Forum:Temporary forums/Slurs and derogatory terms

Proposal

Hi, everyone. Forgive the slightly choppy words of a guy who has never had to write an opening post before, but let's get right into it. When I first became an active editor here at the Wiki, it was in the midst of a first discussion on the matter of pages in the Category of Derogatory names and insults from the real world. During that Forum discussion, we were able to immediately tackle a number of terms that we agreed were in no need of a page & for which, the contents of which could instead be properly funnelled into the pages of Racism and Homophobia - where they'd sit with the appropriate and very much needed context of their usage. (Pending the now-at-last ongoing thread regarding Content Warnings, these two pages might also end up with very helpful signposting that would warn users of the presence of said slurs.)

At the time, it was very clearly said by myself that the pages I outlined solutions for in my proposal (as an onlooker, not as thread-opener) was based solely on my immediate feelings & thoughts regarding what could be readily and easily handled. And that we would come back and deal with many of the others at a later date. In-fact, I considered it one of the most important matters for us to deal with. Though it has - just by unfortunate circumstance - taken until now that we'd be in a position to handle this... I'm glad to finally get to outline these further terms/pages I would like to handle & how I would like to handle them. For the purposes of clarity, I will use all the terms as they were written in this list just this once.

• Blackamoor (used in The Shakespeare Code and Renaissance of the Daleks) - I'll say that I left off this one before despite personal discomfort with the usage in-story because I didn't feel I could put forward a robust comment on it. However, now having had discussions with others, I feel I can confidently say there is a general 'uncomfortability' to the term among fans. Though archaic, it is still a particularly strong term (leaning towards the heights of the n-word we removed before) for black people. And once that often has a strong attachment towards the real-life matter of the atlantic slave trade. I know that's a heavy point to illustrate... but tTSC itself does - regardless of whatever writer, editor & showrunner intentions may have been - handle this term rather flippantly. And thus, it would be easy to misunderstand the seriousness of it. As such, I feel that the mitigation for this would be to move the TSC statements on this page to the Racism page: where they can properly be contextualised in a way that even the show was unable to manage. I would also hope to do so with the Renaissance remark too; but that will need further examination to see what more we can add to that as context in making such a move. (Does Floyd get surprised by this? Correct him? It feels a little surprising that we don't have any elaboration on this.)
• Cocksucker (used in The Man Who Destroyed Torchwood) - milder, but honestly for a single sentence: it feels like it could be much better contextualised if shifted into the Homophobia page. It's a remark that comes along in the imagination of a man with such prejudices.
• Coloured (used in Rosa and Remembrance of the Daleks) - The Remembrance comment is already on the Racism page... and we've put plenty other stuff related to Rosa into the page that the remaining stuff on this could be added into. Having had some insightful conversations with US fans of colour, and baring in mind, the real-world usage of this term... I think we need to handle this. Albeit it will be a bit tricky to reword the Rosa stuff to be more illustrative of the confusing nature of 1950s bigotry & how that put Yaz in a difficult position regarding how she should act within that system of discrimination: I'm sure we'll be able to think of some way to word it.
• Coolie (used in Ghosts of India) - Mild but historical. And again, it would be better served to illustrate that as a point of 1947 on the Racism pages, alongside Donna's objection to the Major's use of the term.
• Ladyboy (used in Orr) - this is perhaps a more difficult one to handle, as we don't currently have an 'umbrella' page to handle transphobic terms in context like we do racism and homophobia... but it's something we should discuss, as moreso than many of the other terms in the cate, this one is in current frequent real-world use.
• Mongrel (used in The End of the World and Rosa) - both of these should be moved to Racism. Again, the Rosa remark will fit in with the rest of what we've covered there about that story. The End of the World... well, given that Cassandra is referring to the fact that other humans have 'mixed', it is a form of species-based racism. And we already readily allow for such things to be covered when it is done by other species, so I'd say it's a fair move to make.
• Poof (used in multiple stories) - During the first discussion, I recall that as well as myself, another long-standing member of the Wiki also indicated their strong disapproval of keeping this page around. Not only do I still think all this content should be moved to Homophobia... but it also needs much more context in general. Does Death and Diplomacy give any more specifics about how individuals were termed as such and courtmartialled? What are the usages in Endgame and Interference - Book One? Does it get used against Eight in 1938 or 2003 in Timeless, as we'd need to know where to place it in the history of usage? In general, there's a lot of work to be done there.
• Uncle Tom (used in Torchwood: Believe) - right, this one is complicated. Historically, we're in a bit of a minefield. The name is that of a fictional character who was devised by an abolitionist woman as part of a story to show the suffering of slavery. BUT the name became a term that has racial usage and connotations; particularly tied to slavery and minstrel/blackface shows. Essentially, others reimagined the character into some that fit racial stereotypes. As if to make matters here worse off, in the story, it is instead used by a white man against a white man in a moment of betrayal... Meaning this one isn't just a simple move to the Racism page, because it's not actually being used in that sense - despite being a term of that origin. Honestly, I don't quite know how we should best handle this one. (But if I may be excused a slight personal comment for a moment: Oh, why why why did this story have to choose to do this?)

