Hipster racism?
I define hipster racism (I’m borrowing the phrase from Carmen Van Kerckhove) as ideas, speech, and action meant to denigrate another’s person race or ethnicity under the guise of being urbane, witty (meaning “ironic” nowadays), educated, liberal, and/or trendy.Racialicious.com
Weird stuff happened in my world last week. I contemplated sharing, not sharing, not caring and maintaining a stiff upper lip. That is until I came across this post on the Obamas' New Yorker cover. Reading this article - and in particular the quote above - convinced me to seek the opinion of the inhabitants of planet Blue Oregon.
Last week, I believe I had three instances of the so-called "hipster racism." I will only talk about one since it is pretty reflective of the other two. I was at a hip bar in the hip section of North Portland. I was sitting with some people new people and a couple old friends. The new people were all dressed in old-school Wranglers and tight graphic tees that made references to certain - allegedly funny - things. While I was amazed at how similarly they all looked in the hipster style, I immediately felt out of place in my loose-fitting blouse and pants. That was OK, I rolled with it. I'd wear my ironic t-shirt next time.
During our cocktails, one of the people referred to a Black person as a Negro. I immediately said something, making it clear that it was not OK to use that word. I got blank stares, a "you are too sensitive," and then they returned to conversation. Now, I was never excluded throughout the evening and shared some laughs with these guys. As soon as the word "Negro" was uttered I felt very separate and different, and not just because my shirt didn't have writing on it. What intrigued me more was that no one else - save my friend who is a member of the GLBT community - understood or defended what I said.
Now, I know people are going to comment and say this was an anomaly, but something similar happened another two times last week! What in hipsters' names is going on in this town? Just because "Swingtown" and "Mad Men" are hits doesn't mean we keep the lingo during the commercial break, people. Has anyone else heard throwback racist terms lately under the guise of coolness?
|
August 19, 2008 |
Karol Collymore | Comments (100 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: tb | Aug 19, 2008 9:23:48 PM
I would chalk this up as further evidence that hipsters tend to be vapid posers.
Posted by: Dan Petegorsky | Aug 19, 2008 9:33:36 PM
Yeah, it really does seem either clueless or uncouth, Karol. Like an inability to distinguish between what can be an intimate use of a term among friends or in a "safe" place as opposed to using the term in a very presumptuous way, where its effect us just the opposite.
Posted by: Ray Duray | Aug 19, 2008 9:55:04 PM
Hmm, let's see...
We've got Georgia's thuggish leader trying to start World War III, we've got NATO committing itself to this madness while losing 10 members of its pointless (except for Sarkozy's ridiculous sense of glory) occupation of the wild hinterlands of Afghanistan, we've got the most severe financial crisis in the nation since the Great Depression, we've got an accelerating debt problem, and our infrastructure is in need of the money that the Bush Junta is wasting on war profiteering cronies in Iraq, Afghanistan and the D.C. suburbs.
And what of importance needs to be discussed on BlueOregon tonight? Bar chatter from the perspective of political correctness. Whatever happened to the advancement of Colored People? Oh, that's probably a politically incorrect thing for me to say, except if I were to attend a NAACP meeting.
Come on people, let's focus on the stuff that matters. Please.
Signed, A Dumb Polack Really Beginning to Be Irritated with Liberalism's Dementias, Pecadillos and Petty Grievances.
Posted by: peter c | Aug 19, 2008 10:10:42 PM
wait... would that mean that jeff alworth is a hipster??? (see Missing the Irony, which defended the New Yorker cover, here on BO) i think that destroys your thesis**...
**seriously, though, i have no idea if jeff alworth is a hipster or not.
Posted by: LT | Aug 19, 2008 10:31:07 PM
Although I know what else is going on in the world, and hadthought the New Yorker cover was old news, I was at a local Democratic social event last night.
Out in the lobby, a few women (who didn't all know each other very well) were talking. One said she was getting tired of Obama --and someone asked if she'd been listening to right wing radio.
