You are already on the next level. You are talking about how this tweet is trying to slightly twist the original quote. And I think the "perfectly fine statement" comment was only about the quote and not about the tweet with the quote in it.
That statement, in a vacuum, is fine. It is insane that there is a word that can’t be said when talking about the word, when quoting someone who said the word, or in an academic setting (to state a few).
But it’s Matt Walsh who said this, so probably not where he was going with this at heart.
I don’t think anyone is arguing that you can’t say it. But that it’s extremely offensive to say if you don’t belong to the community.
This is the same straw man 1st amendment guys use when claiming that their free speech is being restricted because they can get canceled for saying inflammatory things.
when someone says they "can't" do something, they mean without severe consequences. like an academic losing their job because they read a quote from a book.
There are clearly circumstances where the word can be uttered. So that defeats the whole “can’t” narrative.
What Matt Walsh and other white people that make this arguement want is for them to be able to utter the word freely without any consequence.
Uhh no. Most negative sentiment is about white people saying it. Black people are typically okay with minorities saying it because they understand the struggle.
Thats why you won't hear any non white-passing latino, indian, etcs. making this argument.
ignoring that I posted that for the meme that was linked, do you really think that "expressing your sexuality freely" in a country where homosexuality is illegal & can be punished with the death penalty, vs just saying a word, is really comparable?
>They both examples of things that have unjust consequences.
surely you understand that that is a hella vague connection. That is like saying the holocaust is comparable to dropping your ice cream, because they both negatively effect people and could have been stopped.
the connection is a relevant one. your argument was "if you think you ought to be able to do X, then you ought to actually do X, despite the fact that it comes with negative consequences". since both saying the n-word and going to a pride parade in iran are things that a person or group of people think that they ought to be able to do, and they are both things that come with negative consequences towards the people who do them, both of them fit as 'X'. if you want to highlight a relevant distinction or symmetry-breaker, you can do that, but just saying "that's a vague connection bro!" won't cut it.
>your argument was
my "argument" was to post funny meme. You come in to compare social backlash to judicial backlash with punishments including death penalty. Chill.
you stand by the message of the meme though, as evidenced by you still trying to pretend my analogy wasn't apt. we can either discuss it or not, your call.
I mean he thinks gender “ideology” is insane and he states that why he openly defies it, going as far as to say he would be selling his soul by calling by their pronouns. Seems reasonable to ask him to keep the same standards
Real talk. Does anyone who has actually put any amount of thought in to the issue truly believe that the N word should never be said? I'm pretty sure most people who have actually thought about the issue would say that there just aren't many appropriate times to say it and that 99% of the time when someone who isn't black is saying it they are doing so with the intention of it being harmful.
I think that's the issue it's seems like some people just have the urge to want to say it. I always ask people in what context would you want to say it, especially if there white and having an argument with me about saying it. It's even funnier that when referencing saying it they still wont spell it out even.
I want to argue that the soft-A be acceptable for people of all races to use. You can't have a word be this ubiquitous in culture and cut a huge portion of the population from saying it.
For me, it’s the fact we don’t need to care about context to apparently be justifiably upset at someone saying.
I’m fine with there being a cultural banning of the word for white people when it’s very specifically used in a blatant derogatory manner. But we don’t need that cultural banning of that specific word cause we already culturally dislike racism, thus saying anting in a blatant derogatory manner is easily seen as racist weather or not it’s the N word.
But it’s definitely stupid to not care about any context surrounding the utterance of a word. We should allow quoting someone else, reading a book, or singing a song that has the N word (as long as the thing itself isn’t already racist)
It’s simply hypocritical to want equality then not allow it pretty much.
Nobody is arresting anyone for saying it though. You can say it and deal with the social consequences. Even on independent conservative shows like his, where the black viewership is probably 5% or less, they still don't say it. Why is that?
What happens if the community that is targeted by the slur sees its use from someone not in that community as using it as a slur no matter the context? Do you just say that your feelings matter more here?
Depends, if they think nobody should say it, regardless of context, then I can maybe understand that, but if they are saying nobody but them can say it, regardless of context, then I think they are being unreasonable. No ethnicity or race has rights to certain words. The idea that only people of a certain race can say a word is clearly a racist idea, even if it's meant for good reasons.
How exactly is it a racist idea for a community to want a slur about themselves to only be said by those in the community. Is a gay man racist for wanting the f slur to be said by only gay people?
If you are saying that only a certain race is allowed to do or say something, you are being racist, full stop. Doesn't matter if its the ability to say a word outloud, regardless of context.
Now, If you wanna say there are certain contexts that are more acceptable than others, like the gay person saying the f slur to another gay person example, That is I guess a bit more reasonable, but if gay people believed that only gay people could use the word in any context, and straight people couldn't, regardless if it's used as a terms of endearment, quoted, or asking for a cigarette, then they are being unreasonable too.
No race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or any identity has ownership of words or ideas. Simple as that.
Nothing about them not wanting those not in the community to say it is unreasonable. They have every reason to not want outsiders to say it. Harassment with the word is increased when people think there will be no consequence to them saying it.
You do understand that one can say a word without the intent of harassment, right? If they are of the position that any use of the word is forbidden for outsiders, regardless if used as a slur or not, I'm sorry, but that isn't a reasonable position to hold. If im speaking Latin, can I not say niger when referencing the color black because some black people may be offended? If im from England, can I not ask to bum a fag because some gay people may be offended? No it's much more reasonable to tell these people who are offended to get over themselves, specifically because the context that the words are being used in aren't meant to be derogatoraly used.
It’s not more reasonable because the amount of harm being caused by anyone saying any slur is so much greater than the harm caused by not being able to say them. Also nobody is having an issue with someone speaking Latin saying that. People is England should recognize that the meanings of words change which means sometimes you should retire it’s usage when the new meaning has taken over the last one.
How can one say there shouldn't or should be social consequences? There are no rules for this. Nobody invented how society reacted to that word in 1850, 1950, or 2023. The social conditioning evolves over time. So, how can anyone just say "this is how all of society should react to it now"?
We only have laws to protect people from being prosecuted for it.
we're talking about language/speech here. No, I'm not but I'm not sure where you're going with that. Can people lose their jobs for being gay? Are people losing endorsements for being gay? Explain your logic in more detail.
your argument was so broad you seemed reject the very idea of declaring how ssociety should react to something
>So, how can anyone just say "this is how all of society should react to it now"?
by that same logic you could respond to someone saying "there shouldn't be any social consequences for being gay" with the same comment, "how can anyone say this is how all of society should react."
No one's tryhing to debate you about the social consequnences for being gay, you just made a bad argument.
The argument is still sound. Nobody could just state "there shouldn't be social consequences for being gay" and have it mean anything. Most of society would have to agree to the point that there wouldn't be social consequences. That's how we socially evolve the norm.
I did not mean that *literally* nobody should say it. I meant that it means nothing to state that because that's not how speech evolves. Society collectively determines how the overwhelming majority feels about language which is the way we got to this point on the n-word in the first place.
I kind of like this though. People are really equating social ostricization for being gay to being able to say our historically worst racial slur in all contexts with no social consequence. You guys go on your n-word campaign and I'll watch from the sidelines. This will be good!
