Against words

Some time ago, Facebook blocked several well-known users for publishing the poem “Iphigenia in Aulis” by Maria Stepanova, in which the words “Jews” and “faggots” were found. At the same time, of course, the poem was neither anti-Semitic nor homophobic (those interested can verify ), but this incident once again made us think about the “struggle against words” that has been going on in the world for the last decades.

Russia, of course, does not stand aside. Is it possible to use the word "chick"? And the word "Negro"? Is it okay to say “homosexual” or should we say “homosexual”, “autist” or “person with autism spectrum disorder”? Sometimes polemics take on a comical character, sometimes passions flare up in earnest - and I have not yet mentioned the question of what pretext should be used to write Ukraine and how many double consonants are there in the capital of Estonia.

The fight against “bad words” is based on the assumption that words determine consciousness, or, more precisely, language determines thinking. Linguists sometimes call this thesis the " Sapir–Whorf hypothesis ". It became known to the general public last year thanks to the film Arrival, but in fact it was formulated almost a hundred years ago. A logical consequence is the assumption that the fight against “bad words” helps to improve morals and reduce xenophobia. It is assumed that if we get rid of the words "kike" and "fag", then anti-Semitism and homophobia will disappear.

In fact, linguists do not necessarily consider the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis to be the ultimate truth - and I generally have serious doubts about the benefits of politically correct language.

Let's take anti-Semitism, for example. In the late USSR, the word “Jew” was never used in print; even in fiction they tried to avoid it. At the same time, the level of state and everyday anti-Semitism was quite high - not like in 1948 or during the “Doctors’ Plot,” but still sufficient: some universities did not accept Jews, and sometimes problems arose when getting a job.

After perestroika, the dam broke, newspapers were sold on every corner and leaflets were distributed, where the word “Yid” was freely used, but at the same time the level of anti-Semitism fell, at least as far as school and work were concerned.

It’s somehow strange, they object to me, why then are they so actively fighting against offensive words in the USA? Maybe the example given is an exception that confirms the rule? After all, it is obvious that the reduction of homophobia and racism in America went hand in hand with the rejection of offensive words!

However, everything is not so simple. The history of “bad words” in America is much more complex than it seems today to adherents of language purity and followers of the Facebook abuse team . The struggle for civil rights knew different language strategies - for example, the word queer was originally a swear word for gays, but has been recoded into a completely academic term, devoid of any negative connotations.

Что же касается слов, которые сегодня считаются однозначно плохими — прежде всего n- word , пресловутого nigger , — то борьба за расовое равноправие и против расизма началась не с борьбы за чистоту языка: в шестидесятые годы люди прежде всего выступали против сегрегации, ущемления избирательных прав African Americans and other forms of discrimination. The Black Panthers had many grievances against the white majority - and linguistic issues were certainly not at the forefront. In those days, the expression “ African- American ” itself was not at all an obligatory part of the language of fighters against racism; it came into speech later.

(In parentheses, I note that calls to abandon the word “negro” because it resembles the English n- word do not seem particularly adequate to me: we do not demand that the Czechs and Poles abandon their word for Jew because it sounds like offensive Russian word “zhid”? Yes, I shudder every time my friends from these countries introduce me as pisarz rosyjsko-żydowski (Russian-Jewish writer) - but this is my problem, not the problem of the Czechs and Poles. nigger всегда переводился на русский как «черномазый», и поэтому требовать заменить слово «негр» словом «черный» — это проявлять лингвистическую глухоту.)

In other words, it seems to me that the struggle in the field of legislation, the practice of applying laws and social practices in general should precede the struggle for the purity of the language. First, we must ensure that blacks in the South are allowed on the same buses as whites and at the polls, and then we can fight to be called African-Americans.

Unfortunately, today in Russia many people prefer to fight xenophobia in forms other than those chosen by American civil rights activists in the sixties - polemics for the purity of language usually take place among “our own people,” that is, people whom we do not particularly suspect in xenophobia. Conducting such a debate is much easier than actually fighting for the rights of minorities or women, plus you can feel a little like you are on an American campus (which, of course, is much more pleasant than knowing that you live in a rather xenophobic country).

A good example of two different strategies is a comparison of last year’s “Ain’t Afraid to Say” campaign and the “Chicksgate” that happened a little earlier. I also think that using the word “chick” in the media (or on media Twitter) is insensitive, to say the least. But the scandal that occurred after Meduza’s unsuccessful tweet remained an anecdotal event in the life of the media community, but the publication of stories under the hashtag #I’m not afraid to say actually did a lot to rethink the problem of violence and the situation of women in Russia.

I’m not saying that you shouldn’t react to words - we are all living people, and most likely, if I hear an offensive word that has real racism or homophobia behind it, I will also be indignant. But it is important to remember that real racism does not always involve the use of taboo words, just as the use of words does not necessarily signal xenophobia.

The struggle with words attracts with deceptive ease, emotional and physical safety - and thereby draws energy away from solving serious problems.

It seems to me that there is some bitter irony in the fact that in a country with the highest level of family and gender-based violence, in a country where the “Dima Yakovlev Law” and the law on gay propaganda were adopted, in a country where in one of its subjects The federations are now torture and kill homosexuals, people are hoarsely argue whether they can say “Negro” and “fag”.

What, seriously? Do we have any other problems?

I wouldn’t like to think that we do this because we have lost faith that we can change anything more serious than word usage. So let's not lose hope for change and remember that the fight against xenophobia begins with the fight for civil rights and against discrimination, and not with the fight against “bad words.”