Should Al Franken Resign?

[Cow Poke]

Just the liberals?

Give some examples of conservatives changing the language to win debates, please.

[carpedm9587]

One example that springs readily to mind: it was implicitly declared politically incorrect to refer to homosexuality as immoral. Homosexuals and their advocates didn't want to discuss right and wrong but only rights. Once certain parties conceded that point and refrained from discussing homosexuality on moral grounds, the debate swung in favor of homosexuals and their advocates, and they eventually won.

Abortion is another one: it's politically incorrect to refer to the fetus using any term that might humanize it. Once that hurdle is out of the way, the rest falls into place relatively easily.

These are excellent examples. I agree with you. So I would assume you likewise do not support laws that prohibit the use of the words "climate change" in government documentation, or "global warming." Or to mandate that "income disparity" not be permitted.

Control of language to control a topic is not unique to the left or the right, MM - and it would be a hard case to argue that one side does it more than the other.

Or in your case, trying to find "culturally appropriate" ways to wish someone a Merry Christmas, which seems to ignore the reason the holiday even exists in the first place.

I think you missed the point. I am not looking for a "culturally appropriate" way to wish someone Merry Christmas. If I know you are Christian, I will wish you a Merry Christmas without a second thought. But if you are of another faith, I will wish you a joyous celebration that is appropriate for your faith (Kwanzaa, Hanukkah, etc.). And if I do not know what your faith is, I will use the generic.

In other words, I do not (somewhat arrogantly) assume everyone is Christian and celebrates Christmas.

People learned a long time ago that if you can control the language then you can win any debate.

I fixed that for you..

[Mountain Man]

I know, Adrift. That's my point. Because "dis" is associated with disrespect (insult), there is a growing consensus that "disable" evokes that idea and the word should shift. It also focuses on the lack of ability, rather than affirming the ability. As with many such shifts, this one is starting with the community that most closely works with these people. I was awakened to it by a special educator. When my own son was diagnosed with learning challenges, I began to realize just how it impacted me when someone called him "disabled." I was surprised to find that I could not get him on a 504 or IEP unless an evaluation of him was written, and that word HAD to be used - by law. The school accused me of "denying he had a need" because I was advocating for them to stop using that term about (but especially around) my son. I could see the impact it had on him, each time someone used that word about him in his hearing. I saw the tears - I heard the pain he expressed.

Until I had that experience, I never thought twice about "disabled." Now that I have had the experience, I am a strong advocate for shifting the language. To many, I have crossed over to "politically correct." I am the "word nazi." To me - I am a father looking to minimize the pain my son is experiencing, and doesn't have to experience, if people would just be a bit more careful about what words they use.

So when someone comes to me, today, and tells me that something about my language is hurting someone else - I pay attention. I don't dismiss them as "PC." I look for the human being that is expressing hurt, and look for what I can do, without really harming myself in any way, to help them with that hurt. Changing a word here and there is simply not too big a price to pay.

My middle son was born deaf making him technically disabled, so I understand where you're coming from. When people find out for the first time that he's deaf, they almost invariably say, "Oh, I'm sorry." One of my favorite things to do in response is to fix them with a stare and simply ask, "Why?" and then try not to laugh as they awkwardly stammer out what they think will be an inoffensive reply. Sometimes I'll let them off the hook and say, "Look, you don't have to apologize for his deafness. There's nothing wrong with him. He just can't hear."

I understand that he's going to face certain challenges in life because of his condition, and, yes, the IEP says that he's disabled, but so what? That's just a clinical term and not a negative label that he's required to embrace. We choose to define him by his strengths and not his weaknesses, but this is no different than how we treat our other children. Getting my nose out of joint just because someone might use the "wrong" language when describing him would be a waste of energy.

[Bill the Cat]

My middle son was born deaf making him technically disabled, so I understand where you're coming from. When people find out for the first time that he's deaf, they almost invariably say, "Oh, I'm sorry." One of my favorite things to do in response is to fix them with a stare and simply ask, "Why?" and then try not to laugh as they awkwardly stammer out what they think will be an inoffensive reply. Sometimes I'll let them off the hook and say, "Look, you don't have to apologize for his deafness. There's nothing wrong with him. He just can't hear."

