Bill Moyers Journal: Racism, Misogyny and Hip-Hop

« Poll: Free Trade | Main | Bill Moyers Essay: SOS »

Racism, Misogyny and Hip-Hop

The recent firing of Don Imus for making racial slurs on the radio has stirred up much discussion about racism in America, particularly the role that certain derogatory words play in fanning the flames of social bigotry.

Russell Simmons, founder of legendary hip-hop label Def Jam, has been at the forefront of this debate recently, pushing for a ban on the use of 3 words in hip-hop lyrics that he deems sexist and racist:

"The words 'bitch' and 'ho' are utterly derogatory and disrespectful of the painful, hurtful, misogyny that, in particular, African-American women have experienced in the United States as part of the history of oppression, inequality, and suffering of women.
The word 'nigger' is a racially derogatory term that disrespects the pain, suffering, history of racial oppression, and multiple forms of racism against African-Americans and other people of colour."

--Russell Simmons

But Melissa Harris-Lacewell, with whom Bill Moyers talks this week on THE JOURNAL, believes that banning certain words only serves to "cover over racism" and that truly facing the issue of bigotry in America today requires new tools:

"I hope by the end of my class though, they would be saying, 'Look, we recognize that even if we got rid of every derogatory, racial utterance, even if no one ever, black or white, used the 'N' word again, that this would not actually end racial inequality in America.'
I hope that my students have learned something about the structural nature of inequality and the way that racism gets perpetuated through our assumptions and our history and our culture, and not just through bad words or language."

--Professor Melissa Harris-Lacewell

What do you think? How important are words in fighting prejudice in America?

Photo: Robin Holland

Tag(s): race , women
Posted by Bill Moyers Journal on May 17, 2007 5:37 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/156

Comments

Yes, There Will Be Racism Against Mr. Obama. Is The Media Truth Enough to What The Media Used to Be to Admit That The Media (Even The Same Democrate Media) Has Been Sexist and Painting an Image of Negative Against Mrs. Cliniton From The Beginning? This huge and every where broadcasted collection of biases towards Mr. Obama is one of the strongest reasons I am voting for Mrs. Cliniton. Every time The Diana Rhem Show discusses The Democrate Representative Election without bring up the sexism, along with the racism, the host, those it takes to make the show and your meida organization and the guests on those discussions are betraying the standards of ethics and morals of media broadcasting, past legends and PBS' s Bill Moyers. The participants that are women are betraying not only our species, but their own unequally treated sex. While I do not think just because she is a woman she should be treated differently, but she MUST be treated equally when actions are taken based solely on her race and not intelligence. 940 AM, progressive radio hosts rarely discuss the election with the sexism happening; however, the radio station fired their best host (a woman...

Posted by: Jason 'Great White' (Shark-Animal Rights Person) | April 23, 2008 11:32 AM

By THOMAS BEAUMONT REGISTER STAFF WRITER March 12, 2007 Muscatine, Ia. - Illinois Sen. 'NOBODY IS SUFFERING MORE THAN THE PALENTINIAN PEOPLE,' OBAMA SAID, while on the final leg of his weekend trip to eastern Iowa. The Palestinian Authority is controlled by Hamas, a political party that does not recognize Israel's sovereignty and is listed by several countries - including the United States - as a terrorist organization. The United States and other nations imposed restrictions on aid when Hamas gained power last year. http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007703120330 THE HALAL FOOD ACT WAS SPONSORED BY BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMS. in August 2001. "This law will give Muslims in Illinois confidence that the Halal food products they buy are indeed prepared according to Islamic law."' "Senate Bill 750 was sponsored in by Senators Christine Radogno, R-La Grange, Laurence Walsh, D-Elwood, Barack Obama,..." http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/ShowPressRelease.cfm?SubjectID=3&RecNum=1517 Obama's pastor admits concerns over candidate's ties to Islam Chad Groening OneNewsNow.com March 21, 2007 The head of a pro-Israel ministry is praising the PASTOR OF Democratic presidential candidate Barack OBAMA'SO church for ADMITTING HIS CONCERNS ABOUT the Illinois senator's (OBAMA's) ASSOCIATION WITH THE PALESTINIANS AND THE NATION OF ISLAM leader Louis Farrakhan. http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/03/obamas_p...ts_concerns.php ...in two separate interviews, Pastor Wright has REVEALED...

Posted by: Johnathan P.Jansky | October 30, 2007 3:38 PM

Bill's surprise about Melissa's reference to hip-hop as a cultural and potentially political influence probably represented well the reaction of a number of us whites in the audience. But have we forgotten what rock did to politics in the 1960s---and the influence Rolling Stone continues to manifest? For a LEARNED reminder, will The Chronicle of Higher Education do? http://chronicle.com/temp/reprint.php?id=ryfkv3twkxqs5dx7ky4z3wkrk1327d10 I look forward to Harris-Lacewell's next appearance on the Journal.

