[gsk22]

The interesting thing is that some of the "new" taboo words are only taboo for certain groups of people.

The N-word has been reclaimed by people of color, but remains taboo for others to say.

The F-slur is in the process of being reclaimed by gay people, but remains taboo for everyone else.

I can't think of any parallels in past English curse words -- "fuck" was taboo no matter who you were.

[pessimizer]

> The N-word has been reclaimed by people of color, but remains taboo for others to say.

The "N-word" was never reclaimed by black people, we always said it, and it always means something different than when said by a non-black person (and there was never a "hard-r" or a "soft-r," that's just a mockery of black dialects.) It's like the word "bitch." If a woman calls another woman a "bitch," she's obviously not demeaning her for being a women.

Also, the "N-word" was not a swear word for non-black people. It was a word to demean black people, who were demeaned by consensus by the majority of the population of the Anglo-American world. It was also used for any dark-skinned person that they didn't think of as fully human, as it was the prevailing slur during the US-Philippine War.

The "N-word" has become a swear word for non-black people because the consensus about black people has changed for the moment, and using it indicates a particular political position on race. It has been a perennial issue for non-black people to complain about because white people want a place in the oppression olympics, and it's really hard to find something that they've ever been officially restricted from doing.

[eszed]

This is a best-of comment, and I'm glad I waded through the rest of the dreck in the thread to find it. Thank you.

[Edit] Thinking through your final paragraph a bit more, there are "oppressions" (and I'm putting that in scare-quotes, because I think it's too strong a word; I'd say something like "prejudices" or "restricted opportunities") which some (USA) white people accurately perceive being applied to them. Those are based around class markers (think: what schools someone went to, what accent they have, what body-type they are), not race. Accurately understanding that would require / create an entirely different sociological paradigm.

[_bin_]

I don’t think bitch is an appropriate parallel because I hear women use it in both insulting and friendly senses. And while I think a word being taboo for some but not others is silly, it doesn’t constitute oppression. For instance, I don’t think you should cancel some kid for singing along to his favorite rap song.

Regardless, I think using either word is in poor taste.

[haccount]

We're on the internet, anonymously discussing swear words, you can just type out nigger.

There's still large segments of the internet not subject to hysterical brigades of thought police demanding every typed word be cross referenced with the ever-growing Manual of Self-Censorship and Conformity with Whoever Is Offended In The Loudest Manner.

[mmooss]

Just because you can get away with it, doesn't mean you should. And it seems you agree: why create a new account?

[_bin_]

Because there are insane people who will try to ruin your job and life over it, even if you use it in a factual, rather than personal, context.

Yesterday on twitter someone posted reddit screenshots of a ukrainian dude in a thread. He said he was voting for trump and his account was semi-public, and some absolute sociopath started sending screenshots of it to every university and internship program he could think of.

[mmooss]

> even if you use it in a factual, rather than personal, context.

We all know that the 'factual context' is often used as cover by trolls. Whatever the excuse, people are not idiots.

Also, I'm not sure 'factual context' is a good idea - why say things that are upsetting to people? If my friend's mother just died, I don't talk about death 'in a factual, rather than personal, context'. In general, I don't describe, e.g., torture 'in a factual context'; it's not nice.

[_bin_]

Sure, I’m not saying trolls don’t try to cover it up. I don’t see any particular issue calling them out for it. That doesn’t mean there aren’t also bad-faith nutcases who can and will cause problems. The internet is a big place and there’s no test of basic sanity to log on, and few jobs or schools would want the reputational risk of defending even someone who was using a word in a factual discussion.

I don’t think there’s any virtue in using it when it upsets people. I also don’t think there’s virtue in refusing to use a word, even in discussions about that word. There’s a line of reasonability: using it to express hate can and should be frowned on. But substituting a euphemism in all contexts is excessive.

The person that comment referenced doesn't seem to be a troll and obviously wasn't writing in a hateful context. Ironically, the fact that he used a euphemism pretty much proves that.

[haccount]

The only requirement for shaping language and informal thought policing is a sufficiently malignant army of trolls then?

I'd rather have a wild jungle internet full of anonymous people saying nigger in every second sentence than one of voluntary gestapo thought police combing through post histories to dox and hound common people because they don't fulfill the "linguistic standards" imposed by a small group of ideological/political activists.

[cduzz]

Those words are "taboo" because they convey a direct "you are property or worse and I can hurt you and you can't stop me" violent threat. At the moment, at least in some parts of the world, that _violence_ is what is taboo. Maybe some people don't understand the implicit meaning, but lots of people do, especially the ones who're threatened.

That article didn't discuss class / culture, so whatever a nobel who's threatening an underling might say, "peon" or whatever, wasn't mentioned. Elsewhere someone made the distinction between 'insult' and 'slur' which I think is a good way to distinguish vulgarity/insult from threat.

[_bin_]

Most cuss words are more taboo for women to say than men, and somewhat accepted in male company (bars, locker rooms, cigar bars, etc.) than in mixed. At least that’s how it was, and closer to how it is where I live.

[selimthegrim]

Only certain people of color.

[gsk22]

Sure. I was necessarily speaking in generalities. There are always exceptions.

[kgwgk]

Many nigger-word-related incidents in the US are extremely funny when seen from outside. They look like the stoning sketch from The Life of Brian.