tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6937848248469121586.post8482707674640230121..comments2023-12-24T19:38:00.242-08:00Comments on Mendelson's Memos: Thoughts on the Brett Ratner mess: When explicit slurs become part of everyday language and how to deal with their casual and out-of-context use.Scott Mendelsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08131426080984100749noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6937848248469121586.post-23509019077196245952011-11-09T15:30:01.704-08:002011-11-09T15:30:01.704-08:00To quote George Carlin "they are only words.....To quote George Carlin "they are only words....they are not bad or good they are simply words."revgabenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6937848248469121586.post-23500922788391515062011-11-09T15:27:59.148-08:002011-11-09T15:27:59.148-08:00Can't people just grow up and quit acting like...Can't people just grow up and quit acting like fags?revgabenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6937848248469121586.post-46373589066650724632011-11-09T07:06:31.785-08:002011-11-09T07:06:31.785-08:00Ratner's use of them isn't the same as Tar...Ratner's use of them isn't the same as Tarantino or Scorsese. Ratner didn't do this in the context of a film. He did it while speaking for himself. You can't compare them that way, especially since in the case of "Taxi Driver," Scorsese's use of it really originated in the script that was written by Paul Schrader. So, if anyone should have been taken to task, it should have been Schrader. But again, the instances are not remotely the same.Keith Emrollnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6937848248469121586.post-556861699477110822011-11-08T12:31:32.876-08:002011-11-08T12:31:32.876-08:00When I say 'you can', I mean it is technic...When I say 'you can', I mean it is technically possible, not that it is appropriate or polite, or (at this point in time at last) socially acceptable.Scott Mendelsonhttp://scottalanmendelson.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6937848248469121586.post-71671266214824875522011-11-08T12:30:17.616-08:002011-11-08T12:30:17.616-08:00This is a great and philosophically very interesti...This is a great and philosophically very interesting article. Hopefully HuffPo will post it but I'm going to assume that they won't. Anyways, to the topic at hand, I completely agree with the distinction that you bring up. I have tried to make the same point in personal discussions with friends about the 'n-word' versus the 'f-word' (I personally choose to not use or even write slurs because I can usually make my point without using them) and the big difference between them. I also just want to clarify that I have never defended the use of the 'f-word' but I do agree that it is, by nature, different by virtue of the history of its meaning (originally being used to refer to a bundle of sticks and then a loose cigarette) and the fact that it was not originally created or used as a slur rather becoming one over time. As far as other directors using slurs, QT famously dropped the 'n-bomb' in Pulp Fiction and even the great Scorsese dropped it in Taxi Driver but neither of them has received this kind of backlash. I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head in that Ratner is an easy target because of the lack of respect he gets in the film community (not that he deserves it (although I too enjoyed Red Dragon)). Todd Phil also makes an interesting contribution noting the somewhat racially charged nature of his comments about Olivia Munn (noting that he 'banged' her before she was Asian). I think he's probably just been out of the public eye for a little bit and has probably lost the little tact that he had before achieving his success. Poor choice of words on his part and he should definitely chill out.7DaiseAWeeknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6937848248469121586.post-2376485463619727332011-11-08T12:16:22.084-08:002011-11-08T12:16:22.084-08:00Chris Nolan would not say "rehearsals are for...Chris Nolan would not say "rehearsals are for fags", and if he did, he would get slaughtered. Maybe Tarantino, but let's be a little more realistic to the personalities you bring up. You are taking the history of the person saying it out of the context. This statement comes in a week where he sexually and racially disparaged Olivia Munn and then admitted he lied about "banging" her. Not to mention that he was so quick to defend himself over her accusation of an anonymous director masturbating during an audition. Who in their right mind would read that description and think, "That's me!"Todd Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6937848248469121586.post-20700472351950106722011-11-08T12:13:43.255-08:002011-11-08T12:13:43.255-08:00"Point being, you can call someone or somethi..."Point being, you can call someone or something a 'fag' without referring to homosexuality. You probably shouldn't, as doing so shows either ignorance of the word's origins or an indifference to its real meaning, but you can."<br /><br />No. No you can't. It's a word unacceptable in "polite" company and always has been. And yes if QT is rolling around life dropping "N" words at the same level he uses them in film then he would be an ignorant bigot. But I strongly doubt that he does. Ratner has been properly chastised. Any distinction you are trying to create is pointless.Billhttp://pulse.yahoo.com/_3XCHNM6LV6SRVFXIWRUWJPQM5Qnoreply@blogger.com