“Macaca” II: Selective Outrage

Two days ago I referred to the overheated, strained, partisan response to a dumb comment (“Macaca”) Sen. George Allen directed at a young Indian-American student who has been “tracking” his campaign for rival candidate Jim Webb.

Note, by contrast, the silence from these and related quarters about the treatment of Ruth Malhorta, an Indian-American student who dared to challenge liberal orthodoxy at Georgia Tech. Faced with the prospect of a federal lawsuit, Georgia Tech has just agreed to drop or amend its speech code.

Ms. Mahorta was not called “macaca,” whatever that may mean. Instead, as the Atlanta Constitution reported yesterday:

Some fellow students threatened to choke her between classes. Others said they would throw acid on her at Tech’s graduation.

Someone stuffed her campus mailbox with Twinkies snack cakes — implying that she was yellow on the outside (Malhotra is of Indian descent) but white on the inside.

Her lawsuit challenges Tech on its campus policies aimed at protecting students from intolerance.

Elite colleges “protecting students from intolerance” increasingly calls to mind the old humorous non-sequitur: “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you.”

But there can be no doubt that Ms. Malhorta and her colleagues were a subversive threat to the politically correct status quo, which earned them a visit from the “diversity” police:

Her group’s “diversity bake sale” — which charged students different prices depending on their race and gender to protest affirmative action — garnered a visit from the Tech police.

No wonder.

Say What? (28)

  1. actus August 18, 2006 at 12:07 pm | | Reply

    Can you believe the media pays more attention to a senate candidate thought to be presidential material than to an undergrad? Whats wrong with people these days?

  2. Michelle Dulak Thomson August 18, 2006 at 4:35 pm | | Reply

    From the AP story FIRE linked:

    The Georgia Tech policy still bans physical assaults because of racial, ethnic or sexual identity.

    I suppose otherwise they’re OK?

  3. Dom August 18, 2006 at 9:24 pm | | Reply

    “Can you believe the media pays more attention to a senate candidate thought to be presidential material than to an undergrad? ”

    Depends on the candidate. Biden(paraphrasing) “You can’t walk into a 7-11 without an Indian accent”

    Or Clinton (paraphrasing again) “If gandhi were alive, he’d own a 7-11”

  4. sharon August 18, 2006 at 9:57 pm | | Reply

    I can’t believe the media pays attention to half the things it does. Like making “macaca” a racial epithet.

  5. actus August 18, 2006 at 11:19 pm | | Reply

    “Or Clinton (paraphrasing again) “If gandhi were alive, he’d own a 7-11″”

    See I saw both of those on the media. But they did lack the mean spirited anti-foreigness of Allen.

  6. Cobra August 19, 2006 at 12:08 am | | Reply

    “Macaca” is actually a very interesting term.

    If you use the description of the term as a racial epithet against Muslims in North Africa, that’s pretty telling in and of itself, considering that Allen’s mother was French Tunisian and 5 languages were spoken in that household.

    http://mediamatters.org/items/200608170005

    If you take the dictionary definition of “Macaca”

    >>>”Noun

    1. Macaques; rhesus monkeys”

    http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/translation/macaca

    …then I guess the only thing that would make it WORSE is to add “porch” as a modifier.

    Not that I can read Allen’s mind or anything like that.

    –Cobra

    BTW, Love the title of this thread, John.

  7. sharon August 19, 2006 at 11:21 am | | Reply

    Wait…so, if I call you “macaca” in a not “mean-spirited way,” then it is excusable?

  8. actus August 19, 2006 at 12:49 pm | | Reply

    “Wait…so, if I call you “macaca” in a not “mean-spirited way,” then it is excusable”

    Ya. I’m just having a hard time thinking of how you’d do it.

  9. Dom August 19, 2006 at 5:45 pm | | Reply

    And here, just recently, is Andrew Young, Cater’s ambassador to the UN”

    “Andrew Young, the American civil rights leader who was hired by Wal- Mart Stores to improve its public image, has resigned from that post after telling an African-American newspaper that Jewish, Arab and Korean shop owners had “ripped off” urban communities for years, “selling us stale bread, and bad meat and wilted vegetables.”

    In the interview, published Thursday in The Los Angeles Sentinel, a weekly, Young said Wal-Mart should displace mom-and-pop stores in urban neighborhoods.

    “You see, those are the people who have been overcharging us,” he said of the owners of the small stores, “and they sold out and moved to Florida. I think they’ve ripped off our communities enough. First it was Jews, then it was Koreans and now it’s Arabs.”

  10. sharon August 21, 2006 at 7:06 am | | Reply

    “Ya. I’m just having a hard time thinking of how you’d do it.”

    I have the same problem with people using the N-word in a non-“mean-spirited way,” but there are evidently people who believe it can be done.

    And Dom, you don’t understand. Stereotyping Jewish, Arab, and Korean shop owners was probably not done in a mean-spirited way, either. Why resign?