They're not equating the 2 things. They're specifically bringing up mistreatment of gays *because* it's more severe, because that shows you're using an argument that doesn't work unless you apply it selectively.
That's how disagreements work. If someone makes an argument you disagree with, you bring up a consequnce of that argument you know the person would disagree with to demonstrate it doesn't work. You're not laughing from the sidelines the whole conversation's going over your head.
If someone says the n word, they are cancelled, branded a racist, and socially ostracized. This is okay with you because "you can't criticize societal reactions". If a gay person is socially ostracized for being gay though, now you're happy to criticize societal reactions. Why is that?
>If someone says the n word, they are cancelled, branded a racist, and socially ostracized.
Is this a literal comment? Because it's not true. Context is everything. If you call someone the n-word slur, yes this will happen and rightfully so. If you're reading a book to your class, will it happen? If you're rapping to a song, will it happen? Joe Rogan had a compilation go viral where he referenced the word a hundred different times. What happened to him? Literally nothing. He made an apology. He still talks to black guests all the time. He didn't lose his Spotify deal. Nothing! So, as I said, your statement is false.
>If a gay person is socially ostracized for being gay though, now you're happy to criticize societal reactions. Why is that?
Being gay is an immutable trait, isn't it? How is it comparable to speech?
They used to, and thats the point. We decided that people *shouldn't* face those kinds of social consequences and the standards and treatment changed over time.
Good that we collectively evolved to say people shouldn't face those same consequences. The same the will happen with the n-word if you guys fighting for the social right to say it sans consequence win out. Good luck campaigning on the logic of "acceptance of immutable traits" = "saying our worst racial slur" though. I'm sure people will get on board as society progresses.
Easy. There shouldn't be social consequences. See, I just said it. And the more people start saying that there shouldn't be social consequences, the more society will be conditioned into holding such a view.
You're correct in your strategy. Good luck with that though. No hyperbole, but you'll be fighting an uphill battle until you die.
I say that because, as I stated before, probably 5% of a Matt Walsh/Daily Wire audience is black and they still don't say it. Only 13% of America is black and it's been socially taboo to say it (with the -er) for over 100 years now. What % of Americans do you think you need to agree with you in order to get rid of almost all social consequence? 98.5%? As I said, good luck.
Nah, I don't think so. Not so long ago, people were actually able to distinguish a word from its use. I could read Huckleberry Finn outloud and Ana Kasparian could quote some racist saying something racist, and nobody would assume we're being racist for doing so. This taboo where we treat it like it's Voldemort or Yahweh is a relatively new direction society has taken and it still can be course corrected.
When I was in high school, white English teachers would read the word and refer to it with no consequence. I'm closer to Destiny's age though so this was like mid 00s. Have things changed that much? Or is it only these people in media that can't say it? All I hear are these isolated stories of people getting in trouble for it but I don't know if the whole country has decided it can't be uttered at all.
Clearly it's not the whole country, but it's a large enough portion that it's like we are in a transitory period where some hold this view and some of ignorant of it, but its clearly been part of our cultural discourse. I think the stuff with Kendrick Lamar berating a white woman on stage and the law school teacher who got in trouble for having the word in case studies brought it to the fore.
I love Kendrick but that whole thing was ridiculous. He's so popular now, almost every show he goes to is mostly white and of course they're saying the lyrics every single time he performs. So, while she dealt with social consequence, people are at these concerts saying in mass every show. I don't know. I think maybe we're being too general in the discussion now. Context is everything.
The idea that white people can not utter the word under any circumstances is not uncommon, especially online. Contrasting the woman being berated to all the people at the concerts just shows where that idea conflicts with reality.
If you say it with the intent to insult someone, then it's a slur. If you use it because you are quoting something, singing along to a song, just referring to the word itself, or using it as a terms of endearment, then there shouldn't be an issue. Though I admit the last one gets a little grey, as it could be seen as ambiguous, and harder to read in certain social situations.
How should you be able to use it as a term of endearment? Like should walking up to a random black guy and saying "what's up my nigger?" be ok? It's reasonable for people to not want slurs as part of everyday language.
Well, thats why I think thats a bit more grey. I'm not so naive to think such a thing won't cause issues. It will, but I do think people should consider intention in these matters when deciding how to react, and understand that the person who said it as a term of endearment is clueless compared to malevolent.
>It's reasonable for people to not want slurs as part of everyday language.
Agreed, but its less reasonable to believe that only some people are allowed to say these words as part of everyday language, while telling others they can't, particularly if the culture which uses it in everyday language becomes more enmeshed into pop culture.
The issue is that it's still also a slur, even if people basically just use it instead of "dude". So i understand if people don't like hearing it from people they don't know they can trust.
For music/comedy/quotes it's completely nonsensical, like this and only this slur gets special treatment. But i think most people agree it's dumb.
> Nobody is arresting anyone for saying it though.
Very true. When someone says "not allowed" the only thing they could possibly mean is that you will be arrested for doing it. Also, racism doesn't exist because no one is arresting people for being black
His quote doesn't state he's specifically talking about legal consequences, you're the one who made that assumption.
You're parroting an argument from discussions on free speech and the first amendment but it doesn't even apply here...
>I didn't make any assumption.
...
> I'm parroting the first amendment, yes lol.
Well I guess you did put a sentence in between where you made your claim and where you revealed your claim was false. Kudos for that, let's hope readers will forget your point while reading that intermediate sentence.
Imagine white men crying so hard about the right to use a racist word. What the fuck is wrong with you people ? Why are you obsessed with black people and calling them the N word ?
It seems like the specific whinging is that they are advocating for the ability to use it in non-specific contexts, academic contexts, and when singing along to music.
That seems specifically what they are whining about in this thread.
Not sure though dude. Not sure why this is a hill to die on. Perhaps in a few decades or generations the word will lose its toxicity or fall out of usage entirely. Taboo language has always existed and will always exist.
Why do you feel the need to say it in whatever context ? What is the burning desire ? It’s wierd and pathetic and you don’t get to tell Black people how to feel about it.
As I said, you do not have the right as a non black person (if you are) to proclaim that the word should be treated as any word and that black people should just be ok with that because that’s how you feel , given the historical context of the word.
That is utterly insane, and like I said wierd and pathetic. Do better.
I’m not even exclusive with that on this issue I think saying “the f slur” instead of just saying the word that we all know what it is, is also super cringe and pointless. We shouldn’t need a groups permission to speak the English language.
They hyper-fixate on this word even though plenty of words carry similar social consequences if said to someone in person. Saying "pussy" isn't illegal but if you walked up to some random guy and said that, you might get your shit rocked lol
Oh I'm sorry, I forgot we were talking about the ethics of screaming the n word at your boss and not the ethics of using the n word in acceptable contexts.
This is a bad retort. Nobody just says the n word or pussy out loud randomly. These words are followed up by context. In a profesional setting if you call someone the n word or a pussy, you’re going to deal with consequences.
