Ricky Gervais, and to possibly a lesser extent Tim Minchin, are both high-profile comedians who have been subject to controversy in recent weeks over the use of apparently offensive language. Gervais was slated for using the word 'mong' in his blogs and tweets a couple of weeks ago, and Minchin was forced to apologise for using the word 'tranny' on a panel-based comedy show.
But are these words really that offensive? And whether they are or not, is it really that funny or necessary to use them anyway?
Comedians seem to be highlighted for using certain words more than most, and perhaps this is the nature of their profession. Anything a comedian does or says surely mirrors the society they draw their material from. Gervais defended his use of the word 'mong' by suggesting that modern/popular culture now understands the word as meaning 'idiot', rather than a supposedly archaic word used to describe people with cerebral-palsy (in honesty, I actually always thought it was a derogatory word for disabled people and don't think I have ever used it). Likewise, Minchin was unaware that the word 'tranny' was considered offensive by those it described.
I wonder if the use of some of these words can be excused as a generational confusion. Sixty or seventy years ago the word 'nigger' was a frequently used and an old word used as a name for black people. It is by and large now no longer in use. And very rightly so. Never has a word in history ever represented such a travesty in social justice. Millions of human beings throughout several centuries were enslaved and considered lesser human beings under that word.
Weeks ago my father told me how he had recently had to have words with his own father about him using the word 'nigger' and how it is considered terribly offensive and that he shouldn't be using it. But if it is was a common word when he was young, and I don't actually know if it was that common - although we are led to believe that it was used more back then, then maybe he can be excused for not realising its significance. My dad couldn't understand why he found it so difficult to understand how offensive the word was when he explained it to him.
Likewise, a few weeks ago, while out for a few drinks with my dad, I had to reprimand him for using the word 'faggot', which these days is considered to be an aggressive and offensive word to describe gay men. He couldn't really see that this was more offensive than any other words people use to describe gays. Having been a firefighter all his life, and working in a male-dominated working-class environment, I gather words and language such as this becomes widely spread, and so that is why he probably saw it as a word such as any other. I told him that I knew for a fact that people my age, and I was certainly thinking of some gay friends of mine, would find the word offensive, but somehow he still didn't see it.
It seemed to me that the offensiveness of these words could have changed generationally - or even as a result of circumstances - presumably, just as all language goes in and out of fashion, the words that cause offence also fade in and out. What wasn't considered overly offensive then is considered drastically offensive now. Of course, and I dearly hope it isn't the case, my father may just be a homophobe, and my grandfather a racist.
Of course, words like this are always going to be subjective. Words that to some people are outrageously offensive said to others may mean very little. Just like the way people rate swear words as to their relative rudeness. Some may see words like 'twat' or 'crap' to be very rude, whereas others will see them as tame, but words like 'fuck' or 'cunt' as being very offensive. Others, and most of the people that drink down my local, think nothing of saying 'fuck' and 'cunt' every other word, and would probably struggle talk without using them.
One man's 'crap' is another man's 'fuck' is another man's 'cunt'.
So people perceive offensive words to different degrees. Everyone is different, and so will always think differently. And possibly some words go in and out of fashion and history and generations pass. Words are just words aren't they? Sticks and stones etc..... Some people think the almost 'banning' of offensive words or phrases like 'nigger' or 'faggot' or 'mong' is an attack on their freedom of speech. That they shouldn't be told what to do, and that they themselves are being victimised by not being allowed to use these words. They cite 'political correctness gone mad' and 'thought police'........
......and they are of course wrong, and very ignorant. When Ricky Gervais and Tim Minchin were forced to apologise for their individual faux-pas's, they were entirely right to do so, even if Gervais was predictably childish about it. Anything that causes offence to others, and especially minorities, is well worth an apology. It is not for the individual speaking these words to decide what is offensive and what is not. They obviously won't find what they are saying offensive or they wouldn't even think it in the first place. Of course people can't help it if they didn't know a word of phrase was offensive, and they can instantly remedy that by trying to understand the opposite point of view and apologising.
I think that is my point overall in a way, as disjointed and unfocused as I have been here. Offensive words are not really acceptable, and if you didn't understand their meaning or relevance when you used them, then you should apologise to those concerned and try not to use them again. Conscientiousness and consideration is the key.
For a certainly better constructed, and considerably funnier, argument about the use of offensive language amongst other things, follow the link below to hear the first episode of 'The Richard Herring Objective' on Radio 4, which considers the history of 'The Gollywog', and highlights a similar subject. I highly recommend it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b016wzrz/Richard_Herrings_Objective_Series_2_The_Golliwog/
No comments:
Post a Comment