"think this way - do you like burning your figures? no! therefore you avoid burning your fingers at all cost (sitting away from stove, wear gloves, ect).
if you really, really don't like the N word and truly believe in that, then you would avoid using it very much the same as avoiding contact with fires.

the fact that people are prone to use the N word whenever the opportunity presents itself reflects racists attitude that is still prevalent in common people's mind, and this to me is detestable and most terrible."

Just wrong sir, an illogical comparison followed by an incongruous statement. The question at hand is about using the word in the context of a historical quote, which is a far cry from "whenever possible." I think you are getting a little self-righteous here. The only personal harm (ie "burn") you could inflict upon yourself by using the word would be if a group of black gangsters came and gangraped you for using the word offensively, therefore it's not in your best interest to use the word

I am very surprised, abgemacht, to hear that the Professor taking your class was in any way taken aback when a student used the word 'nigger' when quoting from a historical source. Surely your professor must be aware that the word 'nigger' was used quite often by some people at the time of the US Civil War? As such, it's bound to come up in historical sources from time to time.

To delete the word 'nigger' from a historical source is basically attempting to re-write history. So your fellow student was 100% correct to say 'nigger' in this context.

@Spyman "Some people consider the term "black" to be offensive and instead use the term "person of color". "

I would have thought the other way around more offensive, but then I try to avoid having to describe anyone by the colour of their skin. I've only heard "Cracker" in a few movies [Oceans 11] but here in Aus it can imply somethings good. I wonder if this would even be a discusion if the student reading the quote was Afro-American?

I wonder if this would even be a discusion if the student reading the quote was Afro-American?

No it would not be an issue. Jay-Z does it all the time.

Greydon Square - N Word
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBjr-e9Il9Q

USA - In an academic setting I think that it is completely appropriate to use any language when reading a quote. If we a studying what someone said then we should hear the exact words that they used. In an academic setting we should study history, not censor it.

USA and white - "Cracker" and "Nigger" aren't even comparable. As someone said, no white person was ever lynched by a mob with no legal consequence. No white person was ever stolen from his land and put into slavery with the at least tacit acceptance by the entire "civilized" world.

But history is history, and we ignore it at our peril. We should hear the words, and be uncomfortable saying them, and accept that our history is full of uncomfortable truths. I find it fascinating and uncomfortable that the black community has accepted the use of the N word internally, but I also understand it - to claim a word is to deprive it of it's power over you. This is the same reason that the gay community has adopted "queer". There is no equivalent for straight white people simply because we've been in charge for so long.

So I'm aware, and I would never use the N word, or any word used to persecute a minority, in any conversation, although I'll include it in a quote - but I'll be VERY aware of my audience, and I'll probably even say "This quote contains language that I find offensive". Which is all very interesting, because I don't really consider myself very Politically Correct, it's just my nature to avoid insulting words of any kind.

My father published a book of his essays recently. He was very conflicted about whether to include an essay describing his High School's minstrel show, and his reaction to it, because he was embarrassed that he had even taken part in it. However, I pointed out that his teacher had allowed him to take the only non-blackface part because he had expressed his reservations, and it's a little much to expect a 15-year-old kid in 1950 to take a stand against his teachers and refuse to take part. So he kept it in, because it's a part of history and the story should be told, and understood.

I'm surprised that there is such uniformity (although, idealist, I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make). I suppose I agree that it should be acceptable to say in a quote, although I would still feel extremely uncomfortable saying it. But, as some have mentioned, people should feel uncomfortable when saying it and to take it out is to water-down history.

I believe this is only my profs 2nd semester teaching, so maybe this will change over time, but she definitely should have prepared the class better for this.

As to cracker, unless I"m horribly mistaken, there are no terrible atrocities that have gone along with that word. Terrible things happened to people because they were "niggers" or "kikes." Furthermore, crackers are delicious, so all around it's stupid.

@abgemacht - ultimately words associated with things we perceive as negative, often gain a social stigma. E.g. handicapped, retarded etc. when we are referring to "Special Needs" people, the words we use will always become derogatory because of the subject we are referring to.

The untouchable "N" has already lost a lot of its significance due to the odd use by African Americans to refer to themselves by it. The word is then in effect receiving a reverse effect whereby, black people are de-valuing the words historical significance by misusing it.

There are however blacks who are extremely sensitive to the word (most of whom are left wing "tolerance" activists), and this dichotomy only increases the awkwardness of using the word in either an academic or colloquial situation.

So is it right or wrong? Surely we agree that historical quotes shouldn't be altered, but the word should also carry the same stigma when a black person says it which isn't the case, and until black americans can get their own misuse of the word under control, it is arch-hipocritical to accuse others of being intolerant.

My two cents would be that intent is the real issue. If the student was merely pointing out a quote to further some point in the class, then I see no problem with it. If the student was using it as a cover to get a rise out of others in the class, then that's totally different.

