Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

The March of the Nannystate (or, “we are intolerant of intolerance, and we aren’t afraid to show our displeasure by way of banning that intolerance in the name of tolerance”)

The head, it spins.

From the New York Times:

The New York City Council, which drew national headlines when it passed a symbolic citywide ban earlier this year on the use of the so-called n-word, has turned its linguistic (and legislative) lance toward a different slur: bitch.

The term is hateful and deeply sexist, said Councilwoman Darlene Mealy of Brooklyn, who has introduced a measure against the word, saying it creates “a paradigm of shame and indignity” for all women.

But conversations over the last week indicate that the “b-word” (as it is referred to in the legislation) enjoys a surprisingly strong currency — and even some defenders — among many New Yorkers.

And Ms. Mealy admitted that the city’s political ruling class can be guilty of its use. As she circulated her proposal, she said, “even council members are saying that they use it to their wives.”

The measure, which 19 of the 51 council members have signed onto, was prompted in part by the frequent use of the word in hip-hop music. Ten rappers were cited in the legislation, along with an excerpt from an 1811 dictionary that defined the word as “A she dog, or doggess; the most offensive appellation that can be given to an English woman.”

While the bill also bans the slang word “ho,” the b-word appears to have acquired more shades of meaning among various groups, ranging from a term of camaraderie to, in a gerund form, an expression of emphatic approval. Ms. Mealy acknowledged that the measure was unenforceable, but she argued that it would carry symbolic power against the pejorative uses of the word.

Actually, the only symbolic power it will carry is that, though the nanny statists and linguistic totalitarians can’t yet enforce such a ludicrous attempt to ban “slurs,” they will keep on trying — until at long last they are able to completely invert the concept of free expression so that it comes to mean “expression not considered impermissible by the state.”

Don’t like this “living Constitutional” interpretation of the First Amendment? Too bad. Your “freedoms” bring about the discomfort of others. And giving offense is practically treasonous.

So stop your b-wording, haters!

As David Harsanyi notes:

There’s plenty of discussion about whether such a ban would work (of course not), but there is virtually no conversation on whether such a ban is a restriction of free speech (yes) — or does that matter not deserve any attention? What possible justification could a city council have to ban a word, even symbolically? Surely someone would challenge such a law. The ACLU? Right? Right?

The Times reporter seems surprised that “bitch” has so many defenders in NYC. My favorite justification was forwarded by Darris James, an architect from Brooklyn, who claimed, “Hell, if I can’t say bitch, I wouldn’t be able to call half my friends.” Hell, you may not be able to say “hell” soon either.

(On a personal note, I don’t like the idea of being hampered by laws at home. As someone who has called his wife the B-Word, I would only support such a ban if her usage of “prick” or, well, some other nasty words, were also banned to balance the “discussion.”)

You would expect, perhaps, that those who use “bitch” properly would be the word’s staunchest defenders. Not so. As far as shedogs are concerned, the host the Westminster Kennel Club dog show in New York believes that the show would be “grandfathered in” though, the “reality is it’s in the realm of responsible conduct to not use that word anymore.”

Actually, the responsible conduct would be to use bitch. It’s the correct word.

Well, perhaps technically, David. But it’s no longer the thought that counts — just how others predisposed to offense are able to resignify the thoughts in order to affect outrage and hurt.

The whiny little bitches.

39 Replies to “The March of the Nannystate (or, “we are intolerant of intolerance, and we aren’t afraid to show our displeasure by way of banning that intolerance in the name of tolerance”)”

  1. MMShillelagh says:

    Where do they get this shit?

    Where ever there exists a political climate such that thoughts like this can be entertained and even promoted, therein freedom is dead.

    Can we have a revolution yet? That tree keeps looking positively parched.

  2. McGehee says:

    What are those sons of bitches in New York bitching about now?

  3. JD says:

    Bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch … All of those whiny little bitches on the NY City Council sit around bitching about bitches saying bitch, bitches, and beeyotch and those stupid sons of bitches do not even realize that they wouold be trampling all over that bitchin’ document called the Constitution. Now, take that, bitches, before I make you my bitch.