Sidepoints for discussion:

1. Should Straight be in the Derogatory terms RW cate.? Nothing there seems to be as such...?
2. Queer - should we subsection the page and distinguish identity-usage from derogatory? Should we completely split that into two pages? Queer and Queer (derogatory term)? This matter is particularly in mind as queer is the term we use for titling Queer representation in Doctor Who.

JDPManjoume ☎ 20:56, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

I support all of the proposed consolidations, as well as revising Queer to distinguish between its usage as an identity and its usage as a homophobic slur. Pluto2☎ 21:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Queer is not a slur anymore, it was derogatory 30 years ago not today. Straight is not derogatory at all, at least in the US straight is just a normal term that is completely neautral, though "straight cis man" and "straight cis white man" are considered derogatory in general. As a white straight cis-gender man I can say that "straight cis man"/"straight cis white man" doesnt carry quite the same weight as litterally any other derogatory term used against other people because we were never oppressed, we were the ones who oppressed everyone who wasnt the same as us, but these are just american social conditions im talking about so I dont know about how it is in other countries. Tellymustard ☎ 21:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

As an American, let me say to the above, "lol, perhaps lmao, and potentially even lmfao". I'm a little iffy on Uncle Tom, for the reasons I outlined on your talk page JDPM. It's not a term people use in polite company, but the connotation really isn't minstrel shows, it's about being a race traitor. Which, yes, is still something we could cover on the racism page, but I don't think there's any other DWU story that covers that sort of internalized racism, or us v them mentality that exists in minority groups that ends up with blaming those who "collaborate with the oppressors". It just seems that in order to discuss that particular term as it really needs to be discussed we're going to need an extensive BTS section particularly for it, and I'm not sure that it's best served by doing so at the racism page as opposed to its own. Grain of salt of course, being that I'm white.

My opinion on "queer" hasn't changed from the discussion at Talk:Queer representation in Doctor Who, while noting that it's not, in particular, my place to comment. Straight is obviously not a slur.

Is there much transphobia in the DWU outside of Orr? Was there any in Stranded, for instance? Arguably we could shunt off some real world issues there. I dunno, not an area I'm super familiar with.

Much of the rest seems like common sense to me. Najawin ☎ 22:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

I support everything proposed here. I don't think Straight should be treated as a "derogatory term" at all. And I do support splitting Queer into two pages. Furthermore, I support making a page for general Transphobia, or the like, and moving any derogatory phrases there. Uncle Tom is, as we've all said, very complex, as it is a term with a racist history but is often just used to mean "traitor," and that's exactly how it's used in the story in-question.

Otherwise, I don't think I have much to contribute, and I just generally agree with all else that has been said. OS25🤙☎️ 22:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

There's a transphobic slur used in Horror of Glam Rock, and Magrs later apologized for including it. Pluto2☎ 23:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't think Straight should be treated as a derogatory term. And I do support both splitting Queer into two pages and the creation of a general Transphobia page. I will refrain from taking any sort of stance on the rest of it. I'm afraid that I am too ill informed on the subject of racism and it's history beyond the surface level to feel comfortable getting involved in that discussion. Time God Eon ☎ 00:23, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm going to be honest here, I really don't follow this notion of splitting "Queer" into two pages. I don't think there are two distinct meanings here, not to a stark enough degree to warrant two pages. "Queer" as used by homophobes doesn't have a different meaning from the word as used by queer people and allies; it's just that people who use it as an insult deem the concept itself to be inherently contemptible. If I get called queer with malicious intent, I'm going to retort "yes I am, and I don't care what you think about that"; not "how dare you call me that. But coincidentally my identity is a homonym for the slur you just used". I'm not sure of the right way to go about this, but treating derogatory and non-derogatory usages as though they were different words altogether really doesn't seem correct.

(By way of comparison, an antisemite might snarl out "Jew" with as much venom as any racial slur you'd care to name, but that doesn't make "Jew-as-slur" a distinct word! That's not how this works! It's just the same word being used by someone who hates the people whose identity is described, one way or the other, by that word.) Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 18:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

You make a good point there, I think I'm going to change my stance on that. Time God Eon ☎ 18:10, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

It's interesting that you bring this up, and as a queer Jewish woman I'd like to put my two cents in. Antisemites actually do tend to use "Jew-as-slur" as a distinct word, particularly in the context of using it as a verb. But such usages should be covered at Anti-Semitism (I'd argue that that page should be moved to antisemitism as organizations like the ADL prefer that rendering, by the way). So yes, I would actually be in favor of making the distinction in that case as well because antisemites have additional forms of usage for the word that a Jewish person will literally never use. Pluto2☎ 18:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm with Pluto on this one. I think there is a distinction. I do think it's worth pointing out that splitting the concept would make for a less confusing page, as I do think our page on the word is a bit of a mess. OS25🤙☎️ 18:22, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not saying there is literally no distinction, just that it's — to get all fancy and semiotic — connotative rather than denotative. Our page could usefully be restructured to better distinguish positive and derogatory instances, but if we're going to have the page at all, I just don't think it would be accurate to the history of the term to treat it as a completely different word from prior derogatory usage. (And as for the — as far as the DWU is concerned, hypothetical — antisemitism example, as Pluto said, the subtleties are best covered on the bespoke page; but even before the current effort to resort to this situation more often, I just don’t think Jew (slur) would have been the right way to approach he problem.) ∼∼∼∼