oh, you right.

trying to ban them is futile

as an author, slurs in dialogue are really handy. they’re intensely evocative phrases when spoken in anger or hate, and humanizing when spoken in jest. i just really hate it when someone goes on the internet to shoulder the plight of every ethnicity and creed and shouts on their assumed behalf, “no one should use mean words ever”

you’re right but i don’t think he was threatening me, i think he’s just being difficult because nuance is scary

It is fun and easy to feel right by conflating the idea of expressive freedom with the usage of a specific racial slur laden with a unique history of systemic violence and dehumanization, hell yeah.

but louis ck thinks you’re being a faggot

Language is an evolving, organic tool, and attempting to police it usually says more about the person doing the policing than the person speaking. When we start labeling certain verbiage as “correct” or “incorrect,” we aren’t actually protecting the language; we are just enforcing a personal or social preference.

Communication is about the transmission of ideas. If the message was received, the language did its job. Whether it was delivered with a academic precision or through “crass” slang is irrelevant to its functional success. Demanding that everyone adhere to a specific aesthetic or moral standard of speech is just a subtle way of trying to control how others express their reality. If you make certain words the enemy, you’re essentially arguing for a narrow, sterilized version of expression that leaves no room for the raw or the unconventional. It’s better to engage with the actual argument being made rather than retreating into the safety of tone policing.