erastes

Well, I have to admit to writing for that prompt (and I tend to think of them as prompts rather than kinks or deviancies because some of the ones posted simply make me go o.O) and I did write blood treachery. I wrote Fenrir/Narcissa and I hopefully wrote a piece that had the same tone as the word.

I'm not speaking for anyone else in the comm., anyone else who's white, female, in their twenties, English, etc., but whereas I knew the word was a word for something bad, I didn't realise that the word itself was considered inherently racist. Does that make sense? I used the analogy to the word stupid earlier, that calling someone stupid is not a pleasant thing to do, but that the word itself is not a 'bad' word.

I didn't mean to offend anyone if I did, I try hard to be as inoffensive as possible. And if I did offend someone, I apologise.

But I can't help coming back to whether it's the word itself or what was done with it. I'm thinking out loud here, so excuse me rambling in your inbox. I knew what the word meant and considered it fairly outdated but not offensive. I had an informal poll in the office this morning and that seemed to be the general consensus. So, I still don't know what to think.

From:

marquesate.livejournal.com

I think that makes it pretty clear what the word means, and I haven't even bothered to go to my trusty Oxford English dictionary:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/miscegenation

"blood treachery" whatever that means in HP, is not what that word means. Dumb, therefore, or deliberate.

From:

gunderpants.livejournal.com

On the one hand I kinda see where you're coming from: it's a word that's not in use in Australia at all, and it hasn't ever been used in any context here. (I'd probably mention it to someone here and get "miscegewhat?!?" as a response. It doesn't help either that I'm a stupid nerd and get lolsensitive about things like this.

But then, at the same time... something is squicking me hard about it.

From:

rwday.livejournal.com

Ramble on - I'm all for discussion (note how I take over Erastes' LJ!)

I don't think it was wrong to write for the prompt - especially as treating Fenrir/Narcissa as a kink is (IMO) worlds apart from treating Dean/Luna as a kink simply because he's black. And really, as much as I don't see interracial relationships (i.e. black/white, not Snape/Squid) as a kink, I'm not going to tell other people what they can or should write or what their kinks ought to be.

But I can't help coming back to whether it's the word itself or what was done with it

It's the word itself. The word 'miscegenation' was coined in the 19th century to specifically refer to polluting the white race with inferior blood (very Voldemortian, I'd say!) and there are far better and less offensive terms to use if what you really mean is interracial relationships. There's a really good post here discussing the origin and history of the word.

From:

I'm surprised that you hadn't heard the word, as it was practised very widely in Australia in the very recent past. I don't think actual laws were in place - but it was "very firmly discouraged"

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-6511081/Hidden-agendas-the-rhetoric-of.html

But I'm guessing it's not taught - same as we don't learn about Cromwell, and stuff like that

I agree with RW Day, writing for the prompt doesn't make you a bad person at all, specially with that pairing - as it does mean the blood traitor/mixing species that Voldemort is opposed to - but Lee/Luna as a *deviance*? No. So much wrong.

From:

I only knew the word from studying Victorian Literature at university, and loads of what the Victorians had to say was a bit mad so...

And see, I don't know if it is being sensitive or not because I've never really been discriminated against. Well, all right, I had a boss who thought he could make me make him coffee in the middle of meetings because I was the only female member of staff present but I can't equate that to something on the same level in fandom. God, I'm rambling again.

I guess what I mean is: I can definitely understand your squick. I thought it was an odd choice for the month but saw something I could do with it in terms of HP porn.

From:

I suppose that the only people who care enough about a concept like mixing blood are the ones to come up with a word for it.

Thanks for the explanation. I understood the word solely in terms of blood-pollution, and that it had been co-opted for use generally in terms of the white race being the race polluted. I thought it was an appropriation of a word, rather than the actual implied meaning.

From:

The word is sadly all too appropriate for HP-verse. I think it's the combination of a word that has such derogatory connotations with the further implication that interracial couples are a deviance and on the same level as, for example, Harry/Dobby, that really was... in hindsight, a Very Bad Idea.

I don't for one moment think it was intentional but I do regret that it happened.

Do I sound like a politician now? *g*

From:

And you never inhaled, neither!

*G*

From:

thysanotus.livejournal.com

I can't speak for Gun, but I know certainly that it was never taught at either high school or at university here in Western Australia.

I'm trying not to get involved in all this, mostly because it's not something I'm hugely familiar with - I knew vaguely what it meant, but had no actual idea, and it's certainly not a term that I've ever heard in context here in Australia.

