Talk:Nigger/Archive 3

message: Please discuss or give your opinion on this. It is not mentioned on Hemmingway's page which I thought was odd given that it is shockingly striking in uncensored versions of his novel To have and have not. (my seventies version has it in anyway)
(82.40.177.159 07:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hemingway's use of the word "nigger"

message: its a great word to describe them stuipd chicken fried eating blacks!!!!!!!!
It is interesting why this word is even in this 'dictionary'.  African Americans are only 10% of the US population but this word has, what 1000% more content then Caucasian?  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian
This is why I hardly ever use this site.  I wonder how long this comment will stay here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.248.253.208 (talk) 17:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's obvious ingrained racism. I know, I'm white and I see it more than black folk do. Most of us have it inside our heads.(82.40.177.159 07:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well at least it gives all of the little white supremists something to play with...--Art8641 21:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Purpose

message: The word "niggard" has no connection to the N word at all.
Etymology: Middle English, of Scandinavian origin; akin to Old Norse hnøggr niggardly; akin to Old English hnEaw niggardly
: a meanly covetous and stingy person : MISER 
It doesn't have the same etymology and is in no way associated with the N word though people have been fired for using it.
:Yeah, but it's phonetic similarity to "nigger" has (at least) put it on the cusp of being an archaic, obsolete term.  How often do you hear "niggard" in public discourse, compared with its synonyms? Applejuicefool 19:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Related to the word "niggard" 

message: The entire Paragraph below should be removed, as it serves no informative purpose, and is needlessly offensive:
Other creative uses of the word nigger are widely considered highly offensive. For example, a hungry person looking to be obscene might express a craving for a "nigger butter and jelly sandwich", with nigger butter being a word play on peanut butter. Nigger butter in this case is superlatively obscene as it is understood to be made from ground up niggers. More ambitious uses of the word nigger are often virulent exercises in profanity; one could offer the threat, "I'll grind his nigger bones to make my nigger bread", on which one might spread nigger butter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fruitbatnt (talk • contribs) 7 July 2006
:*I agree completely. HumbleGod 20:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Nigger butter? Removed. NorrYtt 23:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Niggers of Europe" is a real term used to refer to Irish people in the 1700 and 1800s.  There are historical documents with its usage, including a political cartoon which I have seen.  I will be researching the source shortly --Farbotron 21:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of Unnecessary Paragraph (Combinations with other words)

message: As a black man, I think that this needs to stay in the article.  Although it is humorous in nature, comedians have often used the stage as their forum for commentary.  These are things that are talked about in the black community amongst ourselves.  It also shows the discontent we have for "our own" who makes us look bad and keep the stereotype alive.  There is a distiction that "we" know of.  It should remain here so "y'all" can see another point of view that had to be re-inserted by someone who didn't want it there.
This is a neutrality issue, because without this angle, it keep the work solely on race, as opposed to a wider, unmentioned context.--Ben414 02:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inclusion of ''Independent of race'' segment

message: There are multiple problems with this sentence which is in the Usage paraphgraph: "More recently, the term has been used to signify a black person who is a thug, instead of black people altogether."  Not only is this POV, it is also imprecise and confusing to somoene who is not from the U.S. or is not familiar with black culture.  First of all the term "thug" needs to be defined, because its current usage does not correspond to the dictionary definition.  Secondly, it is only in certain cases where the n-word is used to refer to "thugs."  The sentence as it is fails to consider that black people use the word in a number of different contexts.  The word is sometimes used even when the two people in the conversation do not consider themselves to be "thugs."  --Farbotron 21:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with usage of "thug" 