I understand that he's going to face certain challenges in life because of his condition, and, yes, the IEP says that he's disabled, but so what? That's just a clinical term and not a negative label that he's required to embrace. We choose to define him by his strengths and not his weaknesses, but this is no different than how we treat our other children. Getting my nose out of joint just because someone might use the "wrong" language when describing him would be a waste of energy.

My son has autism and ADHD and a few other challenges. He hates it when people call him disabled.

[guacamole]

Give some examples of conservatives changing the language to win debates, please.

It seems to me that all sides use language to put the best spin on their positions. My favorite has always been the outrage that the Republicans have been able to whip up over the "death tax." The choice of those words, of all possible descriptors--other, more differently jaundiced descriptions might be "inheritance windfall tax" or, if we really want to throw some fire bombs, "The Program to Prevent the Formation of a Hereditary Aristocracy." We see this in the way pollsters manipulate language and positioning of questions to get certain answers, especially when they want to justify legislation. We see this in the way bureaucrats and the military use purposefully obscure language to hide the reality of their actions: The Bush administration coined the phrase "toxic asset relief program" instead of "Program to make the taxpayer assume the risk for over leveraged corporations ". My favorite military one is "collateral damage" instead of "dead civilians."

[Cow Poke]

My son has autism and ADHD and a few other challenges. He hates it when people call him disabled.

We had a kid - probably 8 - visit our church , and this kid had some issues, but I just talked to him like I'd talk to any other kid who was 8. His parents later commented that they appreciated that. Apparently, they had visited a couple other churches where the people "talked down" to him, like he was stupid or something.

[carpedm9587]

Give some examples of conservatives changing the language to win debates, please.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...-banned-236655

http://www.news.com.au/technology/en...b49ab5ebcb0b9d

http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/florida...climate-change

There are others - but the news feed is SO full of the mistaken story about the seven banned words at the CDC that finding them is taking too much time. I do know that various states have banned terms like "income disparity." Just not finding the article now.

Bottom line - controlling the language always controls the argument. Republicans and liberals not only ban, they create words intentionally designed to skew the discussion, so "Estate Tax" becomes "Death Tax" and consultation on death issues becomes "death panels." A bill designed to restrict freedoms and increase surveillance becomes "The Patriot Act" (because being against it instantly makes you against patriotism, of course). The right does it - the left does it - everybody does it.

Trying to make the case that one side does it more than the other would be an exercise in futility - and shows (IMO) a clear bias to one's own side.

[carpedm9587]

My middle son was born deaf making him technically disabled, so I understand where you're coming from. When people find out for the first time that he's deaf, they almost invariably say, "Oh, I'm sorry." One of my favorite things to do in response is to fix them with a stare and simply ask, "Why?" and then try not to laugh as they awkwardly stammer out what they think will be an inoffensive reply. Sometimes I'll let them off the hook and say, "Look, you don't have to apologize for his deafness. There's nothing wrong with him. He just can't hear."

I understand that he's going to face certain challenges in life because of his condition, and, yes, the IEP says that he's disabled, but so what? That's just a clinical term and not a negative label that he's required to embrace. We choose to define him by his strengths and not his weaknesses, but this is no different than how we treat our other children. Getting my nose out of joint just because someone might use the "wrong" language when describing him would be a waste of energy.

First - as a Dad - I applaud your approach. People sometimes say things without thinking. I adopted both of my boys and they are black. Setting aside the one person who actually asked me if we had told them they were adopted , we often get "are they brothers?" I know what they are asking - but I cannot resist responding with "they are now! "

For the record, however, I don't get my nose out of joint for very many things. Well - except for a nice mutton and tomato sandwich, when the.... oh never mind.

But I DO take presented opportunities to educate people about the impact of their words, in much the same way you take the opportunity to educate people who treat your son's reality as something to be sorrowful about. Encouraging people to look for the abilities instead of the dis-abilities just makes us all better. It doesn't have to be a religion - just a simple part of life.

