Comments on: Is “Slumdog” the new “Macaca?”

By: baboo5000

baboo5000 — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:28:38 +0000

When a white person says “whats up, slumdog” to me, I respond “not much, Milk”. Then I remind him that I won, and that he is a homosexual.

By: Samir

Samir — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:12:43 +0000

Office trivia game.

By: desigirl

desigirl — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:54:11 +0000

Just had a boss who was merely mildly irritated throw out the "slumdog" word, thought it was extremely funny that the prize in the movie was not worth much because, "it was worth, what? probably fifty cents?," then proceeded to hint that if I was upset with this comment that he might ding me on my evaluation.

So in a word, um, yes. (actually that was two words).

And frankly, as much as I may disagree with Jindal's politics, it's comments like my boss made, that suggest it's high time we Indians (and those of Indian origin) stopped shooting ourselves in the foot.

By: mountaindreamer

mountaindreamer — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 03:25:25 +0000

To be clear the following question that I asked was more in reference to Slumdog versus Macaca: “When a liberal makes up a derogatory word for art is that more acceptable than when a conservative makes up a derogatory word?” Not only about liberal versus conservative but also art versus politics or non-art spheres. Tying to figure out why Macaca did not stick but Slumdog did.

I don’t think the problem is liberal vs. conservative. With the macaca slur Allen was called out immediately and shamed for the use of the word in a derogatory sense. So after that there was no ambiguity – it was not OK to use the word, everyone got it. The slumdog phenomenon, on the other hand, has been trickling through, people using it half in jest. So right now the appropriate reaction is not clear – if you take offense are you over-reacting ? Can the person using the word say – ha ha I was joking, chill – and get away with it ? Going by the blogosphere, the word is quickly losing its innocence and taking on some ugly undertones.

I would not blame Danny Boyle for this – people can twist any word to suit their purpose.

By: Sonal

Sonal — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 02:48:32 +0000

“…did not say anything about the questions that I asked about when a liberal makes up a derogatory word versus a conservative. Which is fine.” I wrote that in error. CC I re-read your comment after my first response and re-saw your Gran Torino comment. Hence my later brief address on that. You upset me and my focus in my initial response was on addressing those other points, and blanked out on your other movie reference.

By: Sonal

Sonal — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 02:39:22 +0000

To be clear the following question that I asked was more in reference to Slumdog versus Macaca: “When a liberal makes up a derogatory word for art is that more acceptable than when a conservative makes up a derogatory word?” Not only about liberal versus conservative but also art versus politics or non-art spheres. Tying to figure out why Macaca did not stick but Slumdog did.

By: Sonal

Sonal — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 02:31:36 +0000

With regard Gran Torino, cc, maybe liberals should have complained. I didn't see that movie so I cannot comment on what words were used.

Yeah Mountaindreamer. Too few in the South Asian community supported the people in the slums when "slumdog" was a derogatory word for them. Perhaps it is poetic justice for them that now all South Asians even somebody like Jindal so far from the slums are referred to as "slumdogs" just like them. The larger South Asian community did not hear the voices of those of us most vulnerable in society, now we all get to be called "slumdogs" by liberals and conservatives and others.

By: Sonal

Sonal — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 02:09:49 +0000

CC you made the same false accusation against me and didn’t hear me in my response. People in the past discussion said the word was not made up by him. That is why I said “said himself.” I confused Boyle with Beaufoy. That is all. So the sentence should have been Beaufoy said himself he made up the name “slumdog.” Stop making it more than that. Stop making your response a personal attack. Maybe you live in a world where people are shady, but I don’t so don’t project on me. You spent more time talking about how it is not possible to change the movie, but did not say anything about the questions that I asked about when a liberal makes up a derogatory word versus a conservative. Which is fine. Quite frankly I don’t understand your belligerence. What I mean by that is you seem to be very emotionally invested in the movie for some reason as if you were either Boyle or Beufoy (though I can’t say if they would be as uncivil as you, who knows). You could have simply said that by the time the slum dwellers protested there was too much money spent and just not possible to change, and left it at that. You seem to me to have taken a personal affront to a general discussion and started attacking me. Me if I had the power I would have spent the money (yes even if it were millions, and yes I really would do that if I had the power) and effort to change the title in order to be consistent if I were a person in films who cares about people in the slums. They are so little heard in society. That to me would have been the ethical thing to do. I don’t work in the film industry so I cannot give you a line by line detailed description of how. And since this is just a discussion board, I don’t think anyone expects that other than you. If it weren’t time wise possible to change the title by Oscars, if I had the power I would have made sure it was changed after the Oscars and I would have let everyone know why in the news – the people living in the slums deserve to be heard and respected. Their dignity matters, their voice matters, and if I do something wrong against them, even unknowingly, I correct it. That is me and maybe it doesn’t make sense financially to people only looking at the business aspect, but it does to me ethically, and therefore the benefit to me is worth the financial cost. These are my thoughts. If you cannot address me without personally attacking me then I do not want to have a discussion with you any further.

By: mountaindreamer

mountaindreamer — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 01:43:37 +0000

The word "slumdog" is becoming a slur for desi H1-Bs at sites like this. This site even has a Slumdog Comment Generator.

From : http://itgrunt.com/ (emphasis mine)

DISCLAIMER: The thoughts expressed on this blog may or may not be the author's own and are protected by the 1st Amendment. Any attempt to reveal his identity by contacting a slumdog hack at Google, or a corrupt Desi sys-admin at his ISP will be dealt with promptly and severely. Civil and criminal penalties may apply if one is found to have used private information in an attempt to get the author fired at the Hindu-only I.T. ghetto he currently works at. In addition, any Desi who attempts to burn the author's house down because they are enraged over his writing will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This isn't India.

Thanks, slumdogs. Now please go home.

Ã¢â‚¬Å“Bunch of slumdogs, right? Dude, they're taking over.Ã¢â‚¬ï¿½

By: mountaindreamer

mountaindreamer — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 01:04:19 +0000

Should the slum dwellers not have been offended? Were they wrong to protest? Or were they right all along? And because not more people supported them then, we have the situation now where liberals and conservatives alike are comfortable using the term to refer to South Asians.

Bang on ! When the slum dwellers protested the general reaction (even amongst most desis i know) was - oh they are creating such a fuss and embarrassing us. Of course now that these relatively well to do Indians in U.S. are being called "slumdogs" on anti-immigration boards they are suddenly uneasy and find that they don't relish it much. But like you pointed out, the time to protest has passed.