Creating a protected class, i.e. black people, embeds this idea of 'race' and further pushes minorities and other marginalized groups into these protected classes that embed an identity of helplessness, and needing us to intervene. As notable sociologist and race relations professor from Duke university stated in his paper "White logic, white methods," there is an effect of race, "this social construction of race as an unalterable characteristic places a conceptual limitation ... on the researcher's ability to understand racial dynamics" (Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, p. 6). By our own very definition of race, and thus our attempt to protect minorities through a racism rule, we are alienating and further pushing away those who we wish to protect. Silva goes on to state that race is a social construct and that within this construct we call race "the person of color does not exist outside of his or her otherness". By our own use and thus ban of the word 'nigger' we further emphasize this otherness, and alienation of minorities, and this sort of segregation and alienation of our friends, no matter what color or creed is something that drives me crazy. While the simple answer is to just say 'nigger' is racist, by mystifying and creating a protected class, as Silva showed us, it only leads to further segregation and alienation.
We can see examples of this 'other' created in articles such as "Black Feminist Archaeology", where the author, Whitney Battle-Baptiste (Professor from University of Massachusetts Amherst) discusses the impact of being 'othered' and seen as a different person. She discusses how the current depiction of african americans, specifically the intersectionality of african american women, has become "fraught with misconceptions, misgiving and stereotypes" and whether these are positive or negative, they are "fully entabled in the way women of African descent are perceived generally" (p. 40). Thus, the defintions we are creating here at GFL are creating this protected class of black people, and of minorities. We seemingly want to accept them on the surface, but there is a clear favoritism shown towards certain ethnicities due to us only chosing to protect certain ethnicities, i.e. blacks. Prof. Battle-Baptiste discusses in her article, how even when attempts are made to help and push a rhetoric more in favor of a certain ethnicity or minority, it creates countless problems, and then alienates those who it seemingly tries to protect.
Another major way in which I feel we are alienating our friends who happen to be of a certain skin pigmentation is through limiting the word 'nigger'. As everyone knows, the word 'nigger' plays a prominent role within discussion and social discourse, and by limiting one's own ability to say it, we are limiting our ability to have an open and honest discussion surrounding the topic of race.
Another major issue I hold with our ban on the word 'nigger' and the racism rule in general is that it creates an ordering of social justice, and what is and isn't ok to talk about. For those of you who don't known what intersectionality is, it's a theory created by Kimberly Crenshaw, a noted UCLA professor, that studies how different power structures interact in the lives of minorities, specifically black women, with a simple defintion by her is that it's "when African American women or any other women of colour experience either compound or overlapping discrimination" i.e. you can experience overlapping discrimination based on a multitude of characteristics, for example, a gay man may work at an office and a black woman may work at an office, but the office would be a lot less likely to hire a gay black woman than either a black woman or a gay man (Crenshaw, 2014). Now at GFL, I feel like there is a similar issue, sure we say we don't accept racism, but what about sexism? transphobia? etc. I can't call someone a nigger, but I can call them a cunt, or a 'fucking piece of shit tranny'? At what point do we draw the line, and where do we draw it? Is it ever enough? The more you try to protect certain classes of people, the less you protect anyone, as it elevates certain groups over others. This is why we shouldn't try to protect anyone, as it in fact creates an idea of otherness, embedding these horrible stereotypes and hierarchies into our minds, with certain classes being protected and other not. It's impossible to protect everyone from discrimination, so why protect anyone at all? In that scenario there can be no 'other' no person who is discriminated against more than another, and we're all equal, without true equality, we are simply enforcing ideas of a racial hierarchy.
For the other articles you got the names and the authors feel free to look them up, I ain't making a whole bibliography.