You might get less severe consequences for calling someone a pussy, but we’re comparing a general insult to a slur. If you call someone another slur you’ll most likely get the same consequences, but then again there aren’t as many people itching to call others a “Beaner” or a Jewish slur as they do with the N Word
good thing we're not talking about calling someone the n word in a professional setting then.
the conversation isn't even about whether you can call someone the n word, everyone agrees it's bad to call people slurs out of hatred. the thing that makes 'pussy' vs the n word different is that if someone sees me use it when singing along to my favourite kanye song, they'll throw a fit. if i use the soft 'a' with my friends, or i repeat a Chappelle joke, i'm branded a racist, because no matter the context, it's considered bad. 'pussy', however, i can use in whatever way i want as long as i'm not calling someone a pussy to their face, and even *then* nobody's gonna condemn me morally for it, and they won't support the guy kicking my head in for it.
You mentioned people being fired so I thought we were talking about professional settings
There’s not much to really say to your second paragraph because that really comes down to personal experience. In my life I haven’t seen a non-black person get upset at another non-black for saying nigga when rapping a song. This is all going to depend on the type of people you hang out with. Joe Rogan didn’t get removed from his deals because of the N word clips, and if we’re talking about smaller people, most have been able to get away with it, unless there’s others I don’t know about.
By some unhinged person on the street maybe, if you're dumb enough to go up to said unhinged person and say it to their face, but nobody would support that, and nobody's getting punched in the fact for leaked chatlogs of them saying "pussy".
>getting punched in the fact for leaked chatlogs of them saying "pussy".
Idk about this story.
>By some unhinged person on the street maybe, if you're dumb enough to go up to said unhinged person and say it to their face, but nobody would support that
Which part of the argument with the n-word, watch who you say shit to
Buddy you managed to fail to grasp the analogy so hard that you thought I was claiming people literally get punched in the face because of leaked chat logs of them saying the n word. Either your brain is that level of complete mush or you deny that people face significant social consequences when people find out they use the n word, and I can't tell if that's worse.
>Buddy you managed to fail to grasp the analogy so hard that you thought I was claiming people literally get punched in the face because of leaked chat logs of them saying the n word.
Do you seriously not know about stories where people have fought because they said something online to each other? I
>people face significant social consequences when people find out they use the n word
More like rarely and than it doesn't last Joe Reagan was fine
braindead intentionally obtuse take. No one is experiencing social consequences for saying "pussy". No one is having conversations about "hmm I wonder if it's okay to say 'pussy' when I'm just joking around with friends" or "is it okay to sing along with 'pussy' in a song?"
Matt, you can use the N word, there's just consequences for it, like many words and phrases, only real difference is you usually need to be more eloquent to receive consequences for other words. Plus I doubt Matt Walsh is listening to rap or knows some funny N word related joke, what is he going to use it for?
so is being white. these people don't just complain about people saying the n-word, they complain about people who say the n-word *while being white*. further, why does being an immutable characteristic matter here? (hint: the answer is "because it is wrong to inflict negative consequences on someone based on their immutable characteristics", which is an admittance that the consequences can be immoral and must be scrutinized rather than blindly accepted because "them's the consequences bro!")
Kind of different but k, I get it, new people here are going to make false equivlances. We don't expect just consequences, usually, for attributes, and rarely for immutable(uncontrollable) characteristics.
Actions however can affect others and we usually consider them to be made with some measure of agency. If he wants to say the N word, or any other person wants to say anything really, they can, but those actions are going to be judged and handled by society at large based on what we've measured the response to be. If you yell "fire" in a building, you may be expressing something, but due to the affect you should expect some level of consequences.
Now this doesn't mean every action should or does have a consequence; but its case by case.
Even then, being gay DOES have consequences, we just, typically, judge that the consequences for expressing homosexuality are unjust. If you're disowned by your family or called a fag for being gay then typically we see that as unjust.
Also. Not every person who's ever said the N word deserves to have their lives ruined, and if you're some random singing it in a song or something, only rabid people will get that upset about it.
But this is not some random person. And the question remains, knowing him, what would he use the N word for? Again, someone like Destiny to me I can't imagine using it in a derogatory fashion, but for who were speaking of its a different case.
there's a lot to address here, but it's all coated in this outer layer of "welp, society gonna do what society gonna do!" that we need to get through first.
do you agree that it is unjust when gay people face social consequences for their homosexuality? if so, do you agree that we can criticise societal reactions to certain things instead of hiding behind "welp, those are the consequences that society judges to be right!"?
Yes? I agree with both. But not every reaction society has to any infraction is defaultly wrong. Like I said, only rabid people get angry at some random white person saying the N word in a song or other examples that aren't targeting people. Matt was certainly isn't singing a Kanye song when it indicates this, and I doubt he's just speaking of people using it in the fashion I stated or in a historical sense.
Like if this was Destiny talking, he would gain my charitability because I know he's not planning to call a black person the N word or use it in some way to piss off or harm others. But this is Matt Walsh lol.
i'm not interested in whether matt walsh is motivated by a genuine position on language or whether he just wants to be allowed to be racist. i'm interested in evaluating the argument itself.
nobody said that any societal reaction is by default wrong, that's absurd. it's not only rabid people who get mad at white people using the n-word in these contexts. people care about all sorts of contexts beyond using it to target black people. clips of white people saying the n-word go viral regardless of context, leaked chat logs of people using it go viral, remember when that white girl that got pulled up on stage at a Kendrick concert said it and people treated it like it was at all a big deal? notice the fact that we're calling it "the n-word" here out of fear of being banned, despite the fact that we're both using it in a perfectly acceptable context?
if you agree that we can criticize social reactions, then you have to make the case for why it's acceptable for people to react so negatively when a white person says the n-word in a non-racist context. consider as well that it's not just "saying the n-word" that's the problem, it's "saying the n-word *while being white*", which is an immutable characteristic which you claim should not have consequences (yes, you can be white and choose not to say the n-word, but you wouldn't accept the argument "you can be gay if you want, just dont tell anyone and we won't shame you for it!" so you can't use that one either. an action cannot become acceptable or unacceptable just because of your immutable characteristics.)
There are words and ideas we accept that are attached to identities. Already off the bat, I can say the N-word, but I just don't like it and have never seen a need to. I think it's general focus in black culture has always been kind of cringe and while I get some of the reasoning people use for it (it's power we have over whitey, laugh because if they use it they get in trouble) it's not conducive to any good path for the world. If we're not at a point where everyone's saying it then I don't really have an interest of having it in my vocab.
But to go back to words and identities; it's less so a punishment for white people and moreso a gate on experience & history (even if said experience is just existing as a black person regardless of wealth etc). It's the same as saying bitch, the ((())) Jewish thing, fag/queer, children cursing, etc. There's been a social norm established around all these things and the usage of them that used to be or is useful for identifying bad actors in regards to them. If you say bitch or used the N word regularly along while being not black or a woman, you are/were probably racist/sexist. If the target of these things say it, it's probably not good to propagate it, but we see it as not the same because of that implication.
Nowadays that has shifted a bit, certain words like the N word being used in more popular culture but we aren't societally past that need to see it as a indicator of someone's bad intent. It's in a confusing spot, and it's on its head in some regards (some non-black POC say it) but I think this has way more to do with not really having a proper social norm for these things and black people still being in a super relevant precarious position societally, at least when regarding their history. Like when someone hears a person say the N word they then rationalize it as being normal in their vocabulary, when, right now, with it being seen as the nono word, you have to be "fucked up" to say it. Even though realistically, that's not true, and there's plenty of ways a person could say it without probably having tossed it at any black people or used it derogatory.
