Quote:
Originally Posted by JW
I don't see how people are trivializing lynching here. Some people just seem to be saying that not everyone automatically thinks of lynching in racial terms and that the sportscaster might well have not been thinking at all in racial terms.
|
I think it's pretty likely that she wasn't trying to be a racist and I would say that she wasn't thinking at all rather than thinking in racial terms. I can't see how any sane person in this country can think honestly about lynching and not giving even the slightest thought to the racial element to american lynching
But as I said, I don't think she was trying to be a racist and I don't think very many people think that.
Isn't the point that the criticizers are saying though is that there should be clear boundaries and we're not at the point that we can decide that on a case by case basis?
I mean, once a precedent is set, you'd have to allow the truly racist to say whatever they want too. Is it perhaps better to have a few unfair examples made so the boundary is clear?
Keep in mind, really I'm playing the devils advocate here. I'm actually a believer and have stated it here several times that I think this word policing is silly but I'm trying to see the other side and the fact that people can come out and say that they never knew black folks was lynched more than white folks to be very scary because when people lie like that for no reason I have to wonder what they are really thinking.
I brought up the last post though because I found the topic in it interesting. I'm sorry that my one sentence diminished the interest in the rest of the piece for you.