message: There are inconsistencies and clunkiness here. 
1) The first sentence is fine. 
2) The second sentence is far too long, and very hard to understand. I easily see that nigger was for a long time "a standard, casual English term for black people," and I agree with that characterization. 
But what on earth is the meaning of "During the period when slavery was practiced worldwide, and in particular by the United States and European countries, and for several decades after Europe and North America prohibited slavery, ..."? I think it might mean "During the time when slavery was practiced in the United States and Europe, and for several decades thereafter, ..." 
I also think that "several decades" is incorrect. I believe the word had the casual meaning until the 1960s, or for about 100 years after the abolition of slavery. 
I would suggest something like "From the time of the Atlantic slave trade into the early 1960's...."
3) The third sentence seems to contradict the second. If the word was for a long time a "standard, casual term," how can it have "traditionally been associated with "an overt contempt," etc.?
4) I lived in the North during the 1940's and most of the 1950's, and in the South during the late 1950's and early 1960's. I can say with certainty that in my world nigger was not particularly associated with an "assumption of inherent black inferiority," or of "bestiality." Neither was it "extremely pejorative." It was simply what white people often called black people. It was not considered to be a polite term, however, and in polite conversation the word negro or colored person were commonly used. There was an assumption of inherent black inferiority and maybe worse, but the assumption was independent of the word used to refer to black people. 
My personal experience shouldn't determine the content of the article. It calls the third sentence into question, though. Lou Sander 03:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 100 years could fall within the scope of the phrase "several decades". Wiktionary defines "several" as "Consisting of a number more than two, but not very many, three to seven; a divers; sundry." Yes, I see the 3-7 range, but it's not a very exact term and could easily be stretched to 10.  Also, I dunno if I agree that nigger was still a "standard, casual term" by the '60s.  Sure it was still being used, but since that's when the Civil Rights movement was in full swing, I imagine nigger would have been pretty inflammatory by then. Applejuicefool 20:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead Paragraph 

message: Shouldn't a reference to 'niglet' be made in this article?  Maybe on the combinations with other words?
--Kalmia 02:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Niglet 

message: The word nigger is simply derived from the Latin word meaning 'black', and has been used to refer to black people, typically though not always of African origin, since the 1500's. The two African countries Niger and Nigeria (originally pronounced 'Niggeria') also derive their names from colonial use of the word Negro and its variants: Negroid, negro (Italian and Spanish), negre (French), etc. there are also relic Negroid peoples through the Malay archipelago and vietnam peninsula: Negrito's in the Philippines, Montagnards in Vietnam, the Andaman isalnds off India. Of course with time this generic term (simply the opposite of 'white') came to have a derogatory connotation. I have heard it used extensively in black on black conversation in high schools for example, usually as an insult. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lgh (talk • contribs) .
No, unfortunately you don't know what you're talking about. Check the article on the Niger River... 
The origin of the name Niger is unknown. It is often assumed that it derives from the Latin word for "black", niger, but there is no evidence for this, and it would have been more likely for Portuguese explorers to have used their own word, negro, or preto as they did elsewhere in the world; in any case the Niger is not a blackwater river (see Rio Negro). The name is thus thought to be indigenous, but no convincing origin has been found among the 30 languages of the Niger delta and lower reaches of the river. One hypothesis is that it comes from the Tuareg phrase gher n gheren "river of rivers" (shortened to ngher), originating in the middle reaches of the river around Timbuktu. Arthurian Legend 21:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: God, I love Wikipedia! So many knowledgable people. Darnold01 21:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Even if "Niger" doesn't come from the Latin root, that doesn't mean "nigger" didn't.  Also, surely SOME Portuguese of the time were educated enough to speak Latin, no? Applejuicefool 20:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I work in a tile shop in Australia and all the black tiles we import from Spain are called the niger series. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.107.182.227 (talk) 03:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  clarification 

message: The claim in this article that the word "nigger" was not considered offensive before the 1960s is highly dubious, and contradicted by the article itself.  If it was not offensive until the 1960s, why was the New York Times censoring the word in the 1940s?  Why was a book that used "nigger" in the title sparking protests in the 1920s?  The word's pejorativeness or lack thereof over time needs sourcing, badly. Nareek 22:35, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed the lead, but this piece still has serious problems.  The assertion that "coon", "darky" etc. were at one time words with no pejorative connotation desperately needs a source--I for one find that very hard to believe.  The claim that the many literary uses of "nigger" show that it was not an insult also needs to be backed up with an outside source; most of the quotes read to me like writers using a provocative word for humorous, shock or ironic purposes. Note the paragraph about slaves using the word to indicate acceptance of a subordinate status--how could it do that unless their was something subordinating about the word? Nareek 02:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The term nigger, however, is truely not of any black racism. It's real meaning is that of an ignorant person. So people who take nigger to offense, are ignorant. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.39.224.202 (talk) 17:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictions 

message: "Its use by other races, particularly Chris Baker, is regarded as extremely offensive, however the different pronunciation "nigga" can be used within the African American community in a neutral or positive way." Err? 24.132.24.44 14:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Vandalism, I removed it.  Feel free to do so yourself next time :)  Use the history option to see what changes are made and which are appropriate to remove/fix. - BalthCat 14:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chris Baker? 

