Language policing costs a lot, but its invisible since its the cost of everyone updating themselves and spending time rethinking what to say. That is worth many billions of dollars in lost time, and since its a moving target like we see with other words constantly getting updated it will never stop, its an ongoing cost we constantly pay for this.
>Language policing costs a lot, but its invisible since its the cost of everyone updating themselves and spending time rethinking what to say.
How often do you think the average person actually has to change their language? It seems like it would be a pretty tiny fraction for the vast majority of people in the vast majority of circumstances. On the other hand, if you're a professor of history or a public official, it probably does cost some of your time. But in those cases, doesn't it also provide value?
Is the same true of other forms of manners, table behaviour say, or are they actually encoding something useful and pro-social?
My guess is, if I'd had to learn to use a knife and fork and typical Western table manners at 35, it'd remain a small stone in my shoe for life.
Which is to say, not using certain language might always grind our gears a little. I notice it, certainly don't always use the words my brain first reaches for, but not so much as to bug me. There's so much other self-censorship that we automate subconsciously or almost, it's not a big deal.
For younger people? It's no deal at all, they have no more use for the R word than you or I do in some obsolete 19th century racial slur.
> For younger people? It's no deal at all, they have no more use for the R word than you or I do in some obsolete 19th century racial slur.
That's because they replaced the r word with autistic, which I presume will be the a word in about 20 years and some other term will be used to describe autism.
They describe quite different phenomena, both in terms of the actual state of being and how they're deployed as a slur? "autistic" seems to be more like "nerd" used to be a slur (but also sometime identity badge) before the rise of SV billionaires.
I've never heard "autistic" applied to anything other than people (and possibly animals, for humour) for example, in the way the r word was used as a stronger version of "dumb".
Anyway, I think people having to be a little careful with their words is a small price to pay to breaking the linguistic and stereotypical link between people with learning difficulties, Downs etc. and dumb, annoying situations.
It's called spelling a word because words are spells, which is why it's ok to place some of them off-limits.
> They describe quite different phenomena, both in terms of the actual state of being and how they're deployed as a slur? "autistic" seems to be more like "nerd" used to be a slur (but also sometime identity badge) before the rise of SV billionaires.
Not what I'm talking about at all. Teens in the US use autistic in the exact same way the r word was used 20 - 30 years ago. It's an insult that is a stronger version of dumb.
> I've never heard "autistic" applied to anything other than people (and possibly animals, for humour) for example, in the way the r word was used as a stronger version of "dumb".
You're just not exposed to it then. Which is fine, but doesn't mean it isn't commonplace. I am guessing you don't live in the US based on your spelling of humour, which would be one explanation of why you aren't tuned into this.
> Anyway, I think people having to be a little careful with their words is a small price to pay to breaking the linguistic and stereotypical link between people with learning difficulties, Downs etc. and dumb, annoying situations.
People being considerate is good. But banning specific words doesn't accomplish what most of the word police claims it will.
> It's called spelling a word because words are spells, which is why it's ok to place some of them off-limits.
> Not what I'm talking about at all. Teens in the US use autistic in the exact same way the r word was used 20 - 30 years ago. It's an insult that is a stronger version of dumb.
Well that's... <searches mental Rolodex> the actions of a bunch of people with the intellect of a grape, the empathy of a stale French fry, and the collective odour of a sack of dead badgers.
(See how much more fun this whole insult business is with just a little more effort?)
> You're just not exposed to it then. Which is fine, but doesn't mean it isn't commonplace. I am guessing you don't live in the US based on your spelling of humour, which would be one explanation of why you aren't tuned into this.
Yep. I'm in the UK. Have teenage kids, if I caught them using autistic in that way, they could say goodbye to wifi access for a month.
> People being considerate is good. But banning specific words doesn't accomplish what most of the word police claims it will.
Eventually it does, or helps to at least, but over a much longer timeframe. Generations, realistically - many middle-aged people don't have the mental plasticity to absorb big shifts in how race, gender, sex, sexuality are addressed.
Changing minds takes a lot longer than changing manners, but the latter can make a positive difference in the meantime.
I don't disagree with anything you said, but that doesn't change anything about how little language changes impact the lived experiences of the targets of the slur du jour.