The first woman said she had thought the New Yorker cover was funny, and HEY! It's the New Yorker.
Someone said "Gee, David Remnick would love you for saying that!".
Someone else said they didn't think the cover was funny.
Also, advice was given to the first woman that if she wasn't excited about the Obama campaign there are plenty of people who were excited about it. And there are lots of local/legislative candidates deserving of volunteer support who don't have such large amounts of support from volunteers--esp. a couple of deserving local legislative candidates who have the possibility of dumping Republican incumbents. So she should campaign for the legislative candidates and ignore any federal campaign she can't get excited about.
Let's talk about stuff that matters. Yes, the world situation matters. But something else matters at least as much. There is a competition going on in this country about whether individuals have the right to think for themselves. It is quite obvious that John McCain thinks every American should say out loud "THE SURGE WORKED" as if that is the only foreign policy he needs.
Here is how I believe the debate should be framed:
Agree or disagree to the statement,
"Every American has the right to decide for themselves what they find admirable, what they find funny, what they find offensive".
Say what you will about Pres. Clinton, that was 8 years of citizens allowed to think for themselves. These last several years have had Americans being browbeaten--we should think the way Rove, DeLay, Bush, Cheney, McCain, or any other powerful person told us, that we should believe what they said "all good people believe".
As someone who has admired David Remnick for years, I was offended by the New Yorker cover. I'd worked in school age child care this spring, and had dealt with a white 3rd grade loudmouth taunting a mixed-race 2nd grader. I would like to have forced Remnick to explain the cover to that second grader. Then he would realize we are beyond the day when adults who read his magazine are not the only ones who hear about the magazine cover. The picture was NOT just on the cover of the New Yorker, it was widespread.
I believe the Russians inflamed the situation in Georgia. I believe that only time will tell what will happen in Pakistan now that Musharaff is just an ordinary citizen holding no office.
I also believe that children should not have to be exposed to any adults who think racial slurs are funny.
I think that is what happened with the New Yorker cover---had it only arrived in mail boxes and news stands, I would have had no objection to it. But as widespread as the picture was (TV, blogs, etc.), I thought it was irresponsible. When I saw Remnick being interviewed about the controversy, I wanted to scream at the TV.
I don't think that makes me a "liberal" or any other label. I think it makes me someone old enough to be a great aunt (meaning I lived through the civil rights movement) concerned about how kids adapt to such things being widely publicized, and also whether adults have the right to decide for themselves what is funny, what is satirical, what goes over the line.
In a free country, individuals have the right to think for themselves.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 19, 2008 10:42:02 PM
Ugh. Yet another meta-critic who thinks that each post on BlueOregon must be more important to the future of the planet than the last.
Give it a rest. If you don't like it, don't read it.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 19, 2008 10:43:17 PM
For Ray, I'll copy and paste this part of our mission statement that's been there since the beginning:
[BlueOregon:] It'll be political, but not narrowly so. It'll be a free-ranging social and cultural critique. It'll be by Oregonians and for Oregonians, but not always about Oregon.
Posted by: Gregor | Aug 19, 2008 11:18:10 PM
It's terribly funny how the Right does not want anyone judging their speech yet they judge us for judging them. It's a funny circle to be spinning around uselessly demanding the right to remain ignorant and respected at the same time. Please be advised you have the right to remain ignorant, but I feel judgment is coming. The ignorant will be less tolerated then they have been in the past because we all know where that attitude has gotten us these past eight years. More people are waking up to the fact Dubya was a failure every day. Now if only they will realize McCain offers more of the same, we can hope.
As to the question regarding "hipster" racism, in their abject laziness, I believe these "hipsters" could be too lazy to enunciate African-Americans, so they defaulted to Negro not realizing it was offensive. When offense was taken they may have been surprised. I suspect they may not be the klan variety racists so they didn't take the suggestion regarding the racist nature of their declaration personally, or even seriously. The self-declared dumb polack would rather not even discuss it.