message: Has anyone thought to increase the enormous number of racist epitaphs that fall into this category? One term I'm absolutely astonished nobody added was the term "college nigger." Capote uses the term in In Cold Blood to describe a person who attempts to use fancy language in an attempt to appear more educated (i.e. looking up long words in dictionaries then using them). --76.16.160.102 00:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other "Combinations with Second Words" 

message: lot's of vandalism on this page. It's inappropriate TareTone 05:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  vandalism 

message: Although the term is commonly used in the United States, Caucasian is not an accurate word to describe all White people. If you click on the Caucasian link, you will see various definitions with precise meanings (including people from the Caucasus region).Spylab 12:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Caucasian in common usage is a reference to the Caucasoid race, which seems to be as accurate a description of white people as any other.  Obviously, like any other word, its meaning must be taken in context.  The proposition that someone could, in conversation, mistake a reference to "white people" as a reference to "people from the Caucasus," quite frankly seems asinine to me.--24.40.139.209 07:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

text: People shouldn't have to be "smart enough." Caucasian pretty much only means white in America, every where else, it relaies to the Caucasus region. Using it for white is very much America-centric. ɱўɭĩєWhat did I dowrong 03:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

text: This is confusing as anything to me. I understand that America-centricism is frowned upon in Wikipedia - why? The United States contains the majority of native English speakers in the world. Not just a plurality - a clear majority.  Yet whenever a term comes up (like Caucasian) that is used primarily in the United States, it's automatically suspect or put down for "America-centricism".  I know this is a politically incorrect thing to say, but maybe it's the rest of the world that's wrong. Applejuicefool 21:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Caucasian]] not accurate term for whites

message: My edit was to correct a simple error in fact.  normally I wouldn't comment on a routine edit.  But given the volatility of the topic, I suspect there may be editors waiting to pounce on any changes made to this article.  If that is the case, those editors may have been condtioned to expect edits here to be rascist one way or the other.  So I'm adding this discussion to avoid problems. 
context:
I just made an edit resulting in:
David Howard, a white city official in Washington, D.C., was fired from his job in January 1999, when he used "niggardly" in a fiscal sense while talking with African American colleagues, who took offense at his use of the word. In the subsequent furor, Howard was offered his job back but declined it.
The original incorrectly stated that howard quit but was reinstated.  This is incorrect as of the last time I read about the case.  (Also, I believe that you can only be "reinstated" in you were fired, though I could be wrong about that).
Now, it is POSSIBLE that howard recently agreed to return to his job and I don't know that. In fact I hope so; I live here!  But if that is the case, then that fact should be *appended* to what I wrote because he did, in fact, decline to return when the offer was made to reinstate him.  (The universal assumption by people living here is that he declined because he was disgusted at having been fired by semiliterate black people for using a word correctly). 
Even if howard has returned to his job, the original article omitted the critical fact that in a PC pogrom, he was fired from a government job for using an innocous word correctly.  It was THIS aspect of it which caused the furor.  If somebody quit just because his coworkers were grumbling, it wouldn't have made the Washington Post.Sys Hax 05:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the Washington Post and the Straight Dope, Howard was not fired, he resigned; and Mayor Williams subsequently rehired him. The edits will be corrected. 74.136.207.99 02:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The David Howard case

message: nigga should have a different page as nigga. one is offensive and one is not offensive. It makes things less controversial on this page and there is already a lot of controversy on this page. Twentyboy 18:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really understand what you mean by having the articles seperate making things "less controversial."  Either way, I don't think that's a particularly strong reason for or against a merge.  I would support a merge -- nigga is simply a variant on nigger, even if the meaning is different.  It makes more sense to discuss it as a subset of nigger than as if it's some entirely different word. -Elmer Clark 04:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, but Wikipedia really isn't the place to argue your opinion on this kind of issue. -Elmer Clark 22:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nigga merging 

