Where’s the Blank-word?

Is it just me, or is anyone else getting tired of the incessant replay and repetition of Don Imus’ insensitive remarks concerning the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team? Don’t get me wrong. He needs to be taken to task for what he said. What I am concerned about is that what he said is being republished by the media.

The media won’t use the n-word, the f-word, or the j-word. I assume the broadcast media also will not use any of the seven-dirty words made famous by George Carlin. Why does the media feel it is okay to repeatedly use the h-word? Is there some hierarchy of offensive words that requires some of them to be blanked out while others are not? Is there a double-standard at work here that allows words that are derogatory toward women to be repeated when other offensive words are not? If so, who decides?

I can see an argument for why offensive remarks should be repeated. Perhaps, only by repeating them will people come to understand how they are offensive. If we hear the audio or video of offensive statements, we can better judge from the inflection of the voice or the expression on the speaker’s face the intent with which they were delivered and better determine whether the inevitable apology was sincere. But if this is an argument in favor of repeating Don Imus’s remarks, why is it not an argument for repeating Michael Richard’s offensive diatribe?

The reason, of course, is because to re-play Michael Richard’s remarks would have caused more hurt to more people and in direct and subtle ways would have legitimized the devaluation of a race. Which brings me back to my earlier point: Do members of the media think that re-playing Don Imus’s remarks are not hurtful to anyone other than the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team? In my opinion, by republishing such remarks the media is a party to the devaluation of women generally and the accomplishment of female athletes in particular. They should be ashamed.

— Sharon K. Sandeen