It's a difficult conversation to have. I believe the vast majority of white people have no idea when they are using racist speech. As for me, I bristle when accused of such an ugly insinuation, but in the hope that we can reach each other, I try to take a breath and hear what it is that causes concern for people. Frankly, racism in all facets has shown itself to have prevented us from developing a terrific resource, the African-American community. I would only caution us to be careful with how we deal with this subject so that we can continue the conversation without assigning a klan robe to people who are possibly ignorant, not that they used an unacceptable term, but how deeply use of the term hurts people.
Posted by: Garrett | Aug 19, 2008 11:57:38 PM
Ugh...hipster used as a negative term again. I like style, I like American Apparel, I listen to music you haven't heard about and I won't think it's cool once you start listening to it (ahem Vampire Weekend).
This is a flat out stupid post. Stupid...I'm not going to say retarded due to the current flap about Tropic Thunder (apparently some people don't understand satire).
Look, this is just ridiculous. Martin Luther King used the term negro. Is it just racist because a white guy in an ironic t-shirt said it? I have a t-shirt that says "No New Cathedrals" and I'm not Catholic. Does that make me anti Catholic?
I wouldn't use the word "negro" in a million years but don't call them "hipsters" and label them as racist because of it...and don't label a whole group of people as racist just cause there are a couple of stupid white people.
I'm going to go back to listening to the Decemberists records from when I used to go watch Colin at the Rabbit Hole before any of you heard them...
hipsterist out
Posted by: edison | Aug 20, 2008 12:05:29 AM
Wow ... who knew hipsters were so sensitive? I must remember to be careful what I say around them. :-)
Posted by: joel dan walls | Aug 20, 2008 1:57:36 AM
I suppose The Hipster Handbook ought to be required reading, although Ms. Collymore evidently being amongst the irony-challenged, she might not appreciate it, even though it pokes fun at precisely the sort of posers she criticizes. Oh my, how things do get self-referential.
Cover of The New Yorker: good gawd, not revisiting this one. Can we please quite trying to enforce (or reinforce) "rules" for "correct" use of humor, sature, and irony? Can we please quite pretending that the election outcome in November in, say, Missouri is going to depend on voters' fading memory of a magazine cover, for gawd's sake?
Posted by: Karol | Aug 20, 2008 2:08:42 AM
If only I were irony-challenged! My life would be so much more angry and I would be a lot less funny at dinner parties!
Just to let you know, I'm just musing on language, that's all. If you choose to listen to a band called Vampire Weekend, that's awesome. Just try to avoid calling me a Negro if you see me out and about. Thanks!
Posted by: Dan Petegorsky | Aug 20, 2008 6:38:03 AM
You know, I'm glad Ray wrote what he did. How come? Because I actually think that issues of "identity" and how individual and group identity are expressed in social, political and geo-political terms has been one the most difficult and salient issues in the post- Cold War world. It's certainly an absolutely central aspect of many of the wars that have erupted around the globe.
So here's a suggestion, Ray: pick up a copy of Michael Ignatieff's Blood and Belonging: Journeys into the New Nationalism. Just read the first couple of chapters, if you want: it's brilliant, and might just give you some insights.
Posted by: meg | Aug 20, 2008 6:58:24 AM
"Just try to avoid calling me a Negro if you see me out and about. Thanks!"
As the Great, Samuel L. Jackson says. "Shit, Negro, that's all you had to say"!
Posted by: kicker check | Aug 20, 2008 7:03:46 AM
I'm not a minority (unless you count the fact that my high school is now less than 20% caucasion), but I hear lots of speech that I object to in bars, on TV, and during backyard BBQs. Some of that speech is critical of who I am: including my profession or my political beliefs.
Hearing people say things that are dismissive and insulting to others is part of living in a free society. I assume there is less public criticism of ethnicity, goverment failings, and people who are "different" in China, but the impetus for that "harmony" is the tangible threat of government sanction.