message: Fat Joe is of both Puerto Rican and Cuban descent. It is common knowledge that Puerto Rico and Cuba were colonized by Europeans, and that black African slaves were imported to do hard labor. Moreover, these black Africans often mixed with the indigenous peoples as well as the colonists. After hundreds of years of intermixing, it is evident that populations of both Cuba and Puerto Rico are very heterogenous and that one would be hard pressed to find a purely white or purely black Puerto Rican or Cuban. Furthermore, according to the one drop theory, having anyone of black lineage in one's family indeed makes one black. Therefore, I question the relevance of mentioning Fat Joe in this article if he could in the strict sense be considered black.
:I strongly disagree.  You're not going to find a lot of people who consider Fidel Castro black.  And I hate to break it to you, but the "one-drop theory" kind of went out of vogue a century or two ago. -Elmer Clark 08:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ref Fat Joe as non-black 

message: I've noticed through many people, all around the world (specifically US, Canada, UK, Thailand and Singapore) that the N-word is used somewhat jokingly by non-black people, even referring to non-blacks as well. I don't see it used often in a single conversation, perhaps once or twice but it's utterance is popping up all over the place, regardless of whether or not a black person is present. It seems to be a bit more lax and is losing its negative, racist connotation. Take for example Shaun of the Dead, when Ed gets out of the car and says 'Sup N****s', and only receives just an exaggerated sigh and minimal shock from the others. That seems to be the reaction around a lot nowadays. But, to the point, should this be mentioned, and if so how?
:Well step one is to find a credible source.  Always keep WP:NOR in mind. -Elmer Clark 21:09, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent Usage

message: If this article is going to use a dictionary source, it ought to use the Oxford English Dictionary. This would give a much more reputable definition than Webster's and would also give the accepted etymological origins of the word. A copy of this text can be found at almost any university library and also online if the library is a subscriber.
:[moved section to the bottom] Feel free to do so, I can't imagine anyone would object. -Elmer Clark 05:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dictionary source 

message: Someone needs to write about popular efforts to ban the word (i.e. by Rev. Al Sharpton or Rev. Jesse Jackson). Also there needs to be information about how some people are proponents of the word and how it relates to free speech. 
The popular culture section seems a bit long as well.
129.7.254.33 17:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Efforts to Ban 

message: "Ice Nigger" should be added to the list as it's commonly used to refer to Inuit and other Northern natives.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Kogen (talk • contribs) 
:[moved to bottom] Could you provide some kind of citation that this term exists and is notable?  I sure haven't heard it... -Elmer Clark 07:46, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But that is what Oriental means? -Elmer Clark 16:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Oriental" is apparently considered a disrespectful descriptor for East and Southeast Asians.  I've heard it said that, "Orientals are rugs; Asians are people".  I don't personally understand it. -GTBacchus(talk) 17:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added Nigger Terms 

message: I mean of all the things the slave owners called the slaves, nigger was probably the nicest.  This article doesn't answer the question.  I mean historically the reason you are not supposed to use this word is because when the North won the Civil War the war-winning white people in the North decided that only war-losing white people in the South would use this word, so it meant you were a war-loser.  Nothing to do with black people, just a word that only uneducated white war-losing farmers use.  
Michael Richards did not only make a horrifically racist statement when he used the word--more ominously he also asserted that he is willing to go to war with the United States to defend those perverse views.
It is significant that this word is associated with breaking the Union.  It came to mean you hate the Union if you use this word; it was the most unpatriotic word in the lexicon. It became the linguistic equivalent of burning a flag.  Because it reminds people that the United States is not invincible it is effectively banned.   
The African American Registry states "Nigger is the ultimate expression of white racism and white superiority no matter how it is pronounced."  In reality it is the ultimate expression of disrespect for the United States, its structures of authority, the police (who incidentally wear Union blue).12.41.40.20 21:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you talking about? Obviously the current implications associated with the word have little to do with its origin. In our modern society, the word "nigger" is a highly offensive racial slur.  It has no longer has anything to do with disrespect for the United States or sedition agaisnt the government. Incidentally, not all police wear blue uniforms.  Khaki, brown, and even gray are popular colors as well. Applejuicefool 18:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why it is bad 