From:

irreparable.livejournal.com

Likewise. I have to say that I've never heard the word before today. And I hardly consider myself uninformed or uneducated. I asked around - everyone I spoke to today who is Australian had never heard of it prior to my asking them about it.

From:

asphodeline.livejournal.com

It's an entirely new word to me and I've just been reading all the various posts about the kerfuffle it's caused. I learn a lot from LJ!!

Having read the mods replies and so on, I would agree that if it is indeed so offensive to so many then a judicial re-wording might have been more appropriate.

I should read my dicitonary more often!

From:

gunderpants.livejournal.com

No, you are right. And I'd tried to reply to you last night but my internet was being totes twatty. Miscegenation was used, but there are a lot of really overpowering reasons as to why it isn't a word in common understanding here.

Even so, in Australia we are taught nothing about indigenous history or the white treatment of the indigenous population after colonisation in schools. If people don't know what the word miscegenation means, it's because education in Australia is so overwhelmingly anglocentric in its bias and delivery that issues relating to and pertinent to indigenous people aren't taught.

Additionally, a lot of the treatment of aboriginal Australians *has* been hushed up. I think if most Australians knew the extent of black deaths in custody, atrocities still existing to this day (don't even get me started on 'hunting Gin') they would be shocked and appalled.

And finally, there hasn't been the prominent civil rights movement here as there was in the states: therre are plenty of indigenous leaders and representatives who do try and bring recognition to indigenous issues, but at the same time the proportion of indigenous Australians to white Australians is far, far tinier than that of black Americans to Americans of European heritage. I never thought that I'd be saying this, but even America's paltry history curriculum does a better job of detailing history than Australia bothers with.

From:

I had a feeling that was the case - I'd only learned myself about the whole breeding out and rehoming of children with white families through documentaries and films. It's rather horrible in this day and age that such things are hidden away in history lessons. We're not taught about the Slave Trade, the Irish Famine, or what Cromwell did when he was over there, either.

*subliminal growling*

From:

The first time I ever heard the word was in "Showboat" the musical where Ava Gardner has been hiding the fact that her mother was black and she has been passing as white and is married to a white man - they pull into a town and the authorities insist that they leave town because of the miscegenation laws. I think I was about 10, and, being the elephant's child, had to go and find out what that meant.

From:

logophilos.livejournal.com

The irony of your anecdote is that the casting of Ava Gardner as the mixed race woman was itself racist as the person who should have got it rightfully was Lena Horne - who'd already played the role - but she was not cast because of the studio code against showing interracial couples.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lena_Horne

And to all those morons claiming Australians don't know the word, or that it doesn't apply outside America - fucking do and it fucking does. The Australian record on this matter is as shameful and dark as anything in the Deep South.

From:

Are the links that DD provide incorrect, then? Or do they not actually represent the views that the mods say that they do.

I'm a member of

daily_deviant but don't post in odd numbered months and haven't read anything of this month's entries as I've been busy with RL, so I haven't really come across it.

What makes me uncomfortable is the fact that some people seem to, according to what other people have said here, have associated mixed-colour relationships with mixed-creature relationships.

On the other hand,

daily_deviant are at least prepared to answer the emails that they got and to explain clearly their position. One of the mods is a friend of mine and I am (a) certain that she is not using words like this to offend and (b) sticking to what she believes is an appropriate cause of action. I can see that she would be worried that to change on one occasion might create an awkward precedent, especially when DD deals with all sorts of 'taboo' topics.

From:

If JKR had used the word miscegenation, referring to the inter-species relationships rather than Blood Treachery, then I would not have commented, but that word is as offensive as Nigger, and has too much hate and bad bad history, in hundreds of countries around the world, to be ignored.

I am quite sure no-one meant to offend, either.

From:

True. But the trouble is that if they're taking terms directly from an encyclopedia, blood treachery wouldn't be in it. I'm now intrigued as to how old the encyclopedia is, and as to why it still has this term in it if it's of recent origin. If it is, I imagine that I would assume that the word had been 'co-opted' into acceptable English (rather like the word 'queer') and would have used it.

I'd have changed the word, personally, but I appreciate that they do have reasons for not doing so.

From:

I think it's probably worth pointing out that they offer two options - kinks and themes. 'Lesbians' would come under the heading of a theme, not a kink, and I would be absolutely STUNNED if mixed sex couples did not come up as a theme at a different time. As they're picking them at random, however, they can't provide themes just to 'prove' that they're not homophobic.

From:

I imagine that I would assume* that the word had been 'co-opted' into acceptable English

*I would HAVE assumed without further knowledge.

From:

iamisaac.livejournal.com

Oh, and...
http://community.livejournal.com/daily_deviant/169702.html

From: