|
Until I joined the Air Force in 1990, my access to computers was essentially limited to two classes in high school, as well as being able to look over the shoulder of a friend at his Texas Instruments computer. When I enlisted, computers became a part of my daily work life and eventually most other aspects of my life (I got my first Bachelor’s degree online and am on the computer daily). It’s hard to imagine a life without computers (I know some people who are going to give them up for a week, which I don’t think I could do at this point in my life).
In many ways the computer has been a boon to me (the aforementioned degree, contact with people I would have not otherwise kept in touch), but it’s also sometimes a horrible place, for a variety of reasons (cyberbullying, stalking, Rick-rolling). Another thing I have noticed is the cowardice of anonymity. On sites such as Yahoo, CNN.com, Ain’t It Cool News and many others, people write in comment sections mean, nasty, vile, disgusting, etc. type things, that they would never post under their own name or say in a person-to-person meeting. Some people call it “trolling” or “flaming”. I don’t have a problem with people being an asshole--I’m often an asshole myself. However, I’m willing to stand behind what I write; everything I post is easily identified by me, and I do not use pseudonyms beyond the same ID I have used for nearly fifteen years. And I would never think to comment on a page about somebody’s death to rejoice in that death, no matter what I thought of that person. But I see it frequently, on every type of page. I have seen liberal/conservative battles on sports pages. I’ve seen personnel attacks from people I just know would not open their mouths in public.
I am trying to avoid reading comment sections, even on subjects I’m invested in (I love Bruce Springsteen, and I can’t stand to read the Backstreets comments because of some of the moronic comments of his “fans”), but it’s hard, like not staring at the side of the road where the crunched-up car and police lights are.
Today there was a shooting in an Arizona grocery store. At last report, it appears that six people have died, including a federal judge and a nine-year-old. At least twelve other people have been shot, including A United States Representative, who was shot in the head. You can read on almost any news site that includes comments that is the liberals’ fault, the conservatives’ fault. Many people have pointed already to Sarah Palin, who had an advertisement last year which listed the Representative as a person to be targeted in the November elections. Sadly, the targeting included a map in which her district was covered with a rifle scope. There is no indication that the shooter was a Palin supporter, but it could turn out he was. Hell, it could turn out the advertisement motivated him to do the shooting, but I can no more blame Palin than I can blame Marilyn Manson for the Columbine shooters (and I don’t). I have no problem heaping harsh words upon Palin and her brood. I think she is a dangerous woman. She is not stupid, but she is ignorant, and she plays upon the hatred and prejudices of others to get her way. But people blaming her are making the same mistake as those blaming Manson and video games for Columbine--they are going around the problem and not confronting it. If too much anger turns toward her, she will be able to convert it for usage in her martyr complex. Don’t let that happen. For now, I will grieve for those killed and injured and hope that America can step from behind their monitors and see human beings all around them.
***
Five days ago I brought up the plan to change the word “nigger” to “slave” in Huckleberry Finn. Since then I have read many things about this, including one person’s observation that the change doesn’t even make much sense, since not all slaves were of African descent (and not only an American issue; also does not include sex slaves, etc.). Also, the word “nigger”, when directed to a person, is most often (if not always) done in a disparaging manner, while “slave” is not quite the same (although obviously not all puppy dogs and rainbows). I’ve seen some people opine that white people (and in some cases, any people) should not use the word at all, even in print (which would also include me), as there is no case in which the word is not offensive. I cannot use “N-word” instead of “nigger”, not because I hope to provoke or insult, but because to me it is no better than putting asterisks over the “g”s. We all know what it means and the word forms in our minds. I guarantee if you were to go up to an African-American and said, “get out of my way, you N-word” you would get the same reaction from them if you called them a “nigger”. The word is a disparagement and putting a coat of paint on it protects the word’s intent, not those the word is used against.
Obviously, that is the case for some people, and some people have a valid reason to say that the word is offensive, but I have several issues with that. First, I cannot find any word offensive. Words are malleable--they can be wielded as weapons or salve. Words that are considered lovely and harmless can cut deeply based on intent. To me, no word is off-limits. There are some words I do not use, because my wife does consider them off-limits (“cunt” and “goddamn”), although I have to admit I have used both of these, in times of anger (“cunt” was never directed towards my wife; in truth, that word has been only directed to people on the highway). I cannot mount a defense of the use of those words, as they seldom come up in an intellectual debate (“do you not see how valid it is that Hemingway described her as a ‘cunt’?”). But I do not see any reason to strike these, or “nigger”, from the dictionary, even if, like “xenophobic” or “tintinnabulation”, they are words I seldom use.