message: In Argentina the spanish word "negro" or "cabecita negra"  (black little head, by black hairhead) is refered to people mestizo or only with an only slightly darker appearance than those  Europe descent. The use is derogative. 212.97.181.220 22:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  negro-cabesita negra 

message: Does it make sense to add (either to the second paragraph or as a third paragraph) something along the lines of:
The more recent expression, "Afro - Engineering" may have been created as a response to the political correctness (Cultural Marxism) movement while attempting to preserve the original derogatory context of "Nigger - Rigging".
?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.32.49 (talk) 00:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition to "Non-Human Uses"? 

message: For some reason I can't edit the article to add a 'this opening is too short' template but could someone do it for me?  Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.132.108.195 (talk) 18:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening Sentence 

message: It says that the text is edited on "television", but it should be made clear that this is only on certain stations. Any station that doesn't censor (cable stations) do no such thing. Most stations that do censor either edit in a way to avoid showing the sign or simply mosaic it out. 66.167.145.54 12:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Die Hard 

message: Why is there a picture of a black person headlined "This is an example of a nigger"? The definition tells it all, why do we need a picture "explaining" what a nigger is?
:It was vandalism, and was reverted in four minutes.  You just happened to catch the article at the wrong moment. -Elmer Clark 05:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This is an Example of a Nigger

message: I disagree with the line in Etymology and history where it states that "In the United States, the word nigger was not always considered derogatory, but was used by some as merely denotative of black, as it was in other parts of the English-speaking world. In nineteenth-century literature, there are many uses of the word nigger with no intended negative connotation. Charles Dickens, and Joseph Conrad (who published The Nigger of the 'Narcissus' in 1897) used the word without racist intent."
Joseph Conrad it has been argued by academics for a number of years, had racist undertones in a number of his books.  This was most notable opined by Chinua Achebe . --Woodyteegra 01:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Though bear in mind that even if there were racist undertones to his work, this doesn't necessarily mean that his use of the word nigger was racist per se. garik 13:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joseph Conrads use of the Term Nigger 

message: The word nigger is related to the old anthropological classification of Negroid. There's no way to define the word Nigger without using the word negroid.
This article begins by saying that "Nigger is a racial slur used to refer to dark-skinned people, especially those of African ancestry.". 
This is an attempt to avoid using the word negroid, but it fails on the grounds that Egyptians are relatively dark skinned, of African descent and NOT especially likely to be called niggers. 
Negroids are especially likely to be called niggers. Negroids ARE of African descent and ARE dark skinned (though a light skinned person with negroid looking features would still be called a nigger), but not all people from the African continent with dark skin are likely to be called niggers (see North African examples).
Negroid may be an outdated classification to many anthropologists but the word Nigger harks back to a time when the word was in commmon use and is a synonym for it. It must be included. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.253.75.243 (talk) 23:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The word Negroid cannot be avoided 

message: Is anyone else appaled by the movement (I can't remember the name) to make it illegal to say the word "nigger." I honestly think that making at least ONE word illegal would completely destroy Freedom of Speech, regardless of how the word is used. Anyone else?
:I'm sure many people would be appalled if there ever were such a movement in the United States—at least if the movement received significant attention and support.  But I don't see any proof that this happened and indeed I am dubious that it did.  Any references? Phiwum 10:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only would it curb freedom of speech, it would also mean loss of sociolinguistically relevant information.  --80.149.16.69 16:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Right.  I did not ask for more dubious claims.  I asked for evidence that anything like this has ever happened.  So, what's the name of the town?  What is your source?  Who are "they" that are trying to make it illegal nationally and how are they doing this?  Oh, and what is your source?  Much thanks. Phiwum 01:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Huh? garik 19:00, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Making 'Nigger' Illegal

