On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:09:02 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews"
wrote:
>
>
>?? wrote:
>
>> Frank F. Matthews wrote:
>>
>>> Now things are really getting ridiculous. Are you allowed to use the
>>> special words if you are closely related to a member. Perhaps a
>>> spouse or in-law. How about a second cousin or maybe a person who has
>>> lived there for a few decades or so,
>>>
>>> If the damned term is offensive then it's offensive whoever uses it.
>>> If folks use it among themselves then it isn't offensive if someone
>>> outside the magic circle uses it.
>>>
>> I've witnessed an argument between blacks in which they were calling
>> each other "nigger". But I don't think a caucasian could get away with
>> calling either one of them "nigger". In like fashion, the sports teams
>> of the Red Mesa, AZ High School (on the Navajo rez) are the "Redskins".
>> But the Washington "Redskins" are under attack. It's all related to
>> "ownership" of the word, I'm told.
>snip
>
>Then those folks can all piss off and be ignored. Words are not owned.
>
But words can be powerful, and where a word has a history of
being used in a derogatory manner, "fighting words," it is only
polite to avoid using it.
Once upon a time in America, redskins were people to be
eliminated in a near genocide, so the remaining redskins might be
a bit tetchy about the word.
Would you think that a sports team that called itelf the
"Fighting Kikes", a homage to the winning nature of the Israeli
army, would be appropriate?
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * |