|
RE: Sigaba
I believe I understand the intent of your post; discussions regarding the sudden explosion of "identities" and how to refer to them in such fashion that they do not feel marginalized.
I can understand the academic pursuit of such discussions. The disconnect between what you suggest we should do, and actually doing it is that I, for one, am not open minded enough to care whether its OK to use the word "queer" or "fag" this week or not. For me, I have no desire to look beyond "dude" or "chick", "sir" or "mam" and to try to discern whether to use post-trans, pre-trans, trans-woman, hermaphrodite etc... Furthermore, I assert that by allowing all these weighted and contextually sensitive adjectives into popular language actually hinders what could have been otherwise valuable debate. How much time and money have we spent attempting to shift the popular conservative/right leaning mindset into "tolerance" all the while shoving that same group of people into the category of "intolerant" and "bigoted"?
Tolerance and acceptance works both ways. You can't call folks "bible clinging, gun toting, hillbillies" while appealing to their logical side to accept and EMBRACE things that disgusts them.
I welcome your thoughts.
|