A while back in my writing group, a playwright (not a POC) posed this question: “How offensive or acceptable do people find on-stage racist and sexist name-calling?“
Racist and sexist name-calling appear in disparate (and award-winning) plays such as CLYBOURNE PARK (by Bruce Norris, a Pulitzer Prize winner), Caryl Churchill’s SERIOUS MONEY, THE SUBMISSION by Jeff Talbott (Laurents/Hatcher Foundation Award), THIS IS HOW IT GOES by Neil LaBute, THE INDIAN WANTS THE BRONX (Israel Horowitz, Obie Award winner), SPRING AWAKENING, music by Duncan Sheik and book and lyrics by Steven Sater (Tony Award winner), as well as RACE by David Mamet. And many more.
It appears using sexist and racist epithets can be almost surefire award bait.
Kidding aside, my own opinion is that the context is everything. It is offensive? Of course. Is it racist or sexist? Yes, epithets based on race and gender are objectively racist and sexist.
The question is, is the use of that language gratuitous and sensationalist — or is it intrinsic to the essence of the character and/or making a larger point? Too many times when I see this tactic used, it is a way for the audience members to feel superior to the character, and it absolves themselves of any self-examination. By that I mean the audience says, “Look at those awful racists/sexists. I’m glad I’m not like them.”
This last outcome is not a good one, in my opinion. I find that subtler forms of sexism and racism than outright epithets are more effective, theatrically, in making points about sexism and racism in real life. As a playwright I must ask: “What is the meta-narrative I want to present in this play? At root, and thematically, does this play further our understanding of race, or does it play into our already-held assumptions?” Ultimately it’s an artistic choice, but white artists need to self-examine this tendency to use bald and stereotypical epithets in making our points.