Racism in the workplace - page 11

Not to be a downer or anything but I have noticed some harsh things said about patients and sometimes even co workers in my unit when they think no one else can hear them. Has anyone else dealt with... Read More

  1. by   Sheri257
    Quote from Logan
    I'm of the honest opinion that eliminating the useage of the "n-word" will do nothing to reverse discrimination and prejudice.

    To disempower a word, it needs to lose it's shock value.
    Ok so ... to eliminate shock value ... I guess I'm supposed to use the N-word to address my African American patients to disempower the meaning of that word?

    C'mon.

    Ever see the popular movie "Rush Hour?" There's a scene in a bar that illustrates the absurdity of the situation.

    The blacks in the bar are referring to themselves as "my *****." Jackie Chan's character is from China so ... he thinks that's ok because that's what they're calling themselves.

    But when Jackie Chan says it ... a fight breaks out because NOW they're offended. How is that disempowering the meaning of that word?

    If you really want to disempower the meaning of a word ... don't use it.

    :typing
    Last edit by Sheri257 on Aug 26, '06
  2. by   LADYFLOWER
    Quote from TheCommuter
    Not all black people use the N-word. I'm black and never use the term. Please keep that in mind prior to making blanket statements about an entire group of people.
    Thank YOU!
  3. by   leslie :-D
    i think timothy and logan both agree with this theory.
    i personally think to downplay its' usage would be to negate a crucial piece of history.
    it's important to recognize why this word is so powerful and also, so repugnant.
    it warrants a proper burial.

    leslie
  4. by   Multicollinearity
    It is only disempowering the word if the minority person uses the word themself. Of course only an African American can use the n***** word, and nobody else of another color. As a white person, I'm uncomfortable with it - but since I'm not the minority, I'm certainly not telling the minority person that they shouldn't reclaim the word. It's their experience and I don't walk in their shoes.
  5. by   firstaiddave907
    Quote from MuddaMia
    Wow, thats a bit of a defeatist attituide. We MUST believe in change--otherwise we have no hope of evolving.
    I agree with what you said
  6. by   firstaiddave907
    Very good point Lizz
  7. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Quote from earle58
    i think timothy and logan both agree with this theory.
    i personally think to downplay its' usage would be to negate a crucial piece of history.
    it's important to recognize why this word is so powerful and also, so repugnant.
    it warrants a proper burial.

    leslie
    I don't exactly agree, but I haven't really discussed this topic on this thread because it has it's own thread. You are kind of cross-quoting me from the other, and older, thread.

    And my comments THERE were addressed to what the youth are doing and culture changes, and the semantics of language.

    https://allnurses.com/forums/f112/te...se-138348.html

    I'll comment there.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
  8. by   Logan
    Quote from earle58
    i personally think to downplay its' usage would be to negate a crucial piece of history.
    it's important to recognize why this word is so powerful and also, so repugnant.
    it warrants a proper burial.
    Hi,

    I don't think downplaying it's useage would make it lose it's meaning - nor is my intention to "forget" what it stood for. No sane person can forget what the word once meant - I merely wish to whittle away at it's barb and sting and reduce it to the point where using the word won't cause anguish, anger and hurt anymore.

    Throughout our history, communities and groups of people have come forward and embraced epithets usually used to describe them in a negetive fashion - converting them into positive identities.

    I think it's important that we continue to do this - rather than reserve exclusivity for words, we reduce their value. We reduce the HURT it carries.

    Quote from multicollinarity
    It is only disempowering the word if the minority person uses the word themself. Of course only an African American can use the n***** word, and nobody else of another color. As a white person, I'm uncomfortable with it - but since I'm not the minority, I'm certainly not telling the minority person that they shouldn't reclaim the word. It's their experience and I don't walk in their shoes.
    Hi,

    I think that's kinda what I'm trying to arrive at in the end.


    Thanks,
    Matthew
  9. by   Logan
    Hi,

    Quote from lizz
    Ok so ... to eliminate shock value ... I guess I'm supposed to use the N-word to address my African American patients to disempower the meaning of that word?

    C'mon.
    Uhhh, I didn't realise that we used pet names, nick names and other terms to address our patients at work! This isn't a valid comparision because the point is moot --- I can't call a white person a "cracker" at work anymore than I can call him "buddy" or "dude".