Our Secretary of State and the Democratic candidate for President are two prominent examples of successful African-Americans overcoming racism. Ihere is a growing segment of affluent and middle class minorities, most of whom live outside racial enclaves. I don't see "the man" keeping minorities down in a concerted manner, as was certainly true 30 to 40 years ago.
Does that mean everybody is going to be nice, and treat minorities will color blind eyes? Probably not: but the trend is positive. I don't think I would enjoy living in a world where offensive speech is subject to goverment sanction: I don't know how else you might expect it to end, other than becoming unfashionable.
Posted by: dartagnan | Aug 20, 2008 7:56:38 AM
I'm old enough to remember when "Negro" was the preferred term and it was considered insulting to call someone "black." It also was okay to speak of "colored people" (as in "National Association for the Advancement of Colored People") but now it isn't -- though it's cool to use the term "persons of color." Point being that what is deemed politically and socially acceptable terminology is largely a matter of fashion.
That said, after you told the hipsters that you found the term "Negro" objectionable they should have apologized and desisted from using it.
Posted by: Jo Ann Bowman | Aug 20, 2008 8:03:59 AM
Karol,
Thank you for your post. Some responses show that folks just don't want to put themselves in another's shoes. I understand your experience. Any person of color who currently lives in North or Northeast Portland has shared this experience.
Many of the new establishments in North & Northeast Portland feel very unwelcoming to anyone outside of the "creative class" or "hipsters" universe. There are days where it feels like an invasion has happen and the new comers are pretty clueless about their impact on the community.
It must be like Native Americans felt when Columbus "discovered" America. The hipsters have discovered North & Northeast and it will never be the same multicultural community it once was. How sad
Posted by: Garrett | Aug 20, 2008 8:36:02 AM
It must be like Native Americans felt when Columbus "discovered" America. The hipsters have discovered North & Northeast and it will never be the same multicultural community it once was. How sad
Oh pardon the hipsters for finding affordable housing and then living there...
Again, I wouldn't use the term negro ever...Martin Luther King did though. I'm not condoning these "hipsters" use of the word I'm just saying Karol was targeting an entire group of people for two idiots and that's wrong.
Posted by: Dan Petegorsky | Aug 20, 2008 8:49:11 AM
Meg's "Pulp Fiction" reference brings up an important point that, despite quite a bit of recent discussion here, often seems lost or confused: one and the same word can be used as a slur or insult in one context but as a term of affection in another. When those usages are both plentiful in popular culture, they can appear to give permission to people to use them in ways that the social context does not actually support - thereby, as in Karol's case, becoming insulting by suggesting a false sense of intimacy.
That's why the "Pulp Fiction" scene works:
Jules: You sendin' the Wolf?
Marsellus: Oh, you feel better, motherfucker?
Jules: [relieved] Shit, Negro, that's all you had to say!
By contrast, try to imagine Pumpkin saying to Jules as Jules has his gun trained on him in the coffee shop, "Negro, chill: you don't need to blow my brains out."
I don't think so.
Terms like "Negro" or (as an example for my tribe),"Yid," define who's inside/outside of a group, emphasizing the sense of belonging or not belonging. What makes them so potentially loaded is the historical baggage of their sinister use to indicate non-belonging and the consequences that followed that social exclusion....
Posted by: James | Aug 20, 2008 8:58:01 AM
My apologies for your experience. There is NO excuses.
Words don't hurt, but how (or if) you use them does.
Posted by: Karol | Aug 20, 2008 9:00:35 AM
Garrett,
I was using hipsters as a description, not as a damning of all tight t-shirt wearing men. I know not all hipsters call me and people my color Negros. But I also know - as I defined above - there is an idea that we so beyond some things that we bring back old terms to prove how powerless the word is, like its supposed to be cool and ironic. But the word still has power if the person you are conversing with doesn't appreciate it. You get where I'm coming from?
Posted by: Karol | Aug 20, 2008 9:01:29 AM
Garrett,
I was using hipsters as a description, not as a damning of all tight t-shirt wearing men. I know not all hipsters call me and people my color Negros. But I also know - as I defined above - there is an idea that we so beyond some things that we bring back old terms to prove how powerless the word is, like its supposed to be cool and ironic. But the word still has power if the person you are conversing with doesn't appreciate it. You get where I'm coming from?
Posted by: Pat Malach | Aug 20, 2008 9:15:14 AM
Karol,
Hipsters absolutely love Pabst Blue Ribbon beer, so clearly there are judgment problems with that group that go beyond language.
It must really suck for hipsrters to have to be that "cool" all the time. Imagine the pressure.
Posted by: randy | Aug 20, 2008 9:43:21 AM
Yet another post from Krybaby Karol. You must really lead a shallow life to post such trival tripe.
Posted by: Adam L | Aug 20, 2008 9:46:17 AM
Dan P. totally nailed it.
As for myself, I think 'negro' is at the least rude.
I see no problem in using the label 'hipster' since they have given a concerted effort to dress the part.
Although I was called 'white chocolate' a few weeks ago and I'm still glowing with pride.
Posted by: Kevin | Aug 20, 2008 9:50:33 AM
The etymology of the word "negro" is that it is a direct reference to color.
That being the case, how ironic is it to on the one hand refer to one's own people in terms of color and on the other hand view a word which does precisely that as offensive?
I don't use the term, personally. But I've witnessed far, far too many African-Americans gleefully referring to each other by the other, allegedly more offensive, "N" word to really give much of a damn any more.
If/when we get to the point where we can define the intentions in the heart of another when they use such words then I'll be willing to give a damn again. Until then I'll remain as deeply skeptical of the racist intentions of whomever uses such words as I am of the racist intentions of whomever takes offense at it.
Posted by: Hipster Police | Aug 20, 2008 9:52:13 AM
Garrett-
I'll have to go back and check the code, but I'm pretty sure once you call yourself a hipster, you no longer are. Most of your posts also violate the Pledge of Aloofness all hipsters take when they go to their first underground show.
Just saying.
Posted by: Kevin | Aug 20, 2008 9:52:40 AM
Hipsters absolutely love Pabst Blue Ribbon beer, so clearly there are judgment problems with that group that go beyond language.
ROFL!!
Well said, Pat.
Posted by: Karol | Aug 20, 2008 9:52:51 AM
Adam L, White Chocolate has to be the ultimate compliment! Wanna go out? :)
Posted by: Pat Ryan | Aug 20, 2008 9:56:48 AM
I haven't used the word in 40+ years except when speaking spanish where it designates a specific color.
Since black is almost always inaccurate to some degree, we're left with the seven syllable term African-American, which leads one to think (in the interests of brevity) that one should pause another tenth of a second to ask one's self if a racial identifier actually brings any useful information to the sentence.
Posted by: Karol | Aug 20, 2008 9:58:02 AM
Kevin,
I'm not a user of the ultimate N word. I don't think the folks who said "negro" (plus the other incidences that week) are racist, but to me personally, I think it is a racist term. I told them what they said was offensive and they didn't care. That's all I'm saying.
Just because some black folks call each other the N word doesn't mean that I have to accept the word Negro while I'm enjoying a vodka.
Posted by: Pat Ryan | Aug 20, 2008 10:05:56 AM
Also, there's huge diffference between identifiers for self-selecting social groups and hereditary or genetic predisposition groups.
In Portland, hipster is almost always a term of derision as even those externally identified that way have almost unlimited varieties of ways that they divide themselves in their struggle for uniform iconoclasm.
I know quite a few self styled rebels who are rebelling against the other (externally identified) fake rebel posers.
It's like trying to chase down the various shades of lefties in 1930s England...........There are an infinite number of permutations at odds with each other.
Good clean fun
Posted by: Not Really Jacoby Ellsbury | Aug 20, 2008 10:14:22 AM
Karol,
Just curious: Would you mind sharing the context in which the word "Negro" was used in your conversation? I think it is awfully hard to judge the offensiveness of the use without the context in which the term was used.
