Category: Language

By on

I noticed a new word the other day while browsing though the internet. Josh Marshall, at Talking Points Memo has devised a short hand for the term throwing someone under the bus, Marshall now writes underbus. I have to admit I like it. I knew immediately what he was referring to and it abbreviates the phrase into a new verb that can be conjugated effortlessly. Four stars for underbus.

By on

I can’t believe I find myself in the position of defending Piers Morgan but such is the world we live in that a pompous ass like Morgan has become the voice of reason. Tucker Carlson tried to get Morgan to use the word faggot. Morgan politely declined which didn’t satisfy the feisty Carlson as he fired off a round of faggots. He then wondered why he couldn’t say the N word.

Interestingly Carlson used the N word instead of the actual word. The repercussions for the N word were too much even for him. He knew enough not to say the actual word which also means he knows why he shouldn’t say faggot. Free speech comes with repercussions. He thought he could get away with faggot but knew enough not to gamble on saying the N word. And he has the balls to complain he doesn’t understand. He understands all too well.

When people complain that they can’t use words like faggot or the N word, they are being incredibly disingenuous. They understand the meaning of these words. They are derogatory and hateful words. People use them to hurt people and that’s why most people avoid using them. People know that and choose their words carefully as a way to manage their way through civil discourse.

In the good old days, say 50 years ago, a White man could say the N word without much of price. Thankfully this has changed. The audience for people willing to hear a White man say the N word without repercussions has gotten infinitesimally small. You are free to say it but there will definitely be a price as there should be.

But, why then do Blacks get to use the N word and he can’t. Well, hmm, let me think about that one. Maybe, and I am just guessing here, it might be that for a good portion of American history that whites used the N word as a way of putting Black people down. A White person carries some historical baggage for racism so it becomes important for them to avoid using the N Word to avoid looking racist. Blacks, on the other hand, do not bear this same historical baggage so are better able to get away with using it. Yes, it is unfair but then life is unfair.

The annoying thing about this whole kerfuffle is that Carlson understands perfectly well why he shouldn’t say faggot and the N word. Pressing Morgan to partake in it was a childish attempt to undermine Morgan’s good manners. To Morgan’s credit, he refrained from getting pulled into Carlson’s nonsense. But if it is so darned important for Carlson to say faggot or the N word without social cost, I suggest he attend a KKK meeting, I am pretty certain he could get away with it there.

By on

I just used the term underage girl while writing about the Epstein Files. It bothered me as I felt it was redundant. A girl, by the very meaning of the word, is underage. Girl is sufficient. Right?

I think this is due to the fact that, in the past, girl was used to describe young women. So if I said girl, people might think I was talking about an adult and not someone who was underage.

I debated this for quite some time before I opted for underage girl. I just think it more clearly describes who I was talking about.

But am I wrong?

By on

I was going to mention this in my previous post regarding Ron Johnson (see my thoughts here) but there are two different topics here and so I decided to do two separate posts. Welcome to the windmills of my mind. Never ending or beginning on an ever spinning reel.

Johnson writes “This is all preplanned by an elite group of people.” Isn’t planned sufficient? What different meaning does the pre give to preplan. Nothing, right?

I was disappointed to find a definition for preplan. It means this travesty has been on the loose for some time and has wandered a bit too far to bring it back into the barn. But, I am sucker for losing causes so please remember to plan and avoid preplanning at all costs. If nothing else using plan will save you some time. I mean thats three less letters to write. That’s something. Pretty please.

By on

Until recently, I prided myself on being able to spell the most difficult word and if I couldn’t spell it, I could generally spot my error pretty quickly when I edited. As I age, though, I find that this super power is declining. Maybe aging isn’t to blame but I have only noticed the problem since I slipped over the 65 years marker. Whatever the reason, I have noticed my spelling has gone to Hell in a hand basket.

Here are two recent and, once you see them, embarrassing, mistakes. I tried to spell technically as tycnically. I was convinced that the tycn was correct and ically was wrong after I began to edit. I spent an ungodly amount of time trying to change the ically before realizing that perhaps the tycn was wrong. I still think that tycnically is a valid alternative.

Then there was exspell instead of expel. This misspelling I blame on my sounding it out. I say ex spell when it should be Ex pel.

I am not so worried about the actual misspelling because I think that when you are writing and you need to get the word on the page, putting down a close approximation of the word is enough until you go back and edit. But now I can’t see the problem where it once, on review, was easy for me to spot. I now make countless attempts to correct the wrong syllable.

Which means I am down to one super power – parallel parking.

By on 1 Comment

Moms for Liberty, a right wing group, recently quoted Hitler. It created a great deal of commotion. So much so that Lt. Gov. Robinson came to their defense. His awkward finesse was basically that just because Hitler and Mao were wrong about a lot of things doesn’t mean that they weren’t right about some things. As the old saying goes, a stopped clock is right twice a day. This doesn’t mean you should rely on that clock in any way.

As a rule of thumb, I think if you have a quote from a serial killing authoritarian and you want to use that quote as support for a position you are espousing, take a deep breath and, after regaining your senses, find another quote from someone less controversial, and when you are considering Mao and Hitler, this would be almost anybody, and use that instead. But never use the quote from the dictator. NEVER. It will only bring you heart ache.