    You're confusing two issues - the point about the useage of the word and racism in the workplace.

    Racism is more than racial epithets.

    Quote from lizz
    Ever see the popular movie "Rush Hour?" There's a scene in a bar that illustrates the absurdity of the situation.

    The blacks in the bar are referring to themselves as "my *****." Jackie Chan's character is from China so ... he thinks that's ok because that's what they're calling themselves.

    But when Jackie Chan says it ... a fight breaks out because NOW they're offended. How is that disempowering the meaning of that word?
    Ahhh yes!

    Using that argument:
    Ever listen to multi-platinum 'gangsta' rap CDs? I guess it's ok to refer to woman as B*****s.

    I've seen plenty of the guys on my drilling crew refer to each other by the "N word" with nary a fist nor wrench thrown their way. *shrug*

    Quote from lizz
    If you really want to disempower the meaning of a word ... don't use it.
    Symbols don't disappear because of repression - just ask Germans how much success they have had in trying to stamp out Nazi symbolism.

    They lose their value by losing their 'exclusivity'.



    Thanks,
    Matthew
    Last edit by Logan on Aug 27, '06
  10. by   Roy Fokker
    Quote from ZASHAGALKA
    I haven't really discussed this topic on this thread because it has it's own thread. You are kind of cross-quoting me from the other, and older, thread.

    And my comments THERE were addressed to what the youth are doing and culture changes, and the semantics of language.

    https://allnurses.com/forums/f112/te...se-138348.html

    I'll comment there.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    I think I agree too - this discussion is diverging to the point of confusion - IMO.
  11. by   staygold
    Why do Americans assume its always about black people and white people and the word ****** when discussing racism?I left out the races of the other involved parties for the fear of this happening.But since it did i'd like to know.
  12. by   Logan
    Quote from staygold
    Why do Americans assume its always about black people and white people and the word ****** when discussing racism?I left out the races of the other involved parties for the fear of this happening.But since it did i'd like to know.
    Hi,

    Good point.

    Convenience might be one.
    Familiarity might be another.



    Thanks,
    Matthew
  13. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Quote from staygold
    Why do Americans assume its always about black people and white people and the word ****** when discussing racism?I left out the races of the other involved parties for the fear of this happening.But since it did i'd like to know.
    It's because the historical institutionalism and contexts of the black/white focus overshadows all others.

    For example, the Irish had the same problems assimilating after the potato famine sent millions of them here in the early 20th century. NINA - No Irish Need Apply. But, without the long shadow of institutional and historical bias, they were able to assimilate more readily.

    How much do we discuss Irish/Caucasian biases in our society today?

    Even the hispanic/white racial difficulties today are more expressed in current legal questions: immigration status, then in long inherited institutional biases. I guess growing up in Texas, I didn't even realize that being 'hispanic' was a different 'race' until I was an adult.

    We do discuss in the public forum Black/Asian and Black/Jewish biases, but, as important at they might be, they don't rise to the level of historical validity. What I mean is: undoing those biases is easier to address, and indeed, perhaps not as foundational, BECAUSE they lack a long historical context.

    Did you know that Hollywood almost univerally scripts leading Black Males as dating Hispanic Female leads? Look at Will Smith and Denzel Washington and their 'leading ladies'? I can think of exceptions (Independence Day - but even then, Will Smith and Vivica Fox were part of an 'ensemble' cast, with more then one lead relationship.), but the rule is different. Know why? Because movies with dual black leading roles have been proven not to do as well at the box office. Using a hispanic female is a Hollywood compromise to the masses. And that's not just here, the same formula applies overseas as far as sells go, as well.

    America brags that we are a melting pot. That concept helps the assimilation process. Even those violently against illegal aliens make it a point to distinguish that sentiment from legal immigrants.

    But, the institutional and historical biases in Black/White relations are simply overwhelming. The total disenfranchisement from society by some, to the point that even doing well in school is considered by many as caving in to 'the man', is so pervasive and so problematic BECAUSE of the very long shadow of contexts that go with it.

    We didn't have a Civil War with any other racial overtone as one of the issues.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on Aug 27, '06

close