Just to give two examples, one of which I would say would be OK and one of which would not be OK, if hipster A referred to hipster B as his "Negro" as a term of endearment and neither hipster A or hipster B are African-American, that's (a) wrong and (b) totally cringeworthy. If on the other hand someone was telling a story about a polite but prejudiced person of an older generation, and that person used the term while imitating the polite but prejudiced person, saying as if they were that person, "Not all black people are bad. Why just the other day a nice young Negro man helped me cross the street", I don't think that's offensive (except for the original remark, which is offensive). I grew up in the South and I grew up with a lot of people who said things that made me blanch when I heard them (I could always tell when my face betrayed my offense at their remarks, because the speaker would invariably start babbling about how he/she wasn't a racist). I just think the context of how the word was used probably matters a lot in gauging its offensiveness in this situation.
Posted by: Dan Petegorsky | Aug 20, 2008 10:14:25 AM
Kevin - there's also a completely non-racialized element of what's going on here:
I want to gag every time John McCain looks into the camera and says, "My Friends...." Why? Because he's not my friend, I don't want him to be my friend, and I don't want him acting like he's my friend.
By contrast, when Colbert addresses his audience as "Nation," I feel wrapped in Stephen's warm embrace.
What we call each other is important. It can communicate respect, disrespect, ignorance, sympathy, etc. So I have a hard time understanding why some folks seem driven to distraction when Karol offers some insightful observations on what works/doesn't work for her.
Posted by: ws | Aug 20, 2008 10:30:27 AM
I'm aware that there's some objection to the term, 'negro', but haven't heard that it's generally offensive in the sense that the other 'n' word is. Karol Collymore doesn't say outright that the two words are equally offensive, but that's the sense that comes across.
Wikipedia isn't universally respected as a reliable authority on subjects it addresses, but the introduction to its entry on the term and subject, 'negro', is kind of how I understand the status of that term in today's time:
"Negro is a term referring to people of Black African ancestry. Prior to the shift in the lexicon of American and worldwide classification of race and ethnicity in the late 1960s, the appellation was accepted as a normal neutral formal term both by those of Black African descent as well as non-African blacks. Now it is often considered an ethnic slur[1][2][3] although the term is considered archaic and is not even common as a racist slur. The term is still used in some contexts for historical reasons such as in the name of the United Negro College Fund[4][5]. "Negro" means "black" in Spanish and Portuguese, and the French "noir" as well as the Italian "nero"- all of which derive from the (Latin: niger = "black"). In Italy the word "negro" is still used neutrally by many people." wikipedia/negro
But hipsters... . Were the hipsters in question barely of drinking age? That could explain a lot about how it is they happened to use that word.
Posted by: Not Really Jacoby Ellsbury | Aug 20, 2008 10:38:59 AM
Karol,
Would you mind providing some more description about the context in which the term "Negro" was used?
In judging the relative offensiveness of the use of the word, context matters a great deal. I could give two examples, one of which I would say is offensive and the other which I would say is not. If, on the one hand, hipster A used the term "Negro" as a term of endearment when greeting hipster B and hipster A is not African-American, I think that is (a) wrong and (b) totally cringeworthy. On the other hand, if someone was telling me they thought William F. Buckley was an aristocratic racist and, while mimicking Buckley's voice said to me "the problem of the South is not how to get the vote for the Negro, but how to train the Negro — and a great many whites — to cast a thoughtful vote," I wouldn't take offense at their having said it [note: the quote above is from Buckley's book Up from Liberalism], I wouldn't say that person mimicking Buckley is offensive. I just think that context matters a great deal when you are trying to gauge the relative offensiveness of someone's use of that word.
Posted by: Karol | Aug 20, 2008 10:43:41 AM
More context: I was at a table - that I was invited to as I was meeting someone I already knew and their friends - and one of the guys (aged 35) referred to a Black person in his story as a Negro.
