The Semantics of Unpleasant Realities

[DGS49]

I just read an essay by a cute young journalist who was finishing an extensive investigative report on the conditions at the local Allegheny County jail. The essay was not the investigative report itself, but rather a "What I learned while doing this..." kind of thing.

One of the things she learned was NEVER to refer to the jail-birds as "inmates" or "prisoners," as those words are demeaning. She learned that the correct terminology was "incarcerated person," or some such thing.

I learned a while ago that polite people never refer to "slaves," but rather to "enslaved persons," for the same reason.

In spite of the ubiquitous presence of "Handicapped" parking places in our society, we all now know NEVER to refer to a handicapped person as a "handicapped person," but we should better use some circumlocutory expression like, "otherly-abled person," or some such nonsense.

I can't even imagine what some woke-ster would do with "juvenile delinquent."

It seems to me that all of this semantic nonsense is created to separate the truly enlightened people from the troglodytes, using the phony justification of not wanting to offend those whose descriptors are offensive. As the descendant of a slave, does that really make me feel better about myself (or my ancestor) if I call them an "enslaved person"? I doubt it. Does the person in jail - who admittedly may be there pre-trial, and actually be guilty of nothing at all - feel better about itself if referred to as an "incarcerated person"? Hardly.

It's semantic Fascism. I refuse to comply.

 

[Moonglow]

Wow, way to "ramble-on" Led Zeppelin.
Imagine that language modified by the users, like that has never happened before.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Indeed. Like Orwell's Inner Party, the Democrats believe that by erasing words they can ultimately erase history as previous generations die off.

Newspeak is a long process.

 

[Votto]

I just read an essay by a cute young journalist who was finishing an extensive investigative report on the conditions at the local Allegheny County jail. The essay was not the investigative report itself, but rather a "What I learned while doing this..." kind of thing.

One of the things she learned was NEVER to refer to the jail-birds as "inmates" or "prisoners," as those words are demeaning. She learned that the correct terminology was "incarcerated person," or some such thing.

I learned a while ago that polite people never refer to "slaves," but rather to "enslaved persons," for the same reason.

In spite of the ubiquitous presence of "Handicapped" parking places in our society, we all now know NEVER to refer to a handicapped person as a "handicapped person," but we should better use some circumlocutory expression like, "otherly-abled person," or some such nonsense.

I can't even imagine what some woke-ster would do with "juvenile delinquent."

It seems to me that all of this semantic nonsense is created to separate the truly enlightened people from the troglodytes, using the phony justification of not wanting to offend those whose descriptors are offensive. As the descendant of a slave, does that really make me feel better about myself (or my ancestor) if I call them an "enslaved person"? I doubt it. Does the person in jail - who admittedly may be there pre-trial, and actually be guilty of nothing at all - feel better about itself if referred to as an "incarcerated person"? Hardly.

It's semantic Fascism. I refuse to comply.

The correct term for inmates is "Guests of the state".

It puts a smile on your face and a spring in your step, so why not?

 

[JLW]

I agree. This politically correct crap, or whatever you want to call it, is getting out of hand. It has transitioned into farce.

 

[Moonglow]

We don't use the term mobile phone anymore does that mean we killed it with semantics?

 

[Oddball]

I just read an essay by a cute young journalist who was finishing an extensive investigative report on the conditions at the local Allegheny County jail. The essay was not the investigative report itself, but rather a "What I learned while doing this..." kind of thing.

One of the things she learned was NEVER to refer to the jail-birds as "inmates" or "prisoners," as those words are demeaning. She learned that the correct terminology was "incarcerated person," or some such thing.

I learned a while ago that polite people never refer to "slaves," but rather to "enslaved persons," for the same reason.

In spite of the ubiquitous presence of "Handicapped" parking places in our society, we all now know NEVER to refer to a handicapped person as a "handicapped person," but we should better use some circumlocutory expression like, "otherly-abled person," or some such nonsense.

I can't even imagine what some woke-ster would do with "juvenile delinquent."

It seems to me that all of this semantic nonsense is created to separate the truly enlightened people from the troglodytes, using the phony justification of not wanting to offend those whose descriptors are offensive. As the descendant of a slave, does that really make me feel better about myself (or my ancestor) if I call them an "enslaved person"? I doubt it. Does the person in jail - who admittedly may be there pre-trial, and actually be guilty of nothing at all - feel better about itself if referred to as an "incarcerated person"? Hardly.

It's semantic Fascism. I refuse to comply.

Control the language and you control the range of "acceptable" thought....Classic Orwell.

 

[TheParser]

Well, sometimes it is nicer to use certain words or terms that are more gentle.

"Disabled" seems more gentle than "handicapped."

I, for example, never use the three-letter word for a Jewish person (although Jewish people themselves regularly use it). And it is NOT offensive if said in a respectful tone. Nevertheless, I feel very uncomfortable saying or writing it.

In the English language, the longer term often is more polite and not so abrupt. So in my posts, I might refer to "African Americans," but never just the color of their skin.

The short word "gay," is, however, preferable, for people who refer to someone as a "homosexual" usually are implying their disapproval of that person's sexual orientation.

 

[Oddball]

Well, sometimes it is nicer to use certain words or terms that are more gentle.

"Disabled" seems more gentle than "handicapped."

I, for example, never use the three-letter word for a Jewish person (although Jewish people themselves regularly use it). And it is NOT offensive if said in a respectful tone. Nevertheless, I feel very uncomfortable saying or writing it.

In the English language, the longer term often is more polite and not so abrupt. So in my posts, I might refer to "African Americans," but never just the color of their skin.

The short word "gay," is, however, preferable, for people who refer to someone as a "homosexual" usually are implying their disapproval of that person's sexual orientation.

Well, sometimes it is nicer to use certain words or terms that are more gentle.

That's exactly what the people bastardizing the language need you to believe, in order to control the range of "acceptable" thought....You're "nicer and more gentle"-ing us into semantic fascism.

 

[Gdjjr]

We don't use the term mobile phone anymore does that mean we killed it with semantics?

They aren't people, stupid- how's that for PC?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I agree. This politically correct crap, or whatever you want to call it, is getting out of hand. It has transitioned into farce.

It was farce to begin with.