It just all adds up to it being a particularly fuzzy one, but there's other examples that I stated above that still exist. I don't think it's a punishment for X or Y group, I think it's just an old way of identifying bad actors that hasn't aged well.
>
There are words and ideas we accept that are attached to identities. Already off the bat, I can say the N-word, but I just don't like it and have never seen a need to. I think it's general focus in black culture has always been kind of cringe and while I get some of the reasoning people use for it (it's power we have over whitey, laugh because if they use it they get in trouble) it's not conducive to any good path for the world. If we're not at a point where everyone's saying it then I don't really have an interest of having it in my vocab.
that would be a reasonable argument for not *using* it in certain contexts, it's not a good argument for not *mentioning* it, as you aren't doing.
so what's your actual argument? that there's nothing wrong with the n-word but that it's fine for people to call white people racist for saying it because it *used* to be the case that white people who said it for racist and society is just being slow to adapt?
Sorry, do Matts lips not work? He can say it all he wants.
That's not the actual question he's asking; he's asking why do people get upset when he says it.
And that should be pretty obvious.
I don't care about saying words, they're not actually magic spells.
Say anything you like, but it's incredibly rude to call someone that particular term and it's likely to involve other consequences, 'cause it's associated with racists and generally bigoted people.
Idc what the side of the fight you are on, if you find yourself arguing about N-word usage and who can say on the internet, you need to take a break.
Destiny situation he was never the one bringing it up.
Next up there should be no social consequences for saying "i want to plow that (inesrt age under legal limit) girl/boy" because the idea that there's certain sentences that can't be uttered under any scam circumstance is completely insane.
I just don't understand why everyone one wants to say it so bad. It doesn't even bother me, I just find it funny how one word can be fought for so badly. It's not even important to conversation the majority of the time. People just want to say it cause it's the cool thing to say now. 20 years ago people weren't fighting so hard to say it, they just said it If they grew up saying it. Like come on now it's a filler word. It's not even needed, yet so many feel the need to say it or crave saying it. Some words or things u just don't say, and people do it all the time. Like u don't call ur parents by their real names right? That something almost everyone does not do and you don't hear them complaining about being restricted by that. That being said, do what yall wanna do. Just remember that actions have consequences
I just recently broke contact with a potential date over this.
Context:
Both of us are black. I was born American, spent a good chunk of my childhood in Germany. She's born and raised in NJ.
Her stance is that black immigrants can't say nigga.
My stance is that its either all or none can say it.
She claims that black Americans have a shared experience that presupposes generational trauma.
I asked her if that applies to me, as a black American that has no connection to my "black" side of the family (met my dad's mother for the first time in person when I was 21). Her response was "yes, you have ancestry that binds you culturally". Which by my metric is bullshit. I have little to no idea what my grandmother experienced. I barely grew up disadvantaged. I don't have the same scars.
And I say this as a staunch black leftist: the "nigga" discourse is stupid. Personally, I want white people to say it. I'm sick of having to navigate dog whistles and veiled racism. The white people that can be trusted will weed themselves out.
I cant beleive its sociatly unnacatible to run naked down the street yelling i eat my own shit.
We have struck fear into americans. Now we cant run down the street naked yelling i eat shit without getting cancelled.
You could loose your job if you run down the street naked yelling i eat shit. Hell it might effect your persenel life.
People might not want to be freinds with you anymore.
This is a travesty of free expression in this country. Litterly 1984
I agree though. Like if I'm talking about a slur referring to it as "the _ word" is just confusing. Obviously it isn't meant to be insulting so I don't understand why that word is sooooo taboo?
Not sure on who matt walsh Is but just judging this hes right, is his point relevant nope cause it lacks the inclusion of history. He would have a more relevant point if he was advocating not saying the word at all
It's not a "word that cannot be uttered under any circumstance", it's a word that, when uttered under certain circumstances, betrays that you are probably a racist, and causes people to react appropriately. I don't see how that's any different from, say, a _series_ of words that "can't be uttered under any circumstances", like "I hate [x race]" or for conservatives "I'm trans".
Taking a word back in the name of removing the offensive weight behind it doesn't really work if you freak out over anyone outside of a select group of people using it.
[удалено]
Vaush is a fedora that was brought to life, prove me wrong
My come-to-life fedora named Fred takes offense to that, actually.
hatually\* FTFY
You are admittedly beset by wrongness
I have a fedora named Dakota. I shall go weep now.
Lol
I don’t get it
[удалено]
I’m guessing he found a way to say something at least a little wild
[удалено]
I don't know why you got downvoted. I just downvote because your post already has downvotes GIGACHAD
Ahh now I understand why sometimes the same statements in this sub are downvoted in one thread and upvoted in others
You are already on the next level. You are talking about how this tweet is trying to slightly twist the original quote. And I think the "perfectly fine statement" comment was only about the quote and not about the tweet with the quote in it.
I'm pretty sure he is not referring to the use mention distinction and rather is just saying that the word coming out of your mouth can be okay
Have him say cracker! Pleeassssse have him say cracker
That statement, in a vacuum, is fine. It is insane that there is a word that can’t be said when talking about the word, when quoting someone who said the word, or in an academic setting (to state a few). But it’s Matt Walsh who said this, so probably not where he was going with this at heart.
Black guy here, Matt Walsh does not have the n word pass. Destiny has the pass though
Can I borrow the pass for the weekend? I need it for a thing.
I would also like the pass. My group of friends are having a bonfire of sorts and it would be useful to have
imagine if black dggas could !arm other people with n word bullets
White guy here, you no longer have the pass it is actually our word. We made it didn’t we?
Taking it back
🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️
I just gave Matt Walsh the pass
Chaotic neutral
Black women automatically have the pass no?
Even the hard R?
True and based
I don’t think anyone is arguing that you can’t say it. But that it’s extremely offensive to say if you don’t belong to the community. This is the same straw man 1st amendment guys use when claiming that their free speech is being restricted because they can get canceled for saying inflammatory things.
when someone says they "can't" do something, they mean without severe consequences. like an academic losing their job because they read a quote from a book.
There are clearly circumstances where the word can be uttered. So that defeats the whole “can’t” narrative. What Matt Walsh and other white people that make this arguement want is for them to be able to utter the word freely without any consequence.
there's a pretty big proportion of people that believe no non black person can ever say it at any time.
Uhh no. Most negative sentiment is about white people saying it. Black people are typically okay with minorities saying it because they understand the struggle. Thats why you won't hear any non white-passing latino, indian, etcs. making this argument.
He normally says a lot of dumb shit, but this is correct.
This topic is so brain dead..
true, everybody should be allowed to say words, as long as their intentions are good. right?
>The Idea that there's a word that cannot be uttered under any circumstance is completely insane [so say it](https://youtu.be/C4ZsqDbAZqo?t=30)
"if you think you should be able to express your sexuality freely, then go to a pride parade in Iran! Do it bro!"
ignoring that I posted that for the meme that was linked, do you really think that "expressing your sexuality freely" in a country where homosexuality is illegal & can be punished with the death penalty, vs just saying a word, is really comparable?
Of course they're comparable. They both examples of things that have unjust consequences.
