Repositories (1)

use-perl.github.io
3 snippets stored for this repo
<div class="span8">
<p><html><p>Ruben Navarrete, Junior, is a syndicated columnist who frequently writes about the problems of Hispanics in America. I often agree with him, either entirely or to a limited extent. Sometimes I think he&#39;s nuts. Today, I&#39;m pretty disgusted.</p><p>In his <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/24/navarrette/index.html?eref=rss_topstories">latest column</a> syndicated through CNN, he complains that people feel too free to use the word &#34;wetback.&#34; Apparently Bill O&#39;Reilly said it and then was condemned by a bunch of people who said, &#34;I can&#39;t believe Bill O&#39;Reilly called Mexicans &#39;wetbacks.&#39;&#34;</p><p>Navarrete is upset because they should have said &#34;I can&#39;t believe Bill O&#39;Reilly called Mexicans <em>the w-word</em>.&#34; In other words, he&#39;s saying that &#34;wetback&#34; is so offensive that it shouldn&#39;t even be spoken aloud, even when the speaker is speaking about the word, and not about the people whom it is used to deride. The parallel he draws is between &#34;wetback&#34; and &#34;nigger,&#34; saying that none of these people would have dared say, &#34;I can&#39;t believe Bill O&#39;Reilly called blacks &#39;niggers!&#39;&#34;</p><p>This is exactly the wrong position. Nobody is going to forget that the word &#34;nigger&#34; exists because we only reference it obliquely. It will go away as a term of hatred when people stop using it that way, and it seems absurd to suggest that referring to the word &#34;wetback&#34; (as a term that one <em>shouldn&#39;t</em> use to describe Mexicans, no less) is a gateway to using the word to refer to them.</p><p>The only thing this kind of thinking accomplishes is to shift the emphasis from wrong <em>thinking</em> to wrong <em>speech</em>. As more and more words become entirely taboo, it will become safer and safer to say nothing against those who use hate speech hatefully than to take a stand.</p><p>He writes: </p><blockquote><p>But just because O&#39;Reilly acts like a jerk doesn&#39;t mean that Rich, Kurtz and O&#39;Donnell should get a pass to follow suit. Here&#39;s a tip for liberals and those who play them on TV: If you&#39;re trying to come off as more enlightened than the next guy, it helps not to mimic the very behavior you&#39;re going out of your way to condemn.</p><p>Or else people might question your sincerity and conclude you&#39;re not really progressive -- as much as pretending.</p></blockquote><p>In other words, a real progressive believes that condemning hateful speech by referencing it is, itself, a continuation of the original speech.</p><p>He&#39;s right, at least, to say that none of these people would have been likely to decry the use of other slurs without some euphemism. <em>That</em> is their failing.</p></html>
</p>
Worth seeing a $4.50 matinee for Dunst's wet dress and all the homoerotic facial cumshot imagery.<p>
<h3><a href="/user/pudge/">pudge</a> on 2002-05-06T11:40:39</h3>
<i>homoerotic facial cumshot imagery.</i><br/><br/>You sure spoiled it for me!