Linguistic tongue twisters about equity isn't good

Banning words won't make the world more just. This comes from a lib columnist at The Atlantic.

Someone with a criminal record is a "justice involved person".

The disabled is now "a person living with a disability".

A slave now needs to be referred to as "an enslaved person".

Why? Who is this helping? The answer is no one.

This huge expense of energy to purify language reveals a weakened belief in more material forms of progress. If we don't know how to end racism, we can at least call it "structural". The guides are meant to make the ugliness of society disappear by linguistic fiat. Even by their own lights, they do more ill than good-not because of their absurd need to avoid using the word "congresswoman" or "expat", or the self torture they require of conscientious users, but because they make it impossible to face squarely the wrongs they want to right, which is the starting point for any change. Prison is not less brutal by calling someone locked up in one a "person experiencing the criminal-justice system". Obesity isn't healthier for people with "high weight".... equity language doesn't fool anyone who lives with real afflictions. It's mean to spare the feelings of those who use it.

Petroleum Transfer Technician is the job description for what used to be the guy who pumped gas. Of course, I haven’t actually seen a SERVICE station in decades … a place where teenagers would wash the windshield and check your water and oil while the tank was filling.

Don't look at us...

That's liberals doing that.

Y'all need to fix your over-sensitivity.

@wildgrass said
Banning words won't make the world more just. This comes from a lib columnist at The Atlantic.

Someone with a criminal record is a "justice involved person".

The disabled is now "a person living with a disability".

A slave now needs to be referred to as "an enslaved person".

Why? Who is this helping? The answer is no one.

[quote]This huge expense of energy to ...[text shortened]... www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/04/equity-language-guides-sierra-club-banned-words/673085/

Here's a good example; instead of "child pornography" or "kiddie porn" it suggests "child sexual abuse content". That's a far more accurate descriptor which stresses the harm done to the victim without using a neutral word like "pornography".

@wildgrass

Some people just like being in control. And I have to admit, whoever dreamed up changing the meaning of
the word "gender" is a convincing cult leader because no one ever challenged his right to do so. so there ya go


PS: had to add,
The leftists are so *sensitive* over a term like "illegal Aliens", yet will scream "white supremacist" to a passerby with great gusto.

@earl-of-trumps said
@wildgrass

Some people just like being in control. And I have to admit, whoever dreamed up changing the meaning of
the word "gender" is a convincing cult leader because no one ever challenged his right to do so. so there ya go


PS: had to add,
The leftists are so *sensitive* over a term like "illegal Aliens", yet will scream "white supremacist" to a passerby with great gusto.

I'm impressed,

@NOT

@no1marauder said
That "liberals" at this moment in history find the time to belittle attempts like the Progressive's Style Guide's to suggest the use of more accurate terminology that doesn't reflect common biases, shows how pathetic they are and how unwilling they are to actual confront the growing neofascist movement which now dominates the Republican Party.

Here's the A Progressive’ ...[text shortened]... nd rarely does it insist that one and only one term be used in place of biased ones commonly in use.

@endlame said
Don't look at us...

That's liberals doing that.

Y'all need to fix your over-sensitivity.

@no1marauder said
Here's a good example; instead of "child pornography" or "kiddie porn" it suggests "child sexual abuse content". That's a far more accurate descriptor which stresses the harm done to the victim without using a neutral word like "pornography".

@earl-of-trumps said
@wildgrass

Some people just like being in control. And I have to admit, whoever dreamed up changing the meaning of
the word "gender" is a convincing cult leader because no one ever challenged his right to do so. so there ya go


PS: had to add,
The leftists are so *sensitive* over a term like "illegal Aliens", yet will scream "white supremacist" to a passerby with great gusto.

@wildgrass said
Yeah I don't know where your weird ideas about gender definitions fit into this.

But... Coming up with more different words to add into the LGBT acronym? I feel pretty well informed but still just found out they added a 2 and a + so it looks more like a maths equation now.

And the proper use is to say that the lgbtqia2s+ are a "community"? I don't understand who this ...[text shortened]... ure is confusing a lot of good intentioned people.

In your PS..... these are not the same people.

@no1marauder said
No guns are being aimed at anybody's head to make them use any particular term. This is a big nothing burger except to further divide the Left by such petty complainers as the author of the Atlantic article.

I did bookmark A Progressive's Style Guide and find it quite useful. You should look it over.

@wildgrass said
I didn't write that. I wrote that its confusing. You may like it but it is a waste of time and effort for every citizen to figure out and adopt new terminology for the same thing on a rotating basis.. It seems to purposefully distract away from actually fixing problems.