“One of the benefits of slang is its ability to provide layers of meaning understood within particular groups. When the pop singer Nicki Minaj asked fellow pop star Miley Cyrus “What’s good?” during her 2015 MTV Video Music Awards Acceptance Speech—after Cyrus had criticized Minaj’s diagnosis of racism within the music industry as “not polite”—it was a question weighted with multiple layers of mean-ing.5 What various meanings did Minaj’s question have? What subtext does the question “what’s good?” include if we consider it as slang versus if we consider it from the standpoint of Standard American English? Another reason this public feud between pop stars is relevant to the discussion of language use is that it opens an important debate about what has come to be known ” as “tone policing.” Tone policing is a silencing tactic used to prevent marginalized people from sharing their experiences of oppression. When Cyrus called Minaj’s comments about racism “not polite” she, perhaps inadvertently, sought to silence discussion about racism in the music industry by focusing on the tone of Minaj’s criticism rather than the substance of the criticism.
As critical thinkers and careful users of language we should hold ourselves to the highest standards of expression, but how do we set boundaries within conversations without silencing others, especially marginalized people? In discussion with your classmates, consider examples of tone policing you’ve seen or experienced. How could these conversations have proceeded better?
Can you suggest any guidelines for avoiding tone policing? Slang is a colorful, quickly shifting style of language that has benefits as well as limits. Some of the benefits of slang include the ability to communicate more quickly than through formal language, to communicate ideas and concepts that formal language has not caught up with yet, and to provide a nuanced subtext of meaning understood within particular groups. However, slang can also be restrictive when it limits its speakers’ vocabulary, making it easier for others to classify them as types rather than individuals. It can also be restrictive when it limits speakers’ expressions to a