Posted by: Richard Carlson | June 24, 2007 3:52 AM

Why do we focus on such things? I am white and I will tell you that I am disgusted with a lot of things I see. I am most disgusted with how people treat each other! Come on folks. We are all people, we are all different, get used to it. We express our "beliefs" in ways that would seem strange to other countries yet... yet we cannot even get along in our own!! We try to hard to see the differences and sometimes we need to see what we all have in common, each other! Maybe this isn't the time or place but for crying out loud.. Don Imus said something that has been said [maybe not about those girls] over and over and over and over again... I heard the real issue was that he wouldn't let go of the 911 issues. Lets face it folks..black, white, red, pink, green doesn't matter the color. If the government has us fighting each other then what aren't we paying attention to? That's right, the government. Think about that for a while.

Posted by: John | May 31, 2007 7:52 PM

Professor Harris-Lacewell was a breath of fresh air, I'm tired of the usual leaders that appear on talk shows... She made he points with dignity, intelligence and humor. Some blogs was great, and some I wonder if they were listening to her. I'm realistic, most of America is not ready for a black face as leader of the free world, they might go for 2nd. There are many that are ready, but most are not. Bring the professor back on another subject.

Posted by: Malik Edwards | May 29, 2007 5:20 PM

I don't think this has to become an issue of rights, but one of taste. Just because you have a right to say something, doesn't mean you should choose to do so. If we are going to have a civilization, that means being willing to curb our behavior when it impacts other people. Of course that language is offensive - it's intended to offend. Prohibiting the language is only a first step, but it's a step that needs to be taken. Then we need to look at the myriad forms of prejudice in our society and address the sense of entitlement that a person feels gives them the right to discriminate or harass. Until we deal with the entitlement issue, racism and it's ugly cousins like homophobia, fat phobia and misogyny, will continue.

Posted by: Morgaine Swann | May 21, 2007 11:10 AM

The conversation with Ms Harris-Lacewell was intriguing to say the least: starting with the arbitrariness and historical specificity of "one-drop" blackness, she then went on to treat the subject as though these tainted notions of race were entirely natural, insisting that Obama 'really is black'. The evidently alien idea in American politics and society that someone like Obama is as white as he is black, and that neither term is of any great use points to a terrible resistance to changing racial assumptions: a preference for simplistic binary choices over complex reality, and a resorting to the notion of ideas like 'both sides of the racial divide'. One can contrast this, to a degree anyway, with a country like Brazil, where few families can comfortably identify as either black or white (recent immigrants are an exception), and where in any case awareness of indian heritage is more integrated into national identity. Brazil has not solved its racial problems, but the debates around race there seem to me to be a million miles ahead of those in the States: and this in a country where slavery ended only a little over a century ago. This resistance to revising one's ideas seems...

Posted by: D Donaldson | May 21, 2007 1:33 AM

No one is under the illusion that the elimination of certain words from public discourse is going to end racial inequality. To start your argument with words like that with children or anyone else invites the rolling of the eyes.

Posted by: longnow | May 20, 2007 11:20 PM

I tuned in late - caught just enough of the interview to hear her complain that her opinion was not sought enough by mainstrean media - begin thinking - she sounds articulate maybe they should, maybe finally here's an intellegent black spokesperson/leader that has her head on straight about race. Then she blames hip hop misogyny on "rich white boys". I turned the TV off and did laundry.

Posted by: Greg hyde | May 20, 2007 9:57 PM

Bill was obviously impressed with the talented Ms. Harris-Lacewell who steered through some very troubled waters with considerable grace. She turned some well chosen metaphors and showed just enough edge to make her points without scaring white people too much. It will be interesting to see how often such a telegenic and authoritative commentator appears elsewhere in the so-called liberal media; not very often I would think.

Posted by: myra | May 20, 2007 9:46 PM

She has no hope in Obama, but has hope in Hip Hop. Did I get that right? Did I HEAR this as I think I did? Hip Hop, as she stated as now a commodity, is an abyss into where false hope or a false sense of "voice" has been misplaced. Its an easy trap for kids or people to place their hope in entertainers for social change. But again, its an abyss. Its like placing faith on false prophets. Hip Hop is a corporate commodity and brand, its what NOW makes money. Any articulate voice in Hip Hop does not nor will it EVER make a true movement. Because very simply, it does not make money and will be ignored by not only major conglomerate music divisions or "record companies", but by the advertisers that sell with it. Why would you steer modern racial movements towards a corporate backed entertainment commodity and away from actual real people, doing their best to move their people out of a Hip Hop light and maintain a "conversation" such as Obama. I think her lack of faith in Obama and just viewing him as a Vice President is extremely sad. Sad because as...