If I were in the position of the student, I'd have probably said the quote exactly as it was recorded. In some instances though it's advideable to preface a quote with an expression of your own intent. "Hey everybody this quote contains crude language, but I'm not going to sugar coat it and risk making this gfigure look like anything other than the ignorant bigot that he was"

@Crazy Anglican - I totally agree, but I think the larger problem here is the odd social stigma, that the particular "n" word in question, carries.

@KK,

I think I have to disagree with you there.

First, although I'll agree that all of those words have a negative connotation, I think they have varying degrees of inappropriateness.

Second, I don't think N has lost it's significance because of the way some Blacks use it. Blacks started using it as a way of taking power away from racists. In a perfect world, then yes, N would have the same meaning to everyone, but that simply isn't the case.

@abgemacht - I agree that there are varying degrees of inappropriateness, and that we should be sensitive to that. However I would completely disagree with your conclusion. If a word has a negative meaning when one race uses it, and a positive/neutral connotation when used by another race, there exists a problem.

You can't live with that dichotomy, there is no such middle ground. When it comes to language there are absolutes, and the "n" word is either inappropriate for everybody or nobody (I would suggest the former).

Just because black people wanted to "take power away from racists" doesn't justify them crucifying others for using the same word. Their intent was to neutralize it, but they have instead completely reversed the situation. If they wish for the word not to be used, then they must in turn not use it. Period.

If African Americans are divided on the issue of the "n" word, then they have no moral authority to impose a unified front against other races (primarily Caucasians) also using the exact same language.

@abemacht - by the way, I think it is worth mentioning that I don't condone anybody using that language outside of an academic situation such as an accurate quote.

@KK

The fact that some Blacks use the N word with each other and that some Blacks are offended by the N word does not mean that Blacks need to have a Black Convention and decide how to properly use the word. The point here is that they are all individuals.

The real question was should it be acceptable to use N in a historical context? I don't think anyone is making the case that Blacks have a moral authority to censor words.

I think the real question has been answered and we've moved on to side questions and there is nothing wrong with that.

Note that in a group of friends you might often find them using normally insulting language towards each other in a friendly way, but if a stranger walks up and uses that same language it would be considered insulting. Within that context the current use of the N word isn't that different from any other insulting word.

I should also point out that just because whites persecuted non-white more often than the other way around doesn't mean it hasn't happened the other way around. In college I had a couple of friends that grew up in Hawaii and because of their white skin were persecuted by the other kids including regular taunting and getting beaten up. While that doesn't compare to the level of atrocities that were inflicted upon african americans, let's not think it doesn't ever happen the other way around.

What always amazes me is how when a situation like that happens everyone freezes, scared to not make a mistake, and falls back to the 'rulebook'. Something quite unnatural about it. People don't act like this usually.

Rules are there to make sure we don't kill each-other. Common-sense is there to make sure it's bearable. Obviously quotes should be ok, as long as there's no obvious intent.

Or... we're mostly racists and could very well kill each-other in the 'right' circumstances. In which case it's obviously not ok :) Guess it depends on the audience?

Btw, in Bulgaria the officially used and politically correct term is "blackskin" (if there's such a word).

@all who replied to my post.

what im getting at is if one really hates the word, he wouldn't use it. just like you wouldn't get yourself burned because you don't like to be burned.

@ottovanbis
"The only personal harm (ie "burn") you could inflict upon yourself by using the word would be if a group of black gangsters came and gangraped you for using the word offensively, therefore it's not in your best interest to use the word"

it's a reflection of ones character - namely that using race offensive word reflects negatively toward him or herself. its not about getting beat up by african americans, but that its an internal respect for anyone and everyone.

@obiwanobiwan

that is ubsurd.
so from your logic, its okay to repeat the holocaust on germans to let them "feel uncomfortable" because its history?

yes, it is history - a sad portion of history, too. people who studied history innately understands the terrible effects of slavery (if not, go read uncle tom). we don't need to use the word to "feel uncomfortable." i am uncomfortable already hearing people advocating the usage of this word...

i personally use dictions as african american, asian american, or whatever-american when addressing people. of course if i'm outside of US, then its a different idea. but labeling someone a color is simply terrible. would you like to be labeled as a color?

I really dislike African American. First, it's really, really long. Second, I can't always tell if someone is from Africa or, say, somewhere in the Caribbean. I don't see anything wrong with saying someone is Black, as long as you don't treat them differently BECAUSE they're Black.

And, yes, I am labeled as a color: White. I like that term a lot better than Caucasian, which is just as stupid as African American.

I suppose I should have said that first sentence better: I really dislike *the term* African American.

The terrible effects of slavery are innately understood by people who study history? You know we are talking about a class with students who are LEARNING right? And from my experience, not many people innately understand most anything.

well i guess we just share different opinions.