EVERYONE wants to be JUST LIKE THE U.S.A.!

JoeEkaitis · Aug 24, 2009

Sometimes in the worst possible ways.

Damn right I blame US for infecting the rest of the world with this kind of lunacy.

jennontheisland · Aug 24, 2009

Huh. My first thought was in the realm of BDSM.

Oops.

C.bronco · Aug 24, 2009

The destruction of words is a beautiful thing. Maybe not beautiful; perhaps it is just double ungood.

Sweetleaf · Aug 24, 2009

Oh dear. I read a while ago about one local council in the UK that banned the term 'brainstorm' because it was offensive to skitzophrenics. Staff had to use 'thought showers' instead.

benbradley · Aug 24, 2009

It's much better for a business to be in the African American, as opposed to being in the Native American.

kct webber · Aug 25, 2009

~~Nuts.~~

No... can't use that. It'll offend the feminists. Or the ~~crazy~~ people... Not sure.

~~Crazy~~ fucking...

No. Obviously can't use that. I mean... fucking's okay, I guess, but crazy is right out.

It is indeed a ~~black~~ day...

Nope. The article said that one was out. Oh screw it.

And miserable? They say miserable is okay, though? What about us misers? I'm highly offended by the whole thing!

Wayne K · Aug 25, 2009

It points out that certain words carry with them a “hierarchical valuation of skin colour”. The commission even urges employees to be mindful of the term “ethnic minority” because it can imply “something smaller and less important” if taken out of context..

I fixed it for them.

Wayne K · Aug 25, 2009

I don't mind the advice because it's nice to be nice, but the word minority refers to a number, not significance.

KTC · Aug 25, 2009

overtired said:
Oh dear. I read a while ago about one local council in the UK that banned the term 'brainstorm' because it was offensive to skitzophrenics. Staff had to use 'thought showers' instead.

maybe we should ban brainstorm from AW?

kayleamay · Aug 25, 2009

benbradley said:
It's much better for a business to be in the African American, as opposed to being in the Native American.

I've never understood that concept as a whole. My parents were Welsh. I was born in the US...doesn't that make me a native American? My kids are 1/8th Navajo so I guess they're more entitled to the term, but I doubt either of them can spell "Navajo" or tell you what it means. I have an African American friend who was born in India. What should I call him? The kid across the street has light blond hair and blue eyes. He was born in Mexico and speaks fluent Spanish. What is he? I think I will just start referring to everyone in the shade of beverage I think they most resemble....like, milky, or mocha or straight-up-black. I have a friend in liver failure. I'll call him a beer-shaded American. Yeah...I think that would work.

Yeshanu · Aug 25, 2009

I'm going to be blunt here and say that while PC language can go to far ("thought showers" falls into this category, IMO), language that assumes that right-handedness, whiteness, maleness, and straigtness are the norm, and are good, IS oppressive.

We're all writers, and we know the power of words. The right word in the right place can uphold and uplift, or put down and oppress.

It doesn't take much effort, for example, to use "human" and not "man" when you really do mean all humans. Or to find different ways to speak about right and wrong that don't use black and white as metaphors.

The way we use words is changing, as it has been changing since language was invented. So why are you upset when some people, (who were NOT necessarily American, BTW) realized that words have the power to hurt, and are trying to change the way we speak?

I really don't understand why people complain about PC language. To me, folks who do so seem either to be prejudiced against the groups in question, or people who are unwilling to change simply because they've been told that what they've been doing all along is wrong.

kayleamay · Aug 25, 2009

I just think people tend to get too caught up in being PC. I work with an incredibly diverse group of people. You name it, we got it. In my personal experience it seems that the ones that are usually offended by less-than-PC-verbage tend to be the ones that discriminate the most.

Example. I work with a really big black guy. I call him that because he's really friggin' big and his skin is black. I've worked with him for years and we have a great relationship. A nursing student was told to find "Nurse X" and didn't know who he was so she asked me. I told her he was the big black guy at the other end of the station. She was offended. She reported me to the manager as a racist. The manager, out of obligation called "Nurse X" into her office to discuss this. He laughed his ass off. So why was she so offended? Because I called him black?

Two weeks later I heard THE SAME GIRL trying to push a patient off because she didn't like Russian patients because they were too demanding.

I just think everything has to be looked at in context.

JimmyB27 · Aug 25, 2009

Yeshanu said:
It doesn't take much effort, for example, to use "human" and not "man" when you really do mean all humans. Or to find different ways to speak about right and wrong that don't use black and white as metaphors.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/man
"1.an adult male person, as distinguished from a boy or a woman.
2.a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex: prehistoric man."