  4. happyfeet says:

    Ok then, the c-word it is. I’m flexible.

  5. SporkLift Driver says:

    Darlene Mealy is a bitch.
    That kennel club person? Yeah another bitch.

    TW: When devil

    Freaky

  6. happyfeet says:

    I’d only use it insouciantly of course.

  7. N. O'Brain says:

    How about we ban the word “Democrat”?

    We can replace it with the word “fascist”.

  8. SporkLift Driver says:

    The ACLU defend the first amendment? The second? Any amendment?
    It
    is
    to
    laugh.
    Those bitches.

    TW: from Cincinnati

    Huh?

  9. Johnny Cochran says:

    Since the article specifies the word Bitch and Ho but not any colloquial relatives, eg Beotch and hodawg, 40 guzzler, shorty, chicken necks, etc; I request that the court hold my clients, Death Row records, Def jam Recordings, Sean Jean Inc (and all alias and trademarks – Puffy, P-Diddy, Puff Daddy, et. alia), Rocka-Fella Holdings and all inner city, outer city, country-ass n***as and all men of colored persuasion and language exempt and immune from prosecution under these statutes.

    OJ is still free …. white bitches!

    Respectfully,

    John Cochran Jnr. ESQ, PDQ, SOL and DOA

    TW: Wedge Cations; Thats Wedge-u-cations. Layola Law School class of 78 – beotches

  10. I’m guessing here..just guessing, but I’m thinking these aren’t those religious rightwing nuts we hear about.

  11. Phinn says:

    I regret to inform you that the term “haters” has been banned pursuant to the Civil Liberty Offense-Deterrent Clinton Aggrandizing Act of 2008.

    You are hereby ordered to report to one of the seven (7) Department of Information re-education facilities in your area for … training.

    Markos Moulitsas
    Secretary of Information

  12. Ouroboros says:

    Where they made their mistake is in trying to simply ban the word. What they should have done is have the Ministry of Truth remove all reference to the word “Bitch” from every publication it appears in worldwide , then just coerce the proles into pretending they’ve never even heard the word, et voila!, in a generation there’ll be no one that can even commit the thought crime of thinking “bitch!”.

    I thought women hated the word “cunt” more anyway.

    tw: plough their … hahahah I’m not touching that.

  13. DrSteve says:

    Seriously? Nothing better to do?

  14. Jeffersonian says:

    I blame Giuliani. If Gotham was still the cesspit of crime, corruption, violence and decay these Councilmen wouldn’t have time for such nonsense. I say bring back the pathologies so New Yorkers can breate free air again!

  15. BJTexs says:

    I’m going to show up at an NYC council meeting wearing a T-Shirt with the picture of a smiling shark head and the caption:

    “It’s Great to be White”

    Then I’ll stand back as heads explode.

    The stunning lack of self reflection that would allow 19 council people to display their unseriousness to the entire city is mind boggling.

  16. dicentra says:

    Next word to be banned: “Voldemort”

    Because it’s now a Taboo, and if you speak it, the goons from the Ministry of Magic will show up and jinx you silly, wherever you are.

  17. Pal2Pal says:

    Well I’m an opinionated BITCH and proud of it. Call me the “C” word though, and I might have to resort to violence. I have a .wav file that says it all – “I’m 49% Bitch and 51% Sweetheart, be a man, not a Dick, and deal with it.”

  18. Sigivald says:

    Well, the ACLU can’t challenge such a “law”, because there will never be any grounds to challenge it.

    A symbolic ban can’t be challenged, because nobody will ever have standing, since there is no punishment allocated and no enforcement.

    On the plus side, at least being on the NYC Council prevents these people from having dangerous power somewhere else. Kinda like permanent kindergarden.

    (Also, does this mean that “c?ntfl?p”* is out?

    “Cantflip”, used to mock those incapable of acrobatics.)

  19. Jim in KC says:

    I hereby take back anything I’ve ever said about how stupid Kansas City’s city council is.

  20. MarkD says:

    Well, Bloomberg has already solved all the rest of the city’s problems, so what do you people want? St Mark’s Place to stop smelling like a sewer? Affordable housing in Manhattan? Get real. Talk is cheap, actually doing something is not so cheap.