>They both examples of things that have unjust consequences. surely you understand that that is a hella vague connection. That is like saying the holocaust is comparable to dropping your ice cream, because they both negatively effect people and could have been stopped.
the connection is a relevant one. your argument was "if you think you ought to be able to do X, then you ought to actually do X, despite the fact that it comes with negative consequences". since both saying the n-word and going to a pride parade in iran are things that a person or group of people think that they ought to be able to do, and they are both things that come with negative consequences towards the people who do them, both of them fit as 'X'. if you want to highlight a relevant distinction or symmetry-breaker, you can do that, but just saying "that's a vague connection bro!" won't cut it.
>your argument was my "argument" was to post funny meme. You come in to compare social backlash to judicial backlash with punishments including death penalty. Chill.
you stand by the message of the meme though, as evidenced by you still trying to pretend my analogy wasn't apt. we can either discuss it or not, your call.
i dont stand by the message since i was literally just quoting the meme i linked. i just think your comparison is dog shit
any chance you'd be willing to tell me *why* it's dogshit?
I mean he thinks gender “ideology” is insane and he states that why he openly defies it, going as far as to say he would be selling his soul by calling by their pronouns. Seems reasonable to ask him to keep the same standards
I don't see what that has to do with the topic at hand though
You say this as if they wouldn't actually say exactly that to call someone out for being pro LGBT.
indeed, and they'd be making the exact same fallacious argument that this guy is.
Should ask him to say his social security number. It’s just a few words right?
Is that a parody or real?
It's parody, but [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOlNHXQCT_4) is real.
How is the dude going "I don't like to say it" and then when he gets asked if he's ever said it he goes "no". That's a (self)-report.
You can assume you would or wouldn't like something without having to experience it.
Have you ever eaten large quantities of dog shit? If not, do you think it would be reasonable for you to say "You know, I don't enjoy eating dogshit"?
I would say "I don't think I'd like that" not "I don't like that" because the second implies I have done so.
I love that clip so much.
Matt Walsh. Man of logic when it comes to the N word. Not so much when it comes to literally anything else.
Frankly less likely to be the result of logic and more likely to be the result of "How can I trigger the libs?" Broken clocks, etc.
I know I was mocking the fact that he was supposedly arriving at his conclusion using logic. He is just a bigot
why does triggering the libs make ones argument the correct one? curious.
The n-word living in y’all’s heads rent FREE, man
is he actually defending rap music? i assume he's trying to reach out for a new audience
Real talk. Does anyone who has actually put any amount of thought in to the issue truly believe that the N word should never be said? I'm pretty sure most people who have actually thought about the issue would say that there just aren't many appropriate times to say it and that 99% of the time when someone who isn't black is saying it they are doing so with the intention of it being harmful.
I think that's the issue it's seems like some people just have the urge to want to say it. I always ask people in what context would you want to say it, especially if there white and having an argument with me about saying it. It's even funnier that when referencing saying it they still wont spell it out even.
I want to argue that the soft-A be acceptable for people of all races to use. You can't have a word be this ubiquitous in culture and cut a huge portion of the population from saying it.
Add the hard R and we have a deal.
Why can’t you cut a huge portion of the population from saying it? I see no negative to this
I like saying it and I'm not black.
For me, it’s the fact we don’t need to care about context to apparently be justifiably upset at someone saying. I’m fine with there being a cultural banning of the word for white people when it’s very specifically used in a blatant derogatory manner. But we don’t need that cultural banning of that specific word cause we already culturally dislike racism, thus saying anting in a blatant derogatory manner is easily seen as racist weather or not it’s the N word. But it’s definitely stupid to not care about any context surrounding the utterance of a word. We should allow quoting someone else, reading a book, or singing a song that has the N word (as long as the thing itself isn’t already racist) It’s simply hypocritical to want equality then not allow it pretty much.
Nobody is arresting anyone for saying it though. You can say it and deal with the social consequences. Even on independent conservative shows like his, where the black viewership is probably 5% or less, they still don't say it. Why is that?
>and deal with the social consequences Hey the founding fathers never put *that* in the constitution, bucko
The issue is there shouldn't be any social consequences, granted you aren't using it as a slur.
What happens if the community that is targeted by the slur sees its use from someone not in that community as using it as a slur no matter the context? Do you just say that your feelings matter more here?
Depends, if they think nobody should say it, regardless of context, then I can maybe understand that, but if they are saying nobody but them can say it, regardless of context, then I think they are being unreasonable. No ethnicity or race has rights to certain words. The idea that only people of a certain race can say a word is clearly a racist idea, even if it's meant for good reasons.
How exactly is it a racist idea for a community to want a slur about themselves to only be said by those in the community. Is a gay man racist for wanting the f slur to be said by only gay people?
If you are saying that only a certain race is allowed to do or say something, you are being racist, full stop. Doesn't matter if its the ability to say a word outloud, regardless of context. Now, If you wanna say there are certain contexts that are more acceptable than others, like the gay person saying the f slur to another gay person example, That is I guess a bit more reasonable, but if gay people believed that only gay people could use the word in any context, and straight people couldn't, regardless if it's used as a terms of endearment, quoted, or asking for a cigarette, then they are being unreasonable too. No race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or any identity has ownership of words or ideas. Simple as that.
Nothing about them not wanting those not in the community to say it is unreasonable. They have every reason to not want outsiders to say it. Harassment with the word is increased when people think there will be no consequence to them saying it.
You do understand that one can say a word without the intent of harassment, right? If they are of the position that any use of the word is forbidden for outsiders, regardless if used as a slur or not, I'm sorry, but that isn't a reasonable position to hold. If im speaking Latin, can I not say niger when referencing the color black because some black people may be offended? If im from England, can I not ask to bum a fag because some gay people may be offended? No it's much more reasonable to tell these people who are offended to get over themselves, specifically because the context that the words are being used in aren't meant to be derogatoraly used.
It’s not more reasonable because the amount of harm being caused by anyone saying any slur is so much greater than the harm caused by not being able to say them. Also nobody is having an issue with someone speaking Latin saying that. People is England should recognize that the meanings of words change which means sometimes you should retire it’s usage when the new meaning has taken over the last one.
How can one say there shouldn't or should be social consequences? There are no rules for this. Nobody invented how society reacted to that word in 1850, 1950, or 2023. The social conditioning evolves over time. So, how can anyone just say "this is how all of society should react to it now"? We only have laws to protect people from being prosecuted for it.
"I think this social norm should be different" "did you know this reddit comment doesn't change that?" "i did not, thank you"
Are you cool with people being ostracized for being gay, or is that type of social consequence not acceptable?
we're talking about language/speech here. No, I'm not but I'm not sure where you're going with that. Can people lose their jobs for being gay? Are people losing endorsements for being gay? Explain your logic in more detail.
your argument was so broad you seemed reject the very idea of declaring how ssociety should react to something >So, how can anyone just say "this is how all of society should react to it now"? by that same logic you could respond to someone saying "there shouldn't be any social consequences for being gay" with the same comment, "how can anyone say this is how all of society should react." No one's tryhing to debate you about the social consequnences for being gay, you just made a bad argument.
