I am writing in response to Thomas Kyle-Milward’s opinion column (“Watching words is a lost cause,” ODE Apr. 30). Although the debate over “PC” terms is complex and many standpoints can be taken, I was especially offended by the naivety present in Kyle-Milward’s argument. Arguing that words like “gay,” “lame,” “retard,” etc. should not be taken offensively and that words themselves are empty of force not only perpetuates hate speech, but is quite a curious position for a writer to take. Kyle-Milward then submits that the “n-word” has been reclaimed by the black community, but his abbreviation of the word contradicts his own claim. If the word truly has lost its hateful connotation, why can’t he voice it in print?
His stance is one of deflection and non-responsibility. He places the burden of “reclaiming” slurs on the groups they target. Should women be expected to reclaim the word “rape?” Gay men the word “faggot?” The lexicon of hate against people of color, women, queer communities, and the disabled is staggering, and the responsibility of battling the oppression of those groups is on all of us. Casually dismissing the ability of language to incite symbolic and literal violence is simply a way to shirk responsibility for the consequences of speech. I would hope that Kyle-Milward, and the Daily Emerald itself, reevaluates their position of privilege in society and the role of words in the oppression of others.
[email protected]