The FaceBook discussion here was begun when Siobhan Weiss volleyed the first post.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Siobhan: Okay, this is just bizarre as hell: " Using the N-word, "he posits, "does not automatically make her a racist." Pastor Gregory A. Tyson.---- Sir with all due respect-- SERIOUSLY???:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/al-sharpton-paul-deen_n_3491440.html?ir=Media
(note: this link connects to an article from the Huffington Post about the response by Rev. Al Sharpton's spokeswoman to the public reaction to his broadcast coverage which appeared to apologize for Deen's remarks.)
Gary Wilson: Never be afraid of words. Only the meek will try to defile you.
Alina Valdez: Boy, he really looks "Thin" in this pic.
Cristea Andra Lorea: I guess what you find bizarre is this coming from a black person. If he had been white, ammunition would have been granted for everyone to blast him until Messiah comes; but since he's black, and saying what he's saying, no one is sure what to do with his opinion, so bizarre is an appropriately tepid term that means something, but not too much; it means we are all frozen waiting for someone iconic to dare sanction one way or another what this guy as a black guy said. I happen to agree with him. To use the word in question is plain rude and rudeness can and should be punished to a certain extent, but the zeal it is being dealt with right now should be saved for rapists, murderers and others that too often enjoy too good lawyers that manage to make them look too innocent and get away with too few years in too nice prisons. And if you live in, or pass by a low income black neighbourhood you will witness the bizarre burst into comical when too many people, all of whom black, address one another with 'Yo n...' The comical part is not that they are using a term racist towards the origin they all share. It is that even though they are black and obviously using the term as part of an internal jargon of their neighbourhood, without intent to offend one another, they are supposed to be arrested for it!!!
Jeff Thomas: Interesting context Cristea; solid evidence that most issues can be defended when artfully diffused. I cannot argue with your broader view of language; however by removing the stigma of Paula Deen's reckless use of her media status for personal profit,
(ref: Novo Nordisk; http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2012/01/17/why-drug-execs-might-wish-theyd-never-heard-of-paula-deen/); and by omitting the racist details of her Wedding plans which also include a staff of "traditionally suited" black waiters in Plantation-style white jackets and bow-ties (think Pullman Railroad porters); I think it fair to say you ignore much of the collateral damage from which the "righteous" outrage (hence: reactions like "bizarre") stems.
. . . . . . . . and for more on context:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/opinion/bruni-paulas-worst-ingredients.html?hp&_r=0
Wayne Howard: I agree. Paula grew up using the word & it doesNOT necessarily describe her feelings!
Cristea Andra Lorea: Jeff, I do admit I ignore a lot of this lady's persona. I am Eastern European, I haven't had a TV in the house for the past 10 years and am not about to just start watching cooking shows in order to pin the racist she may or may not be. I was merely talking about the extreme politicization of the n- word and of the hilarious (if unresolved) consequences thereof. Instead of it staying a rude and tacky word that recommends its user as a rude and tacky person, it must become a crime. How do you then deal with black people using it copiously among themselves?! Because now the dealing is done in a really racist way: the white people are crucified for it and the blacks are anything from left alone to made millionaires (see JayZ's & acolytes' lyrics). To clarify my position further- I am for courtesy and against rudeness; but while you are right to point out I do not know enough details to decide for myself whether this lady deserved to lose her job or not, I just don't understand how a few tens of pedophile public school teachers are able to keep theirs, and why the public is so much less outraged at them. That's all.
Jeff Thomas: We are not so different Cristea, that this "N" word should disengage the conversation toward an antiseptic analysis of six collected letters and away from the more vigorous public backlash against a celebrity who tested its volatility and lost.
Paula Deen broke no law when she used the term. Being a racist in America is not against the law. Using the "N" word is still a legal choice. Here in America, the implication of any word’s context remains the privilege of the listener and the burden of the speaker.
If a listener decides that JayZ has in fact defensibly framed the word “nigger” between his shared legacy of inherited race-bias and the coded, ethnic language of contemporary sarcasm toward its fatigued progress, than JayZ is significantly less adventurous when he selects it to express himself.
If we permit his connotation to be excluded from the discussion, then any understanding of Paula Deen’s disgrace will remain unnatural, antiseptic and indefensible. It would be disingenuous to propose that Paula Deen holds equivalent credibility here.
When Mark Twain framed his use of the word to ridicule the social blindness of his time to the cruelty and inequality of some advantaged Americans toward other castigated "Americans", he braced himself to suffer the fall out of those critics, standing firm behind his work and every syllable therein. History has judged him favorably.
When Paula Deen defends her decision to use the word "nigger" in such company as to include individuals who might argue with her appreciation of its "harmlessness", she has ignored the "burden" of decency obliged of the speaker.
When she gets on TV and lies, through a puddle of tears: "I only said it (“N*****”) once; when a black gentleman held a gun to my head"; against an earlier statement to the contrary, she exhibits her decision to descend the time-worn stairs of lost integrity; first evidence of a break-down in her own self-credibility.
When she displays a pattern of context (ref: Plantation Wedding, above) at odds with any possible defense of her claim to be above the inherent elitism (read: bigotry) of her remarks, then let the cards fall where they may. She is still not guilty of saying the "N" word.
No, her crime was to employ a system of ethics that distinguish two sets of Americans and run her business accordingly. That such practices advantage one set and discriminate another IS against the law here in the States. In so far as this case is about the great “invisible crime”, it is necessary for the prosecution to establish a concrete pattern of behavior to lend substance to the shadow.
It is of no distress to me that the consequences of this case have destroyed the media myth of kindness she has worked so hard to cultivate. This is extreme Capitalism at work. This is America.
Jeff Thomas:
@ Wayne: The only reasonable way to make sense of your comment would be to consider any one of the following interpretations:
- She is a victim of childhood indoctrination . . .
- Paula Deen does not use language to describe her feelings
- Paul Deen uses incoherent/arbitrary words to describe her feelings
- Paula Deen is not responsible for the statements which come out of her mouth
- Paula Deen suffers from Turrets Syndrome
- I must pity this loud-mouthed Southern Belle for her loss of credibility and empire by disregarding collateral evidence of "Confederate-style" hospitality on the basis of her inability to form sentences that capture her feelings? . . . . . am I close?
No comments:
Post a Comment