|
I am continuously surprised at the number of people who don't understand "historical context."
It is not a double standard, it is not "reverse racism" . . . it is placing things in their proper historical and cultural contexts. "Cracker" is more acceptable than "nigger" because of the historical implications of such terms. If you are a white person who is offended by "cracker" then GREAT -- make it known. If no whites ever comment on the fact that they're offended by that, then it will continue to be seen as less harmful. And if you're a white who's not offended by the use of "cracker" or "honkey" but you're just using it to make a point, then I don't think they're comparable.
Also, Rudey, comparing the "niggardly" example to blackface is hardly accurate. "Niggardly" had no ties whatsoever to racial issues. Blackface does, and is offensive. It isn't about people not being able to "handle" it -- it's about what's appropriate.
I'm not sure why so many people are obsessed with their "right" to wear blackface. I don't know, but I'd cheerfully give up my right to paint myself brown and call myself Oprah if it meant that there would be less racial conflict in this country.
|