Posted by: Gary | May 20, 2007 7:02 AM

I notice Melissa is probably half white...and I often wonder if that makes all the difference? I'd like her to discuss how she feels being identified that way?

Posted by: Lorrie O | May 19, 2007 8:00 PM

Score another big one for you, Bill Moyers. I am constantly inspired and entranced by the interesting and important people you bring to my attention. Melissa Harris-Lacewell is one I am very pleased to meet and listen to her views. Thank you again, for at least the 1000th time. You are a national treasure, Bill Moyers. Have a hug.

Posted by: Shirley White | May 19, 2007 7:49 PM

I will restrict my comments to the question "How important are words in fighting prejudice in America?" My mother's family immigrated to California from Oklahoma in the 1930s. Although many of my friends and I took great pride in being the descendents of Okies, my mother's older sisters were greatly offended by the word "Okie" and exhibited extreme emotional distress at hearing the word. I soon learned to not use the word around them. Many of my friends were born in the relocation camps to which Japanese Americans were sent in 1942. Some of them used the word "Jap" among themselves and with friends such as myself, while others were greatly offended by the word. Because I have an adversion to offending people, I quickly learned when and where I could use the word, which was seldom. Infact I decided it was safest to not use it at all. As I gained confidence, I began to object when I heard people use these words in a derogatory or insensitive way. I am very much opposed to outlawing any speech, but see no reason to use names or labels that cause anyone emotional distress.

Posted by: Jim Hardwick | May 19, 2007 3:10 PM

Dear Mr Moyers, thank you so much for your thoughtful and interesting program. I am a US citizen and am in Norway these days. I read in the local media today that a young (28) immigrant who was in the socialist party of Norway received racist mail from a colleague which led to her resignation. http://www.tk.no/Innenriks/article2776773.ece She was told that “as an immigrant she did not have any right to criticize the Norwegian society”. Racism and xenophobia is everywhere and it is a very sad phenomenon. with best wishes

Posted by: anon | May 19, 2007 2:30 PM

I tuned in to Bill Moyers in order to hear Bruce Bawer, an author and activist I deeply admire. Melissa Harris-Lacewell appeared first and I was troubled by her presenation. The following is my subjective response: Ms. Harris-Lacewell repeatedly made racist comments about whites and America while assuming what appeared to me to be an artificial smile. Her eyes, though, to me, appeared to be full of hatred. Again, this is a subjective response, and many will reject it for that reason. I can only report what I saw, but I can also mention some pertinent statistics and the work of other leaders in the African American community who are taking an approach very different from Ms. Harris-Lacewell's. In any case, Ms. Harris-Lacewell, according to information online, is the child of a white mother. That she is so negative in her response to whites, and that she assumes a position that, ultimately, has proven to be so unhelpful to African Americans, is interesting psychological data. Bill Moyers pointed out, correctly, that "nappy headed ho" is very much *not* white vocabulary. White people, on average, simply don't use the term "nappy headed;" to the extent that "ho" has entered white speech...

Posted by: Danusha Goska | May 19, 2007 12:31 PM

Melissa Harris-Lacewell was the most insightful social critic yet. Clear and honest to a fault. I look foward to hearing more of her. Especially her political commentaries. She is a star in my book.

Posted by: marvelousone | May 19, 2007 12:18 PM

I missed a bit of the opening last night but did see your showing of Rush Limbaugh's song parody of Al Sharpton's criticism of Obama as not being black enough. The song originated from articles in the LA Times calling Obama "the Magic Negroe". I want to be sure you actually heard or saw Rush's program where a full explanation of this jocular treatment of Sharpton was presented, so you would not indulge in simple minded bashing of Rush who is not a racist, unlike Sharpton

Posted by: John Sturgeon | May 19, 2007 11:08 AM

I thought the interview with Bruce Bawer was more interesting than it was enlightening, and I think it affirmed the review that the economist gave his book. I don't know if he is simply disingenuous or lacks scholarly training but a few of his comments warrant nuance. He spoke of the Cleric known in Norway as Mullah Krekar whom he correctly identifies as the founder of Ansar al-islam (a Kurdish terrorist group) he however neglects to mention Krekar has consistently claimed that ansar al-islam was not a terrorist group while he was its leader a claim which has not yet been disproven. Thus while he most definitely is a fundamentalist (and teroroist sympahizer) he can as of yet not convincingly be prosecuted for terrorism. Norwegian law also explicitly prohibits extradition to countries where capital punishment and/or torture is applied. It also needs to be pointed out that he is not a central figure of the Norwegian muslim community, and is often seen as deeply embarrassing by Norwegian muslims. Furthermore he seems to say explicitly that London received known terrorists with open arms, again here he has rushed to judgement, while it is true that London has for a long time...

