[GCFL-discuss] Re: Offended by Language

[gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net]

Since we seem to have the beginnings of a nice, balanced discussion
going, I'm going to respond on the side point of whether the word
"peckerwood" is offensive (see Kateinmo's well-written comments).
Basically, I resent the idea that "ethically challenged politicians who
couldn't pass the ninth-grade biology if their lives depended on it" are
especially representative of rural people, or even of people who don't
have a lot of advanced education, much less of any particular ethnic
category. There are lots of very sensible rural people without much
formal education who can see right through this nonsense, so let's not
blame them for any particular brand of idiocy that may pop up in
Congress. Most of these "folksy" politicians are just acting for the
camera -- they have nice vacation homes and plenty of investments on Wall
Street.

I haven't looked it up in the dictionary, but "peckerwood" commonly has
meanings of backwoods, uneducated, dumb or unsophisticated. It is
sometimes used by people with a high epidermal melanin concentration to
refer to someone with a pale complexion (known in American mythology by
the quaint label of "white." See II Kings 5:27 for why nobody should want
to call themselves "white." Or black, for that matter.) I would say that
James Earl Jones' use of the word in MATEWAN was fairly appropriate --
especially since he was more insulted that he had been called a "scab"
than if he had been called "nigger." Anyway, it was historically accurate
for the time and place represented.

Most to the point: these hypocritical legislators are NOT stupid or
unsophisticated. They indulged in a calculated, cunning, sophisticated
maneuver for their own reasons.

Siarlys