  11. actus August 21, 2006 at 10:35 am | | Reply

    “I have the same problem with people using the N-word in a non-“mean-spirited way,” but there are evidently people who believe it can be done.”

    I actually found a way with the macaca. Its the way we’re all doing it here. We’re not making fun of anyone for having a foreign sounding name.

  12. JSinger August 21, 2006 at 6:21 pm | | Reply

    Her name, by the way, is “Malhotra”, not “Malhorta” or “Mahorta”. It’s a fairly common Indian name, best known in this country from Columbus Blue Jackets center Manny Malhotra.

  13. sharon August 21, 2006 at 11:49 pm | | Reply

    “I actually found a way with the macaca. Its the way we’re all doing it here. We’re not making fun of anyone for having a foreign sounding name.”

    Actually, I think if I ran around calling my homies “macaca” that wouldn’t be “mean-spirited” either, would it? That’s the logic with the N-word users.

  14. Cobra August 22, 2006 at 9:23 am | | Reply

    Sharon writes:

    >>>”Actually, I think if I ran around calling my homies “macaca” that wouldn’t be “mean-spirited” either, would it?”

    Do you think Sen. George Allen considered S.R. Sidarth his “homie?”

    –Cobra

  15. sharon August 22, 2006 at 3:07 pm | | Reply

    Nope, but I was addressing Actus’ claim that the N-word can be used in a not “mean-spirited way.” Was Allen “mean-spirited”? Perhaps. But would he have been less “mean-spirited” had he addressed Sidarth as “him” or “you”? Probably not, but the flap about “macaca” would just be caca.

  16. actus August 22, 2006 at 5:44 pm | | Reply

    “Nope, but I was addressing Actus’ claim that the N-word can be used in a not “mean-spirited way.””

    I made no such claim.

  17. sharon August 23, 2006 at 7:52 am | | Reply

    So, you didn’t try to distinguish between Hillary Clinton saying Gandhi would be running a 7/11 and Allen’s comment? You didn’t say her comment “lacked the mean-spirited anti-foreigner” slant? Scroll up.

  18. sharon August 23, 2006 at 7:56 am | | Reply

    Your comment was that Allen’s remark was different because it was “mean-spirited.” I asked if it were possible to say things in a “non-mean-spirited way” and that if so, it takes the offensiveness out of the statement. Either way, “macaca” isn’t nice, but it’s not a racial epithet, either.

  19. Cobra August 23, 2006 at 6:43 pm | | Reply

    Sharon writes:

    >>>”Either way, “macaca” isn’t nice, but it’s not a racial epithet, either.”

    If you were Tunisian, like George Allen’s mother, you wouldn’t define “macaca” as you just did. Under what context do you think George Allen first heard the term, and why would he feel the need to use the term to describe Mr. Sidarth?

    –Cobra

  20. sharon August 23, 2006 at 10:02 pm | | Reply

    It’s irrelevant, Cobra. Using your theory, virtually any noun could be an epithet. To most Americans, “macaca” wouldn’t be considered one, but, as I already pointed out, would it be equally “mean-spirited” if he had called Sidarth “you” or “him”?

  21. actus August 24, 2006 at 9:48 am | | Reply

    “To most Americans, “macaca” wouldn’t be considered one, but, as I already pointed out, would it be equally “mean-spirited” if he had called Sidarth “you” or “him”?”

    It would have been mean spirited if he called him ‘different.’ Intent matters.

  22. sharon August 24, 2006 at 12:26 pm | | Reply

    Oh, I see. So now “different” is an epithet?

  23. actus August 24, 2006 at 2:35 pm | | Reply

    “Oh, I see. So now “different” is an epithet?”

    See, you’re stuck on the word. Its the intent and context that matters.

  24. sharon August 24, 2006 at 7:25 pm | | Reply

    “See, you’re stuck on the word. Its the intent and context that matters.”

    Nope, I’m not stuck on the word at all. Now you are making my point.

  25. actus August 24, 2006 at 8:28 pm | | Reply

    “Nope, I’m not stuck on the word at all”

    Ya. You’re only focusing on the word, not the ways it can be used.

  26. sharon August 24, 2006 at 11:19 pm | | Reply

    “Ya. You’re only focusing on the word, not the ways it can be used.”

    Hmm, you might want to reread my posts. Here’s a couple of examples:

    “would it be equally “mean-spirited” if he had called Sidarth “you” or “him”?”–posted 8/23 10:02 p.m.

    “But would he have been less “mean-spirited” had he addressed Sidarth as “him” or “you”? Probably not, but the flap about “macaca” would just be caca.”–posted 8/23 3:07 p.m.

    Try reading next time.

  27. actus August 25, 2006 at 12:13 am | | Reply

    “Hmm, you might want to reread my posts. Here’s a couple of examples:”

    That really doesn’t clear it up. A word can be used in a mean spirited fashion or not.

  28. sharon August 25, 2006 at 11:50 am | | Reply

    Yes, it does clear it up. Your response made my point.

Say What?