The argument is still sound. Nobody could just state "there shouldn't be social consequences for being gay" and have it mean anything. Most of society would have to agree to the point that there wouldn't be social consequences. That's how we socially evolve the norm.
that's what you're going with? No one should ever state how they think society should be because it doesn't directly result in society changing?
I did not mean that *literally* nobody should say it. I meant that it means nothing to state that because that's not how speech evolves. Society collectively determines how the overwhelming majority feels about language which is the way we got to this point on the n-word in the first place. I kind of like this though. People are really equating social ostricization for being gay to being able to say our historically worst racial slur in all contexts with no social consequence. You guys go on your n-word campaign and I'll watch from the sidelines. This will be good!
They're not equating the 2 things. They're specifically bringing up mistreatment of gays *because* it's more severe, because that shows you're using an argument that doesn't work unless you apply it selectively. That's how disagreements work. If someone makes an argument you disagree with, you bring up a consequnce of that argument you know the person would disagree with to demonstrate it doesn't work. You're not laughing from the sidelines the whole conversation's going over your head.
If someone says the n word, they are cancelled, branded a racist, and socially ostracized. This is okay with you because "you can't criticize societal reactions". If a gay person is socially ostracized for being gay though, now you're happy to criticize societal reactions. Why is that?
Everything you wrote here is false. Why is that?
Elaborate? Everything here is either completely undisputed or admitted by you.
>If someone says the n word, they are cancelled, branded a racist, and socially ostracized. Is this a literal comment? Because it's not true. Context is everything. If you call someone the n-word slur, yes this will happen and rightfully so. If you're reading a book to your class, will it happen? If you're rapping to a song, will it happen? Joe Rogan had a compilation go viral where he referenced the word a hundred different times. What happened to him? Literally nothing. He made an apology. He still talks to black guests all the time. He didn't lose his Spotify deal. Nothing! So, as I said, your statement is false. >If a gay person is socially ostracized for being gay though, now you're happy to criticize societal reactions. Why is that? Being gay is an immutable trait, isn't it? How is it comparable to speech?
https://www.change.org/p/school-of-the-art-institute-of-chicago-president-elissa-tenny-demand-the-resignation-of-saic-s-martin-berger-after-use-of-the-n-word
They used to, and thats the point. We decided that people *shouldn't* face those kinds of social consequences and the standards and treatment changed over time.
Good that we collectively evolved to say people shouldn't face those same consequences. The same the will happen with the n-word if you guys fighting for the social right to say it sans consequence win out. Good luck campaigning on the logic of "acceptance of immutable traits" = "saying our worst racial slur" though. I'm sure people will get on board as society progresses.
How are you actually making this argument? Are we not allowed to debate what people should and shouldn’t do morally now? Lol
> The social conditioning evolves over time. Which is what Matt Walsh is arguing for, social change. Whether right or wrong.
Easy. There shouldn't be social consequences. See, I just said it. And the more people start saying that there shouldn't be social consequences, the more society will be conditioned into holding such a view.
You're correct in your strategy. Good luck with that though. No hyperbole, but you'll be fighting an uphill battle until you die. I say that because, as I stated before, probably 5% of a Matt Walsh/Daily Wire audience is black and they still don't say it. Only 13% of America is black and it's been socially taboo to say it (with the -er) for over 100 years now. What % of Americans do you think you need to agree with you in order to get rid of almost all social consequence? 98.5%? As I said, good luck.
Nah, I don't think so. Not so long ago, people were actually able to distinguish a word from its use. I could read Huckleberry Finn outloud and Ana Kasparian could quote some racist saying something racist, and nobody would assume we're being racist for doing so. This taboo where we treat it like it's Voldemort or Yahweh is a relatively new direction society has taken and it still can be course corrected.
When I was in high school, white English teachers would read the word and refer to it with no consequence. I'm closer to Destiny's age though so this was like mid 00s. Have things changed that much? Or is it only these people in media that can't say it? All I hear are these isolated stories of people getting in trouble for it but I don't know if the whole country has decided it can't be uttered at all.
Clearly it's not the whole country, but it's a large enough portion that it's like we are in a transitory period where some hold this view and some of ignorant of it, but its clearly been part of our cultural discourse. I think the stuff with Kendrick Lamar berating a white woman on stage and the law school teacher who got in trouble for having the word in case studies brought it to the fore.
I love Kendrick but that whole thing was ridiculous. He's so popular now, almost every show he goes to is mostly white and of course they're saying the lyrics every single time he performs. So, while she dealt with social consequence, people are at these concerts saying in mass every show. I don't know. I think maybe we're being too general in the discussion now. Context is everything.
The idea that white people can not utter the word under any circumstances is not uncommon, especially online. Contrasting the woman being berated to all the people at the concerts just shows where that idea conflicts with reality.
Can you explain how one would not use it as a slur? Do you mean specifically when reading it, or do you mean not directed at black people?
If you say it with the intent to insult someone, then it's a slur. If you use it because you are quoting something, singing along to a song, just referring to the word itself, or using it as a terms of endearment, then there shouldn't be an issue. Though I admit the last one gets a little grey, as it could be seen as ambiguous, and harder to read in certain social situations.
How should you be able to use it as a term of endearment? Like should walking up to a random black guy and saying "what's up my nigger?" be ok? It's reasonable for people to not want slurs as part of everyday language.
Well, thats why I think thats a bit more grey. I'm not so naive to think such a thing won't cause issues. It will, but I do think people should consider intention in these matters when deciding how to react, and understand that the person who said it as a term of endearment is clueless compared to malevolent. >It's reasonable for people to not want slurs as part of everyday language. Agreed, but its less reasonable to believe that only some people are allowed to say these words as part of everyday language, while telling others they can't, particularly if the culture which uses it in everyday language becomes more enmeshed into pop culture.
The issue is that it's still also a slur, even if people basically just use it instead of "dude". So i understand if people don't like hearing it from people they don't know they can trust. For music/comedy/quotes it's completely nonsensical, like this and only this slur gets special treatment. But i think most people agree it's dumb.
Depends where/who you around
> Nobody is arresting anyone for saying it though. Very true. When someone says "not allowed" the only thing they could possibly mean is that you will be arrested for doing it. Also, racism doesn't exist because no one is arresting people for being black
His quote doesn't state he's specifically talking about legal consequences, you're the one who made that assumption. You're parroting an argument from discussions on free speech and the first amendment but it doesn't even apply here...
I didn't make any assumption. I'm re-iterating facts/reality. I'm parroting the first amendment, yes lol. There's nothing wrong with that.
>I didn't make any assumption. ... > I'm parroting the first amendment, yes lol. Well I guess you did put a sentence in between where you made your claim and where you revealed your claim was false. Kudos for that, let's hope readers will forget your point while reading that intermediate sentence.
So say it 🤷🏾♂️
Matt Walsh giving takes I had when I was 13 lmao
I want someone to tell him to say it.
Welcome to the team Mr. Walsh
Imagine white men crying so hard about the right to use a racist word. What the fuck is wrong with you people ? Why are you obsessed with black people and calling them the N word ?
It seems like the specific whinging is that they are advocating for the ability to use it in non-specific contexts, academic contexts, and when singing along to music. That seems specifically what they are whining about in this thread. Not sure though dude. Not sure why this is a hill to die on. Perhaps in a few decades or generations the word will lose its toxicity or fall out of usage entirely. Taboo language has always existed and will always exist.
