument. Words do matter....

I've said that argument (though I say "it's just a sound") to emphasize the importance of context. In what context would "It's just a word" have meaning? Look at starwater's post... That person has demonized the word/sound itself, in total disregard of all context. So, yes, it is just a sound in and of itself until someone supplies a meaning within a context. But some people ignore that and are self-oppressed with an excess of rules.

... I watched Bill Maher live on Friday night and was shocked that he used the word. I turned to my husband and asked "Did he say what I think he said?" I never have that word in my vocabulary, and was surprised that Bill could make this kind of mistake. He was referring to himself, and in this context I will forgive him, but he should really remove the word from his internal thoughts and vocabulary.

(emphasis added)

This is the problem I'm focusing on. Prudes want to control other's thoughts and actions and they try to do it with shame. They're on about "shoulds" and the instrument of persuasion isn't reason but shame. "I feel offended" is supposed to speak for itself, but it doesn't because no one should give a shit if another feels offended unless they can give good reasons for it. The expectation is that people should live in the fear of being a shameful person, and you're under the scrutiny of The Public Eye. We're social and have to mostly (not entirely) get along, but those of us who care more for freedom than propriety will reject The Public Eye and its manipulations at least sometimes.

Personally I thought nothing of it when Maher said it. I was surprised when I saw people were making a big thing of it. The senator fellow was talking about "We'd love to have you working in our fields" and it conjured the image of slaves in fields in my mind too. So Maher joked about an alternative sort of slave-work as an ironic contrast (having it relatively easy contrasted with the harsh work of the fields). Since I "got it", it was a wee-bit humorous but in any case it was not a denigration of anyone, and it would have to be to be rationally considered an offense.

It's like saying "if only everyone were nice to each other, there wouldn't be any problems!" No shit, but there are problems.

And it's impossible to be "nice" to everyone because some have excess standards of nice-ness and in those cases "nice" would be a burden that should be rejected.

 

[zorq]

...

As you say, offence is a choice. And if my using an euphemism to convey the meaning I intend helps some people to choose not to be offended unnecessarily then I have communicated more effectively than had I used the proper word.

You admit that some people would have different reactions had Maher used the substitute so you must concede that the offence is often less. I don't have to completely eliminate offence in my audience, as I agree that is an unreasonable standard. But reducing offence by any degree is productive.

 

[TSwizzle]

Prudes want to control other's thoughts and actions and they try to do it with shame. They're on about "shoulds" and the instrument of persuasion isn't reason but shame. "I feel offended" is supposed to speak for itself, but it doesn't because no one should give a shit if another feels offended unless they can give good reasons for it. This attitude expects people to live in the fear of being a shameful person; your life's lived under the scrutiny of The Public Eye. We're social and have to mostly (not entirely) get along, but those of us who care more for freedom than propriety will reject The Public Eye and its manipulations sometimes.

Personally I thought nothing of it when Maher said it. I was surprised when I saw people were making a big thing of it. The senator was talking about "We'd love to have you working in our fields" and it conjured the image of slaves in fields in my mind too. So Maher joked about an alternative sort of slave-work as a contrast. Since I "got it", it was maybe a wee-bit humorous but in any case it was not a denigration of anyone, and it would have to be to be rationally considered an offense.

It appears Bill has issued a short statement saying he regrets using it. Apparently this is not enough for Al Sharpton who wants to meet with HBO.

It certainly wasn't one of Bill's brightest moments but the likes of Al Sharpton should be told to get lost. HBO/Maher have dealt with it, let's move on.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I was expecting the worst when I first read about this, but after seeing the video yesterday, I think people are way over-reacting. The context matters. It was actually kind of a funny joke he made. The left-wing authoritarians progressives need to chillax a bit and stop trying to destroy peoples' lives because they got offended by a silly joke or a slip of the tongue.

There was similar situation with Larry Elmore and Pres Obama, where he called him "my nigga". It was a joke, not a pejorative insult.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzMgCeVmQ-4[/YOUTUBE]

Yeah, this. ^ Let Maher keep his job.

Except Larry Wilmore is black, Maher isn't. Maher has shown no race related issues over his very long career, so the intent wasn't disparaging. Should be careful in the future about the word though. It wasn't necessary to get the point across.

 

[repoman]

This was a self-immolative performance.

Not enough compassion or comic sense. Her "nigger, nigger, nigger" rant would have been halfway appropriate for another situation like poor media role models, but not for this caller who felt put upon by her in-laws because she was black.

It would be like playing "Short People" to a caller having a hard time dating because he was 4'9".