Jump to content

New York City Bans The N-Word


R!ck

Recommended Posts

  • Members

REUTERS

NEW YORK (Reuters) - New York City symbolically banned use of the word nigger on Wednesday, the latest step in a campaign that hopes to expunge the most vile of racial slurs from hip hop music and television.

The City Council unanimously declared a moratorium that carries no penalty but aims to stop youth from casually using the word, considered by most Americans to be the most offensive in the English language.

The New York City measure follows similar resolutions this month by the New York state assembly and state senate, and supporters of the ban are taking their campaign to The Recording Academy, asking it not to nominate musicians for Grammy awards if they use the word in their lyrics.

Many rap artists and young New Yorkers toss the word around as a term of endearment or as a substitute for black, angering some black leaders who consider those who use it as ignorant of the word's hate-filled history in slavery and segregation.

"This could be the beginning of a movement," councilman Albert Vann said.

Councilman Leroy Comrie, a sponsor of the moratorium, said the campaign against the word has gained strength since comedian Michael Richards spewed it in a racially charged tirade in Los Angeles. The Laugh Factory club where Richards performed has since banned comedians from using the word there and the former "Seinfeld" television star has apologized.

"The Michael Richards incident really brought it to another level. It has forced people to express their outrage. Many people had been seething quietly," Comrie said. Comrie also asked TV network Black Entertainment Television to stop using the word in its shows. Representatives of BET did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A Grammy spokesman said he doubted the academy's 11,000 voting members would support any measure that might censor artists. "They are not going to be supportive of something that excludes someone simply because they are using a word that is offensive," said Ron Roecker, vice president of communication for the Recording Academy.

The city resolution calling for the moratorium traces the etymology of the word from the Latin "niger," meaning black, to its first documented written use in 1786 as a term slave masters used to label their African slaves.

Use of the word by blacks exploded with the rise of rap music in recent years, and some black comedians like Chris Rock continue to use it in their routines.

"What, is there a fine? Am I going to get a ticket?" Rock mocked in a Reuters interview when asked about the City Council move. "Do judges say, '10 years, nigger!"' Rock said politicians were trying to divert attention from real problems: "Enough real bad things happen in this city to worry about how I am going to use the word."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I'm torn.

I think its a good idea to stop using this word altogether as a society.

But banning the use of a word...isn't that a violation of the 1st amendment?

And when the black community almost uses it more than the white community, well are they willing to give it up or will they think they are excused from the ban bc of who they are?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

My problem with the question is that it then comes off as if someone who is not black so desperately wants the right to say it. Why do you want to be allowed to say it? Hell, why do you want to say it so damn badly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Why does ANYONE want to say it? That's the $1,000,000 Question.

If we HATE it when someone else uses the word, why do we use the word? I mean, it's a blatant double standard.

Stopping the use of the word starts when rappers, comedians, etc. take it out of their songs and make a stand that they refuse to use to word. Will it ever happen? NO! Because a lot of black people want to hold onto to that word "because they can." Use it at their convenience and then rake someone over the coals of a different race who has heard it in a rap song or think it's cool to use it with no racial implications whatsoever.

I try as much as possible to stay out of the race threads and "the n-word" threads and be as PC as possible, but I just don't really care to anymore.

If black people, as a whole, don't care to change using the word, why should anyone else?! It's outrageous.

It's fine to be offended by the word, to be uncomfortable with the use of the word. But for Christ's sake, don't say, "I can use it. You can't. Why do you want to use the word so damn bad? Nanny nanny boo boo." It's just a copout for what the REAL issue with this word is...black people(as a whole) have to take a stand and stop using the word if we expect for no one else to use it. Otherwise, the argument has no merit, IMO. If no one else has the right to say it, then we shouldn't say it either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I love when people read things into stuff that isn't there. There was absolutely no indication of that. Though since no one has said anything racist that you can latch on to, I guess the next best thing to fabricate something. Ahhhh, nothing like basking in victimhood, is there?

Well, that's how your post "comes off" to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I swear to God, without a doubt you just know how to take something and just twist it. Chill the heck out for a second and quit pulling the racist card everytime someone asks a damn question. It is not needed, its annoying and is dead and tired. He asked a simple question that has a lot of validity to it. So instead of going on the war path, just step away. I'm tired of the 10 page threads because you feel that you have to give everyone the tired degree just because they don't see your POV and then accuse everyone of being a racist. Its just not needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I love how instead of answering a perfectly valid question, you take it upon yourself to attack me personally. I haven't accused anyone of saying anything racist because everyone knows that if I wanted to, I would've said it. I have told specific people that I think they're racist. I'm not going to circle around it. My question was not directed to AlwaysAMC personally, but rather to everyone. It's a question that I've asked repeatedly whenever racial issues have come up on this forum that no one ever seems to answer.

If you think perfectly valid issues are "basking in victimhood" maybe you need to look inside yourself to see how you view POC.

Maybe, if you stop attacking me because I want to put my voice into the matter, we'll have a rather simple discussion. He asked a question, I responded with one of my own. If you choose to answer it, fine, but don't get on me because I decide to be a part of a discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

First off, yes you have.

Secondly, personal questions are directed via Private Messages, not on the boards. You wanted this to be public, or else you would have kept it private.

And lastly:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

well lets see, you quoted what you said and then you also said:

and then you also proceeded to say:

You quoted his post, used the word you so more than likely you were directing it at him. That doesn't sound like a general question. And of course no one wants to answer your questions, because you attack everyone and just beat them over the head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
    •   Thanks for sharing these. I wonder if Charles might have been in the running for Adam. I know Preacher was a bit of a bad boy at times on EON, but Neal seemed to be a step down, and Robert Lupone had played a similar part on AMC. Given the huge cast turnover at this point I wonder who thought they had been there long enough to go.  Laura Malone/Chris Rich would get a remote within the next year. 
    • Interesting.  It seems to allude to that statement that Warren Burton made around that time about some AW actors getting special treatment.  I wonder who was resentful about not getting to go. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy