Slurs and derogatory terms

Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → Temporary forums/Slurs and derogatory terms

This thread has been archived.

Please create a new thread on the new forums if you want to talk about this topic some more.
Please DO NOT add to this discussion.

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.) Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 18:32, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Not familiar with most of these, so I can’t really do much commenting here. I do know though, that calling me, for example, straight is not derogatory towards me. I am straight. Nothing wrong with that. I don’t feel belittled by that. At all. That’s really all I can say. Danniesen ☎ 18:38, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I support everything this OP proposes (and am quite shocked by the volume of derogatory words /slurs in that category). Additionally, I support the general idea of moving all slurs onto their associated prejudice page. Ladyboy raises an anomalous case, as we don't have a page for transphobia, but I'd elect we just create one, even if it is in mild breach of T:NO RW (unless it has had a mention, and just doesn't have a page for some reason...?), although I can understand why people may not want an RW breach. Cousin Ettolrhc ☎ 18:53, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Just to reinvigorate discussion, potentially, before I nod off, let me just note, Etty, that there used to be far more slurs, including, well, the slur. Most of them were deleted on one of the last threads in the old forums. The ones that remain are the ones that were potentially complicated and not clear cut.

Speaking of which, I actually think my reasoning, and a lot of our reasoning, for thinking "straight" should be moved out of the category is incorrect. It was placed there as a synonym for "square", not for "heterosexual". (EG: "straight-laced", which I think has the same etymology as the term we currently use, but it's a markedly different usage.) I'm actually no longer convinced we should remove it, but I do think we might want to split the page. (Though as with Queer it might be a connotation/denotation thing and we might not. Complicated issue.) Najawin ☎ 08:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

If memory serves, the etymologies are actually not really related, except in a very tangential way. "Straight" for heterosexual actually started as a term meaning a formerly-actively-gay person who attempted to go back to a heterosexual lifestyle anyway — going straight, in exactly the same image as a criminal "going straight" (i.e. "going back to the straight-and-narrow", etc.). "Sraight-laced", meanwhile, is a corruption of "strait-laced", i.e. "tightly-laced", alluding to a corset or bodice. Some vague notion of "straight = proper, lawful" influenced by the same "straight and narrow" image as the heterosexual synonym is probably behind the common misspelling, of course. But to cut a long story short, I definitely think the terms are fundamentally different enough to warrant different pages, in a way which isn't the case for "queer-as-in-derogatorily-LGBTQ" vs. "queer-as-in-positively-LGBTQ". Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 12:54, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

So we're about halfway done with our time on this one. Does anyone have thoughts on the issues we've still got some disagreement on? I believe these are:

• Splitting Queer.
• Removing straight from the derogatory terms category or splitting the page.
• "Transphobia" and how best to handle transphobic slurs if the specific term hasn't been used in the DWU.
• Uncle Tom and whether it's best served on its own page or on Racism.

I think there's broad agreement on everything else, if I'm reading the thread right. Najawin ☎ 03:06, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

On a different note, it's worth noting that the term "coolie" is also used in the novelisation of The War Machines - while Ben is thinking about the mind controlled warehouse workers, he compares them to "coolies a hundred years ago" or something. Not sure how to cover that one. The Target novelizations have fairly frequent dated uses of racial terms used in a seemingly neutral way, like "Oriental" or "Negro", that we need to address because these would definitely be thought of as slurs if used today. Pluto2☎ 16:50, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

To come back and get into the remaining points of contention:

• Splitting Queer & Handling Straight - it's already been pretty much covered by Pluto, that yes I am effectively taking it from a perspective that the two meanings applied are at such opposition that it would be a incredibly rare circumstance where we should have two separate pages for the term. And I'd be willing to see a split on Straight in similar manner, given what's been brought up here.
• "Transphobia" and how best to handle transphobic slurs if the specific term hasn't been used in the DWU. - I've checked Doctor Who: Redacteds transcripts and there is no direct naming of transphobia there. Mentions that made in a manner of implicit concern about that ("Is your gym trans friendly?"), but none outright name it. I am not sure about other sources, or to what degree we can bend T:NO RW on this one. Though to quote from it:

"When real-world elements are alluded to in a DWU source, but go unnamed, we do sometimes use real-world information to derive a conjecture page title [...] However, this only applies to page names: the in-universe text of the page itself, including the lead, should not employ the conjectural real-world name."

