Talk:Nigger

	This Racism related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

That article right now

I see nothing wrong with having this article, but if we're gonna do it, we need to do it right. Give it the same level humor we give other topics or it's not worth the space it takes on the innertubes. Right now, the article reads somewhere in between an objective overview and (please excuse the expression) a terrified white guy afraid the NAACP is gonna come get him. So I'm gonna think on this and see what we can do to spice this up. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 11:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

As usual, SirChuck chimes in with the voice of actual reason and as usual I agree! If we're going to have an article on "nigger" can we please link it to Tim Minchin's song called "Taboo"? ^bomination 11:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and plent of "taking it back" jokes a la Clerks 2. ^bomination 11:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the article now, it seems good and I can't see what the controversy is, just needs some references. Lonely, lonely, lonely. SJ ^Debaser 11:20, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the whole issue of the comedians and the "who can say it" issue, I have a personal frustration to "vent". I watch a lot of stand up type stuff on TV, and of course some of the black acts use the word, often profusely. And I like them because they're funny as hell. But we all also know that language is contagious, hearing/reading styles of language embeds them in our own "hyper vocabulary" (like reading too much WP makes me start "thinking" in 'cyclopedia-speak, how dull). So what watching these acts does is raise the dreaded word "up higher" in my potential vocabulary, making me 1. more comfortable with uttering it while discussing it, which carries a certain level of danger, and 2. more likely to accidentally use it in a "context" I learned on TV that doesn't quite fit in real life (a white guy saying it). I hope that one day those who are allowed to use the word will achive what the gays have done with "queer", where I feel safe using the word as long as my context isn't hateful. ħuman 00:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Woah this talk page has certainly helped me learn some things about certain people around here that I otherwise would not have expected, and I don't like it. Why would any white person 'need' to say this word? If you're not a black comedian you're not going to be using it in the same context no matter how hard you try (and please don't try hard with any blackface shennanigans!). Are you serious that you are glad you can say 'queer' now? As if you really wanted to say it before it was rehabilitated? I realize these comments are 13 years old but I am suprised nobody has said anything about them in all that time. Even if your 'wish' to use this word is completely 'innocent', even though it sure doesn't sound like it is, it's still ridiculously naive. Quentin Tarantino has said that he reason he puts this word in his movies so often is because he wants to dilute it's meaning by using it a lot or something... well who asked him to conduct this reckless social experiment?? If black people want to use this word that is their right, they've earned it. Nobody else has and nobody else will. But if we're going to hope for any change in the usage of this word, it should be hope that someday no black people will find the need to use it, rather than a hope that white people will someday get to use it again. FairDinkum (talk) 11:12, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Rassismus

Benutzung von dieses Wort ist eine rassistische Volksverhetzung. Jemand, dass diesen Artikel geschrieben hat, werden zu einem Toleranzlager schicken. –Aleksandr Ehrenstein ЯR 18:00, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Excuse the walls, my haddock is learning the accordion. Sophie^Wilder 18:51, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

NWord-rich

Should I point out that "niggardly", which means "not spending money when you should" has an exact opposite idiom, "nword-rich", which means "spending money when you shouldn't"? CorruptUser (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, I guess you just did. And probably no. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 18:05, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Summer of '67

Prior to the enhanced self esteem movement under the slogan, "Black is Beautiful", and the Summer riots of 1967 particularly Detroit-the deadliest since the Civil War, it was not uncommon or unacceptable for news editors when airing or printing a quote to let the quote go out unfiltered. After the riots, news organizations slammed the door down hard on the epithet and took the lead in educating the public that this term, used for 100s of years, was no longer acceptable. The word would not find its wsy into broarcast, print, or a radio call-in show. Banning it as taboo was quite rapid, over 4-5 days, and was a topic everywhere late summer, 1967.nobs 03:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Good God

The sheer fucking skeptic bro gall of these assholes way back when. "iT's JuSt A wOrD." This article is a lot better now than it used to be. I'm glad this wiki has changed with the times, and is better for it. — Oxyaena ^Harass 09:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Well I don't like it the way it is so I am glad I never saw the earlier versions you did! FairDinkum (talk) 11:15, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Changes That Need to be Made

I have a few minor issues with this article as it is right now, and I'm going to change them if there are no objections. If there are any objections to the changes I'm about to make a case for, please state your reasons.

The first change I want to make is to the line that says that this word dropped out of common use due in part to 'political correctness'. I think it's time we stopped using that term as if it is valid. I'm going to tackle the article on it eventually because it is also problematic. Anyway, according to user 'nobs', this word stopped being used casually in the press in 1967, long before the canard of 'political correctness' ever appeared. I have seen no evidence that 'political correctness' has ever caused anyone to not say something. EVER. It is a term that was coined by people who wanted to re-normalize newly established cultural taboos. I don't know how data could be gathered that could satisfy me, but unless someone can point me to solid research that demonstrates that 'political correctness' has ever resulted in people not saying this word, I'm going to remove the reference.

The second change I want to make is to the right-hand sidebar, where one of the associations with this word is 'First World Problems'. The term 'first world problems' is a euphemism for frivolous issues that only people with too much free time on their hands bitch about. In fact, the people who relate to the term 'political correctness' consider it to be a 'first world problem'. So I do not believe that usage of this word falls under that category.

If there are no objections, I will make these changes approximately one week from now. FairDinkum (talk) 11:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

The sidebar (edit: regarding the "first world problems") I think is auto-generated articles related to the category, which is language. It's not about the n-word.

The whole paragraph with the "political correctness" is weird to me. I think the paragraph is actually talking about the term "negro", but I'm not sure why that actually needs to be in this article. The n-word has been super-offensive since forever. Negro does not seem to be universally offensive, and political correctness at first Google has nothing to do with much with any debate on it (there's a little kerfuffle about that term but in general the impression I get is that it's more seen as a dated archaic term than a super-offensive one). So yes, feel free to modify or excise.

nobs is delusional and has been banned from this Wiki for some time, you can safely ignore anything he says. BobJohnson (talk) 14:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree with the other Bob that you would want to be careful about using "nobs" as a source for anything sensible. It is possible that he might have said something which is correct on occasion - but given his vast range of bizarre unsubstantiated opinions you would be unwise to quote him as an authority.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:15, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Agree with the Bobs. 1) Side-bar is not directly related other than "language". It is auto-generated here: Template:Langnav[1] 2) Nobs was Conservapedian pet troll here for many years, so not a valid source. 3) "Negro" is not offensive per se, just archaic. If people are quoting something from pre-1970 or so, it's not offensive, or it's a historical organization still in existence (e.g., United Negro College Fund); otherwise it's suspicious about the speaker's intent. Bongolian (talk) 20:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

The same can be said about "Colored". The NAACP come to mind. Vee (talk) 20:06, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I was refuting 'nobs', which should have been obvious given the context and content of the argument I made directly after quoting 'nobs', as well as the context of the changes to the article I suggested. I don't know what using a comment without references as a 'source' to back anything up even means. Given the sensitive nature of the topic, I think it would be wise to either ask me what I meant, or reply with something along he lines of, "If you are using nobs' comment to back up your point, then..." FairDinkum (talk) 03:50, 6 April 2023 (UTC)