“Nevertheless, She Persisted”: A Twist To Linguistics Appropriation
- Liana Wadhwani
- Nov 25, 2020
- 3 min read
On February 7th, 2017, Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts spoke out against electing Senator Jeff Sessions as Attorney General due to his civil rights record. Senator Warren justified her claim by reading a letter sent by Coretta Scott King, an author, civil rights activist, and the wife of Martin Luther King Jr. The letter states, “Mr. SESSIONS' conduct as U.S. Attorney, from his politically-motivated voting fraud prosecutions to his indifference toward criminal violations of civil rights laws, indicates that he lacks the temperament, fairness, and judgment to be a federal judge.” As Senator Warren continued to read the letter, Senator Mitch McConnell interrupted her and accused her of “impugning” the intentions of Senator Sessions. Subsequently, the Senate voted to silence Senator Warrens for the rest of Sessions' confirmation hearings. Following the hearing to silence Senator Warrens, Senator McConnell said, “Senator Warren was giving a lengthy speech. She had appeared to violate the rule. She was warned. She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted.” Rather than taking this phrase to be sexist, women worldwide came together and made it their own. Changing the discriminatory remark to a powerful phrase conveying the fortitude of a female voice. Since then, the motto has been proudly chanted by women all over the world and was the theme for Women’s History month back in 2018.
Linguistic appropriation is when a marginalized or oppressed group takes perjorizing language and makes it their own. This, in turn, gives power back to the community. It is simply an act of resistance. These communities refuse to be subjugated by the words of people who don’t know them. They take power into their own hands. While linguistics appropriation is used more often today, the phenomenon has existed throughout history. For example, the French revolutionary group, the sansculottes, reappropriated “sansculottes,” the group's name. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the original definition was “one wearing trousers instead of knee-breeches,” conveying the person’s lower-class status. However, towards the end of the revolution, many educated men adopted the term to represent their patriotism and political views. While the word still means “one without knee-breeches, '' it also marks a revolutionary group that changed France's history forever. Yet, given the long history of reappropriation, it wasn’t until 2009 that the Oxford English Dictionary added ‘reappropriation’ to the lexicon.
More recently, linguistic appropriation has made a huge impact in the LGBTQ+ community. Homophobia and anti-LGBTQ+ are pressing issues, and many people who identify with the community continue to face discrimination. Before the 1980’s the slur ‘queer’ denoted someone strange and peculiar. At the same time, the AIDS epidemic hit, and the word was reappropriated by the LGBTQ+ community to represent one's sexuality. There is no negative connotation attached to it anymore. In 1990, an anonymous queer writer wrote, “Yeah, QUEER can be a rough word, but it is also a sly and ironic weapon we can steal from the homophobe's hands and use against him.” The power of words/words is so strong. So why accept people who treat you poorly? There is always another option, and that option is to make it your own. Reclaiming the word queer was more than about self-respect. It was a way of opposing the oppressor and showing refusal to assimilate.
There are different approaches to reappropriation. One aim of reappropriation is to neutralize a word so that it neither carries a negative or positive meaning (i.e., the noun ‘queer’). Another approach is that you change the pejorized meaning and make the slur positive—for example, the colloquial term savage. In the 21st century, “you’re such a savage” has a positive meaning, which conveys someone is cool.
A common concern about reappropriation is that the word’s original meaning can never truly be erased. For example, while savage means ‘cool’, it still also means ‘uncivilized’ and ‘barbaric.’ It is true that there will always be people who use the original derogatory slur. But to not reappropriate the word is to let those people win and to let the slur silence you.
Language is so powerful, and people can show both love and hatred with just a single word. Saying something demeaning is just as hurtful, if not more, as punching someone in the face. Words linger and have an everlasting impact. In a way, linguistics reappropriation is a way to stand up for yourself.
Info taken from:
image from:
This is excellent. I must be honest - I struggle with the work "queer" as I remember when this was used as a slur. But this was a great discussion. The way that words are reappropriated is fascinating.
love it! super interesting and inspirational