A gathering of students and a few faculty members spent two hours debating and discussing the meaning and implications of one word, and the discussion, stopped because of time constraints, could have gone on well into the night.

Called simply the “N-Word Discussion,” the Feb. 8 event featured a panel of seven St. Edward’s University students answering questions about the n-word: what they think of it, who can say it and why it’s so controversial. The event also offered the opportunity for audience members to give their opinions – and many had them.

The purpose of the event was not to change anyone’s mind about the word, junior Rehema Abdul, the president of the Students of African Heritage Association, said later in an interview. Abdul’s organization and the Multicultural Leadership Board sponsored the event.

Abdul said a student had approached her midway through the discussion and asked her why she had decided to create it, as the variety of opinions in Mabee Ballroom B were not likely to come to a unanimous decision about who can use the word. Many of the African-American students present felt it was only their word to say.

“I wanted open dialogue about this issue,” Abdul said she told the student in response. “Many students on this campus have intelligent, well-supported views that aren’t heard enough, and they don’t always want to hear an expert talk. They are able to all get involved in something like this and help other students figure out what they believe.”

She chose the students in the panel because they come from a variety of ethnicities and backgrounds and know what they believe about the n-word.

Two of the students, freshman Sheenika Medard and junior Brent Johnson, are black. Junior Zachary Peal is white, and sophomore Nicholas Tafacory is half-white, half-Iranian. Junior Juhi Tariq is Indian. Senior Natalie Whitfield is half-black, half-white, and senior Elba Moise is half-black, half-Hispanic. All of them offered distinct, nuanced opinions on the n-word.

“The word itself is not the problem,” Medard said during the panel discussion. “The problem is the intention behind the word. If you’re not going to use it nicely, then don’t use it at all. And don’t use it in front of people it’s going to offend.”

Her comments, which sparked applause from the audience, represented the consensus of students both in the audience and on the panel.

Moderator Teri Varner, a Communication professor who asked the panel pre-determined questions and also fielded questions and talking points from the audience, shed light on why one word is still causing so much controversy.

“A lot of the words we use are given context to us by the people who use them,” Varner said. “The n-word used to be used in a negative way and sometimes still is. That’s why we’re here.”

By the end of the event, many of the students in the audience had shared their experiences with the n-word. Even a student who didn’t stand up and speak had his own opinion. David Delgado, a junior who is half-white, half-black, said after the discussion was over that he doesn’t care who uses the word.

“In the end, it’s just a word,” Delgado said. “It only has power if you let it have power. Like the words ‘gay’ or ‘retarded.’ They’re offensive, but people say them anyway. If you let them bother you, then of course they’re going to hurt. I just don’t think you can ban a word from certain people.”

Because of the history of the n-word in particular – the lynching in the 1960s amid the civil rights movement that finally ended segregation of white and African-Americans in the United States – others did not share Delgado’s view. Students like Tafacory said that the word should be done away with entirely, except in educational contexts such as history class.

But these differences in opinion were okay to have, Abdul said. In fact, the purpose of the discussion encouraged a range of views.

“You know, Rome wasn’t built in a day,” Abdul said. “We’re not all going to agree, we’re not all going to get along, but more discussions like this one will make it easier to disagree.”