I propose that a slur’s intention is to hurt someone psychologically and emotionally through verbal communication. The assertion that a slur is verbal, and that an insult is only conveyed through communication is important to consider especially when we think of the emotions that are elicited by an insult. It seems to me (yes, this is entire blog is utterly subjective) that insults and slurs only draw the Basic Emotions according to Robert Plutchik’s Wheel of Emotions. It also seems to me that communicating is an action and an insult is little more than a malignant communication.
A simple action I believe causes a simple reaction.
A single word (such as a slur) is a simple verbal communication, which is a simple action and so it elicits a simple emotion.
I’ll further argue that a complex verbal communication (such as a speech or essay), a composition of words, which is a complex action, will elicit a complex emotion.
Photographs seem to elicit the complex emotions.
A photograph is a complex communication.Out of the many, the most glaring flaw in the argument opens an important question in this pursuit. Words compose a speech. Circumstances seem to compose a photograph, no? A negative speech uses negative words. Are negative photographs the product of negative circumstances? Racism is a circumstance of our world, isn’t it? If enough racist circumstances contribute to a photograph, why can’t a photograph be racist? I’m looking forward to reading any thoughts you may have. Please try to link a photograph in any of your comments so we can discuss the same details and be on one another’s page.