BIPOC – Black and Indigenous People Of Color
Read this article for a more in-depth explanation. It is a good reminder that searching for (or, worse, demanding) the “right” terminology can erase the struggle involved with developing modes of communicating about groups of people and oppress the people doing the work.
What I really wish is that we could redefine political correctness as “not colluding with foreign governments to get elected” and “not starting wars to get re-elected” and “not lying during (or after!) a campaign”. However, that’s not the world we live in, yet.
One definition I like says:
The avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.
This definition is almost neutered by the phrase “…are perceived to…”. Take that out and I’m good with this definition.
NPR’s piece on the shifting history of the phrase says:
So, to review: “Politically correct” means politically wise or invalid or hypersensitive or cowardice.
It’s not just the Republicans or conservatives that use this phrase as a weapon. I hear comedians and pundits of all politics stripes use this as an accusation against their critics (see various forms of “fragility”). The common complaint is that the speaker “can’t say” what they want to say. Actually, they are perfectly free to say whatever they want. They just don’t want to be criticized for it. That turns their free-speech arguments upside-down.
Still, just using the phrase plays into the game. If I replace variations of P.C. with “compassionate and inclusive” my intent is clearer and harder to argue with.
The genius of the “OK boomer” retort is that any negative reaction to the phrase invites — even demands — the response, “OK boomer”.
The Wikipedia entry for “OK boomer” has a nice overview of the history of the phrase.
I have no standing to define “Latinx”. I am, however, interested in speaking respectfully of people and referring to them as they feel is appropriate. However, with such a large, wide-spread, and diverse set of populations it is all but impossible to choose one word that will make every stakeholder happy. Going forward I will use “Latinx” keeping in mind the information in this article, “The X In Latinx Is A Wound, Not A Trend” on EFNIKS.com
Mirriam Webster defines “trigger warning” as:
a statement cautioning that content (as in a text, video, or class) may be disturbing or upsetting
A trigger or content warning, or TW and CW for short, is used to warn people of content that might illicit [sic] a strong or potentially harmful emotional response. Content warnings may usually be considered less harmful or threatening (or more broad) than trigger warnings, but the severity of response varies. For this reason, there will be no difference between content and trigger warnings on this blog, as the subjects could be both or either depending on the person.
On this site I will use it to point out things I understand some people would strongly object to. It does not mean that I don’t think you should read it! It’s a notice that you might find something objectionable and that if you think it might be triggering for you, you should do some self-care before reading further and assess whether or not to read it.
I most certainly do not know everyone’s sensitive topics so if you think I need to add a “CW” to one of my pages or blog posts let me know (hopefully with some information about why) and I’ll look into it. Send me a message via the Contact page.
This article from The Black Youth Project explains “microappreciations”, a new term to me. This article calls me to publicly back people who are taking a stand and who need to know that someone stands with them. This may be one useful outlet for my various privileges.
This is a good introductory article with several interpretations of these terms.
“These are all terms that have come out of personal experience,” said Lou Himes, a non-binary Psy-D and Liscenced Clinical psychologist based in New York City. That means there are no concrete definitions to go by. Plus, these terms are relatively new to academia, medicine, and mainstream discourse. The beauty of that: Each person can interpret their differences for themselves and identify with the one that resonates most with them.
This means that the will be multiple interpretations and varying definitions and we can expect that they will evolve – both culturally and personally.
How far from a group norm can you be and still be acceptable to the group? Idiosyncracy Credit attempts to explain it. Hmmm…
“Implicit Bias is the process of associating stereotypes or attitudes towards categories of people without conscious awareness.”
Source: Don’t Talk about Implicit Bias Without Talking about Structural Racism
Scott's Thoughts 