Thread Closed
(11-06-2015, 05:11 AM)Verad Wrote:I hate bringing out the same tired words but, 100 years ago, it would be very rude to call someone of african descent "Black" in the United States. 'Colored' was the most appropriate and respectable way of addressing them.(11-06-2015, 05:03 AM)McBeefâ„¢ Wrote: Just because something is not a slur does not mean it is a compliment.Â
I question why someone a smart as you is resorting to petty semantics :c
A compliment cannot be a slur
A slur cannot be a compliment
That doesn't mean something that is not a slur has to be a compliment.
This is not petty semantics for me, but a conclusion drawn from the etymology of the word in both its original and continued use. The original term was a degrading term. In its noun form, it was also a degrading term (the play in which it is first recorded as a description of the profession of sex work is literally called The Woman Hater, of all things). It's also not a term that I can reasonably call technical jargon or archaic where it has an innocent meaning that people miscontrue, like "niggardly."Â
That the noun form has somehow been neutered to be "clinical" is just a side-effect of its use in legal codes written by past generations, not because it's somehow "more technical" than "whore," and not an indication of any kind of linguistic truth.
But you're right, change requires work, and modifying your language is just too damn hard to do consciously unless someone is specifically asking you to do it.
Now Black is considered respectable, and 'Colored' is the opposite.Â
Words change, what once could have been derogative is now clinical. Should it be the other way? Should the word move back to the pejorative? Possibly! However this thread and the opinion of one is not enough to convince me.