Posted by: Sigmund Strand Dahle | May 19, 2007 9:32 AM

Mr. Moyers, 5/18/07 Once again your program was interesting and thought provoking. I was very disappointed that Melissa Harris-Lacewell stated on national television that she thinks that Senator Obama cannot be elected President or should only try to be Vice President. I am white and live in Utah, one the reddest of red states. I think he can be elected. We are very fortunate that he has the courage and the ability to run an excellent and positive campaign. He is the best candidate. It, as he says, is up to him to communicate to people his ideas. He can do this and he can win. I guess some people said that there would always be slavery. Thank goodness they were not correct. Mark R. Salt Lake City, UT

Posted by: Mark R. | May 19, 2007 8:13 AM

Professor Harris-Lacewell discounted the possiblity, out of hand, that Imus' negative comments were garned from hip-hop. At that point, she came across as many black leaders that Imus is necessarily racist. Gwen Ifill took it a step further and called out Tim Russert on Meet the Press...essentially suggesting that should Russert guest on any subsequent Imus program that, he too, would recieve the racist label. I doubt strongly that Professor Harris-Lacewell, or the lady basketball players (who were so traumatized) have ever listend to an Imus radio program. The basketball players in question never would have been affected in the first place if it weren't for Al Sharpton. The sorry fact of the matter is that Imus' contributions to society at large were thrown out the window. I recall listening to Imus one morning when none other than the entertainer Cher called in and contributed two hundred thousand dollars to the 'Intrepid Hero's Fund' which contributed largely to a medical facility in Texas which caters to American soldiers who've had limbs blown off--and other seriously debilitating injuries incurred in Iraq and Afghanistan. Imus could raise funds like few other people in the country. That is now gone. The cliche rings...

Posted by: steve | May 19, 2007 7:27 AM

Hello, We must all make the distinction between race and culture. Within any race there can be many, many cultures. Race is cogent to culture oftener than it is not but race DOES NOT determine culture. Until the all parties involved in any struggle to rectify race relations make the distinction of what constitutes race and what constitutes culture we will be missing an important aspect of the situation. Just because someone is black does not mean that they like hip-hop. Just because someone is white does not mean that they like country music. It is more likely that these people will be involved in these respective genres of music but it does not dictate what type of music any given individual will prefer. All too often someone who espouses a particular viewpoint will interchange black or white with a particular culture. There are many cultures within any racial group. What about the millions of blacks in America that have not ever lived the street culture? Or the millions of blacks that have never experienced anything but street culture? What about all the whites who seem to only ever hear about blacks wielding guns and selling drugs? What are these...

Posted by: Dennis Berg | May 19, 2007 5:02 AM

Mr. Moyers, your program is great, thanks for providing a needed voice. I love how you ask a question and actually let your guest answer it. The typical pattern on most shows now is to skew the issue as much as possible and then interrupt your guest so many times that they cannot provide an explanation. Please keep up the good work. I found the views expressed by Melissa Harris-Lacewell to be quite refreshing, but it is an issue that requires a much deeper conversation than you were able to have on this program. I do hope that you are able to have her back some time in the future. I think many people looking on Hip Hop from the outside only see what gets presented on radio and music videos. This unfortunately gives a very skewed image of what the music is really about. There is no doubt that this commercialized highly standardized pop media is highly sexist highly racist and socially irresponsible. The artists that choose to promote this kind of image and example bear the responsibility for that decision. But is it really news that there are racist and sexist people out there and that some of...

Posted by: John R. | May 19, 2007 4:28 AM

Mr. Moyer, your shows have been excellent as well as educational. I look forward to watching them and hear what you and your guests have to say on the problems we are facing today in America. When I turned 18, it was the first year, in Michigan, that 18 year olds could vote. I was so excited to be able to vote for the first time and felt like I owned a piece of America. I am now 61 and have never before been more discouraged and even a bit depressed about the problems the USA today but even more so, the damage that the Bush Admistration has done to this country on all fronts. I am personally enraged by the fact that there were enough votes to give the Presidency to George Bush. Is there no end to the damage being done to America by this Administration? Even if we elect a Democratic President, can the damage be reversed? Can we find our moral compass again with a new Administration? On the Iraq issue, my son was stationed 9 months in 2003 in Iraq. When he finally got home, the only facts he would give me are that the...

