Fairman's The Case Against Banning The Word Retard

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.

1. Jonathan Rauch is very Millisean in the sense that he believes language on its own cannot be harmful, merely offense. Since this is the case, freedom of speech should not be restricted for any reason. According to “In Defense of Prejudice,” There are two sides to this argument. Purism follows that society will not function justly unless there is no more prejudice at all. In this case that would mean, if necessary, freedom of speech should be restricted. On the other hand, Pluralism follows that we cannot eradicate racism, so we should do our best to change their minds. When all else fails, all you can really do is leave them alone.

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

Kathie Snow’s article, People First Language, has many strong points but I found that there were also some points that Snow made that I found to contradict what the author’s main point of the article was. For an example, Snow states in the second paragraph, “They are people: moms and dads; sons and daughters; employees and employers; friends and neighbors; students and teachers; scientists, reporters, doctors, actors, presidents, and more. People with disabilities are people, first. (Snow, 1)” I found this paragraph to really hit home that these people that are being discriminated, and being stereotyped are no different from you or I. As I continued to read, I found that Snow was trying to make a point in saying that many of these stereotypical slangs and words need to go.

In today’s society curse words and insults are used in many people’s regular vocabulary. Most of these insults, if not all, are being said without prior knowledge of the meaning behind the word. An example of an insult like this is porch monkey, a derogatory term for African Americans. The people that use derogatory terms like this are often ill-informed and unaccepting of other cultures.

Jonathan Rauch’s essay, “In Defense of Prejudice”, explores the idea of pluralism. Rauch focuses on intellectual pluralism in which he states, “permits the expression of various forms of bigotry and always will”. Pluralism may bring different topics such as racism, sexism, and homophobia. Rauch Points out if misguided ideas and ugly expressions be corrected or criticized it would help public safety.

The essay “The Meanings of a Word” by Gloria Naylor discusses the many definitions of a word and how its meaning can change according to context and delivery. She made this point by telling a story of her childhood and the first time she heard the n-word used by a white person in a derogatory, demeaning way. She described her this situation that took place when she was in third-grade and a boy in front of her in math class called her the n-word. She had no idea what it meant to be called that in a negative way because the people she grew up around only used it as positive and empowering. At the end of her essay, she once again emphasized how easy it is to change a word into something hateful simply depending on who says it and their

In addition to suggesting that eradicating prejudice can cause bigger conflicts among the “purist” and “pluralist”. Rauch also argues when purist campaign against words they are also only targeting the surface of the issue. Everyone who is a minority is a target to this kind of language, even Rauch himself. To appeal to our emotions, once again he tells us about the incident in the train when he believed for a moment that those kids were referring to his as a faggot. This experience made him realized the power of prejudice words. By condemning words as inappropriate, we condemn only those whose say them, once again not prejudice it self, and once again leading to a defeated battle from the start. He referenced the “Dictionary of Cautionary Words and Phrases” from The University of Missouri's journalism department as an example of this battle to caution non politically correct vocabulary. Rauch draws a very valid point here, words are just words, and as long as there bigots and racist will find new words to add more fuel to this

Hate speech is defined as “speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against someone based on his or her race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability.” There has been a controversial issue regarding hate speech and the laws that prohibit it. The right to freedom of expression reassures each person the right to express themselves in ideas and opinions without the government's interference. Hate speech is not protected by the first amendment and should not be expressed towards others because it causes harm. In this essay I will talk about the effects harmful hate speech caused to others and to the groups treated as insignificant. I will also discuss how hate speech cannot

The purpose of this paper is to discuss public school districts' limits on "hate" speech and

Rauch examines making the uncomfortable, comfortable. Prejudice has to co-exist within a world by being redirected so that it’s beneficial to society. Rauch wants to provide people with a different outlook on how to handle prejudice as a whole. He makes it clear throughout his essay that he does not want prejudice to be eradicated but to be seen in a different perspective. He wants people to come together and understand that the violence actually doesn’t come from the words. But would rather ignore words that make people feel uncomfortable.

In this paper I will analyze the arguments presented in Caroline West’s article, “Words That Silence? Freedom of Express and Racist Hate Speech.” Here West probes what is meant by free speech and in so doing, identifies three dimensions of speech from which the value of free speech derives. These are production and distribution, comprehension, and consideration. Her major premise is that absent requirements of comprehension or consideration, free speech lacks the value it is generally accorded. West argues that allowing the production and distribution of racist hate speech has a silencing effect on, not only the production and distribution of speech by racial minorities, but the comprehension and consideration of their speech as well. She concludes that this silencing may have a net effect of diminishing free speech.

“The difference between the almost-right word and the right word is really a large matter- ‘tis the difference between the lightning bug and lightning.”(Mark Twain). Mark Twain, the author of an extraordinary yet controversial novel; The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn had a great way of capturing moments in time and bringing them to life through the use of meaningful and direct diction. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has been a vexed novel for it 's a use of the “N-word”. However, many scholars and associations have devised a “solution” for this problem such as, completely banning the book, creating sanitized versions, or even replacing the book for another American literature novel. “What is so wrong

Words can have a huge emotional impact on people, and often affect their self-image and self-worth. It is words like "retard" or "retarded" for one, which can surely lead to such a result. People in today's society are not aware of the true and hurtful meaning of this word when they use it. No matter when it is used or how it is used, it will always have the negative connection with those who have such mental disabilities. Futhermore with such frequent use, those suffering from these disabilities, will feel different from others; as if they are labelled. In no way should the word "retarded" be acceptable in a society of today; for all will just become worse.

What do the words Cracker, Kike, Nigger, Jap, Chinc, Faggot, Queer, Dike and Spic all have in common? They are all derogatory remarks that humans call one another on a daily basis. Why can people use these terms and not have to worry about receiving any punishment or any ridicule? The reason is because of the First Amendment right of free speech. The first amendment gives people the right to basically say anything that comes to mind whether it is something nice or something like a derogatory remark. The first amendment is good and freedom of speech has its advantages like most things, but however, it also has its disadvantages. The disadvantages are that people can say words that are extremely hurtful