04/04/12: Accepting the word ‘Obamacare’

This op-ed appeared in The Virginian-Pilot on the date shown.

SORRY, Mr. President, but I disagree.

The re-election campaign of Barack Obama has decided to embrace the heretofore pejorative “Obamacare” in reference to the Affordable Care Act, the sweeping health care reform legislation enacted by Congress. The campaign believes it can take the sting out of the term by using it themselves.

That’s worked so well for other terms with negative connotations. When I heard the campaign’s announcement, two of those terms immediately jumped to mind.

A couple of weeks ago, there was a panel discussion in Norfolk on the use of the “Q” word. In the 1990s, a group of political activists within the LGBT community decided to claim the term “queer” for themselves. Groups across the country renamed themselves; for example, the Gay Student Union became the Queer Student Union at the University of Virginia.

Twenty-plus years after Queer Nation was formed, the term remains the subject of debate within the LGBT community. And outside of the community, the use of the term remains mostly negative. The mayor of Troy, Mich., was forced to apologize for posting on her Facebook page last summer, “I think I am going to throw away my Love New York carrying bag now that queers can get married there.”

The mayor, even though using the term derisively, claimed it wasn’t offensive because gays use it to refer to themselves.

Sound familiar?

The same excuse is used to justify the n-word. At least the media hasn’t quite bought into the acceptability of that term — yet. A similar debate over the usage of the n-word, in various forms, rages within the black community. It even has a listing in the Urban Dictionary, its use popularized by rap and hip-hop artists.

I see two issues with these attempts to embrace words that entered our lexicon as slurs.

First, it gives license to those who use them as slurs to do so in the public sphere. Do a Google search on the three terms I’ve mentioned. How many of the uses are positive? How many are negative?

Second, it makes communication more difficult. How, exactly, is the writer or speaker using the term? Is there a hidden meaning?

I find the use of all three terms offensive. And outside of this column, you’ll not find me using them.

~

My column last week elicited some interesting email. One theme common to those who wanted to argue in favor of Stand Your Ground laws was the issue of black outrage over the killing of Trayvon Martin. Most of them pointed to what they see as the lack of black outrage over black-on-black killings.

Let me be very clear: There is plenty of outrage within the black community over black-on-black killings. But unless it comes from the likes of Bill Cosby, it doesn’t make the news.

The murder of my brother by another black man taught me a lot about how such killings are handled by the system. My family was urged by everyone — from the police, to the prosecutors, to friends with similar experiences — to stay involved and on top of the case; otherwise, the killer might very well go free. We did as we were told — and the murderer is still in prison.

It is possible to be outraged both by the Martin case and cases like my brother’s.