Posted by: Kathy Frost | May 19, 2007 3:27 AM

Professor Harris-Lacewell shocked and saddened me when she seemed, so definitively, to deny us the possibility of a President Obama in 2008. But as I listened to her, I became more hopeful of Obama's chances--because the Professor, while charming and articulate, is surprisingly clueless. Or perhaps just too young and naive. How can she possibly compare rap and hip hop to the street protests of the Vietnam era? Or the people power of the Orange Revolution in the Ukraine? Suddenly she seemed Orwellian in her complacency. I am white, and I would hate to think that Americans of any color would require 8 years of Vice-Presidency to be "desensitized" to the novelty of a brilliant man like Barack Obama as President. True, it would be a traumatic change from the Fascist idiocracy of the past 6 years, but I think America can handle it. She misuses an otherwise apt metaphor: Professor, you CAN drive a screw with a hammer. In fact, when the threads have been stripped as much as they have been in America during the disastrous Bush regime, the ONLY way to drive that mess is with a hammer. I find the Professor's lively, good natured banter about...

Posted by: Jonathan Tepper, M.D., Ph.D. | May 19, 2007 2:59 AM

It is so good to see Bill Moyers back on TV,I have been a fan since the programs with Joseph Cambell.On the question of whether language matters I think yes, but attempts to create change by santizing language will always fail because language is a living thing and will always seek to convey meaning and betray true intention. Anyone who has watched an old movie or seen a clip from the Gonzales hearings knows that. On the issue of the Muslim world it is a shame that we only ever hear about the fanatics.Do we hear about the faithfull Christian point of view though? I know many people who observe the Muslim fast in the month of ramadan, they do this so that they can feel true compassion for those who have little or nothing in this life, at the end of the month they give alms as an outer expression of the gift of compassion. The "Christian right" scare me enough here at home if I were an immigrant in Norway I'm not sure I would do anything either,especially if I had come from a place where this could bring disaster on a family.

Posted by: Halima | May 19, 2007 2:42 AM

I think that the "one drop" rule has long been outmoded and passe. Who thinks like that?? Many black Americans have more than one ethnic or racial identity whether they know or admit to it. If we can call Barack a black man then we can also call him a white man. He is both. He is a mixture. I am not sure that I agree with Dr. Melissa that race still matters in America. I am not a demographer and I know primarily my frame of reference and where I live, but I think that America has grown tremendously with respect to overcoming racism. I don't see where hip-hop is a modern day vehicle for protest. Dr. Harris-Lacewell did not give any examples, so find that hard to believe. Also, she says that there is a "little bit of a problem"- that hip-hop is a commodity. I would say that that is quite an understatement. The profit motive is what hip-hop is all about, not a little bit. There was no criticalness to anything that Dr. H-L said, e.g. whenever there is anything "wrong" it seems to always be the fault of white people. Hip-hop and the lyrics and...

Posted by: Gerri Michalska | May 19, 2007 1:47 AM

Tonight's program was provocative in the very best sense of the word. There was also an underlying theme re who interprets the word. Melissa Harris-Lacewell (who I'd not known of before tonight) referred to the white males interpreting the Constitution. I want to add to Bruce Bawer's comments by saying that the Christian fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible AND the Islamic fundamentalist interpretation of the Qu'ran come to us through the patriarchy and male bias of those who do the interpreting. Zarqa Nawaz, the filmmaker who created the series LITTLE MOSQUE ON THE PRAIRIE, has another film called ME AND THE MOSQUE where she explores with contemporary Imams the Koranic origins of the tradition that women are to pray behind a wall--and discovered that this tradition has nothing to do with the Koran. It's important to remember that not all Imams are scholars; however, they all have power and so people rarely question their interpretation. I understand that LITTLE MOSQUE will be shown in the U.S. and elsewhere before long, and I look forward to the reactions--it's a comedy series that happens to take place in a mosque (space in an Anglican {Episcopalian} church. It will be interesting to see...

Posted by: Brenda Berck | May 19, 2007 1:37 AM

Professor Melissa Harris-Lacewell was fascinating and I would like to hear her views on other social issues. She is one of the few gifted in this country who can think outside the box and is not yet employeed by neo-con think tanks. I hope Bill Moyer makes her a regular guest! Race relations are still certainly an issue in our country but so are poverty, apathy, ignorance, legal narcotic addicts(oxycontin), crack cocaine, Christian extremists, intolerance and the mindset that 51% of the people may dictate what "life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness" should mean to the other 49%. Thomas Jefferson called this last thought "The Tyranny of the Majority". Our founding fathers designed our government to be a Democratic Republic with the oversight of a Supreme Court to compensate for this possible corruption of a pure Democracy. That last social concern came to mind when watching Bruce Bawer talk about Fundemental Islam and it's effects on Europe. I am also homosexual but unlike Mr. Bawer, I have stayed in this country and done my best to affect slow grassroots change rather than running away to Amsterdam. I have thought about leaving many times and when I can stand...

Posted by: Jack Heginbotham Jr | May 19, 2007 1:37 AM

I'm on Melissa's side. Just giving up a few tacky words is far too easy. Doesn't get to the structure of things at all. Charming interview. I hope she gets to spread her wings and speak on other topics, as well. As for Barack, I love him, but he needs to be VP first for want of experience -- nothing to do with race. (Ideal ticket for moi would be Edwards - Obama.)