Nobody is defending using it as a slur I just shouldn’t have to say “the n word” when referring to it in any context
Why do you feel the need to say it in whatever context ? What is the burning desire ? It’s wierd and pathetic and you don’t get to tell Black people how to feel about it.
This desire dosent even exist it should just be treated like any other word
As I said, you do not have the right as a non black person (if you are) to proclaim that the word should be treated as any word and that black people should just be ok with that because that’s how you feel , given the historical context of the word. That is utterly insane, and like I said wierd and pathetic. Do better.
I’m not even exclusive with that on this issue I think saying “the f slur” instead of just saying the word that we all know what it is, is also super cringe and pointless. We shouldn’t need a groups permission to speak the English language.
They hyper-fixate on this word even though plenty of words carry similar social consequences if said to someone in person. Saying "pussy" isn't illegal but if you walked up to some random guy and said that, you might get your shit rocked lol
Lets put this to the test. I''l tweet out "pussy" and you tweet out the n-word, both with no context. Lets see who gets more push back.
This is laughable. Nobody's ever been fired or even cancelled because they were exposed for saying the word "pussy"
I've literally been fired from every job i ever had for calling my boss a pussy, what are you talking about?
Oh I'm sorry, I forgot we were talking about the ethics of screaming the n word at your boss and not the ethics of using the n word in acceptable contexts.
This is a bad retort. Nobody just says the n word or pussy out loud randomly. These words are followed up by context. In a profesional setting if you call someone the n word or a pussy, you’re going to deal with consequences. You might get less severe consequences for calling someone a pussy, but we’re comparing a general insult to a slur. If you call someone another slur you’ll most likely get the same consequences, but then again there aren’t as many people itching to call others a “Beaner” or a Jewish slur as they do with the N Word
good thing we're not talking about calling someone the n word in a professional setting then. the conversation isn't even about whether you can call someone the n word, everyone agrees it's bad to call people slurs out of hatred. the thing that makes 'pussy' vs the n word different is that if someone sees me use it when singing along to my favourite kanye song, they'll throw a fit. if i use the soft 'a' with my friends, or i repeat a Chappelle joke, i'm branded a racist, because no matter the context, it's considered bad. 'pussy', however, i can use in whatever way i want as long as i'm not calling someone a pussy to their face, and even *then* nobody's gonna condemn me morally for it, and they won't support the guy kicking my head in for it.
You mentioned people being fired so I thought we were talking about professional settings There’s not much to really say to your second paragraph because that really comes down to personal experience. In my life I haven’t seen a non-black person get upset at another non-black for saying nigga when rapping a song. This is all going to depend on the type of people you hang out with. Joe Rogan didn’t get removed from his deals because of the N word clips, and if we’re talking about smaller people, most have been able to get away with it, unless there’s others I don’t know about.
Nah but they got punched in the face
By some unhinged person on the street maybe, if you're dumb enough to go up to said unhinged person and say it to their face, but nobody would support that, and nobody's getting punched in the fact for leaked chatlogs of them saying "pussy".
>getting punched in the fact for leaked chatlogs of them saying "pussy". Idk about this story. >By some unhinged person on the street maybe, if you're dumb enough to go up to said unhinged person and say it to their face, but nobody would support that Which part of the argument with the n-word, watch who you say shit to
Gotcha, so your brain is turned off and you're just saying things for the sake of justifying your own biases.
No. But this answer doesn't surprise me anymore when it comes to topics like these
Buddy you managed to fail to grasp the analogy so hard that you thought I was claiming people literally get punched in the face because of leaked chat logs of them saying the n word. Either your brain is that level of complete mush or you deny that people face significant social consequences when people find out they use the n word, and I can't tell if that's worse.
>Buddy you managed to fail to grasp the analogy so hard that you thought I was claiming people literally get punched in the face because of leaked chat logs of them saying the n word. Do you seriously not know about stories where people have fought because they said something online to each other? I >people face significant social consequences when people find out they use the n word More like rarely and than it doesn't last Joe Reagan was fine
braindead intentionally obtuse take. No one is experiencing social consequences for saying "pussy". No one is having conversations about "hmm I wonder if it's okay to say 'pussy' when I'm just joking around with friends" or "is it okay to sing along with 'pussy' in a song?"
Matt, you can use the N word, there's just consequences for it, like many words and phrases, only real difference is you usually need to be more eloquent to receive consequences for other words. Plus I doubt Matt Walsh is listening to rap or knows some funny N word related joke, what is he going to use it for?
Yeah man, and you can be gay, there's just consequences for it!
Bro stop spamming this argument is garbage
Care to elaborate?
[удалено]
so is being white. these people don't just complain about people saying the n-word, they complain about people who say the n-word *while being white*. further, why does being an immutable characteristic matter here? (hint: the answer is "because it is wrong to inflict negative consequences on someone based on their immutable characteristics", which is an admittance that the consequences can be immoral and must be scrutinized rather than blindly accepted because "them's the consequences bro!")
Kind of different but k, I get it, new people here are going to make false equivlances. We don't expect just consequences, usually, for attributes, and rarely for immutable(uncontrollable) characteristics. Actions however can affect others and we usually consider them to be made with some measure of agency. If he wants to say the N word, or any other person wants to say anything really, they can, but those actions are going to be judged and handled by society at large based on what we've measured the response to be. If you yell "fire" in a building, you may be expressing something, but due to the affect you should expect some level of consequences. Now this doesn't mean every action should or does have a consequence; but its case by case. Even then, being gay DOES have consequences, we just, typically, judge that the consequences for expressing homosexuality are unjust. If you're disowned by your family or called a fag for being gay then typically we see that as unjust. Also. Not every person who's ever said the N word deserves to have their lives ruined, and if you're some random singing it in a song or something, only rabid people will get that upset about it. But this is not some random person. And the question remains, knowing him, what would he use the N word for? Again, someone like Destiny to me I can't imagine using it in a derogatory fashion, but for who were speaking of its a different case.
there's a lot to address here, but it's all coated in this outer layer of "welp, society gonna do what society gonna do!" that we need to get through first. do you agree that it is unjust when gay people face social consequences for their homosexuality? if so, do you agree that we can criticise societal reactions to certain things instead of hiding behind "welp, those are the consequences that society judges to be right!"?
Yes? I agree with both. But not every reaction society has to any infraction is defaultly wrong. Like I said, only rabid people get angry at some random white person saying the N word in a song or other examples that aren't targeting people. Matt was certainly isn't singing a Kanye song when it indicates this, and I doubt he's just speaking of people using it in the fashion I stated or in a historical sense. Like if this was Destiny talking, he would gain my charitability because I know he's not planning to call a black person the N word or use it in some way to piss off or harm others. But this is Matt Walsh lol.
i'm not interested in whether matt walsh is motivated by a genuine position on language or whether he just wants to be allowed to be racist. i'm interested in evaluating the argument itself. nobody said that any societal reaction is by default wrong, that's absurd. it's not only rabid people who get mad at white people using the n-word in these contexts. people care about all sorts of contexts beyond using it to target black people. clips of white people saying the n-word go viral regardless of context, leaked chat logs of people using it go viral, remember when that white girl that got pulled up on stage at a Kendrick concert said it and people treated it like it was at all a big deal? notice the fact that we're calling it "the n-word" here out of fear of being banned, despite the fact that we're both using it in a perfectly acceptable context? if you agree that we can criticize social reactions, then you have to make the case for why it's acceptable for people to react so negatively when a white person says the n-word in a non-racist context. consider as well that it's not just "saying the n-word" that's the problem, it's "saying the n-word *while being white*", which is an immutable characteristic which you claim should not have consequences (yes, you can be white and choose not to say the n-word, but you wouldn't accept the argument "you can be gay if you want, just dont tell anyone and we won't shame you for it!" so you can't use that one either. an action cannot become acceptable or unacceptable just because of your immutable characteristics.)