By on 2 Comments

A Cervical Cancer society in the UK recently made a suggestion, and it was a suggestion and not a command, to medical professionals to use the term bonus hole or front hole instead of vagina when talking to trans patients. It isn’t going to happen. One, if someone said bonus hole to me I wouldn’t have a clue what they are talking about. My mind drifted to golf for some reason but it did not go to vagina. There is also a perfectly good word already in use for vagina that would be vagina. I am not sure why it is offensive to Trans people and I am not sure why it needs to change.

But what about Trans people’s feelings? I doubt that many Trans people actually are offended by the use of the word vagina. Has anyone ever checked into this? Or are Trans activists, with nothing better to do with their time, imagining offenses where no offense is being taken. The Trans community would be better served by activists who can explain why Trans people might need medical treatment, how they are not forcing these medical options on Trans people, and helping parents make the necessary decisions regarding their children’s future. Until then, Trans Activists are acting as if they have won the day and that they are in a position to direct people’s language. They are not. Trans activists are going to lose while also alienating potential supporters of Trans rights which is something I would think they would like to avoid.

Then there is the argument that if it is important for people to be comfortable and to use language that supports this comfort, what about all the people who prefer vagina to bonus hole? Aren’t they people too? Last year, Bette Midler got entangled in another controversy because she objected to replacing the word woman with birthing people or menstruators. She wants to be called a women and I am betting that there are billions of other women who have the same preference. Billions, mind you, while Trans people being offended by the word woman is how big a group — I am guessing hundreds, maybe thousands at best. And to make it even more confusing, what about Trans women who want to be called women? Can they use women? Language is around to make life simpler. Menstruator and Bonus Hole makes life more complicated so are doomed for failure.

So in summation, this society is recommending replacing a perfectly useful and widely understood word like vagina to a different word nobody knows so nobody will understand it when used in order to prevent offending a very small group within society who may not even be offended by vagina in the first place. There is a better use for people’s energies than this losing battle.

By on

A BBC talk show guest recently corrected his host on the proper phrase for seaweed which is apparently marine algae. This is news to me as well. But Ok, yes, maybe seaweed is confusing and isn’t exactly the best way of saying it. On the other hand, people have been saying seaweed for thousands of years. These changes take time and most people don’t take kindly to lectures that make them appear stupid. Since the seaweed/marine algae isn’t a particularly urgent matter, it would be wise to put a lid on it.

It also give the Conservative Press a chance to point out the hectoring ways of some language policing Liberals. Since there are so many more important battles to fight, it would seem prudent to pick the right battles to exert our time and energy. Sometimes you have to fight losing battles but this isn’t one of them.

There is a better way to finesse this. You just start using the correct phrase when speaking with the interviewer. Then, the interviewer can respond to your phrasing and maybe even inquire more about why you prefer marine algae. But to do it in the corrective manner reported is ridiculous. All it does is make me want to say seaweed in the most annoying tone possible: seaweed, seaweed, seaweed. So there.

More importantly, you don’t change people’s minds by making them feel stupid. Once you’ve made someone feel stupid, they aren’t going to listen to a word you say. So, good you are are correct but you aren’t a very effective agent of change. People have to see why they need to change and then they do. Remember Ms? Or should I say, remember Mrs and Miss? Nobody uses Mrs and Miss any more. Ms is just easier. The moment people realized that they could just use Ms instead of inquiring about the woman’s preferred title, the battle was over. I might add that people changed to using Ms in a very short time.

This is also why I think the various personal pronoun options are doomed. It’s too complicated, you have to ask everyone you meet their preferred pronouns whereas, in the past, a quick visual assessment of a person’s gender did the trick and 99% of the time this works. Yes, you might, on a rare occasion, make a mistake but, by and large, you will get it right. I am certainly not going to ask a person for their preferred pronouns and risk getting my head bit off by someone who thinks preferred pronouns are a crap idea which, by the way, is most of middle America. If you want me to use something different, you are going to have to tell me. I will be happy to oblige.

In the meantime, I am telling you now I am not going down fighting to ensure people use the term marine algae for seaweed. Because my reply will be: Seaweed. Seaweed. Seaweed.

By on

I don’t want to bring any more controversy to the abortion debate but I have seen the term medication abortions numerous times in the past week. If I had only seen it once, I would have chalked it up to author error but repeated use of the same term leads me to believe that the accepted term for an abortion brought about by pills is medication abortions. Here are additional example of this phrase here and here. This seems grammatically incorrect. Why is it called medication abortions instead of medicated abortions?

Medicated is an adjective that explains the abortion process the author is talking about. Since abortion is the subject and not medication, medicated abortion is the appropriate expression for the process. Joining medication and abortion doesn’t change the meaning and the term grates on my ears. What is the point? I am baffled. Or am I missing something?

By on

I learned a new phrase for going to the toilet. I never liked the ones presently available as they are a bit too crude for my taste. So I am watching an old television show — Supernatural, season 4 if you must know and discovered the use of Releasing the Hostages. This euphemism perfectly encapsulates, at least for me, the bowel movement process. I can’t wait to use it.