You'd just call bullshit? Me, I'd scream bullshit.

(Reply) (Thread)

Your "you heard it here first" link is borken.

But yeah, I remain unconvinced that someone from Georgia never heard uppity in a racial context.

(Reply) (Thread)

Fixed. Somehow, I pasted the URL after the AJC link instead of over it.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Sure, it's been used in a racial context. But no, that is definitely not the ONLY context it's used in.

I'm not meaning to defend Westmoreland here, but instead the use of a perfectly decent vocabulary word.

Of course, now you might accuse me of being racist because I said 'decent'.

And, as far as your previous post goes... if they've called *every* Democratic candidate for presidency uppity, how is it only now racist? Were they racist when they called John Kerry uppity? An example: http://www.opinioneditorials.com/contributors/glandrith_20040730.html

(Reply) (Thread)

I hear 'uppity' all the time, and not for black people.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

"Uppity" isn't necessarily racist. It can be sexist and classist, too. The implication of "uppity" is that someone is presumptuous, acting beyond his station, with the assumption that there is such a proper station. Would you consider it racist, or at least careless, if Westmoreland said that Obama "doesn't know his place?" The meaning is essentially the same.

The use of "uppity" to refer to Kerry isn't racist. It's just sloppy writing. You can't call someone uppity and a patrician at the same time. That use of "uppity" is a sign of someone who's, for want of a better word, "downity" -- trying to sound folksy by using plain folks' language without an understanding of its nuances. Like using "y'all" as a singular.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

But "uppity" works very well for Kerry. He desperately wants to be a patrician and thought marrying into huge amounts of money would get him that.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I don't know what Kerry's social standing was before he married Theresa, but if the intent was to paint him as a hustling, nouveau-riche social climber, "uppity" would be le mot juste. But that still doesn't jibe with "patrician."

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

"Doesn't know place" is indeed more grating to my ears; I'm just too accustomed to hearing 'uppity.' I understand the point you're making, but ascribing ugly motivations to language just leaves speakers more limited and mute. We already can't say that black people are articulate.

On the other hand, maybe I'm just tone-deaf. A friend of mine listened to the Palin speech at the convention and fumed that the community organizer remark means that she hates black people. "What?!? Where did you get that?" I replied. Then I found out from someone else that the friend's reaction wasn't unique to him.

Here at the university, I was close enough to overhear that one of the doctors involved in novel therapies for thyroid cancer (take a moment to think that the thyroid is located in the throat) was being charged with using crude, sexual language by a patient and her husband. He had said, as he often said to women who would soon be left with a large scar above their shirt collars, something about the husband needing to give his wife a lovely pearl necklace. At first I was just amused they thought this particular doctor would even know about pearl necklaces, then I was angry. How the heck am I supposed to describe my own shellfish-produced jewelry if they are allowed to steal a perfectly good word from the common usage?

Take back the vernacular! Take back the vernacular!...

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Language is a constantly evolving thing. A generation or two ago, it was perfectly acceptable to say "Jews are good with money" or "boy, those coloreds sure can dance." How can it be racist? It's a compliment! That Obama sure is a credit to his race, if he doesn't show his color.

The Biden flap was a relatively minor one, and the backlash arrived about a nanosecond after the first negative reaction. There, it's a matter of nuance: If you say, as Biden did, that Obama is "clean and articulate," it could be read as surprise at those facts. But there is definitely a tendency, never more pronounced than in this race, to take something as racist just because it's directed at a black person, when in fact it's just rude, dismissive or patronizing.

I wouldn't call the GOP's repeated (Giuliani had a lot more to say on the subject than Palin did) dismissive comments about community organizers racist, but there is certainly a tinge of classism. Not to mention stupid politics. As others have pointed out, the roll call of community activists includes names from Jesus to Gandhi, and includes a lot of Republicans, too. Who do you think does all the hard work in those "faith-based" groups the GOP is fond of?

On the "pearl necklace," that's just a question of the human tendency to have sex on the brain a whole lot of the time. "I'm throwing my wife a birthday party on the lake. We're gonna have a tossed salad and some pie, and then I'm giving her a pearl necklace. There will be water sports, too. Do you want to come?"

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Ha. If you were doing on-air commentary this season, I'd watch more of the coverage.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Language does constantly evolve - I'm just trying to point out that sometimes people see racism where there isn't any and that flinging an accusation of racism at someone is a grave insult. Westmoreland is a twit - and, as you pointed out, not very good with words. Is it racist of me to note that Obama is far more articulate than Westmoreland? Is it classist of me to note that Westmoreland was uppity when he used words he didn't understand in order to try to sound impressive? Or is my use of those words only acceptable when I'm expressing sentiments with which you happen to agree?

Part of my rage this political season is with how ineffective the criticism has become. People so busy dumping on Palin about not being a good little woman who stays home with her kids that the fact that she tries to ban books from libraries is totally lost in the noise. I'm so busy wondering what words have become verboten that I almost missed your observation that McCain was a terrible student.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Frankly, I find the quote so convoluted as to be nearly incomprehensible. First, as Vicki pointed out, "they're a member of an elitist-class individual" -- huh? A member of an individual? An individual "that" rather than an individual "who," and finally "thinks they're uppity." Excuse me, uppity (regardless of whether you read a racist subtext here) is an insult used to describe a person who is "getting above themself" -- people generally do not think that they themselves are uppity. That's like saying "we think we're pretentious." Who admits to this? Westmoreland strikes me a subliterate.

(Reply) (Thread)

I've seen the Colbert interview with Westmoreland. You're giving him too much credit.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)