I wonder if some are ready to dismiss me because they believe because it isn't something THEY would do, it means it doesn't happen to anyone? My interest isn't causing trouble but making people think a little harder about the worlds we all live in. I think they are different and it's a good goal to see the world from many more sides that our own.
Posted by: Kevin | Aug 20, 2008 10:45:17 AM
What Pat said about racial identifiers - ditto!
Y'know... it really wasn't that long ago that specific racial terms mattered a great deal to many if not most "white" Americans even though many of them aren't "white" by any definition other than the continent from which their ancestors originated. And even that is muddy as hell thanks to the Moors, Turks and other invaders.
Look at old maps and descriptions of Chicago and you'll find ethnic neighborhoods all over the place which subdivided "whites" into dozens of distinct subgroups. Undoubtedly many of those residents would have taken some degree of offense at being lumped together with another subgroup - say... Armenians and Italians - as monolithic "whites."
Everything about all of it is a veritable landmine field for those looking to take offense at something.
I've long ago thrown my lot in with MLK's vision of a day when we're each judged by the content of our character rather than by the color of our skin.
Here's another quirky thing about all this. As far as I can discern, most "black" Americans prefer to be lumped together into one supergroup - not unlike most "white" Americans, interestingly enough. But it seems to be very different among both Asian and Latino communities. Yet "black" and "white" Americans truly seem to struggle with the distinctions between ethnic Chinese (which "Chinese"? ah, but I digress...), Japanese and Cambodians... just to name three groups. And it seems to depend on context too, as the example of "Chinese" shows. Among themselves it seems to matter which ethnic subgroup they come from but amongst outsiders nationalism seems to be dominant.
It's all hopelessly fucked up, IMHO.
Posted by: Not Really Jacoby Ellsbury | Aug 20, 2008 10:48:55 AM
OK, that's weird. I tried to post something earlier and when I clicked "Post", I got a "Internet Explorer could not open this page" type of error message. When I checked the comments, I didn't see my post. Frustrated by having lost my comment (or so I thought), I walked away for a few minutes and sat down to write my comment a second time. Second time through I thought it would be more entertaining to quote something really offensive Buckley had said (that's not the only quote from WFB that would make a lot of people gasp audibly today if you read it to them, but that passed for respectable journalism 40 years ago). Now I see them both there. Has anyone else had issues of this kind in posting comments?
Posted by: Old one | Aug 20, 2008 10:49:03 AM
Does this mean that the United Negro College Fund is racist?
Should we remove their public service ads from television?
I'm old enough to remember when "negro" was the polite word to be used to describe African Americans. Now it seems a little old fashioned and wouldn't use it except when talking about UNCF or to quote the words of MLK. I don't think its any worse than to say "queer" or "hipster."
Posted by: old one | Aug 20, 2008 10:59:21 AM
Added Comment: I am also old fasioned in believing that you should address people by any title they wish. If a word or title gives offence you should say you are sorry and correct yourself. Saying "you are too sensitive" is rude, and in this part I agree with Karol.
Posted by: Majority | Aug 20, 2008 11:05:07 AM
If you're having trouble with someone's request to be called by a particular term, think about how you'd feel if someone insisted on calling you "Bill" when you prefer "William," or "bookkeeper" when you're really an accountant.
The first time they made the mistake, you'd give them a break. But after that, if they kept calling you too sensitive, you'd think they were an @$$. And you'd be right. We all have the right to be called what we want to be called.
(My name here is Majority, even though that's often wishful thinking.)
Posted by: Majority | Aug 20, 2008 11:12:01 AM
P.S. I once said "African American" in a conversation that included a black friend, and he said, "Hold on. That terms drives me nuts. Just say 'black!'"
So with him, I say black. But I usually play it safe by starting with the most polite term I can think of (Mr./Mrs., Usted, Officer, African American, etc.) and wait for people to invite me to use a more informal term or greeting. That's the best way I can think of to find what people are comfortable with.
