language geeking!

Jul 08, 2009 00:03

This post is a wonderful example of language-geeking to try to remove offensive language from one's own usage-set.

Leave a comment

Comments 18

leora July 8 2009, 07:57:47 UTC
I made a post once saying that being disabled is so lame. I was amused that someone took offense (and missed my point ( ... )

Reply

catamorphism July 8 2009, 14:29:41 UTC
But the two meanings of "calf" aren't emotionally charged (unless maybe you're Hindu?), so there's less of a problem there with emotional associations from one word spilling onto the other.

Reply

leora July 8 2009, 18:54:23 UTC
True. Which simply leaves the oddity of blindness so often being a metaphor for ignorance and nobody really caring, and it basically having no spillover to people who are actually blind.

Actually, I don't think "lame" gets any spillover either. When you actually have trouble walking, people don't think it's lame. Most people seem to even forget that "lame" is a word that would apply to that condition.

I'm not saying don't make the language changes. I'm all for precision. I just find it interesting that it doesn't actually seem to cause problems. At least, not around me. It could be regional or biased by social groups or such.

Reply

catamorphism July 8 2009, 20:02:57 UTC
Dunno, I'm not blind, and I don't know anyone who is, so I can't speak to whether blind people find it bothersome. I do know that at least some non-zero number of disabled people think "lame" is bothersome, so I try to avoid it since it doesn't really buy me anything to spread bad feelings.

I'm probably not disagreeing with you here, just saying :-)

Reply


stereotype441 July 8 2009, 16:37:50 UTC
Can you help me understand the meaning of the term "yaoi"? I can tell it has something to do with the attitudes of people who don't think the use of the word "lame" should be offensive, but I can't figure out any more than that. And I worry I would be pushing brown_betty's buttons to ask her.

Incidentally, google and Wikipedia are no help--they seem to agree that it's female-oriented fictional media that focus on homoerotic or homoromantic male relationships, and I'm pretty sure that's not what is meant.

Reply

boojum July 8 2009, 17:01:59 UTC
As far as I know, that's the meaning of it. I think it's more specific a genre than that (Japanese or Japanese-sourced, with specific emotional themes and setups), but that doesn't seem to be relevant here ( ... )

Reply

keystricken July 8 2009, 17:28:11 UTC
I think boojum is right, this appears to be a ritualized response. My best guess is that it's meant to address the intentional derailment of a topic.

I'm not a member of the anime or fanfic communities, but I'm willing to bet that discussions in their message boards often get "contributions" by people who thought this was the right time to register their disdain about yaoi, furries, etc. Over time, this "please tell me more of your thoughts about yaoi" may have evolved to address this.

Reply


keystricken July 8 2009, 17:32:40 UTC
For more geekery about removing privilege from language, I recommend Douglas Hofstadter's satire. Apparently it had been bothering him for years, and an essay by William Safire finally pushed him over the edge. He wrote an afterword in his own voice.

Reply

stereotype441 July 8 2009, 17:53:13 UTC
I want there to be another soup and story party so I can read this aloud.

Reply

keystricken July 8 2009, 17:54:16 UTC
Maybe we should have one!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up