I grew up before integration, I remember the separate facilities,
laundries, etc. And I remember the faces of nice, friendly white
people I might see, they seemed perfectly normal, joking, helpful,
but even as a child I did not like the look that came to too many
faces, the sneer in the voice, the coldness in the eye that suddenly
came over them when they used the "n-word." If something could turn
nice people into scary, cold-looking people in a snap, I wanted
nothing to do with it, and I still don't. No one ever used that word
in any positive way. I wonder how many blacks/ African Americans who
use the word now ever had any experience with it "back in the day"
when it meant so much more than just a word to so many? Most of them,
the comedians etc. seem kind of young to me. The baggage it carried
back then was nothing you'd want to preserve, or so it seems to me.
But that said, people do tend to get away with saying things or
making jokes about their own group that others couldn't get away
with. You'd be called anti-Semitic if you told all the jokes Jews
tell about themselves. Scots love jokes about their supposed
cheapness. Personally, I can live without ever hearing that
particular word again.
off the third rail...
Nancy
-------
I was never lost, but I was bewildered once for three days.
--Daniel Boone
On Jan 21, 2007, at 8:21 PM, James Brothers wrote:
> My recent experience is that African-American is in, Black is out.
> So much so that there are those who will accuse you of being a
> racist if you use the term "Black".In spite of the title of the
> NAACP, Negro will often get you in trouble. The use of it and other
> historic terms, like Colored Troops or Free Blacks must be
> predicated by extensive explanation that they are historic terms.
> One cannot rewrite historic sources to accommodate changes in
> modern usage. One can be sensitive to it, but historic quotes are
> well historic.
>
> I also find the fact that it is perfectly acceptable, in some
> circles, for African-Americans to call each other using the N, and
> other "offensive" terms word interesting. As someone of Irish
> ancestry, I know of very few "Irish-Americans" who would call
> themselves Micks or bog trotters. And the same is true of other
> ethnic perjoratives. Anyone want to play with that third rail?
>
> I find solace in the fact that if you go back far enough, we are
> all (at least according to the Out of Africa theory of human
> evolution) Africans. So all the furor is really pretty meaningless.
> We are all people and we all bleed.
>
> James Brothers, RPA
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> On Jan 21, 2007, at 19:11, Excalibur131 wrote:
>
>> Kevin,
>>
>> I have learned that at least some, perhaps many portions of what
>> I've said are irrelevant, misleading and confused. I have no
>> problem with this as I have been wrong many times in my lifetime.
>> I have also been confused and, yes, I'm sure misleading, but
>> without intent. I do not believe that anything I say or think is
>> irrelevant, but I will bow to those with more wisdom.
>>
>> For the last several posts I haven't been sure you and I were
>> talking about the same subject. You have written copious
>> quantities, but somehow my simple words seem to have failed to
>> reach you.
>> --------------------
>>> A lot of African-Americans are as interested in their "heritage"
>>> as are white folks.
>>> Anne Pemberton
>>
>> I'm not offended by it, but I'm somewhat taken back by the use of
>> "African-Americans" vs. "white folks." Is there a double-standard
>> at work here? If the identifying terminology were reversed how
>> would the sentence read?
>> Tom
>> --------------------
>> Do you remember that? The sentence was written in January of 2007
>> and my questions were asked in regards to that sentence as it
>> applied in January 2007. With all of your words I don't believe
>> you have satisfactorily answered the questions that I asked. Of
>> course, I could be wrong about that too.
>>
>> I do wonder what reason you had for avoiding the final paragraph
>> of my last post? The paragraph that read:
>> "I don't have a clue what the politically correct term is for
>> "white folks." I do know that, in more than a few parts of our
>> country, the term "black folks" falls into a gray area of what is
>> or is not acceptable and may be considered racist. In 2007, is one
>> term more acceptable than the other? To me its not. If one is
>> unacceptable, then both are unacceptable. If one is acceptable,
>> then both are acceptable."
>>
>> I am a simple man, looking for simple answers to simple questions
>> without 400 years of history accompanying the answer. Kevin, with
>> respect, perhaps you are unable to come down to my level.
>>
>> Tom
>> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
>> instructions
>> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
> instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|