[Mountain Man]

He hates it when people call him disabled.

It has unfortunately become a loaded term. People in the Deaf community hate it, too. There's a whole debate about deafness as a pathology versus deafness as a culture -- also known as "Deaf" or "Big-D Deaf" -- and "audism" was a term recently created to describe the belief that those with hearing loss inherently find life harder and less fulfilling than those who can hear, which I can tell you for a fact is untrue. As I. King Jordan, the former president of Gallaudet University, once said, "Deaf people can do anything hearing people can, except hear," a statement that was quickly embraced as the motto of Deaf culture.

[Mountain Man]

Setting aside the one person who actually asked me if we had told them they were adopted ...

That's hilarious.

[Cow Poke]

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...-banned-236655

http://www.news.com.au/technology/en...b49ab5ebcb0b9d

http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/florida...climate-change

There are others - but the news feed is SO full of the mistaken story about the seven banned words at the CDC that finding them is taking too much time. I do know that various states have banned terms like "income disparity." Just not finding the article now.

Bottom line - controlling the language always controls the argument. Republicans and liberals not only ban, they create words intentionally designed to skew the discussion, so "Estate Tax" becomes "Death Tax" and consultation on death issues becomes "death panels." A bill designed to restrict freedoms and increase surveillance becomes "The Patriot Act" (because being against it instantly makes you against patriotism, of course). The right does it - the left does it - everybody does it.

Trying to make the case that one side does it more than the other would be an exercise in futility - and shows (IMO) a clear bias to one's own side.

Thanks

[carpedm9587]

That's hilarious.

Yeah - I have to work REAL hard not to laugh outloud when it happens, and it happened a few times over the years.

My favorite moment, however, was when we first adopted Isaiah (3 weeks old) and we had him in a stroller at a water park. A young girl - maybe 5 - wanted to see the baby, so we pulled back the blanket and showed her. There was this long minute during which her eyes went back and forth from the baby in the stroller to the two of us, and then she blurted out, "how did you DO that?"

The young lady had enough knowledge of babies to know Mom and Dad were somehow involved (she had a baby brother of her own), and her absolute candor just cracked me up...

[Sparko]

I got the perfect PC term to replace "disabled"

Alt-Normal.

you're welcome.

[Cow Poke]

Yeah - I have to work REAL hard not to laugh outloud when it happens, and it happened a few times over the years.

My favorite moment, however, was when we first adopted Isaiah (3 weeks old) and we had him in a stroller at a water park. A young girl - maybe 5 - wanted to see the baby, so we pulled back the blanket and showed her. There was this long minute during which her eyes went back and forth from the baby in the stroller to the two of us, and then she blurted out, "how did you DO that?"

The young lady had enough knowledge of babies to know Mom and Dad were somehow involved (she had a baby brother of her own), and her absolute candor just cracked me up...

I have two daughters. One had brown hair like her mother and I used to have (well, her mother still does, but it comes in a bottle) and the youngest daughter had flaming red hair.

When Jenny, the younger, was about 4, we were standing in line at Kroger's checkout, and this lady behind us kept staring at Jenny's red hair, then looking at the rest of us. Jenny's was your classic "Texas big poof" red hair and LOTS of it!

This lady finally said, in a rather loud voice, with that "the milk man did it" accusatory tone, "Where did you get YOUR red hair, sweetie?" Jenny looked up at her and said "Jesus gave it to me".

That really shut the lady up, and ended THAT conversation!

[carpedm9587]

I have two daughters. One had brown hair like her mother and I used to have (well, her mother still does, but it comes in a bottle) and the youngest daughter had flaming red hair.

When Jenny, the younger, was about 4, we were standing in line at Kroger's checkout, and this lady behind us kept staring at Jenny's red hair, then looking at the rest of us. Jenny's was your classic "Texas big poof" red hair and LOTS of it!

This lady finally said, in a rather loud voice, with that "the milk man did it" accusatory tone, "Where did you get YOUR red hair, sweetie?" Jenny looked up at her and said "Jesus gave it to me".

That really shut the lady up, and ended THAT conversation!

Oh I have so MANY possible responses here...