[Imc-uk-features] political correctness, and hiding and promoting

[Genny]

Ha!  Wise words there from Noel.

I just went off to look up the etymology of patsy out of interest when I 
saw it in the post and there was the "ethnic slur" definition so I stuck 
it in my comment on the hiding of, er, whatever post it was.  I've lost 
track.  If you do a bit more research, other possible derivations of 
patsy such as "pazzo" (Italian: fool) come up.  So, who knows.  It's not 
a word I hear used regularly, so it's hard to judge.  And I'm pretty 
sure Ben's post was ironic. :o)

I don't think the intention of the writer is crucial in deciding whether 
language is discriminatory, if the word is used as an insult which, by 
implication, denigrates another group.  It's quite possible for the 
discrimination to be inadvertent.

The reclaiming words situation is very interesting, innit?

On the whole topic of editorial guidelines and hiding, some face to face 
discussion would probably be helpful, if only to clarify areas of 
difficulty.

Got to go - I'm being sacked today!

Genny




Cass, Noel wrote:
>  
> The issue with language, to repeat a post I made before, 

is primarily about INTENTION. To my mind it is insane to accuse someone 
of racism

or discriminatory language for using a word like 'patsy'.

This word has a well-understood mening that has nothing to do wih race,

the etymology is irrelevant to the intention of the usage. Likewise 'dumb'.

The primary meaning and the intention is not tothing to do with people 
who cannot

speak. Discriminatory language, like language in general, is about 
language in use.

If the word is an accepted insult or 'denigratory' term, then it is 
unacceptable.

A more interesting case is when words are 'reclaimed' and then we get 
the debates

about who, if anyone, is allowed to use 'nigger' or 'queer' (see recent 
postings).

'Punk' is an insult, originally meaning a young male prostitute

(in England, although an American etymology comes from a tribal language,

and refers to a useless, burned, bit of wood). Can we consider it 
discriminatory?

Only if it is used like that!! I first thought that Ben's post was 
ironic. I hope so.

Let's have some sense...

I agree that both hiding and promoting only work if there is consensus,

if there isn't (as seems the case), then there is a problem.

I trust admins to promote stuff that I want to read first,

then I have a look at the normal posts, especially if they have comments

(although this often means they are controversial postings).

Occasionally, as I'm on the features list, I check hiddens,

to see if I agree with the decision. This system, although flawed,

works to help me, as a regular IMC 'user', find out the kind of 
information I want

to know, and to pass it on to other people.

Remember that there is a hell of a lot of good work going on,

and that for the average 'user', it is still the best resource around. ;-)))
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> --
> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial: features and wire moderation
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features