The "N" word in Watchtower Literature (page 5)

Muddy Waters

If you watch any All in the Family show (from the 70's), you will be astonished today to see the range of presently offensive words and phrases used to describe a variety of people, classes, races, and nationalities, as spoken by its biased, knuckle-headed main character, Archie Bunker.

James Mixon

Yes, Archie Bunker and Fred Sanford (Sanford and Son).....

ILoveTTATT2

in not one instance did the organization quote the source in an approving manner of using the word. Now that would have been a catch!

No, they do not. You are totally correct there. Here's my point: Words such as "damn" and "ni**er" are ok to be used multiple times, most of the times as part of someone else's quotes.

But words such as "fuck" are never to be found, not in any context.

So "fuck" is too strong to ever be printed in WT literature, but "damn" and "ni**er" are ok?

(This response is for Cofty too... I hope you see my point. Now that I think of it, I regret writing the word in full. But this post is about the Watchtower's usage of the word vs the Watchtower's non usage of other words).

Doctor Who

If it's such a horrible word, why do I hear it used over and over again (and variants of it) while riding the bus to work EVERY DAY?

FedUpJW

But words such as "fuck" are never to be found, not in any context.

So "fuck" is too strong to ever be printed in WT literature, but "damn" and "ni**er" are ok?

The word f--k is offensive to many more educated persons whom I know. So why the obvious need to use that repeatedly? Getting some kind of thrill from typing it?

steve2

All this shows is that at any one time in any one country, region, group or the like, a hierarchy exists of offensive words that never fully make it into print. The hierarchy is largely arbitrary and often has little to do with the deemed likely status of people who have attracted the relevant word or label. I can think of a number of offensive words the organization has ( likely ) never printed or spoken against. Words that come to mind include: “kike”, “faggot” and “dyke” .

Moreover, that hierarchy changes over time. I’d say that two or three centuries ago no one in their right mind would publish any word deemed to be blasphemous without looking uneasily over his shoulder.

To even try to suggest that is because the examples I gave were of groups that were/are considered somehow less offensive than people of colour is ludicrous.

The lesson from your simplistic content analysis is that you cannot automatically draw conclusions from the use - or non use, as the case may be - of offensive words that are printed in full. That some are while others are not printed in full in a specified religious organization’s literature is a trivial matter of speculation that more than likely reflects wider societal mores.

The strange thing for me is you disapprovingly quote the organization quoting other sources - yet not once spread some of the criticism to the original sources who used the word in full in the first place.

Your pickings remain slim.

ILoveTTATT2

The lesson from your simplistic content analysis is that you cannot automatically draw conclusions from the use - or non use, as the case may be - of offensive words that are printed in full. That some are while others are not printed in full in a specified religious organization’s literature is a trivial matter of speculation that more than likely reflects wider societal mores.

Steve... 1994????? If I had quotes from 1930... well... ok... but up to 1994 there is a quote with that word in full.

I am pretty sure that the word was very offensive in 1994 in the U.S.

According to a study, in the U.S. the word is considered the most taboo. Outside the U.S. it it not considered to be as strong.

I could fully expect the word to show up in a non-religious environment, in certain contexts, one of them is talking about the word.

There was a person who mentioned they were "talked to" over a relatively harmless word. How much more so would the Watchtower writers, knowing full well how strong the word is received in the U.S., be scrutinized?

steve2

Still not one word about the quoted sources using that word.....even the one from 1994....

cofty

This response is for Cofty too... I hope you see my point. Now that I think of it, I regret writing the word in full. But this post is about the Watchtower's usage of the word vs the Watchtower's non usage of other words

No I don't see your point. You accuse the WT of racism for quoting the word unredacted but you use it multiple times in your first few posts. It's like a parent saying to their child 'stop fucking swearing'.

The WT have taken a decision at that time that quoting the N word was less offensive than quoting other swear words. So what?

freddo

"Still not one word about the quoted sources using that word.....even the one from 1994.."

Good point steve 2 ...

The "N" word in Watchtower Literature

Share this