You can listen to this post as well over at ELRC Radio.
Welcome
back, everyone! This is the Talking Tomboy – a podcast offering a
critical look into the collision of sports and culture. I'm your
host, Korryn Mozisek. Today, I want to explore a sensitive and
hurtful topic – the use of the N word on sports fields. Because of
the hate, harm, and history of the word, I will acknowledge that
today's podcast is for mature audiences only. While I won't use the
word myself, I realize that the word has such power that this
discussion may offend or recall memories for some that are
indescribably difficult. I hope that the point I make is poignant and
insightful, but can understand why you might stop listening.
Why
am I focusing such an injurious word this week? As NFL scouts,
personnel, and hopeful players meet last week at the annual scouting
combine, so did the Competition Committee. In the wake of the scandal
in Miami and Michael Sams coming out as an openly gay athlete, the
NFL has turned its attention to creating a more inclusive working
environment. Of course, their aim is to prevent such heinous texts
and bullying efforts like those from Richie Incognito becoming
headline news and making the NFL look primitive and behind the times
culturally. A point of discussion by the committee was whether
players on the field be penalized for their use of slurs. Ozzie
Newsome, who is General Manager of the Baltimore Ravens was quoted
by ESPN as stating, “We
did talk about it, I'm sure that you saw near the end of the year
that Fritz Pollard came out very strong with the message that the
league needs to do something about the language on the field. So we
did discuss over the last three days.” And, the individual that
Ozzie Newsome was referring to, Fritz Pollard Alliance, believes that
such a rule penalizing slurs will be enacted by owners at their next
meeting.
This
development might be as interesting to everyone as it is to me, but
it might not. This brings me to my focus today which is to highlight
how the NFL's discussion of such a rule change is encouraging a
cultural conversation to occur about the use of the N word. As a
communication scholar, I am excited about this development. I
strongly encourage everyone to watch
or listen
to the recent Outside
the Lines'
Special Report entitled “The N Word.” The special report
highlights the explosive, hurtful history of the N word and the
hopeful, loving appropriation of the word. I suspect that this may
surprise some and trouble others, but the show does a wonderful job
of tackling the complexity of the word and the divergent views about
it. For today's podcast, I want to focus on why such different
interpretations of the word can occur.
As
a communication professor, I talk daily about the power of language.
As a part of our discussions, I often highlight two concepts: context
and power. We often think of communication as just the trading of
information between individuals. You ask me where the bathroom is and
I give you directions. Or I call myself a tomboy and I'm just
describing my identity. I challenge my students, and today you the
listener, to think about how we are not just trading information back
and forth. I'm not just describing myself when I say I'm a tomboy.
Instead, our exchange is a collaborative moment in time where we are
framing our identities, our social norms, our beliefs, and
importantly our world. Saying I'm a tomboy does not just describe,
but creates an impression of who I am as a person for myself and
those that listen to me. In this regard, I agree with John T. Warren
and Deanna L. Fassett when they define communication in their
textbook, Communication:
A Critical/Cultural Introduction,
as having three major aspects: first, our communication is a struggle
between individuals to create and negotiate “common understandings,
beliefs, and social systems;” (p. 7) second, our communication has
consequences not only for those that offer it but also those that
hear it, hence my disclaimer at the beginning of this podcast; and
finally, our communication occurs in cultural contexts. This last
portion argues that in certain contexts a certain phrase, style of
talking, or gesture might be completely acceptable yet offensive in
another. And, I'd like to suggest that this last element of the
definition of communication is the hardest for all of us to navigate.
Yes, we take experiences and learn from our past communication
endeavors, but that does not create a blue print for every future
instance of communication. The other concept I highlight is that of
power – this is a question of who gets to decide what communication
is appropriate and inappropriate and for whom, which I'll come back
to shortly.
With
these ideas in mind, let's turn our attention back to the NFL and its
proposed rule banning slurs on the field. The intent of the NFL rule
appears to be an instance where the league is communicating that use
of these slurs creates an inhospitable and offensive workplace for
players, thus the behavior of its employees needs to change. This
acknowledges that such language does something—that it harms,
injures, and demeans. And, maybe just maybe, even in a sport where
violence is glorified that such harm and belittling by what some
think of as just words crosses a line that we should not cross as a
society. To be clear, I applaud such an acknowledgment by the NFL
because of my background as a communication scholar and as someone
who knows that the old adage “sticks and stones may break my bones,
but words will never hurt me” is just plain wrong! In this regard,
I'd like to applaud the NFL's efforts; we are finally having a
conversation as to why words do harm and why we should be responsible
for our language choices. For this reason, the professor side of me
is rejoicing.
But
others call into question that idea of power I discussed earlier.
Many might be offended by Michael Wilbon's use of the word on the
Outside the Lines
special report. Others might be troubled by the disclosure that use
of the N word is pervasive in our culture. I'd like to focus on how
there is another important discussion happening in relation to the
NFL's proposed rule and this conversation focuses on who should have
the power to restrict or police an individual's speech. This question
asks whether an almost entirely white ownership and league management
with limited diversity should control the language on the field where
the majority of players are black. As I pointed out earlier, the N
word has been appropriated by some individuals to be a term of
endearment, of love. Moments of appropriation of the word aim to
return the power of its use back to those who once were subject of
its ridicule. As the Outside
the Lines
guests highlight, there are different etymologies and contexts that
the N word gets used. So whether it comes from a white individual and
in a context of hate means something very different than when it
comes from a black individual and ends in an -a rather than -er. This
brings me back to that point we discuss in my classes, that of
context and power as being important to the impact of language,
particularly in the world that it creates and the effect it has. And,
I must say, that I understand and cheer the points made by Wilbon and
others of questioning who gets to decide speech patterns and the
meaning of language. Why? Because this gets us thinking about using
language with a purpose and with reflexivity—two traits that I'd
love for all my students to leave my Human Communication class with.
In
the end, I'm not sure whether I support an NFL rule change because I
am troubled by who gets to decide appropriate and inappropriate
language and worry about how such a rule change might be another
exercise of power over a group that has faced historical
discrimination that we should all acknowledge and be reflexive of.
But I am absolutely positive that I am happy that a conversation is
happening regarding the N word. It is not that I think it should be
used or that we should transform it to just a term of endearment and
love because it will never have that connotation for many since it
has such a dark, sinister, and evil past. Instead, I am encouraged by
the fact that as a culture we are having a conversation about slurs,
their power, and how our language choices have a real impact. So I
encourage each of us to think about how our language can empower and
love yet also demean and harm. Who thought the NFL would be the party
that would get us to think about such a complex topic?! That's the
ballgame for this week. I hope you tune in next time when I discuss
another intersection of sports and culture. Thanks for listening
everybody!
No comments:
Post a Comment