Posted by: (The Other) Katherine Harris | May 19, 2007 12:45 AM

I will comment on comment on Bruce Bower's book by saying that thank God Bill Moyers has the guts to cover stuff like this. I used to think that reports from Europe about sharia law in the Muslim sectors was all right wing paranoia and racism. I can see now why I would never call myself a liberal even apart from this. I think for myself & now I know the truth about so-called liberals & about people who know the truth but lie to themselves. I do believe that radical Muslims will fail in their attempt to hijack Europe with pop- ulation bombs but I also believe that too many on the left are afraid just like moderate Muslims.

Posted by: drmyi | May 19, 2007 12:42 AM

Bill, Thank you *so* much for this segment with Professor Harris-Lacewell. It was a wonderful piece of television, a wonderful interview, and solid journalism. Please make sure she does come back to the Journal. Smart, pointed, informative, funny, what's not to like? All the best, -Jay- Portland, OR

Posted by: Jay Lessert | May 19, 2007 12:23 AM

thought the interview was extremely insightful. I am curious though. Dr. Harris-Lacewell stated that although her focus of discussions is on race matters, she is also capable of speaking on other topics such as the electoral college. I agree that limits shouldn't be placed on who can talk about what. so does Dr.lacewell feel it is ok for people who are not african-american to talk about race? It seems that all interviews on television on this topic are limited to african-americans. I never see a white person interviewed or even a person of a different ethnic background. On occasion hispanic individuals are included in the dialogue, but mainly it seems the entire race issue has been limited to black and white. And for the most part, only the black perspective is really examined. A true dialogue should require multiple thoughts and experiences be brought to the table. Far too often it seems this is rarely if ever done.

Posted by: Mona H | May 18, 2007 10:50 PM

AH, this young woman is energetic, responsive, happy,and good looking! I agree with Every Letter she spoke. I screamed when in my estmation that Mr. Obama will not be elected the first man of Color to the US pres. before a white woman; not this season. I know he does not want to be second to none, but in this USA the color barriers still exist, and he will have to be the Vice before the Pres. Oprah exceeded a black male talk show host, and it is by design because it is eaaier to control a worman. After Oprah now a black man if one chooses to take a positon as talk show host maybe could achieve her kind of status. Thank you. Bam

Posted by: Dorcas Tunkara | May 18, 2007 10:44 PM

I was hoping to comment on the Bruce Bawer segment, but, strangely, there is only this. So, what the heck, a little comment about race. It doesn't exist, except in the minds of men. Barack Obama is neither "black" nor "white." Part of why his supposed "blackness" or "whiteness" is an issue is because people in the journalism industry are hyping it. It's all about identity. As we have seen with the creation of the "nation" of "Israel," if you force an identity on people as the "other," they eventually take it on. As this identity enforcement intensifies, it can lead to ethnic cleansing, holocausts, Ku Klux Klan Klaverns, and paranoid enclaves. Without a lot of "hard" evidence, it's hard to say how much effect there has been to the identity enforcement that has been the back-channel agenda of the Bush criminal regime's pursuit of empire, there is little question that it has exacerbated the process. How will this pan out in the future? The Western mind, with its proclivity for the isolated argument, free of context, is ill-equipped for a systems approach. For instance, this is all happening in the context of climate change, depletion of natural resources, and...

Posted by: John Hamilton | May 18, 2007 10:42 PM

Professor Harris-Lacewell may not be aware that almost half the persons in the United States were forced to be ruled by a government that they democratically voted not to be a part of and America suffered 970 thousand persons killed to maintain the control of this central government. Under cruel treatment and occupation, these persons in the South turned all this hatred toward the only group who they could exercise some control over, the freed slaves. The underlying hatred displaced on freed slaves and their decendents continues today. History, controlled by the country who won the Civil War, tells us nothing but the propaganda of "freeing slaves" and nothing about the less popular idea of central government rule that people objected to and were killed for their desire for freedom from this distant rule. (President George from across the Potomac or King George from across the Sea). We, as Americans, pick any excuse for the existance of racism but the real underlying, original cause.