Yeshanu said:
We're all writers, and we know the power of words. The right word in the right place can uphold and uplift, or put down and oppress.

Words do indeed have power. But only when used correctly. I think this is something people often miss when talking about racism/sexism and all the other isms.
To label terms like 'black sheep', or 'right-hand man' as racist, sexist or handednessist, is disingenuous at best, imho, and draws attention away from the real racism out there. It also gives Daily Mail readers and the like the opportunity to stand up and say "Look at this silliness, political correctness gone MAD!", and then just carry on as they were.

ETA - I would also be all for ignoring people who throw about bigoted terms at black people, women, or whoever. That's the linguistic equivalent of attacking someone with a baseball bat and simply ignoring it is like throwing on a suit of armour - it'll bounce right off of you. To really do damage with words, you need finesse and skill, like a well place stiletto.

kayleamay · Aug 25, 2009

JimmyB27 said:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/man
"1.an adult male person, as distinguished from a boy or a woman.
2.a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex: prehistoric man."

Words do indeed have power. But only when used correctly. I think this is something people often miss when talking about racism/sexism and all the other isms.
To label terms like 'black sheep', or 'right-hand man' as racist, sexist or handednessist, is disingenuous at best, imho, and draws attention away from the real racism out there. It also gives Daily Mail readers and the like the opportunity to stand up and say "Look at this silliness, political correctness gone MAD!", and then just carry on as they were.[/quote]

Yeshanu · Aug 25, 2009

kayleamay said:
I just think people tend to get too caught up in being PC. I work with an incredibly diverse group of people. You name it, we got it. In my personal experience it seems that the ones that are usually offended by less-than-PC-verbage tend to be the ones that discriminate the most.

Example. I work with a really big black guy. I call him that because he's really friggin' big and his skin is black. I've worked with him for years and we have a great relationship. A nursing student was told to find "Nurse X" and didn't know who he was so she asked me. I told her he was the big black guy at the other end of the station. She was offended. She reported me to the manager as a racist. The manager, out of obligation called "Nurse X" into her office to discuss this. He laughed his ass off. So why was she so offended? Because I called him black?

Two weeks later I heard THE SAME GIRL trying to push a patient off because she didn't like Russian patients because they were too demanding.

I just think everything has to be looked at in context.

Definitely. And I don't feel that calling a person black because they have very dark skin is racist, nor is describing a person using skin colour. But I'm talking here about using "black" to describe dirty or bad things, and white as a synonym for good and clean.

JimmyB27 said:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/man
"1.an adult male person, as distinguished from a boy or a woman.
2.a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex: prehistoric man."

Words do indeed have power. But only when used correctly. I think this is something people often miss when talking about racism/sexism and all the other isms.
To label terms like 'black sheep', or 'right-hand man' as racist, sexist or handednessist, is disingenuous at best, imho, and draws attention away from the real racism out there.

When I can go into a washroom with the label "Men" on it and not feel out of place, then I'll believe that "men" equals "Human being." It doesn't now, and never has, even if the dictionary gives that as a meaning. That isn't the general usage of it, and that's what counts.

And ignoring the fact that discriminatory language is, in fact, discriminatory doesn't make people any more aware of "real" discrimination, in my experience, nor does using the word "human" when you mean "human" draw attention away from discrimination.

Our attitudes towards others are formed bit by bit over a long period of time, and the words we and others use to describe things play a major part in that formation.

One of the things bugs me the most about people who complain about PC language is that most of the changes are easy to make (I mean, how much effort, really, does it take to add those two extra letters on the front of the word "man," or to use the word "firefighter" instead of "fireman"), and are in no way offensive. So why not make the change? (And once again, I am not talking here about the downright silly, like "thought showers.")

lucidzfl · Aug 25, 2009

I think people who get offended easily are jokes of human nature. And I laugh at their tears of oppression.

JimmyB27 · Aug 25, 2009

"To boldly go where no man has gone before." Or, indeed, the usage in that definition "Prehistoric man."
It's still a perfectly acceptable, and fairly widespread usage to me.
As for changes being easy to make, that's not really a very good argument if you ask me. It would be quite easy for me to start wearing my watch on the other wrist, but there's absolutely no reason for me to start doing so, and there's absolutely no reason for these phrases to change either.

Yeshanu · Aug 25, 2009

I actually don't get offended easily. But I'm really tired of so-called tolerant people saying that using PC language is "infecting the world" in "one of the worst possible ways."

I know Joe's a great guy, and I know he meant it as a joke.

But jokes can go sour, and even the most tolerant person can be worn down after hearing the same "joking" phrase from many different lips (or fingers, in this case.)

Yeshanu · Aug 25, 2009

JimmyB27 said:
"To boldly go where no man has gone before." Or, indeed, the usage in that definition "Prehistoric man."
It's still a perfectly acceptable, and fairly widespread usage to me.
As for changes being easy to make, that's not really a very good argument if you ask me. It would be quite easy for me to start wearing my watch on the other wrist, but there's absolutely no reason for me to start doing so, and there's absolutely no reason for these phrases to change either.

Widespread, yes. But then so is poverty, racism, environmental degredation, and a whole host of other ills.

Acceptable? No. Especially not when it's easy to change.

Wearing your watch on one wrist or another doesn't really affect me, so the comparison doesn't wash.

lucidzfl · Aug 25, 2009

Yeshanu said:
Widespread, yes. But then so is poverty, racism, environmental degredation, and a whole host of other ills.

Acceptable? No. Especially not when it's easy to change.

Wearing your watch on one wrist or another doesn't really affect me, so the comparison doesn't wash.

I think intent should be the measure of one's offense.

If I call my friend a dirty, worthless mexican (He's actually from spain) he knows there is absolutely no negative connotation behind it. He calls me a drunk irish asshole. (Unfortunately, that is a true statement lol) It doesn't offend me.

I call my friend from the phillipines a coconut. Brown on the outside, white on the inside. (He too calls me a drunk irish asshole. wtf man. I should probably stop drinking)

However, you could, using completely PC language say something that was completely hate filled. Its all about the meaning behind the words.

I know you guys love me quoting carlin, but I believe in the man. The word itself has no power. Its the meaning behind them that has all the power.

kayleamay · Aug 25, 2009

But I'm talking here about using "black" to describe dirty or bad things, and white as a synonym for good and clean.

But if my white shoes get black...they're dirty. It's just a fact. If the bottoms of my feet were black...that would mean they were dirty too. So, I will remedy this by only wearing black shoes...so no one can get offended when they're dirty (because you won't be able to see it.)

When I can go into a washroom with the label "Men" on it and not feel out of place, then I'll believe that "men" equals "Human being." It doesn't now, and never has, even if the dictionary gives that as a meaning. That isn't the general usage of it, and that's what counts.

There's a club in town that I go to every once in awhile. They have unisex bathrooms. They're very public and always packed...and filthy. I will gladly concede to the word "Men" on the bathroom door as long as there is one that says "Women" nearby. The "Human" bathrooms are just icky.

One of the things bugs me the most about people who complain about PC language is that most of the changes are easy to make (I mean, how much effort, really, does it take to add those two extra letters on the front of the word "man," or to use the word "firefighter" instead of "fireman")

I'm a nurse. The very origins of my job title are feminine. I work with a fair share of male nurses (or murses as we jokingly call them....and no, they're not offended...they call themselves the same thing). I really hope they don't go and change my job title to something like "Gender Neutral Medical Lackey," or "Body Fluid Technician". The word 'nurse' has a history with it. Even the murses acknowledge that. Just my two pesos worth.

lucidzfl · Aug 25, 2009

kayleamay said:
I work with a fair share of male nurses (or murses as we jokingly call them....and no, they're not offended...they call themselves the same thing).

Could you milk me, Gregg?

JimmyB27 · Aug 25, 2009

Yeshanu said:
Wearing your watch on one wrist or another doesn't really affect me, so the comparison doesn't wash.

Unless you let them, words like 'fireman' don't affect you.

lucidzfl · Aug 25, 2009

JimmyB27 said:
Unless you let them, words like 'fireman' don't affect you.

"Call the firemen! Quick! The house is on fire!"
"Try firePERSON, or fireHUMAN, or even fireFIGHTER. You sexist pig!"
*blink* *blink*

kayleamay · Aug 25, 2009

lucidzfl said:
Could you milk me, Gregg?

I don't even know what to call you.

EVERYONE wants to be JUST LIKE THE U.S.A.!

Certified Gray Haired Geek

the world is at my command

I have plans...

Momentary lapse of reason

It's a doggy dog world

Squirrel, Sekrit type, 1 ea.

Stand in the Place Where You Live

I'm on the phone.

Elf Queen

I'm on the phone.

Hoopy frood

I'm on the phone.

Elf Queen

Back from the dead

Hoopy frood

Elf Queen

Elf Queen

Back from the dead

I'm on the phone.

Back from the dead

Hoopy frood

Back from the dead

I'm on the phone.