John Eligon
Posted on 03/27/2017 1:08:48 PM PDT by Trump20162020
It seems as if everyone in the mainstream media world is taking a fresh look at their style guides this year… for some reason. (*cough*) First we saw the Associated Press preparing to twist their pronouns in strange and unusual directions to avoid offending transgender activists. Now, thanks to some sharp work at The Daily Caller, we learn that the New York Times has grown unhappy with the old list of racially insensitive terms and may be adding a few more.
A group of New York Times journalists released a list of racial terms they find “bothersome” Sunday.
NYT’s Race/Related team included terms like”ethnic,” person of color” and “illegal immigrant” among those they found slightly offensive.
John Eligon, the paper’s national correspondent, found “ethnic”a troublesome term because it “normalizes” whiteness.
The letter reads more like something out of a debate class syllabus at a liberal arts college than a guide to modern English usage.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Sorry, ain’t buy’n it. I am so sick of PC I could puke. These leftists will pepper spray someone who disagrees with them but now has a list that no ones feelings will be hurt.
Emily: Everybody knows that it’s crude and vulgar to talk about rectal things. It’s very uncomfortable and really uncouth and ....
GreyLady: Good grief, Emily, it’s RACIAL, not RECTAL
Emily: ...oops, sorry, ...
Greylady: Just don’t let it happen again
Emily: ... bitch ...
I think to show their wisdom and skill, they need to start an offensive word radioactivity scale. They could do the entire English dictionary and really keep themselves and us busy
It would go something like this
tree - 0.0
Cheese - 0.5 (some vegans may take offense)
friend - 2.0
Ethnic - 3.5
Ginger - 5.0
ghetto - 6.5
Ni**er - 11 (the scale goes to eleven)
If gender ever comes up (which is rare) I now just ask, “are you an x or a y?” Keeps it simple and direct...
John Eligon
>> If gender ever comes up (which is rare) I now just ask, “are you an x or a y?” Keeps it simple and direct...
What would the liberals do if confronted with bathroom doors labeled XX and XY?
Soon, their newspaper will be an unreadable code, like the writings of the Modern Language Association.
Here's an example:
Turning to Anna May Wong, an iconic "race beauty" in the early twentieth century, this essay argues that Wong's glamour is achieved neither through her apparently racialized performances nor through her uncomplicated assumption of female agency but rather through a paradoxical staging and erasure of her own body and skin. By asking how a celebrated body might operate subjunctively rather than materially, we can begin to question the imperatives of personhood that drive both celebrity and race studies.
What that kid thinks is of no importance to me.
.
What would the liberals do if confronted with bathroom doors labeled XX and XY?
A rare chance to share a life long observation: Minorities will ALWAYS complain about whatever they are called, even if it’s the latest label THEY insisted on.
Colored became negative, then it was say it aloud I’m black and I’m proud, then it had to be African American. Somewhere in there emerged “people of color” (colored?).
Simple solution of course would be to stop identifying your group by skin color, but the left doesn’t want that.
It’s not going to be much longer before the AP/NYT dumps he/him/his/she/her for xe/xem/xyrs (they’re already starting to use they/them to refer to an individual).
http://www.bartleby.com/73/2019.html
QUOTATION: “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”
ATTRIBUTION: LEWIS CARROLL (Charles L. Dodgson), Through the Looking-Glass, chapter 6, p. 205 (1934). First published in 1872.
Well you see, you just excluded much of the left and nearly all of press with your wording. If you ask “are you an x or a y?” they can’t tell if you mean “XY” which would refer to males, or “KY” which would refer to them.
That’s your problem right there.
Nope!
The word “tree” rates at least a full point.
By using it in its diminutive lower case format
you have denied it the respect of “personhood”
to which all forest dwellers are entitled.
You have also intimated that those forest dwellers
of the non-ambulatory variety are not entitled to
the same respect as ableist species such as Bears,
Bees, Birds and Bedbugs.
This isn’t about jelly!
;-)
Normal don’t need “normalizing”. White is normal to me because I’m white. If you are black, perhaps it is not. But why do you judge yourself by other people, is my question?
Only Christ can make the appropriate judgments, and He doesn’t do it by skin color, sex, etc. but by your relationship with Him
Lists of prohibitions, once begun, grow.
Like lies, they first appear benign.
PC bookmark
NY TIMES
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.