I’ve recently posted twice about language and social justice. So here’s the post where we really take a spin – this time it’s not about the language of the majority, it’s about the language of the minority.
Reclaimatory language is interesting in part because it is deliberately taking an offensive word and claiming it, giving it a new definition.
The first time I remember seeing this was when a friend of mine proudly proclaimed she was a bitch – a Babe In Total Control of Herself. I didn’t get it at the time, really. I think we all took it as a titilating excuse to say a naughty word and revel in the fact that we were female and believed ourselves strong because of that. I guess I should amend that – I didn’t get it on the high theoretical plane, but on the easier to understand plane of our emotions, I understood. We made it our word, a word about how we were cool, hip, smart, and daring.
You hear this sense of reclaiming language in other situations. People who are black calling each other ‘nigga’. Women re-defining bitch to suit their meaning, a la Meredith Brook’s song titled ‘Bitch’. People with disabilities calling themselves ‘crips’ and talking about ‘crip theory’.
So what is it, this reclaimation?
It’s owning the word that gets thrown at you as a slur. Taking it in and re-making it into your own self-image. Replacing the negative connotations that the original speaker may have intended with meanings that actually fit you.
It can come off as a slap in the face, offensive and harsh, but that’s part of the intent. It’s to alert the hearer that you aren’t defined by the way someone else means that word. You refuse to be defined by ‘them’. It also serves to make people re-think their internalized definitions to words. If you think a cripple is someone who is so disabled they can’t do anything, and meet someone who proudly calls herself a crip…and works a fulltime job, or takes care of her household, or so on…you have to re-think what a cripple is.
So we change the language. Yes, there will still be bigoted people who buy into the older meaning…but we can change that meaning in people whose thinking is more flexible. And we can change that meaning in ourselves.
Brilliant Mind Broken Body 
I’ve been considering what you’ve written. I would say there is a significant difference between “owning” or “reclaiming” a word and reclaiming a word as an intention to slap someone in the face.
Words are by their nature fluid in meaning. Redefining a word to provide it an uplifting and empowering meaning is one thing–something I can support. It is a personal act, one which is hoped to influence others into reconsidering the meaning of the words we use and their affect on others. When used as a form of verbal assault, however, you are perpetuating the problem. Lashing out because of slurs may be a natural human reaction, but it’s not beneficial to either party. It’s not education. It’s not uplifting. It’s using force on others; just reversing who the slur is being used against.
Intention is the distinction I would make. Are you reclaiming the word to uplift yourself (with the hope that, in doing so, you may positively influence others) or are you doing it to affront and offend? Those are two very different actions.
By its nature, reclaiming is an act of deviance. At root, the intention is to say that the meaning the general public gives the word is wrong.
As such, I’d say that the difference you’ve deliniated is more like points on a continuum. Part of why reclamation can come off as a slap in the face is because the words being reclaimed are – or were – offensive. If I choose to call myself a bitch, defiantly owning the word and re-defining it to mean ‘a woman of strength and character’, the fact that I have chosen an offensive word to call myself can come off as a slap in the fact to people who are sensitive to language.
It also can be a way to hit back at people who use slurs. Oh, you want to call me a bitch, do you? Well, if that’s what you like calling women who are stronger than you are, then I guess I am. Bitch. Hmm, it’s got kind of a nice ring to it. And that’s when it becomes an act of deliberate push-back, a cry of defiance. You can’t hurt me with that word because I’ve re-defined it.
We don’t have to be just bringers of good will, passive when we’re attacked. I think it’s okay – perhaps even good – to hit back now and again.
When it comes to cultural meanings, no one is innocent. Part of reclaiming a slur is saying that because the word has a different meaning, it is no longer offensive. Now, that will offend people who have clung to the old meaning sometimes…but that means they’re supporting the old meaning that I’m trying to obliterate. Offending by reclaiming is intended to make people stop and re-think what the word means.
I agree the distinction represents a continuum, but I also think where on the continuum you are matters. Some acts of reclamation are intentionally positive. If you take “bitch” and change the meaning to be a powerful woman, then you are reclaiming a slur that was flung at you and making it positive. (I’ve done that myself. With “bitch” occassionally, but more often with “weird,” which becomes creative, eccentric, and orginal as I redefine it.)
If, on the other hand, you take “bitch” and change the meaning to be a man-hating woman bent on putting men into subservient positions with no ability to vote, own property, or hold positions of power, then you’re taking something negative and making it (arguably) more negative.
That example is somewhat exaggerated (meaning it’s rare, but it does happen). My point is that–while “good” and “bad” are somewhat subjective–if an act of reclamation embraces a different bad, then you’ve gone too far along the continuum. A more common example is how some people use the n-word to refer to themselves and their peers as gang-bangers who celebrate killing cops and raping women; the meaning is different from the original, but no better and no worse a thing to strive for.
Neither of these examples furthers the interests of women or people of color respectively. Worse, in some sense they “prove” the stereotypes were along the right track, but that the reality is worse than what the original slur-slinger had imagined. An act of reclamation that goes too far along the continuum does more damage than the original slur; it’s not an act of empowerment, just another abuse of power.
[…] common among other responders. Much like the only-we-can-use-that-word-for-us discussion on reclaiming language, the argument about art tends to be that only people who have an experience can make art about that […]
I’m currently writing a paper on discriminatory language and why it’s an issue for my senior English class and I came across this entry in my research. This point of view really intrigued me. I showed this to my teacher when I was trying to explain my findings and it created a class discussion. Our class ultimately supported the idea of reclaiming these words with positive definitions because it gave the person being offended a sort of power over the offender.
I just thought you should know that you sparked a great discussion… and also, your blog is great.
I’m glad you found that post educational, and that your classmates were supportive of the idea. Thank you for telling me about this. It’s heartening to know I reach people!
~Kali
[…] Mind, Broken Body: Social Justice–Reclaiming Language 41.927037 -73.997361 Rate this:Share this:Share on TumblrMoreEmail Pin ItDiggLike this:LikeBe the […]