A Brief Note On Reclamation Of Slurs And Its Effect On The Process Of Reclamation Essay

Slurs of racism to suggest that one group is superior will not be mentioned, but the undermining of other groups through various systemic practices of standards by visual/verbal rhetoric will be discussed.

The old idiom, “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me,” has been used for decades, and although a good sentiment, can be disproven by any person with an basic understanding of their feelings. The power of the words one hears can greatly affect their self esteem and confidence. The fact that words hurt is an issue everyone faces, but some words hold too much power, power that can be used in not so ideal ways. Slurs, or words that are used to oppress minority groups, are used too casually in the modern world, with grave consequences on the minorities they are used against. The word faggot, a term used to describe gay men, has become popular in modern America between school boys as a way to either mock their peers or intentionally hurt an actual queer person. This word in particular moves farther away from offensive and can be categorized as oppressive due to its both psychological and social ramifications. The use of the word faggot is an act of oppression when one looks at both the social and psychological effects the word has on both the user and the recipient of the slur.

In The Case Against Banning the Word “Retard”, Author Christopher M. Fairman made his argument clear in very clear that the effort to rid the use of word retarded or retard is futile and a possible danger to freedom of speech. Fairman does not base his argument on the idea that the mentally disabled, or mentally retarded, aren’t offended by the use of the word retard, but rather that the core issue isn’t the actual word but the negative connotation people put with taboo subjects. Because Fairman bases his argument on the idea that the offensive nature of words is created by the taboo nature of their origins, a large part of the paper is devoted to defending this idea with examples like the N-word and the use of the word gay. Although the

The n-word is considered one of the most vicious racial slurs in the English language today. True that the n-word is closely associated with slavery and the oppression of blacks. Even after the abolition of slavery the word still haunted African Americans, especially in more segregated areas; where blacks were viewed as inferior to whites. In recent years the n-word has become less of a malicious slur in parts of our country. Public figures who use the n-word run the risk of losing their jobs. However, since the 1960s African Americans have coined the term “nigga”, when addressing one another. The rise of hip hop culture also enhanced the use of the word-they felt as though they are using the word as a term of endearment. Critics of the

cultural, or bias slurs should be changed so that racial discrimination can be stopped and everyone can

In the essay “Nigger: the meaning of a word” Gloria Naylor discusses the essence of a word and how it can mean different things to different people in a myriad of situations. Depending on race, gender, societal status and age Naylor outlines how a word like ‘nigger’ can have different meanings within one’s own environment. Naylor discusses how a word can go from having a positive to a negative connotation merely due to how it is spoken and by whom. Naylor shares a personal experience with her audience as she describes the first time she really “heard” the word ‘nigger’. A young white boy in her third grade class spit it in her

A sensitive, controversial topic today regarding slurs is the conversation of “reclaiming slurs”. This idea

Speech is often associate with race because some individuals believe that if the person does not sound “educated” enough the person comes from a lower class and was brought up in the so called “ghettos” and this association is often made towards someone that forms part of a minority group. The author illustrates that race is tight up with speech

Unfortunately for Randall Kennedy this limerick held no connotation that he wished to acknowledge, as he recites his Mother’s words, he finds himself in war with a word, a word that for every African-American is at the core of inflicted pain; Nigger. Kennedy narrates his Mother’s experience during the era of the Jim Crow segregation,

However, the historical significance of the word nigger is deeply rooted in American History. For example, Kennedy’s book presents historical examples of nigger in its most pejorative context: “Michael Jordan was suspended from school for hitting a white girl who called him a nigger” and “Tiger Woods was tied up in kindergarten by his older schoolmates who called him nigger” (Kennedy 22). It is precisely because of this history that many African Americans are in favor of banning the word from the English language. Although the historical significance of the word nigger often triggers deep-rooted hostility in the African Americans, it has also progressively evolved into a term of endearment in the modern day African American culture. Consequently, a fine line exists between past and present definitions of the word nigger that opens up the possibility of misinterpretation and the potential of further damage.

The argument of what is offensive and what is not offensive will arise and have to be answered for. It is quit simple, the words for mentioned in this essay will be considered offensive, and any new words that one may come up to compensate for the loss of these words. These words are considered to be offensive, not only to those at the butt of the name calling but for those who

In 1983 Jerry Fodor opened the introduction to his new research of “Modularity of mind” with the phrase; “Behavior is organized, but the organization of behavior is merely derivative”. This meaning that behaviors are simply imitations, never original nor created. Fodor created a theory of how the mind was structured and how would perform. He studied the architecture of mind in modules; a term that will describe that the mind had different specific structures that had precise purposes. Jesse J. Prinz just like Fodor was a philosopher who was in opposition of the “Modularity of the mind” theory. This essay will have as a purpose to create an argument on the explanation and disagreement that Prinz wrote cluster by cluster against the theory “Modularity of mind” in an article called “Is the mind really modular?”

As an evidence of racially or religiously aggraded criminal damage, D who was involved in a dispute over whether an order had been paid for in a Turkish kebab shop, broke a window in the shop in the course of the argument. What may, in other circumstances have been regarded as a minor incident, escalated into a serious offence in the eye of the Crown Prosecution Service as D was intemperate enough to mutter in the course of the argument the words “bloody foreigners”. The offence was charged as racially aggravated criminal damage and, although the justices found as a fact that the cause of the dispute was an argument over money, the Divisional Court held that the words ‘ bloody foreigners’ could demonstrate hostility. D used these words to

Many are disconcerted by the idea that humans and Minds can be described as systems which operate based on interpretations of symbols, much like machines, computers, and robots: things that we have created yet do not think of as being “thinking,” themselves. We, as human beings, are comforted in the notion that we are born into this world with a fully capable Mind, a soul or spirit, and are, thereafter, free to choose our fate as we will. Although it seems plausible that we are born with Mind, I cannot subscribe to such a simplistic version of thinking about our true capacity for affecting outcome.

The purpose of this paper is to present the argument mapping of “The Logic of Nonstandard English,” by William Labov. To start off this understanding I will first define keywords in order for the reader to fully grasp the argument. Furthermore I will state the author's main claim and link them to the evidence Labov provides. In closing, I will show how these claims are linked together by giving my mapping of the interrelated parts, that as I understand, define the article’s overall structure. In the case here, I will be arguing that there are four strong ethnographic facts, one weak ethnographic fact, one general ethnographic explanation and one strong ethnographic observation. In this article, Labov is against the ‘deficit model’ used to