  21. eLarson says:

    Hey, you know I figured out why the Dems in NYC are probably bored with the idea of nuclear terrorism now. They are, since 1984, a Nuclear Free Zone. So they got that going for them.

    Living where I do, I’m going to have to head down to Garrett Park, MD, to escape if the mushrooms start popping up around The District.

  22. Neo says:

    At least they haven’t gotten to .. farck, felberkarg or nerfherder

  23. mojo says:

    Man, the AKC is gonna be pissed…

  24. Am I the only one that recalled how outraged the liberal/left was when the White House called for people to be more responsible in their statements?

  25. Rob Crawford says:

    Am I the only one that recalled how outraged the liberal/left was when the White House called for people to be more responsible in their statements?

    No, but you have to remember — it’s only censorship when they might have to watch their words.

  26. triticale says:

    If the Kennel Club is banned from calling shedogs “bitches”, I would guess that the Horticulture Society is similarly banned from calling cultivating tools “hoes”.

  27. The Monster says:

    Back when Newt’s mom revealed that he’d called Hillary a bitch, I called up a local talk radio show and said that he should apologize for that. My dog has never tried to nationalize an entire industry (health care), for one thing. Newt still owes her an apology for comparing her to Hillary.

  28. Dan Collins says:

    Tune in Saturday at 8 for the BBC’s powerful adaptation of Ben Jonson’s Isle of Dogs, “Bitch, Ho!”

  29. JD says:

    BITCH BITCH BITCH HO HO HO BITCH BITCH HO HO BITCH HO

  30. tanstaafl says:

    Ms. Mealy (mouthed) is appropriately named.

    This stuff is just another aspect of the “we wanna control your neuronal circuits” mentality, which motivation lies at the base of élitist/leftoid “thinking”.

    They have already made substantial inroads into our institutions of public education, at all levels.

    Will Santa Claus be able to say…hohoho ?!

  31. tanstaafl says:

    And another thing, if the culture isn’t strong enough to shout down the idiocy and filth of rap lyrics without resorting to some attempt at legislation (fear and intimidation if the wrong word slips from your tongue) we’s in deep doo doo anyway.

    It’s likely individuals like Ms. Mealy mouthed who have helped bring about the cultural demise in the first place, in the name of some PC concept of filth rap being a venue for self-expression.

  32. JD says:

    tanstaafl – She likely thought it to be racist to single them out, so she figures that break dancing on the Constitution and banning this word for everyone was the more appropriate way to address it.

  33. MMShillelagh says:

    I hate it when those godbothering christofascists try to ban things they find unacceptable! We can’t be free under their oppressive rule!

    Oh, wait.

    Call to leftards: The left threatens and undermines freedom whenever possible. Wake up. You aren’t a rebel, you aren’t smart, or elite; you’re a tool, more or less in the literal sense.

  34. tanstaafl says:

    Enforcing some ban on language is not too different from “hate crimes” legislation, which is more in vogue as activist judges seem to think the purpose of the courts is to enforce some weird version of morality. Even the Supreme Court has been known to look to “precedent in Europe” for some of its rulings instead of its only job of determining whether some law accords with or conflicts with the Constitution.

    (for the record, tho’ you likely know this, a hate crime might be me beating you up because you’re a homosexual instead of the crime just being me beating you up (battery and assault)

    There’s no end to this stuff and, yes, it does go against the Constitution in spirit as well as in fact.

    But the PC’ers have been whittling away at the foundational principles of this country for a long time now.

  35. Rob Crawford says:

    It’s quite amusing over at Dr. Helen’s site, where a weird passive-aggressive troll is saying “no harm, no foul” because the measure didn’t pass.

    Yeah, because we need politicians who are willing, but unable, to pass thoughtcrime laws.

  36. JD says:

    Whiny little bitches and ho’s. I may drop by this thread every day and type the words bitches and ho’s in honor of these legislative shredders of the Constitution.

  37. JD says:

    FEEL MY WRATH, BITHCES !

  38. JD says:

    HO : Good morning, BITCH.
    BITCH : Good morning, HO.

Comments are closed.