this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
582 points (92.4% liked)

politics

19144 readers
3803 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Rep. Eli Crane used the derogatory phrase in describing his proposed amendment to a military bill. Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty asked that his words be stricken from the record.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Linguistically, very little difference. Contextually, when we bring in history? Huge difference.

[–] lemming007@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Just wait 10-20 years. It seems what's acceptable to say changes all the time.

20 years ago "queer" was offensive.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Of course. Society is constantly changing, as is the composition and education of society. And as a result, language changes. This is the same philosophy I take with someone's preferred pronouns -- it costs me nothing to use the right words. So long as unintentional mistakes are overlooked, and I've never seen someone get angry about unintentionally misgendering, I'm totally fine with it.

It comes down to this. If someone is uncomfortable with something you've done, and it's something as simple as word choice, why not accommodate them? Why not let them be comfortable at no cost to you? The exact same principle goes for what's acceptable and what isn't.

It really isn't that much work for someone to say "gay person" or "LGBTQ people" instead of queer. Changing your terminology every 20 years isn't rocket science. Look at it this way, if Eminem can censor himself and apologize for saying f*g, I think the rest of us can make the effort too.

(Eminem's thoughts are actually really interesting here. He points out he doesn't mean it as a slur at all, and that while he was growing up it was a general insult in rap, not constantly used as a slur. All the same, he's still used it less and less over the years. )

[–] Reliant1087@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Honestly the problem is actually getting a chance. I'm not American and English is not my first language either.

I had people get very angry with media from my home country for characters in a movie wearing black coloured makeup and was called racist for trying to tell them that blackface is not a thing in our culture and you can't judge foreign media based on your own cultural norms.

I'm dyslexic and make a word salad almost all the time, without even being aware of it most of the time. Would people honestly give me a chance if I accidentally mix up the order of people and colored? It seems like they wouldn't, given my interactions.

[–] Laticauda@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, that is the nature of language. We don't speak like Shakespeare anymore either, imagine that. Queer people was offensive 20 years ago because it was mostly used as a slur then by bigots. It's not as offensive now because queer people reclaimed it and it is mostly used by them to refer to themselves. They have generally expressed that they are more comfortable with it because of that. "Coloured people" is still used mostly by racists, while "people of colour" is commonly used by non-white people to refer to themselves. In each example an important factor is how the group being referred to feels about a particular term. Most black people have made it pretty clear that they don't like being called "coloured people", especially not by white conservatives, but they generally don't mind the term "people of colour". So if you have to use one or the other, the one that you know they don't like is probably not the safe bet.

[–] jscummy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'd absolutely agree, but I don't think that was his intention. As a politician, he should know better. This seems like another senator tried to score some political points on accidentally using the wrong term though, instead of actually arguing policy

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Oh sure, yeah. I could believe that. His reaction now to the story should confirm it.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don't think that was his intention, huh? Based on what?

"As a politician he should know better" - now, more than ever, "politician" doesn't speak to any basic standard met or level of qualification. A person who isn't a racist doesn't use that phrase today casually because they understand the negative connotation.

[–] jscummy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Based on him listing "black people" separately, and when called out asking to change it to people of color

[–] Skaryon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Non native speaker here. I assume colored people was a term for slaves then?

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It was the “correct” term for POC towards the end of slavery and through the Jim Crowe era. Bathrooms, Pool, Water Fountains, etc. were often labeled “Whites” and “Coloreds”. Segregation is a major part of history most of this country tries to forget, and absolutely doesn’t broadcast.