The person calling a black person a monkey or a Jewish person a rat is either ignorant of the history of those slurs or they aren't.
If they are ignorant of that history, they can easily be excused. The ignorance is usually obvious based on their history of behavior because the accusation would likely be an isolated incident. Considering the history of accusations against Jones and Roseanne, I am pretty confident in saying they are both aware of how their words could be interpreted.
If that person is aware of the history of using those comparisons and isn't racist, what is the reasoning is still using that specific language? You can call Obama any number of insults and not be called a racist. Why would you choose an insult that you know will draw racial comparisons?
Power dynamics are real, and the legal system deals with context all the time. So do humans, they handle it quite well in fact (hence why our languages are not context-free).
I know computer people want consistency in rules. However, do you want to have a simple-minded consistency (with full invocation of Emerson intended here), or do you value full inclusion and reparative actions to restore full humanity to everyone who shares your DNA, yet were considered non-human in the past? (and still are by many people, who are actively attempting to return the past to the future.)
Slavery is ugly and MOST people don't love thinking about that era. Some people DO love thinking about it, and are actively attempting to bring it back. To quote a choose your own adventure:
- If you want to turn your back on historical realities, turn to page 55
- If you embrace the uncomfortable and pledge to work for the betterment of all, turn to page 100
