[Noisebridge-discuss] Oppressive Behavior

Mon Dec 30 03:12:47 UTC 2013

Moderator, can we kill this thread?  Racist terms (even used by the race
they are racist against), is still offensive.  It is still a racial slur,
no matter who or what says it.

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 7:00 PM, slipsream47 . <jarvis.bohannon at gmail.com>wrote:

> No one knows me but I'm fully black, live in Hunters Point all my life and
> never use the "n" word in my vocabulary. You don't have use it for street
> lingo. People have names. Just my two cent and a nickel...Enough said...
> Are we really going to literally debate the semantics and levels at which
> a white person is allowed to use the n word and have it somehow not be
> offensive? like for real? IT IS ALWAYS OFFENSIVE. a white person can "use
> the lingo" of street culture without using the n word. trust me, i am half
> white, fully white passing, was raised in local bay area street and hiphop
> culture (because i am half latino), and still manage to not use the n-word.
> saying that one is a part of street culture and that either requires them
> or permits them to use the n word while white is also pretty offensive fyi.
> and being racist (even passive or unintentionally racist) is pretty
> exclusionary towards POC. personally, as a half latino, I am fully not
> inclined to hang around somewhere where white people use the n word and try
> to qualify how it's not racist because i find that highly racist. white
> people deciding a usage of a racial slur isn't racist is still racist fyi.
>
>
> -hep
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Charles Tang <cjtang1 at asu.edu> wrote:
>
>> To clarify the above is not a justification of cultural relativism or
>> complete nihilism with regard to words.
>>
>> It's just an argument that exclusion should be examined a bit more before
>> decisions are made with regard to words. Otherwise, the function of
>> exclusion can snowball, or just be inherently hypocritical.
>>
>>
>> On 29 December 2013 16:42, Charles Tang <cjtang1 at asu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> There is a difference between appropriation and reappropriation.
>>>
>>> It really depends on how this individual identifies and how the group
>>> around identifies. I don't think language constructs a bright line. If we
>>> are to delve into semiotics here, there are too many experiences, life
>>> circumstances and abridging history of the word to come to a conclusion of
>>> exclusion.
>>>
>>> Take for instance the use of gendered pronouns. If one does not identify
>>> with conflated archetypes of sex, they may want to use a different pronoun
>>> to describe themselves. This upheaval is an attempt to rewrite a dominant
>>> cultural narrative as to who or what one can be conceived with relation to
>>> their body.
>>>
>>> The same upheaval can be applied to archetypes of race, whereby one in
>>> their own whiteness or any other color or affiliation seeks to upheave
>>> their whiteness in an alternative racial narrative. It comes down to if
>>> someone is using the term in a pejorative sense and if the instance it is
>>> cultural appropriation or a reappropriation entrenched in an alternative
>>> identity or schemata as to how one wants to be perceived.
>>>
>>> Now, if an individual was to exclude on perceptual appropriation, we are
>>> excluding others who cannot exist within the strict circles of racial
>>> identity. For example, I'm half Chinese and half Irish. If we can exclude,
>>> were am I allowed to exist in reappropiration. Specifically, where am I
>>> allowed to take back power over my own identity? Perhaps this exclusion
>>> would justify excluding me, as I do not have a discrete identity. What
>>> words can I speak about whiteness, when I'm not entirely white? What words
>>> can I speak about my Asian decent, when I'm not entirely Asian. Such a
>>> discourse of impossibility of existence within the racial strata
>>> articulates that I can't, because reappropration should not exist for those
>>> who are not entirely classified by essentialist functions within a social
>>> space.
>>>
>>> The strictest definition and articulation of dominance comes from
>>> complete censorship. One cannot articulate an ontology in such a social
>>> space because of policing of boundaries. Much can be said of this function
>>> as discourse does construct reality.  Where am I allowed to take back my
>>> identity, where am I allowed to take back power over a word with relation
>>> to my identity? Where does this policing recreate the boundaries it seeks
>>> to police? And does the exclusion recreate the same social functions that
>>> allow the dominant narration to exist in place.
>>>
>>> Just my 2cents. Word boarders are hard to consecrate within frameworks,
>>> because intended meanings are different to perceptual meanings.
>>> Particularly with race narration, identity politics abounds and borders
>>> become salient with relation to their own controversy. Conversely, it
>>> repoliticizes these borders and depoliticizes attempts to strip the words
>>> of their exclusionary value.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 29 December 2013 16:02, Johny Radio <johnyradio at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  On 12/29/2013 1:43:05 PM, "Jeffrey Carl Faden" <jeffreyatw at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It mentions positive purposes.
>>>>
>>>> That's a really good point. I like that part of the verbiage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you have a problem with the policy, please send a pull request to
>>>> the GitHub repository or ask for help to do so.
>>>>
>>>> -we can change verbiage of a policy after it's been consensed on? (that
>>>> could be a good way)
>>>> -github, and not the nb wiki, is now the place we where collaborate on nb
>>>> documents? (i don't object to cloud tools, but i would also be fine with
>>>> 100% on-site nb services)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> hep
> hepic photography || www.hepic.net
>     dis at gruntle.org || 415 867 9472
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>

-- 
Ronald Cotoni
Systems Engineer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131229/06283c44/attachment-0003.html>