The fact that he called his dog Nigger suggests that the term wasn't considered a derogatory racial term back then. I mean, who would name their dog after a racial slur, or any slur for that matter? Would you name your dog Gook, Spic, Fuckface, Cunt, etc? Nigger (slight adaptation from niger) historically meant black , I know Russians who still refer to blacks as niggers in a non-derogatory manner, the word has just been demonised by all the political correctness bullshit over the years and the fact that the South (who used the word more often) were often associated with racism and slavery. The day when niggers aren't offended by the term nigger is the day when racism is not longer such a pertinent issue. Let's hope that day comes soon.
you're probably right that this movie is just a money maker, but to say huck can get away with it because he's real art is, i dunno arrogant or something. when its based on a true story, using actual character names seems fair enough to me. movies offend people, thats alright, just include a disclaimer. my understanding is that nigger is a painful reminder of their enslavement, as well as typically being derogatory.
I guess you need to have been called a nigger in a manner that was derogatory to understand why I consider it offensive. It is hurtful and humiliating, not to mention insulting when you are called that. That is why I personally find it insulting. I have been referred to by that term so many times, especially in my childhood, that to me, it is a horrible word. Having said that, however, I disagree with attempts to alter history because there are people in society who consider it insulting. Tell it like it is, warts and all. If he named his dog nigger, than he named it nigger. You don't try to hide it or deny it because it could be deemed offensive.
Then if it's painful and derogatory, why is it used amongst the 'gangsta' community as an affectionate term? Seems like total hyposcrisy to me, whites can't say the word, but it's OK for 'gangstas' to use it, that sounds like racism, against whites.
I don't view it as an affectionate term, regardless of the person using it. I'd be equally offended if a black person called me "nigger". There is this movement to 'reclaim' the word. It's a word. How can it be reclaimed? It can be hurtful and it can humiliate and denigrate. I guess trying to take the word and use it affectionately amongst the black community is a means to lower the hatred behind it from the past. How can I put this.. If someone calls me a "nigger", regardless of their colour, they will feel the blunt end of my wrath.
Worked for Lesbians and the word 'dyke'. They started using it themselves, and now it is no longer considered an offensive word. To be honest, I fail to see how one word can be offensive. That's bordering on religion.
Really? Because it would be pretty easy to walk up to someone and punch them in the face w/o their permission. And I'm sure very few people wouldn't be offended if someone punched them in the face.
Part.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Maybe. I guess I've just been humiliated and insulted enough during my childhood and early teenage years, especially, to be so free and able to let it go to that extent yet.
I completely agree. The story is what it is, if people find the name of a dog offensive then that's their prerogative - it doesn't change the fact that the dog was called that. 'Mein Kampf' is choc-a-bloc full of racist terms and potentially dangerous ideals, yet it is what it is and is freely available to anyone. I just find this whole argument illogical. I mean, for crying out loud, the word is used in films ALL the time (particularly to give a sense of the attitudes of a certain era). Moreover, in, for example, 'Of Mice and Men' and 'The Green Mile' it is used unashamedly in an offensive way towards black characters. As far as I know, there was no complaint from film companies.
Where do you come up with this stuff? As if offense is purely based on the permission of the target... I'm pretty sure I could come up with a way to offend you without getting your explicit permission. In the alternative, nothing should offend you, including any action the West or the US may take regarding [insert anything]. If this is true, you certainly pretend to portray indignation very convincingly. Or have you given these people "permission" to offend you?
As to the OP topic, my position is portray historical facts as accurately as possible. This will, course, cause controversy. Maybe that is a good thing, perhaps people will learn something - e.g. historically the connotations of "nigger" were very different than those currently perceived. In any event, changing the name of a dog in a movie today will certainly not alter historical facts, despite the desire of certain people to take "politically correct" to insane levels.
You miss the point Randwolf: 90% of the people I meet cannot offend me since I don't care enough about their opinion of me to be offended. That's what S.A.M. means.
Don't change the story, that's stupid. Whatever happened happened. The actual word carries a lot of weight when used that way. Seeing as many black people still remember times before the civil rights movement, they really get in an uproar. It can also be used in a good way too. To me it's like, how it's okay whensome people call u something but not okay for someone else. Like you don't mind when your mom or fri ends call u by some nickname, but get angry if someone else calls u by that name.
There's enough songs and films with the word "nigger" in already. Why change it when it is actually needed?
Well, if that's what SAM meant, than I totally agree. Although it becomes much clearer the way that you phrase it: Kudos... :worship:
