That's context of usage. Not the word in of itself- which is not hateful. It describes something in a social context.
There is such a family like 3 houses down from me. As I type this post I can see my "wasp" coworker cleaning his desk through my office window.It's also simply wrong because there aren't any and haven't been for hundreds of years.
It is that culture changes. I said it three times. It happens. Period.So your point is that "numbers are increasing" and that's it?
It's not a complex subject. More people of the current day think X, Y, Z about A, B, C things and create media, technology, policies, laws, art, social acceptance, etc that are in line with those thoughts. As they have for ages.Seems kind of shallow for an analysis.
Times change.
Not like you've provided any evidence showing that it's growing. I doubt it can be meaningfully measured anyway. But we'll take that pretension as a given.
That times change is not what's being put to question, but your capacity to predict that this particular behaviour is "the direction culture is headed": it doesn't follow from the uninteresting truism.
There's always growing numbers about all kinds of weird shit. It doesn't say anything about their clout to shape culture in any meaningful way.
Heck, I just invented a religion, if you join we'll double its size in an instant and become the fastest growing religion of the moment.
Last edited by nextormento; 2016-09-29 at 01:53 PM.
SJWs are at it again it seems.
Fine, then you defeat the whole purpose of this nonsense.
You're delusional. You're like one of those people who think there's some jewish cabal.There is such a family like 3 houses down from me. As I type this post I can see my "wasp" coworker cleaning his desk through my office window.
Not really a proposition, more of a blanket statement. Doesn't even imply culture will adopt this degenerate manner of speaking.It is that culture changes. I said it three times. It happens. Period.
More platitudes only in service of your lack of a point.It's not a complex subject. More people of the current day think X, Y, Z about A, B, C things and create media, technology, policies, laws, art, social acceptance, etc that are in line with those thoughts. As they have for ages.
Times change.
Im all for people having to put a bit more thought into their words so their intended meaning comes across better. Assumptions baked into a statement detract from the point. On the other hand things shouldnt be taken to the extreme beyond what is required by context. The ever growing LGBTTTQQIAA+ initialism being an example where meaning starts to get lost. If theres an article giving tips how to keep long hair healthy, dont automatically assume it only applies to women. If you mention how polite the tall guy at the supermarket was for helping you pick something from the top row, there shouldnt be any additional need to specify that you didnt do a DNA test or psychological evaluation to determine it really was a guy or someone who identifies as one. Or that even though they helped you, you dont attribute any traditional gender characteristics to them based on this one incident. Id like to think theres a middle ground between making broad, incorrect and unnecessary generalisations and complicated and confusing language where you spend more time explaining the meaning of words than the actual sentence has.
So making a distinction between men and women will one day be unacceptable? That seems, for lack of a better word, fucktarded.
I just can't see why that would or should ever be required. I mean I get it for racial reasons, but there are a lot of differences between cultures, genders, and sexual orientations. Sometimes people need to understand how a particular culture/gender/sexuality views things. It's not necessarily a bad thing and people shouldn't get offended by it.
Variety is the spice of life and if we attempt to eliminate some of that then life gets a lot more boring. IMO people need to just not be so sensitive. Sometimes I wonder if it might be a good thing to have world war 3 so people can put things into perspective. I mean, it wouldn't really be worth it, but it would put things into perspective.
I'm trying to imagine how society would head down that path. The plain fact is that the generic differences between men and women is just so prevalent between races and cultures. It's just such a universally accepted thing. I mean it's biologically evident FFS. Science even agrees. Unless humans somehow become asexual, I don't see how that would ever happen. Otherwise society as a majority would just have to abandon all logic when it comes to the subject.
Not saying women should stay in the kitchen and make sandwiches or anything like that, but there are just generic differences beyond sexual organs which influence personality traits.
Last edited by Docturphil; 2016-09-29 at 09:03 PM.
As the OP describes the use of language; the criteria and example given for inclusive language does not expressly denote word or term use that is purposefully 'hateful'. Or rather, antagonistic &/or derogatory.
Thus the term "WASP" is appropriate as a point of comparison; the term having no negative notion in of itself. Use of the term has simply changed.
I am Jewish...You're delusional. You're like one of those people who think there's some jewish cabal.
My coworker is not a white protestant living in America of German heritage from a nice neighborhood, wealthy family and has a good education? I am pretty sure I know the guy, but if he is actually a Mexican high school; drop out whose parents are destitute and he actually flies home to S. African every night from the Chicago Loop... I would be very surprised.
I am not seeing your point here or the need for your emotional language, frankly.More platitudes only in service of your lack of a point.
Culture, language and social norms change all the time. We have evidence of this; historically and contemporary. If the moderators of the Reddit sub the OP is using feel X, Y, Z about a subject and that sentiment is being shared across various platforms; that sentiment is being adopted.
There is nothing more to say on the matter other than 'times change'; meaning what feel is acceptable changes all the time. That is a point of fact. It is further unnecessary to insert your value judgement of social norms- that is not germane to any of my posts.
It seems like you simply want to argue your dislike of a certain sentiment or notion of culture. Which is fine, but I am not interested.
- - - Updated - - -
Well, at my company we no longer say "Ladies" or "Gentlemen" in memos, or refer to "Men" and "Women", "Mr." or "Mrs.", etc. We say, "persons", "individuals", "employees", etc.
Language use of that sort is considered inclusive by many. People accept and use it in various outlets. Natch, or we wouldn't be discussing it here even.
OK, if you're referring to a group of people that includes men and women, sure. What about if you are referring specifically to a group of men or women though? Or what if you are referring specifically to an individual? How could that ever become unacceptable to use gender specific terms in those instances? That's what I'm having a hard time imagining.