It'd be embarrassing to me if I started with "black" and someone said, "I prefer African American."
Posted by: darrelplant | Aug 20, 2008 11:14:48 AM
I love it when people try to make the point that there are so much more important issues to discuss than prejudice when most of the conflicts around the world are directly influenced by one sort of prejudice or another. Racism, ethnic strife, nationalism, religious intolerance...how many wars and conflicts haven't included elements of one or more of those themes?
Sure, it can seem sometimes like people take offense at something you might consider awfully small potatoes, but on the other hand there's a lot of blatant prejudice out there as well, and you don't have to go very far for it to find you.
Posted by: ws | Aug 20, 2008 11:39:36 AM
Myself, I wouldn't be using the term 'negro', to be referring to people in today's time, because it's old fashioned. It doesn't accurately reflect today's descendants of those people to whom the term originally referred to in the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries.
Like old one, I'm kind of old too, so I remember from '68 when black power activists really raised the issue on a major scale that 'negro' did not acceptably describe whom they considered themselves to be. That was the first time I heard 'black' to be the preferred generally descriptive term for african-americans.
From that time on, I never understood 'negro' to be thought of as offensive on a level with the other 'n' word, but that it might unwittingly or intentionally, I suppose, be used to inaccurately imply that people were prepared to submit to the old routine of being beaten down, be made empty of pride, and self power.
So Karol, did you ever get a chance to ask or otherwise find out why the 35 year old hipster happened to use the word 'negro' in the conversation he was having?
Posted by: Laura Calvo | Aug 20, 2008 11:54:00 AM
What I take from the conversation is the reminder of just how pervasive the concept of privilege is in our society and how it works to separate anyone out from the norm.
In our society, if you anything other than a white male our social conventions require a descriptive label be assigned to differentiate that person or class of people from the implied norm of a white male.
"All men are created equal". Everyone agrees that "all men" is supposed to mean all humans, but we've had a long struggle to get to that and we're still not there.
Karol doesn't quite explain the context of the conversation, so I'm not 100% positive, but if it follows anywhere near my experience, I understand where she's coming from.
The question I think should be examined if we are to continue to move forward, is to ask ourselves why do we need to mention a person's skin color, sexual orientation, or other attribute in conversation, if it really has no constructive bearing on the conversation?
Too many times using such qualifiers only demeans the person being referred to and perpetuates stereotypes.
Karol's post is good in that it has caused some folks to think about the underpinnings of how we think and view others different from ourselves. I don't believe she's been overly sensitive. Instead she's brought the discussion to light and from some of the postings confirmed the dialog needs to happen, probably more often and just as honestly.
Posted by: David McDonald | Aug 20, 2008 12:30:22 PM
You've got to have this sort of conversation if you want to bring about change. Words certainly can and do hurt. Tropic Thunder is loaded with the term "retarded" which has caused protests all over the country. Ben Stiller says it's all fun and satire, but the people protesting disagree.
Posted by: Paul Johnson | Aug 20, 2008 12:37:02 PM
There's already a word for "hipster racism." It's called "Californianism."
Posted by: Vincent | Aug 20, 2008 12:40:34 PM
"Ironic" hipster racism is nothing new, sadly.
Post a comment
Posted by: t.a. barnhart | Aug 19, 2008 9:05:24 PM
this one's easy, Karol: they were stupid clods. nothing hip in the least about using speech that borders on the hateful. what if one of them decided to repeat an old Richard Pryor routine (before he went to Africa and gave up using the n-word)? what's the difference?
words are not pretty trinkets to be taken out and shown to friends like little kids and their Legos or Barbies. words come from the very essence of our human being — they are the essence of our human being. using a word in the way they did, and with absolutely no regard for either your feelings or the sad aspect of the American experience you represent with your very presence, is about as wrong as it gets.
i guess being hip means nothing matters but the sound of the noises coming out of your mouth and the knowing nods of the other empty vessels around you.