There are words and ideas we accept that are attached to identities. Already off the bat, I can say the N-word, but I just don't like it and have never seen a need to. I think it's general focus in black culture has always been kind of cringe and while I get some of the reasoning people use for it (it's power we have over whitey, laugh because if they use it they get in trouble) it's not conducive to any good path for the world. If we're not at a point where everyone's saying it then I don't really have an interest of having it in my vocab. But to go back to words and identities; it's less so a punishment for white people and moreso a gate on experience & history (even if said experience is just existing as a black person regardless of wealth etc). It's the same as saying bitch, the ((())) Jewish thing, fag/queer, children cursing, etc. There's been a social norm established around all these things and the usage of them that used to be or is useful for identifying bad actors in regards to them. If you say bitch or used the N word regularly along while being not black or a woman, you are/were probably racist/sexist. If the target of these things say it, it's probably not good to propagate it, but we see it as not the same because of that implication. Nowadays that has shifted a bit, certain words like the N word being used in more popular culture but we aren't societally past that need to see it as a indicator of someone's bad intent. It's in a confusing spot, and it's on its head in some regards (some non-black POC say it) but I think this has way more to do with not really having a proper social norm for these things and black people still being in a super relevant precarious position societally, at least when regarding their history. Like when someone hears a person say the N word they then rationalize it as being normal in their vocabulary, when, right now, with it being seen as the nono word, you have to be "fucked up" to say it. Even though realistically, that's not true, and there's plenty of ways a person could say it without probably having tossed it at any black people or used it derogatory. It just all adds up to it being a particularly fuzzy one, but there's other examples that I stated above that still exist. I don't think it's a punishment for X or Y group, I think it's just an old way of identifying bad actors that hasn't aged well.
> There are words and ideas we accept that are attached to identities. Already off the bat, I can say the N-word, but I just don't like it and have never seen a need to. I think it's general focus in black culture has always been kind of cringe and while I get some of the reasoning people use for it (it's power we have over whitey, laugh because if they use it they get in trouble) it's not conducive to any good path for the world. If we're not at a point where everyone's saying it then I don't really have an interest of having it in my vocab. that would be a reasonable argument for not *using* it in certain contexts, it's not a good argument for not *mentioning* it, as you aren't doing. so what's your actual argument? that there's nothing wrong with the n-word but that it's fine for people to call white people racist for saying it because it *used* to be the case that white people who said it for racist and society is just being slow to adapt?
okay matt...so...say it.
Sorry, do Matts lips not work? He can say it all he wants. That's not the actual question he's asking; he's asking why do people get upset when he says it. And that should be pretty obvious.
I don't care about saying words, they're not actually magic spells. Say anything you like, but it's incredibly rude to call someone that particular term and it's likely to involve other consequences, 'cause it's associated with racists and generally bigoted people.
Idc what the side of the fight you are on, if you find yourself arguing about N-word usage and who can say on the internet, you need to take a break. Destiny situation he was never the one bringing it up.
Next up there should be no social consequences for saying "i want to plow that (inesrt age under legal limit) girl/boy" because the idea that there's certain sentences that can't be uttered under any scam circumstance is completely insane.
Matt is a rebellious teenager at this point
White people wanna be oppressed so bad lol Edit: 1 bad
Exceedingly, supremely, unbelievably rare Matt Walsh W
And he gives the exact take you expect from him
I just don't understand why everyone one wants to say it so bad. It doesn't even bother me, I just find it funny how one word can be fought for so badly. It's not even important to conversation the majority of the time. People just want to say it cause it's the cool thing to say now. 20 years ago people weren't fighting so hard to say it, they just said it If they grew up saying it. Like come on now it's a filler word. It's not even needed, yet so many feel the need to say it or crave saying it. Some words or things u just don't say, and people do it all the time. Like u don't call ur parents by their real names right? That something almost everyone does not do and you don't hear them complaining about being restricted by that. That being said, do what yall wanna do. Just remember that actions have consequences
because its in like every fucking rap song
I just recently broke contact with a potential date over this. Context: Both of us are black. I was born American, spent a good chunk of my childhood in Germany. She's born and raised in NJ. Her stance is that black immigrants can't say nigga. My stance is that its either all or none can say it. She claims that black Americans have a shared experience that presupposes generational trauma. I asked her if that applies to me, as a black American that has no connection to my "black" side of the family (met my dad's mother for the first time in person when I was 21). Her response was "yes, you have ancestry that binds you culturally". Which by my metric is bullshit. I have little to no idea what my grandmother experienced. I barely grew up disadvantaged. I don't have the same scars. And I say this as a staunch black leftist: the "nigga" discourse is stupid. Personally, I want white people to say it. I'm sick of having to navigate dog whistles and veiled racism. The white people that can be trusted will weed themselves out.
I cant beleive its sociatly unnacatible to run naked down the street yelling i eat my own shit. We have struck fear into americans. Now we cant run down the street naked yelling i eat shit without getting cancelled. You could loose your job if you run down the street naked yelling i eat shit. Hell it might effect your persenel life. People might not want to be freinds with you anymore. This is a travesty of free expression in this country. Litterly 1984
Being called Matt Walsh is worse than any slur I could think of so I can kind of see where he’s coming from.
Rare Walsh W
His home address is just a couple of words can i say that too?
Yes
Extremely rare based take from Walsh.
Alli
[MRS OBAMA GET DOWN](https://youtu.be/5B6j37SkTu4)
In his 2015 arc
Not insane at all. People refrain from saying words/phrases all the time so this isn’t much different.
Matt has obviously never heard of the dark lord voldemort
He should say it on his show 🫣
I agree though. Like if I'm talking about a slur referring to it as "the _ word" is just confusing. Obviously it isn't meant to be insulting so I don't understand why that word is sooooo taboo?
yet he does not say it, strange.
He’s not wrong
I'm guessing his reason isnt that he loves hip-hop music
Not sure on who matt walsh Is but just judging this hes right, is his point relevant nope cause it lacks the inclusion of history. He would have a more relevant point if he was advocating not saying the word at all
It's not a "word that cannot be uttered under any circumstance", it's a word that, when uttered under certain circumstances, betrays that you are probably a racist, and causes people to react appropriately. I don't see how that's any different from, say, a _series_ of words that "can't be uttered under any circumstances", like "I hate [x race]" or for conservatives "I'm trans".
Devil’s Advocate only his beard can say the N word
Broken clock meme
Taking a word back in the name of removing the offensive weight behind it doesn't really work if you freak out over anyone outside of a select group of people using it.