message: the word "nigger" cannot be used without insulting someone. please full protect it if not delete it.
 Deep Impact 10:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but there are a lot of words that cannot be used without insulting someone. "Taiwan", "the Holocaust", and "cunt" come to mind. This is not a valid objection. Please see Wikipedia:Content_disclaimer. --Ashenai 10:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nigger:word usage 

message: This word has a racially charged past, where it has been used for over 200 years as a spiteful and degrading insult to people of African descent (or more generally, dark skinned people). People can't suddenly decide to change its spelling or pronounciation (something that happened in the last 20 years or so), and then suddenly wave a "magic wand" and pretend that everything is ok. Unfortunately, history dosen't work like that - and life isn't that simple. This is a problematic word that is likely to stir strong emotions in anyone it is directed at, ONCE they know the FULL history of the word nigger. If this word has to be included as an entry in Wikipedia (which I believe it does), then we need to make sure that the full definition of the word (not merely modern day revisionist attempts) of the word is displayed in all its gory details - warts and all.
To this end, (as appalling as it may first seem), it would be a good idea if a picture was included in the description. This may be stating the obvious, but I'll state it all the same, just to make sure - under no circumstance should the picture display an actual black person (apart from the charred body I mention below - even in that instance, the face should be blurred to preserve the victim's dignity). If a picture of an actual black person is included, the entry moves from being an objective definition to racist propaganda. The ideal picture would be that of a racist cartoon/caricature showing the exagerated lips and nose, "coon eyes", slopen forehead and the caption "Depiction of a nigger". Alternatively, it may show the stiff, lifeless, charred remains of a lynched body (with face blurred to preserve the victim's dignity) - with a lynch mob chanting "Die, nigger, die" (there are lots of pictures like this from www.maffa.org) - incidentally, these pictures showing a lifeless lynched body - along with a cheering white lynch mob, were a popular form of "ghoulish" postcard in the early 20th century, in parts of America. It is no wonder this word evokes such strong emotions - since some of these events are still within living memory. As shocking as this proposal may seem, if we are to tackle this word, we need to tackle it correctly and fully, so that there is no ambiguity as to what the word has meant for the last 200 or so years. That way, there is a clear, unambigious (and universal) understanding as to what calling someone "a nigger" means. It would be totally irresponsible to use a "tame", "inoffensive" picture to describe what is to most decent people, an offensive word. Suggestions of the cover of Agartha Christies "10 little Niggers" are wholly inappropriate, as they do not relay the gravity and contempt that the word carried. Arguments that nigger was once a perfectly acceptable word to use are equally asinine in that they are telling the story from a very biased Eurocentric (or white persons POV), and are consequently deceitful - because they are not telling the whole story - warts and all.
The (modern) use of the word nigger may be loosely translated as "fellow oppressed" (in a marxist/socialist context, it is akin to saying "we the proletariat"), sometimes it also simply means "I'm not to be messed with" (as in bad assed nigger). The revisionist form, is an attempt to take the "sting" out of the word and to "reclaim" it. Nigga, Nigguh etc, are modern (i.e last 20 years or so) revisions/derivatives of the word, and an attempt to make it "cool". However, the appearance of these words occupy but a very short timespan in the history of the parent word (Nigger). Dont get me wrong, there have black people who have always used the word either because they felt powerless and simply accepted what (white) society imposed on them, or because of a kind of self hate (see article on internal oppresion). Regardless of how the new words are pronounced/spelt, the first thought that comes to mind (especially, to those who grew up in the west), is the word Nigger, because this is a meme that is still very well and alive in the western world. Consequently, any attempts to "reclaim" the word are misguided since two hundred years or so of meaning are not going to be changed by a couple of decades of "redifinition" - this is the social equivalent of shooting oneself in the foot.
"Nigger" as a word, is used in six ways :
1). As a term of endearment (which is misguided but this is a personal POV, so may be ignored)
- typically used in informal greetings, sometimes used in rap music
2). A way of expressing of referring to oneself as "one who is not to be trifled with" - as in "bad assed nigger"
- This is typically the way "nigger" is used in rap music
3). As a way of articulating "otherness", usually within a paternalistic/patronizing/contemptuous context 
- this is typically the way in which white people have used the word (e.g. Rudyard Kipling's "White mans burden", Hemmingway etc)
4). As a put down to remind someone of his "place" or his "past"
5). In a threatening way, jointly, to assert dominance and as a putdown
- typical use in prisons, sometimes used in this way in rap music
6). in an outright hostile way, typically, before an assault (typical use in prisons/racist attacks)
Given the 6 ways in which the word nigger is used (bearing in mind the genesis and history of the word) and ongoing racism in the world, use cases 3 to 6 are automatically "off limits" to non-black people - because of black peoples 400 year history of oppression in the US - and can trigger a "disproportionate" response from a black person if directed to him from a non-black person (the "excessive" response may still not be tempered if even the remark is from another black person). It is obvious to see that use cases 2 when used by a black person, typically expresses a low self image (similar explanation as to why most gang members have a low self image). Use case 3-6 when used by a black person to another black person, is an expression of self hate, as the "offender" is in the same racial category as the one he attempts to dominate/humiliate.
This leaves only use case 1 as the "viable" option - since in its revisionist meaning, it is a term of endearment (i.e "fellow oppressed" / "we the proletariat"). However, when the person making the remark has no "perceivable" history of oppression especially when juxtaposed to the person the remark is aimed at (in history - whites have typically been the oppressors of black people), you end up in a situation where the remark can be seen at best, as patronizing or condescending, and at worst, being racist by "reminding" a black person of his "status" as an oppressed person, it can also be perceived as an attempt to "pull rank" on a black person - this is when "all hell breaks loose". The degree to which use case 1 is acceptable to some (mostly uneducated) black people is the degree to which they "perceive" that the person making the remark (either as an individual or their "race") has shared their experience of oppression. Since the oppresion in this context is based on skin color, there is a direct correlation between the darkness of the skin of the person making the remark, and its "acceptability" to the recipient. Generally, the fairer the skin of the person making the remark (when compared to the person the remark is aimed at), the more the remark is taken as a racist slur and the less room there is for tolerance. It must be noted though, that the vast majority of PROFESSIONAL and EDUCATED black people in the middle and upper middle classes of society, take strong exception to this word (and its modern day derivatives). 
The problem however, with use case 1 is that it creates a "double standard" - in that black (or dark skinned) people are "allowed" to use the word, but lighter skinned and (especially white) people are accused of being racist when they use the word. In certain respects this is unavoidable since the word has strong racist overtones because of its genesis and history - and racism has always been about double standards (based on skin color), never about fairness - so it is perhaps unsuprising that a word with such strong racist overtones "inherits" the double standard inherit in racist thinking/slurs. 
One way to analyse/attempt to understand the "unwritten rule" of who is "allowed" and who is "not allowed" to use the word nigger is to ask yourself the following questions:
Note: the word FAMILY is used as a proxy for "race"
(i) "Is it ok to make jokes/insensitive remarks about a person who is only just recovering from a serious FAMILY illness. Considering that the "family illness" has lasted for over 400 years"?
This question is especially pertinent IF your family (i.e. members of your ancestoral family) were the ones that infected the "sufferer"'s family with the illness many centuries ago and kept the infestation malignant for over 400 years, until only 40 years ago or so"
(ii) "Is it ok for said "sufferer" to make jokes/insensitive remarks about his own condition" ?
(iii) "Is it ok for you to make jokes/insensitive remarks about the "sufferers" condition simply BECAUSE the "sufferer" makes jokes/insensitive remarks about his own condition"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.130.208.224 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 18 May 2007  (UTC)
:In its current form, your proposed addition reads like unverified original research. Can you provide reliable, third party sources to substantiate this material? --Muchness 05:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the long use of heading-code because it was messing up the contents, and have deleted some superfluous empty lines to make things more clear :) SGGH speak! 21:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Meaning of the word "nigger" and how to best make an entry in Wikipedia

message: I pulled comments from this talk page re WP:FORUM. I caught them at the moment and I pulled them right then. That's not blanking, ask an admin. For the record, I agree with you, partially. But this isn't a forum. It's for improving the page. CJ 01:48, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment Removal re [[WP:FORUM]]