Posted by: Ray Barrrier | May 18, 2007 10:22 PM

Thank you for the good discussion with Dr.Harris-Lacewell. As a U of C alumnus, I've followed her work for several years. Some of her points were similar to ones I made in an essay I recently posted at anewdayinmedia.blogspot.com. I would welcome comments on my analysis: Don Imus and the Gansta Rappers: Viewing Black Women Through the Corporate Male Gaze By Dennis Day For several decades, feminists, cultural and film critics have advanced the notion of a �male gaze.� This idea offers a useful construct for analyzing the case of Don Imus. Gaze theory argues that European patriarchal entitlement encourages and allows white males the privilege of viewing women primarily as objects of male sexual spectacle. Women are positioned as defenseless under the penetration of the gaze and rendered powerless to reciprocate. They become passive recipients of voyeuristic pleasure derived by more powerful male onlookers. Those who possess the power to gaze are empowered to impute value to women on the basis of sexual appeal determined by subjective male sensory experience. The male gazer assesses a woman�s physical attributes and personal qualities in relation to what he deems sexually and visually pleasurable. Historically in America, Caucasian women have been venerated...

Posted by: Dennis Day | May 18, 2007 10:10 PM

Professor Haris-Lacewell is limiting Barack Obama because of his race. She did not talk about his being the best candidate because of his ideas, experience, education, family background,etc. Rather, it appears her argument is that white America will not accept Barack because of his race, so Black American should follow suit. Martin Luther, Rosa Parks and others have proven this theory wrong. Black America should get behind Obama if they believe he is the best candidate for America right now. Not because he is Black, not because white people don't like him. The professor and her ilk should take the lead. Black intellectuals have been 'followers' long enough.

Posted by: Evelyn Houston | May 18, 2007 9:34 PM

She rocks! This is such a great show--i love the point about how Constitutional understanding has always been filtered through entirely straight white men for the most part. I'd never even heard of her--wonderful!

Posted by: amberglow | May 18, 2007 9:18 PM

Disrespect is disrespect, whether it's based in ethnicity, gender, or age. There's no excuse for bad manners, and it is NOT entertaining to listen to people call each other names. That kind of TV or radio is puerile and speaks to a lack of imagination, breeding, and/or talent.

Posted by: Lyn Miner | May 18, 2007 5:25 PM

Also, the racist origin of the word "picnic" mentioned in the first comment is an urban legend.

Posted by: Shub-Negrorath | May 18, 2007 3:55 PM

I would just like to point out that this: 'Look, we recognize that even if we got rid of every derogatory, racial utterance, even if no one ever, black or white, used the 'N' word again, that this would not actually end racial inequality in America.' is shoddy reasoning. The question is not whether proscribing or significantly lowering the incidence of certain words will end sexism/racism/homophobia/etc., but whether it will have any positive effect at all. And I believe it would, as I believe that the social deprecation of white use of the N-word has contributed to the spread of racial equality as an ideal in this country. Now it just so happens that I don't think a ban is the best way to reduce derogatory language, but doing so is still a good idea.

Posted by: Shub-Negrorath | May 18, 2007 3:52 PM

Proverbs 18:21 "Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof." The words we speak have power regardless of what one thinks! The word "Picnic" is not a nice word to people of African decent in this country but we still use it and most of us have no clue where it came from! Why do we use the word "race"? You can check that to! Its time we take responsibility for our behavior! I spent over 20 years of my life in the record business and I'm proud to see Russell Simmons take the posture he is taking considering some of the stuff Def Jam has put out over the years! Imus screwed up, his mouth finally got him in trouble but that’s what is does...he once again has provoked thought and if all this attention gets folks thinking about where they really are in there hearts, than thank God! The difference between a Southern racist and a Northern racist is that the Southern one has enough chutzpah to let you know he don't like you! The bottom line is that it is an inside job! Getting to...

Posted by: Better B | May 18, 2007 12:40 PM

Words. Their use, meaning, implications and even spelling changes over time. Pick any word, assign it derogatory meaning and its use will change. Don't even try to BAN words, books, or thought. Rather, TRY to educate everyone. Almost everyone knows what is RIGHT - inside. Let us praise the good and express distain for that which devides humans.

Posted by: Ed Smith | May 18, 2007 8:28 AM

I believe that words carry weight - their own vibration, if you will. It is because of this that I feel it is important to be aware of their impact, both subtle and not so subtle. I agree that banning certain words in casual conversation or writing in some ways does simply cover up the underlying racism, but I also feel it sends the clear message that the majority of society does not approve of such use. The intention of their usage changes the vibration of the dialogue. If these words are used only in the informed discusion of how to improve society, they carry a positive value. If they are used for other purposes, they do the opposite. I guess, as usual, it all comes down to what kind of a society we choose: a kinder, more compassionate one or that which we are creating now. We need to encourage the best in each other, not the basest of instincts. As Maya says, Once you know better, you do better. I think as a society, we need to raise the bar for each other. We each have so much potential to make a difference.

Posted by: Susan | May 18, 2007 7:53 AM

my mother tongue is german but I live in Italy. In Italy they now call male homosexuals gay, in German the former derogatory word "schwul" has become the accepted term. The German solution seems better to me because you have to rethink your prejudice, while the Italian solution which consists of putting a new label on old stuff doesn't change much.

