Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This already is what we do. We observe whether someone just uses the word or if they show the respect of at least referring to it as “the n-word” when there is a meta-context of discussing it.

That’s no different than what you propose, except that there’s far less risk of either incidentally triggering someone for whom the word itself materially carries a weight of trauma, and far less risk of making it seem like the word is OK to say so long as you do mental gymnastics about the context of how you said it (something which people who want to use it racially would like to do to avoid punishment).

Allowing people to scapegoat their clearly racist usage of the word, under the pretense that it’s OK as long as the intended usage is not meant to be offensive, is particularly terrible, as it shifts the blame of “being offended” onto the class of people for whom it is a racial slur. It’s tacit racism endorsement 101.

What you describe seems like it contributes nothing in the way of actually bolstering free speech or better identifying slur usage from discussion usage. The current way already serves those purposes better, and without the extra risks that your described point of view carries with it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: