25
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
http://www.ted.com/conversations/8576/is_reappropriation_an_effectiv.html
==THE REAPPROPRIATION OF STIGMATIZING LABELS: IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIAL IDENTITY==
http://grammarist.com/words/reappropriate/
no edit summary
== TED: Is Reappropriation an Effective Method of Social Change? [http://www.ted.com/conversations/8576/is_reappropriation_an_effectiv.html]==
A.M Croon defines reappropriation as "is the cultural process by which a group reclaims—re-appropriates—terms or artifacts that were previously used in a way disparaging of that group" In other words, groups who have suffered under cultural stereotypes or racial/sexist/facist slurs attempt to reclaim the meaning of an offensive term to shake the negative associations with it and instead use it as a banner of pride.
RELATED TALKS:
Mark Pagel: How language transformed humanity [http://www.ted.com/talks/mark_pagel_how_language_transformed_humanity]
==THE REAPPROPRIATION OF STIGMATIZING LABELS: IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIAL IDENTITY [http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/bodenhausen/reapp.pdf]==
Adam D. Galinsky, Kurt Hugenberg, Carla Groom and
==The queer state of reappropriation== [http://dailycollegian.com/2013/02/28/the-queer-state-of-reappropriation/]==
The issue isn’t our sexual orientations; it is of those who reclaim words like “faggot,” “bitch,” “queer,” “dyke” and ‘tranny.’ Adam D. Galinsky states that this process of reappropriation can occur when a stigmatized group revalues an externally imposed negative label by self-consciously referring to itself in terms of that label. These group members take insults and then use these terms as positive identifiers. The evolution of the word ‘queer’ sheds light on the process. Queer originally meant “to spoil or ruin,” then developed a negative connotation when referring to gays. Now the word acts as a neutral umbrella term that includes all members of the GLBTQ community. Once divided on the use of this term, the queer community now consistently uses the word with its GLBTQ organizations and Queer Alliances across the country.
==Reappropriate (Grammarist)[http://grammarist.com/words/reappropriate/]==
reappropriate is to appropriate something pejorative and make it positive. For example, same gays and lesbians have reappropriated the slurs fag and dyke (and gay itself is a reappropriation), some people within American hip-hop culture have reappropriated nigga, and tech-savvy sci-fi aficionados have reappropriated the originally pejorative words nerd and geek.
The Queer Arts Festival opens Tuesday with an emphasis on reappropriating “queer” so it carries a positive punch. [Vancouver Sun]
==Reappropriate (Fixing English|Book) [https://books.google.com/books?id=unGFAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA142&lpg=PA142&dq=reappropriate+gay+queer&source=bl&ots=gHs90I9pfv&sig=njZ0Fea6JaoxpH7l3832VXEZXBY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwikmNzO0f7KAhVEXR4KHaO_AdkQ6AEIjAEwEg#v=onepage&q=reappropriate%20gay%20queer&f=false]==
==Watch Your Mouth: Reappropriation and Cooption [http://www.shakesville.com/2010/01/watch-your-mouth-part-2-reappropriation.html]==
I think it's clear that by now, the word Gay has been reclaimed successfully by the queer community -- so much so, in fact, that it's unlikely that an author writing in English would use it without being aware that various layers of meaning might be read into it.
On the downside, it's been so successfully claimed that it can once again be used as a pejorative by virtue of being associated with queers ("That's so gay.") *sigh*
"Dyke" is another word that's been reclaimed (see Dyke, sub-category Portly), as is "queer", although the re-appropriation of these terms carries a certain level of controversy that is similar to (but, perhaps, milder than) the split in feminist communities over the word "bitch".
I know a number of lesbians who would be absolutely offended if I called them a dyke -- even in private, or in the exclusive company of other lesbians. I also know lesbians who would be offended if I referred to them as "gay women", and gay women who would be put off if I called them lesbians.
So what's a dyke to do?
Well, for one thing, comprehend and respect this fact: It is vitally important that oppressed persons retain the agency to identify themselves.
Labeling a minority, or any oppressed class, is big tool in the oppressor's tool-kit. That's why there is such a vast array of slurs applied to people who are disenfranchised based on their sex, gender, color, race, creed, orientation, disability, national origin, etc..
When a member of a privileged class uses these terms, they are saying, in essence: "I own the culture, and I get to define you." It is an attempt to exercise power, whether conscious or unconscious.
When a member of a non-privileged class re-appropriates the term, they are saying: "No, you do not define me."
Tends to piss them right off (the privileged label-makers, that is).
Here's a true-story example: I was walking down the street holding hands with my girlfriend, and the guy we'd just passed said (just loud enough for us to hear): "Fucking dykes."
I turned around and said, in my cheeriest voice: "Congratulations, Sir! -- you have correctly identified the dykes -- but I will have to remove points from you for mis-identifying our current activity."
He was absolutely aghast.
I had not only refused to passively accept his right to label me pejoratively -- I had had the audacity to actually confront him for attempting to "power-over" me.
In his mind, the way this was supposed to work was that I would get scared, or drop my girlfriend's hand, or feel ashamed, or Maude knows what -- however he thought it was going to play out, clearly it did not include me engaging him directly and proudly claiming the term he sought to denigrate me with.
So, what does all this have to do with Part 1 of this series?
Let's say a person of privilege uses a term or idiom (perhaps with no intent to offend at all) and a member of the non-privileged class says that it is offensive to them, and the privileged speaker responds with something like: "That term has come into common use and isn't offensive anymore".
I believe that they are enforcing their privilege.
I believe that they are reiterating the following message (usually, completely unconsciously):
"I have the power. I own the language. Your experience does not count, and the fact that you are offended is of no consequence, because you have no power."
