On Sunday’s broadcast of CNN’s “Reliable Sources,” Soledad O’Brien, a former CNN host, made a request for journalists to stop using the word “Thug” as it can be equated to using the “N” word. O’Brien claimed using the word “thug” was not accurate in describing the situation and journalists debating over thug and thuggery was “naive.” She stated that Baltimore City Councilman Carl Stokes was telling Ernie Barnett that “thug is a proxy and a word we use instead of the ‘N’ word.” In her opinion, she believes that to be true.
She went on to say she could not think of an incident where there was a headline that used the word “thug” unless it was in regard to inner city individuals – meaning blacks. O’Brien provided examples of headlines reporting riots after sports events where the word was not used in describing those who started fires and destroyed property. Senso countered O’Brien stating there is no racial connotation contained in the dictionary under the definition of “thug.”
So, where has this notion that the word “thug” is now the new “N” word? It came from none other than Richard Sherman, who plays for the Seattle Seahawks, according to O’Brien.
She claims that journalists should use words that accurately describe what is happening.
The word “thug” actually originated from the cult group “Thuggees” out of India. It was a group known for its violence and criminal activities. So, regardless of color, if a group of individuals is engaged in violence and criminal activities, the word “thug” is appropriate.
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “thug” as “a brutal ruffian or assassin: gangster, tough.”
Since Sherman, who is black, denounced the word “thug,” calling it a replacement for the “N” word, the lapdog liberal O’Brien is jumping on the bandwagon to promote more political correctness started by an overpaid black athlete who probably has no idea where or how the “N” word got started nor the origination of the word “thug.” Athletes, Hollyweird actors, and those in the “public eye” are great at starting these PC spins on words leading to ridiculous on-air discussions on usage as a racial slur. Who can forget all the hoopla over the “N” word with an “ah” compared to the “N” word with an “er” argument?
O’Brien added, “Journalists should think about a word that actually doesn’t have a lot of nuances and isn’t specific, but somehow seems to be used a lot when talking about African-Americans.”
When talking about a situation, one should use words that accurately describe it. It should be the same with people. Riot definitely describes what was happening in Baltimore and “thug” accurately describes those participating in rioting. Not all protesters were rioting; therefore, not all rioters were “thugs.”
Maybe O’Brien might like the word “heathen” better. There’s always “barbarian, uncivilized, hoodlum, criminal, punk, gangster, or savage.” More than likely, none of those would be acceptable either.
It’s interesting how “slurs” are always a one-way street. It’s perfectly acceptable for blacks to use the words “cracker, whitey, white bread, honky, vanilla” or any other slang to depict whites and the same goes for Hispanics. However, the simplest, most accurate description of aggressive individuals engaging in violence and criminal activities using the word “thug” is now just a substitute for the “N” word. Hispanic individuals engaging in the same behavior, as well as white individuals, are accurately described as “thugs.”
Along the same lines, liberals have no problem issuing slurs against conservatives but bristle up like a porcupine when it’s thrown their way. It’s a tactic of deflection. It’s the “okay for me, but not for thee” attitude.
“Thug” has also been used to describe federal agents who are aggressive and violate individual God-given rights guaranteed in the Constitution – “jackbooted thugs,” “federal thugs,” and “government thugs.”
Recently, this writer used the word “thugs” in describing those individuals engaged in rioting, looting, arson and other criminal activities in Baltimore. It was accurate, succinct, and in no way racial. As the old saying goes, “if the shoe fits….” In the examples that O’Brien used, this writer would have referred to those individuals as “thugs” as well.
This really isn’t about race at all. It is another liberal ploy to censor the use of certain words in order to deflect from a real problem – violence among out of control individuals, particularly black individuals, in cities in America today spurred on by the likes of race-baiter Al Sharpton. Liberals want Americans to believe that those who riot, loot, pillage and engage in criminal activities have grievances that need to be addressed thereby “justifying” this type of activity. Removing the negative connotation of “thug” is a measure to go along with that position.
Every individual has the right to “peaceably assemble”; but, no one has the right to steal someone else’s property, violate someone else’s body, or destroy public and private property. It doesn’t matter what grievance those individuals may have. Their grievance, real or perceived, does not provide impunity for criminal activity or a “pass” on thuggery.
Let’s face the fact there has developed a “thug” culture in America. It is dangerous, criminal, out of control and needs to be addressed regardless of race. Listen to any music described as “gangster rap.” It glamorizes “thug” behavior to the point that it is emulated as an attainment of some type of status, instead of being viewed accurately as aggressive, violent, criminal behavior. It promotes inappropriate dress as well. And, yes, it is inappropriate to appear in public with your pants below your backside exposing your underwear. Everyone is entitled to “freedom of expression” until it crosses the line into criminal behavior, socially unacceptable practices, and indecency.
Way back when, it was the “N” word that was unacceptable when used by whites using the “er” pronunciation while blacks using the “N” word with the “ah” pronunciation was acceptable. Just yesterday or so it seems, it was suggested that girls should not use the word “bossy” and it should be banned. There was also some mention of the “R” word (retarded) being used inappropriately. What will the word for tomorrow be that liberals will decide should be censored?