Posted by: Hans Suter | May 18, 2007 3:32 AM

Phenomenal interview Mr. Moyers! Marilyn Young is a heavy weight and a hurricane of fresh air! Thank you for all the time, intellect, exemplary reporting and interviews!

Posted by: jah | May 18, 2007 2:46 AM

I once worked for a CPA who had only female employees. He amused himself by calling us "dumb broads" whenever he felt like it. I called him on it, and he stopped, but that didn't change the fact that his entire business plan was based on hiring women for,as he put it, the kind of pay no man would ever accept. The nasty words my father used to use (jig, spik, wap, sheeny) I don't hear anymore. That doesn't mean the underlying prejudice has gone away. Seems there is a steady supply of people in the world who need someone to feel superior to.

Posted by: Joan Manning | May 18, 2007 12:37 AM

Rap Moguls are just trying to "keep it real" by using such language. In their music they are trying to express how tough life is for billionaires. I mean how would you like to live in a mansion, own a dozen luxury cars, and expensive jewelry? And just think of the upkeep on that private jet!

Posted by: Steven Rudin | May 17, 2007 10:40 PM

Words are quite important; the choice of synonyms can carry very different subtexts. Banning words just makes them forbidden and thus delicious; the really powerful act is when a large portion of the audience denies attention to people using hateful words.

Posted by: Max Kaehn | May 17, 2007 9:53 PM

Words are tremendously important in fighting prejudice. Think back to the Civil Rights movement and black men not wanting to be called “boy”. Think back to the movement for women’s rights when women no longer wanted to be referred to as “girls”. These words were used by white males to make themselves feel more powerful than those who were not white males. Those words imply that the people they are assigned to are somehow not as smart and not as powerful as the people who use them. Now think about “ho”, ‘bitch” and “nigger”. These words go beyond implying that a person is not smart or powerful. These words have a devastating connotation that one is of no value, irredeemably dirty, beyond hope. It is understandable that those who have felt the full impact of these bullets try to disable the weapon from where they came. But the approach is all wrong. Words, it turns out, can hurt as much as sticks and stones. By using these words themselves, the oppressed have become their own oppressors. The sting has not gone out of the words by increasing their use. The prejudiced feel vindicated that even the “hos”, “bitches” and “niggers...

Posted by: Mary Ann Ford | May 17, 2007 9:28 PM

While it's true that attitudes can exist whether or not the language to express them does or not, I think it's equally true that the usage of language facilitates the communication of attitudes (as well as ideas) and, by the choice of language the attitudes related to those ideas are also expressed. For example, there seems, to me, a world of difference between someone yelling "Dirty rotten _______ (fill in; Pole, Jew, Negro, Caucasian, or whatever)" and "Dirty rotten ______ (fill in...well, ya'll know, all to well, what the other choices are). The tenor and effects seem different even if the attitudes aren't. Over time, absent the framework to communicate the effects & emotions, the attitudes must also moderate. On another tack, as children my friends and I passed though a stage of calling each other "Jew-boy" - similar to what's happening with the N-word in Rap Music - (we were all Jewish) until my Dad mentioned to me the nature of the disrespect the term implied and suggested that, if I had so little self-respect as to denigrate myself in front of others, why should I expect them to respect me? It also came to me that, for Jews...

Posted by: Rael Nidess, M.D. | May 17, 2007 8:41 PM

Having lived through and disparaged the racism of the 50's and 60's I still find it's existence in 21st century America sad. In our very common human bodies we all are African with variations of color, form and culture. "If you prick me will I not bleed?" from the Merchant of Venice is the truth. The immigration controversy, the anti gay movement and cultural/racial/ethnic cleansing are views of a small minority. Our diversity is our strength. Thank you

Posted by: Bruce Sorensen | May 17, 2007 7:40 PM

To equate racism to the use of words is a charge that can continue indefinitely. I suggest that we measure action on the part of all of all citizens. It seems there is too much talk and little action. When I rub shoulders at work with another, share a meal, show a kindness...then I begin to absorb the essence of that person and THEN the conversation begins. I fear we have it reversed. Bear in mind that at least two of these objectionable words are probably used more by African-Americans than the rest of us white folks. Fred McElhenie

Posted by: Fred McElhenie | May 17, 2007 5:51 PM

Words are merely one manifestation of attitudes. Racism and personal prejudices run much deeper. While I'd love to see every derogatory word axed from our language, it would make my job as a novelist very difficult. The challenge, as Professor Harris-Lacewell notes, is to begin and sustain the conversation -- to move from the myriad soundbites we use into true examination and exploration of this destructive human tendency to generalize, stereotype, and deride those different from us.

Posted by: Pari Noskin Taichert | May 17, 2007 5:34 PM