Exempt by association?

Lately, there has been a lot of controversy regarding the classic novel, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and the use of the "N" word (to read more click here). Many people feel that exposing our youth to this type of language is unacceptable and that the book should be censored by replacing the "N" word with the word "slave". Though people all over the country have been reacting strongly to this proposal, one of the most famous reactions was that of Roger Ebert. Ebert posted a tweet that said, "I'd rather be called a [N-word] than a slave." Many people found this tweet offensive because Ebert is not black and would never have to deal with being called either name (click here to see one reader's response). However, others argue that he does have the right to make this statement because he is married to a black woman. This argument brings up the bigger issue of whether or not a person can be exempt from being called a racist because they are associated with a person of color. For example, after Obama was elected president, I heard the excuse "I'm not a racist- I voted for Obama!" as a very common argument when anyone was accused of being a racist. Even though many people accept this as a good enough excuse and move on, I don't think it is a reason to make racist remarks.

This idea of being exempt by association applies to things other than racism, such as using the "R" word. I am a huge proponent of not using the word "retarded" when referring to people with disabilities or any time, so whenever any of my friends uses it, I mention to them that they shouldn't say that. It's shocking how many times I've heard the excuse, "Well, I have a cousin with special needs so it's fine" or something along those lines. But, I don't think there is any excuse to ever use that word. I think the same rule goes along with the N-word- just because you know or support a person of color does not mean you have the right to use racist language.

P.S. If you want to join the campaign against the R-word, click here