In many ways the computer has been a boon to me (the aforementioned degree, contact with people I would have not otherwise kept in touch), but it’s also sometimes a horrible place, for a variety of reasons (cyberbullying, stalking, Rick-rolling). Another thing I have noticed is the cowardice of anonymity. On sites such as Yahoo, CNN.com, Ain’t It Cool News and many others, people write in comment sections mean, nasty, vile, disgusting, etc. type things, that they would never post under their own name or say in a person-to-person meeting. Some people call it “trolling” or “flaming”. I don’t have a problem with people being an asshole--I’m often an asshole myself. However, I’m willing to stand behind what I write; everything I post is easily identified by me, and I do not use pseudonyms beyond the same ID I have used for nearly fifteen years. And I would never think to comment on a page about somebody’s death to rejoice in that death, no matter what I thought of that person. But I see it frequently, on every type of page. I have seen liberal/conservative battles on sports pages. I’ve seen personnel attacks from people I just know would not open their mouths in public.
I am trying to avoid reading comment sections, even on subjects I’m invested in (I love Bruce Springsteen, and I can’t stand to read the Backstreets comments because of some of the moronic comments of his “fans”), but it’s hard, like not staring at the side of the road where the crunched-up car and police lights are.
Today there was a shooting in an Arizona grocery store. At last report, it appears that six people have died, including a federal judge and a nine-year-old. At least twelve other people have been shot, including A United States Representative, who was shot in the head. You can read on almost any news site that includes comments that is the liberals’ fault, the conservatives’ fault. Many people have pointed already to Sarah Palin, who had an advertisement last year which listed the Representative as a person to be targeted in the November elections. Sadly, the targeting included a map in which her district was covered with a rifle scope. There is no indication that the shooter was a Palin supporter, but it could turn out he was. Hell, it could turn out the advertisement motivated him to do the shooting, but I can no more blame Palin than I can blame Marilyn Manson for the Columbine shooters (and I don’t). I have no problem heaping harsh words upon Palin and her brood. I think she is a dangerous woman. She is not stupid, but she is ignorant, and she plays upon the hatred and prejudices of others to get her way. But people blaming her are making the same mistake as those blaming Manson and video games for Columbine--they are going around the problem and not confronting it. If too much anger turns toward her, she will be able to convert it for usage in her martyr complex. Don’t let that happen. For now, I will grieve for those killed and injured and hope that America can step from behind their monitors and see human beings all around them.
***
Five days ago I brought up the plan to change the word “nigger” to “slave” in Huckleberry Finn. Since then I have read many things about this, including one person’s observation that the change doesn’t even make much sense, since not all slaves were of African descent (and not only an American issue; also does not include sex slaves, etc.). Also, the word “nigger”, when directed to a person, is most often (if not always) done in a disparaging manner, while “slave” is not quite the same (although obviously not all puppy dogs and rainbows). I’ve seen some people opine that white people (and in some cases, any people) should not use the word at all, even in print (which would also include me), as there is no case in which the word is not offensive. I cannot use “N-word” instead of “nigger”, not because I hope to provoke or insult, but because to me it is no better than putting asterisks over the “g”s. We all know what it means and the word forms in our minds. I guarantee if you were to go up to an African-American and said, “get out of my way, you N-word” you would get the same reaction from them if you called them a “nigger”. The word is a disparagement and putting a coat of paint on it protects the word’s intent, not those the word is used against.
Obviously, that is the case for some people, and some people have a valid reason to say that the word is offensive, but I have several issues with that. First, I cannot find any word offensive. Words are malleable--they can be wielded as weapons or salve. Words that are considered lovely and harmless can cut deeply based on intent. To me, no word is off-limits. There are some words I do not use, because my wife does consider them off-limits (“cunt” and “goddamn”), although I have to admit I have used both of these, in times of anger (“cunt” was never directed towards my wife; in truth, that word has been only directed to people on the highway). I cannot mount a defense of the use of those words, as they seldom come up in an intellectual debate (“do you not see how valid it is that Hemingway described her as a ‘cunt’?”). But I do not see any reason to strike these, or “nigger”, from the dictionary, even if, like “xenophobic” or “tintinnabulation”, they are words I seldom use.