Which would suggest to me on reading that we could create a page named Transphobia, provided we are careful about the wording of contents. (Which I suppose we could easily come to compromise by omitting further direct naming of Transphobia in the article contents until a Behind the Scenes note at the bottom.)

• Uncle Tom and whether it's best served on its own page or on Racism. - In light of further discussions, I am willing to leave this one alone for now & we could perhaps revisit it in some future time on its own Talk page if there is any strong feelings regarding removal of it.

JDPManjoume ☎ 23:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

PS - To address Pluto's point about Target novelisations and the language used therein, since I missed it out... "coolie" would be a hard one to place without an exact context to place it within. (If Ben isn't using it in such a manner, then we're stuck in the trap that a page could be made, but with no in-universe linkage to be made there... and for that, we'd have to note the real-world connotations in a BtS note, I'd say. Of course, those such cases wouldn't be getting added to this cate. anyway, and would be their own discussion. The Empty Planet comes to mind for that: with Clyde using the phrase "honest Injun" - which in reality though an innocently-meant phrase in 2000s usage, actually uses a slur for Native Americans.)

As for the other two, I would say that the latter was already ruled out of existence as a separate page in the last Slurs thread - so that's a case of 'any further usages should be notated in the Racism page, with context.' and the former is likely something we can also apply that same approach to, given other slurs related to South and East Asians that we've already previously ruled out of existence and into consolidation with context at the Racism page.

JDPManjoume ☎ 23:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Conclusion

This thread never got quite as big as we might have hoped for, but the deadline has arrived, and I do think there's a reasonable amount of consensus, so we can resolve this, at least for now, instead of writing it all off as unresolved.

In broad terms, we seem to have consensus on the proposal of merging the remaining slur pages listed in the OP by User:JDPManjoume into overviews of the forms of prejudice they relate to, e.g. Blackamoor into Racism. The original page-name can then of course be retained as a redirect. This redirect should only ever be linked to in direct quotes from the source text (e.g. Ben Jackson compared the mind-controlled workers to "coolies"), never used in plain language.

There was a lot of discussion about Queer. I'm not sure there's a full consensus on whether to view it as one word with two connotations, or somehow two different words. But fortunately, we don't actually have to choose, as such. In light with the wider decision, we wouldn't have a Queer (slur) page at all: we'd just discuss it at Homophobia and Transphobia (or even at Queerphobia if we ever have cause to create a page like that). So, we can refocus the existing Queer page on its use as an identity, listing derogatory uses in a separate, more compact section that points the reader to Homophobia and Transphobia to learn more. In turn, those two pages would document derogatory uses of the word in more detail while making it clear that it also exists as a neutral or positive term.

Transphobia should definitely be created using a {{conjecture}} template to justify the name. The lede could read something like "Prejudice against transgender people was a pervasive issue in the early 21st century…", making it clear that we don't have a source for the word, although "transphobic" and "transphobia" could then be used in the text of the page later on for the sake of ease of expression.

The Uncle Tom case is complicated. Really, it's a fictional character that people are compared to, not a "derogatory term", so I'm not actually sure it belongs in Category:Derogatory names and insults from the real world in the first place. It could be discussed, at least in the Behind the scenes section, at Racism, and the page's own BTS section should definitely explain context and connotations on its own Behind the scenes section. But for now I think it had best keep its own page. As User:JDPManjoume noted, we can revisit that question on Talk:Uncle Tom if there turn out to be people who feel strongly about it and haven't chimed in on this thread. Bongo50 ☎ 14:57, 2 April 2023 (UTC)