“But if you can say the N-word, why can’t we?”
This is a question I’ve heard far too often in school. Many teachers have long stood by the notion that they should be able to say the N-word and other slurs while teaching. Although some teachers may mean well, opting to say it to show students firsthand how damaging it is, they fail to realize the racial ramifications it can have in the classroom.
Using demeaning slurs like the N-word can inadvertently hurt and humiliate students who come from communities historically targeted by such language. In today’s educational environment, teachers have the tools necessary to teach the significance of the word without passing on the trauma it brings.
One person who shares this sentiment is Mount Mercy University Director of DEI Dr. Charles Martin-Stanley II. He encourages educators not only to refrain from using the word but also to explain to students why they do not say it. Being told not to say it but then hearing an authoritative figure repeat the slur can confuse younger children.
To Martin-Stanley II, teaching with the word and saying it is like saying, “Don’t touch the stove,” but then touching the stove. By explaining why they don’t say it, teachers can avoid the “You just said it, so why can’t I?” conversation.
Martin-Stanley II has even come across white students that still use the word “colored,” suggesting we still have a long way to go before such racially taboo words are phased out.
Some may argue that removing slurs like the N-word in the classroom setting will remove an author’s initial intent, such as in “To Kill a Mockingbird.” However, Martin-Stanley II argues, “it is impossible to forget how raw that word is.” Students can still grasp the impact of the word without potentially harming other students.
Depending on the student’s age or the context, saying slurs can traumatize them. Martin-Stanley II said schools should have policies and guidelines to provide ethical and social support while still fostering an environment for learning. He recommends having a discussion beforehand about the significance of the word to mitigate harm.
Others in class or the media have questioned why Black people can say it but white people cannot. Martin-Stanley II believes another conversation worth having is the difference between how Black and white Americans use the racial slur.
RELATED: Opinion | History education must be protected from Iowa Republicans
Black Americans have tried to shift the power of the N-word — something historically and currently used to demean them — by using it into a term of endearment. This often involves replacing the “hard r” with an “a.” The word is rarely used to dehumanize in these contexts. However, white Americans should not be allowed to say it because of the racial vitriol it carries when they do.
The N-word has been used in many facets of Black entertainment, but non-Black Americans must understand the difference between a Black person using it in a song and a teacher saying it in the classroom.
Black authors have also utilized the word to expose America’s racist underbelly in their works, such as Toni Morrison and James Baldwin. Diversifying the curriculum to incorporate these works can further explain why this word and others like it need to be removed from classrooms.
However, some have used the argument for removing the N-word nefariously as a means to further their hidden agenda: removing academic works that critically analyze America’s racist past.
Martin-Stanley II says this strategy perpetuates the narrative of a post-racial society, which is not true. This problematic approach erases Black history and deprives the new generation of exposure to diverse voices. He argues we need these works to stress the importance of the word without saying it.
By using these academic pieces, Martin-Stanley II states, we can help students understand where we’ve been and ensure we don’t go back.