Gwyneth Paltrow Tweets the N-Word: Insensitive or Overreaction?
SodaHead Celebs
2012/06/05 18:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
173 votes
|
|
21% | |||
|
642 votes
|
|
79% | |||
Gwyneth Paltrow found herself in the middle of a media storm on Monday when she tweeted a photo of herself standing next to Jay-Z and Beyonce with the caption "Ni**as in paris for real." She was, of course, referencing a song by Jay-Z and Kanye West, but the media immediately jumped on it. Watch the video below for more.
Some were obviously offended by Paltrow's use of the word, stating that people who are not African American should never, under any circumstances, use it. Others argued that Jay-Z and Kanye are to blame for including the word in the name of the song. Still others felt that her use of the word was harmless. It's an intricate issue, and Gwyneth Paltrow's tweet sits in a complicated spot. Do you think it was insensitive -- or an overreaction?
Some were obviously offended by Paltrow's use of the word, stating that people who are not African American should never, under any circumstances, use it. Others argued that Jay-Z and Kanye are to blame for including the word in the name of the song. Still others felt that her use of the word was harmless. It's an intricate issue, and Gwyneth Paltrow's tweet sits in a complicated spot. Do you think it was insensitive -- or an overreaction?
Top Opinion
-
Assassin~ Badass Buzz Guru 2012/06/05 21:25:38Overreaction
+21It is not offensive. It is however amusing when WASPY people like Gwenyth try to speak "ghetto".
What's your excuse?
I fully understand the argument you're making, and I'm sure that in theory it makes rational sense... but in practice, it's simply (and respectfully submitted, since I also appreciate your thought-out reply) not the case.
I would submit this in return: First, yes, of course there are standards. It's reasonable of you to ask "whose" they are and even to deem some of them as arbitrary, since -- when we get into the specifics of what these standards might be -- many of them seem to be exactly that.
However, it's specious to pretend that the standards neither exist nor would have any validity if they did. We are social beings by design. Our radically decreased survivability outside of social groups is pure scientific evidence of that. And when societies form, so does some code of coexistence... within it, the codes of civility.
We may forever be destined to debate what does or doesn't belong in that code, but there has yet to be a culture that's existed without any understanding of the code... and in ours, the words we use have evolved to such a level that which ones we use... matter.
Thi...
I fully understand the argument you're making, and I'm sure that in theory it makes rational sense... but in practice, it's simply (and respectfully submitted, since I also appreciate your thought-out reply) not the case.
I would submit this in return: First, yes, of course there are standards. It's reasonable of you to ask "whose" they are and even to deem some of them as arbitrary, since -- when we get into the specifics of what these standards might be -- many of them seem to be exactly that.
However, it's specious to pretend that the standards neither exist nor would have any validity if they did. We are social beings by design. Our radically decreased survivability outside of social groups is pure scientific evidence of that. And when societies form, so does some code of coexistence... within it, the codes of civility.
We may forever be destined to debate what does or doesn't belong in that code, but there has yet to be a culture that's existed without any understanding of the code... and in ours, the words we use have evolved to such a level that which ones we use... matter.
This can be tested: Write out that list of "powerless" words and use them freely in a group. See what happens. If there is a reaction, you might attribute that to how flawed other people are. But cover your head before doing it, because it will be your words that force an action, and not necc. the one you'd hoped for.
Further, we're not just social animals... but emotional ones, much as all "rational" people would like to deny it. And it's this emotional nature, for which we're hardwired, that gives the words power. You cannot decide this away.
Last, I work as a writer and have for two decades. Most of that writing is meant to persuade people to buy things. I can tell you, to the dollar, that words have power... and that some words have more power than others.
Again I would submit that it is not the words themselves that have the power. If your proposed experiment were carried out there are two variables which would greatly affect the outcome: the words themselves and the people. As you know, "know your audience." Lets take this set of words: Evolution, Higgs-bosen, big bang and death. Obviously these words would have a different effect on a group of devout Christians as compared to a group of science nerds.
The word "chair" will, in all likelihood,change. The meaning of the word will probably change as well. It is not the word itself that has the power but the essence of the word. That essence or PERCEIVED idea, is created by man.Therefore I say it is not the word but the idea of the word that has the power and that idea changes form person to person. Allegory of the cave comes to mind.
Social animals. Hmmmm, yes, Being Harlow s monkey I understand that all too well. Lord of the Flies comes to mind.
Fourth para second sentence:
"We are social beings by design. Our radically decreased survivability outside of social groups is pure scientific evidence of that."
Scientific evidence does say that our survivability decreases outside of social groups. That says nothing however about design. But that's another discussion.
Take care.
In this case, going back to your original question "Anybody care?" I guess I would add... well, probably yes, given that... knowing this Sodahead audience... there's a high probability out there that someone will take the use of the word here negatively.
Now, whether that matters to you is also a whole other discussion.
But I'm sure you see the point.
Nice talking with you.