| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| GHcool |
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 23:56:05
I was browsing through early 20th century shorts to write reviews about on IMDb and came across this one. The title of the film contains a racial epithet. I can think of at least one review that would probably get a lot of votes, but due to the circumstances, I thought it was best to consult the rest of the group before adding this film to our database as its title is offensive and has great potential for inspiring equally offensive reviews from users of this site (not that I think anybody here is racist, but one person's joke could be very hurtful for others). I'd especially like to hear from some of the African American users of this site how they would feel if films like this were to be put on this site ... |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| w22dheartlivie |
Posted - 02/01/2007 : 17:53:58
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
I think I was musing on, e.g. 'wicked' which currently means terrific [which, incidentally originally meant something inducing terror]!
Wicked, that's VERY South Boston :) |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 02/01/2007 : 11:47:59
quote:
Originally posted by Conan The Westy
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
...rules about usage when the ideas that drive meaning are so fluid.
Just remember: the penis mightier than the sword 
Was it wise to mention fluid, drive & usage in the previous sentence? 
[quote
Wise? Dunno.  Adorable? Of course!  
|
| Conan The Westy |
Posted - 02/01/2007 : 10:15:32
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
...rules about usage when the ideas that drive meaning are so fluid.
Just remember: the penis mightier than the sword
Was it wise to mention fluid, drive & usage in the previous sentence?
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
Sorry lemmy and Cheese, already voted. 
Ditto.
Ditto to your ditto. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 02/01/2007 : 09:11:28
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
Sorry lemmy and Cheese, already voted.
Ditto. |
| Sean |
Posted - 02/01/2007 : 02:53:22
Sorry lemmy and Cheese, already voted. |
| randall |
Posted - 02/01/2007 : 00:59:16
quote:
Originally posted by lemmycaution
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Just remember: the penis mightier than the sword
Yes, but the pen is mightier than the Bard.
Sensei, I fall to my knees in abject adulation. |
| Cheese_Ed |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 23:14:03
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Just remember: the penis mightier than the sword
Mine is! 
So is his |
| lemmycaution |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 23:03:42
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Just remember: the penis mightier than the sword
Yes, but the pen is mightier than the Bard. |
| Sean |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 22:06:39
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Just remember: the penis mightier than the sword
Mine is! |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 16:45:59
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
I think I was musing on, e.g. 'wicked' which currently means terrific [which, incidentally originally meant something inducing terror]!
Another thing about this is that it used to be a really 'sad'/'lame' piece of slang (late 1980s/early 1990s). Then it went away for a while and came back cool. Cool itself, meanwhile, did not not become cool again till past the mid-1990s. I remember this because I used to use it in an intentionally retro sense, and it was not then typical to use it at all. (It was a bit like hip still is now. ) |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 15:39:17
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I just meant that, while spade evidently had a positive meaning there, I'm not so sure that it was coined positively. Therefore, I wouldn't say that that positive meaning has evolved into the current negative one - rather, I am guessing that the non-standard positive meaning fell by the wayside.
However... I've just looked at Wikipedia, which cites spade as being a UK term. Perhaps it was a common derogatory term here but a hip term in the States?
No, I'm sure you're right that it was originally a derogatory term wherever [and, who knows, may well be again]... it's just that during that brief period it was used by blacks and whites alike as a cool [aka hip] figure of speech.
I think I was musing on, e.g. 'wicked' which currently means terrific [which, incidentally originally meant something inducing terror]! As a writer, I'm fascinated by this stuff. Also - as I think someone's already mentioned in this thread - oral language is often perceived differently from written. And perhaps it's futile to make absolute rules about usage when the ideas that drive meaning are so fluid.
Just remember: the penis mightier than the sword
I'm mortal. Immortal. What's the difference? Just some space!
|
| Downtown |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 15:36:55
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
The latter cannot use a Catholic adoption agency.
Can now.
Not in Massachusetts, they can't. Catholic Charities was told they couldn't participate in the state's adoption process if they were going to continue to discriminate against gay couples, so they decided the Christian thing to do was to get out of the adoption business altogether. I guess they decided that if they couldn't play quarterback they were going home and taking their football with them. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 14:11:44
I just meant that, while spade evidently had a positive meaning there, I'm not so sure that it was coined positively. Therefore, I wouldn't say that that positive meaning has evolved into the current negative one - rather, I am guessing that the non-standard positive meaning fell by the wayside.
However... I've just looked at Wikipedia, which cites spade as being a UK term. Perhaps it was a common derogatory term here but a hip term in the States? |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 13:12:36
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
Funny how language changes. Back in the very pc 1960's Greenwich Village, the hip way to refer to non-whites was 'spades' - its use was not only wide-spread but encouraged by non-whites as THE non-offensive term. And, I think I'm correct, it's when and where the word 'gay' came into popular usage equally encouraged by homosexuals of both genders.
Spade comes from (or from the same idea as) As black as the ace of spades. I would think this goes back much further than the Greenwich Village usage. While it may seem to just be descriptive and thus not explicitly racist, I think it is implicitly so, since (i) no black people are literally as black as the ace of spades and (ii) the vigour of the statement would be disproportionate to relaying a simple fact. I would guess that what was hip in Greenwich Village in the 1960s could very well have concurrently been offensive elsewhere.
Partly - but what was hip in the Village had an inevitable way of turning up in the mid-West about a decade later. Like Carnaby Street fashions and Chelsea Rd Mohawks becoming ubiquitous on Sheffield dance-floors in time! I well remember a tiny east village store selling used clothing which was run by two very hip black dudes who called it Spades in Shades.  The 'elsewhere' you mention was at the time probably referring to non-whites with far more blatantly offensive language. I was merely commenting on how what is acceptable for a time either goes out of currency or morphs into something else [as in your fine gay example!]
I hestitate to say this, but you know, Sal, I think people don't disagree with you as much as you think
|
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 01/31/2007 : 12:36:02
With regards to gay as a noun, I meant to previously expand that its usage outside comedy seems restricted to the plural, i.e. "a gay" sounds ridiculous. This applies to "a black" and "a white" just the same. For me, it is nonsensical for a word to be used in the plural which is so absurd (and thus not used) in the singular.
The use of Gays in the names of organisations seems restricted to the United States, where they also have the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Little People of America, i.e. using terms that are not favoured in most countries or, in the case of Colored, even there.
Another development is the use of gay to mean rubbish, cf. lame. This is extremely common in Britain at least. Although gay in the homosexual sense itself developed from other meanings, I do not approve of this negative meaning since it was developed entirely because of homophobia. Nevertheless, despite Sean's earlier point, this does not in any way cause its use in the main sense to have negative connotations. Also, I mind this perjorative usage less than gay as a noun, as I do not think that people using it now are often being homophobic. For example, people use it talking to me and I am not offended or annoyed. |
