About Politically Correct Language - Tyranny or Sensitivity
Gary wrote:
> So I guess the point I’m trying to make is that often those who are the
> most vocal about the “correct” way to call someone or some group of
> people, etc., that these people are perhaps not as comfortable with their
> own selves as perhaps they would like to be.
Gary, I’m sorry, but while what you say may be true (I have no evidence one way or another), I don’t see it that way. And, I’m not sure that your experience is typical of minority groups, since it sounds to me you did not grow up bearing the prejudice and bigotry that “could” have been addressed towards you based on your
heritage. (I’m assuming) Neither are you choosing (I am assuming here), the role of advocate and activist.
I happen to believe that it is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL that we have advocates and activists who yell long and hard about both what we might think as the big things AND the “little” things. I happen not to like some of them, but there is still a role there.
It keeps the issues in the public eye, and while we’ve made progress in a number of areas, it’s easy for “majority” folks to forget that there is NOT equity in our societies, and that language plays a role in working towards that equity.
I wouldn’t suggest that a woman who took umbrage to being called a girl was “uncomfortable with herself”. I would say that she is pointing out a bias in language that can affect (and still does affect) hiring of woman, particularly into senior positions. Hiring a “girl” to be CEO doesn’t make sense. Hiring a woman does. The language here isn’t trivial.
What we need, Gary, is for more people (particularly NOT associated with minorities (e.g. white middle class people) to stand up and say “Hey, if you want a word that is inclusive of your situation, I’m willing to change the words I use”. There is no cost for any of us to do so. It costs me nothing to say woman rather than girl (ugh). It costs me nothing to call my significant other the same word that a gay person would call their significant other. (I just don’t know what that word should be).
That doesn’t mean that they > need to “change,” but that perhaps they just need to be more accepting of
> who they are and of others who are also perhaps a bit afraid of who they
> are, as well. After all, we usually have feelings of hate and bigotry
> towards those things we fear, not those things we understand or accept.
> One of my Native American mentors once said that the opposite of Love is
> not hate, but fear. I find that a very interesting concept.
I agree on the fear. I just am not comfortable diagnosing people on the basis of the words they choose to use, or ask us to use. It’s a blind alley.