Copyright © 2019 Henrietta W. Hay
Disparaging Language
May 17, 1993
When I went to High School we were called the Englewood Pirates and we played basketball and football against the Arvada Redskins. We had not heard of Politically Correct Language and we had not heard very much about human rights. Almost everybody was white, and prejudice against anybody who wasn't just like us was the normal state of affairs.
There have been some changes. Unless you have been living in a cave the past few weeks, you are aware of the furor taking place in the Arvada High School over seventy year old school name, Redskins. The principal was visited by American Indian parents who protested the name. He listened, and decreed that the name is no longer acceptable. Traditionalist students and alumni came unglued and the ensuing battle is still going on.
I suppose I should recuse myself from this discussion, since only recently I protested strongly against using the term "Lady Buffs" on the grounds that the name was patronizing toward women athletes. As it turned out, the C. U. Athletic Department felt the same way, and by sheer coincidence the "Lady Buffs" became The Women's Basketball team that very week.
The move toward politically correct language is ridiculed, but it is evidence of our efforts to be civil to one another. Our civilization is trying to come to grips with diversity. Of course, we often go too far to right a wrong. That is the American Way. The line between the sensitive and the ridiculous is hard to find and we often get pretty silly. But we're trying.
Random House's New Webster's College Dictionary shows how thin the line is. On one side it has been criticized by the New York Times for "sanctioning the jargon of special interest groups." This august publication objected to words like "womyn," "herstory" and "waitron;" and to buzz words like "wuss," "malling" and "dumbing down." In defense, the editor says, "We're saying that a dictionary is 'descriptive' rather than 'prescriptive' and that certain words can be used or spelled in certain ways." That edition became known as the first politically correct dictionary.
The Politically Correct People objected to the inclusion of such politically incorrect and offensive epithets as "nigger," "wop" and "honkey." But, the editor says, "It's better to put those words in the dictionary and unequivocally tell people they're offensive and derogatory, than make believe they don't exist."
Labels, which hurt or denigrate a group of people, are no longer acceptable in our society. And unless we have been there, we really don't know what hurts. My friend who comes from South America says that "wetback" is to him the most offensive epithet. Language does matter.
Acceptable terms evolve through the years as minorities gain recognition and the power to speak.
We no longer, I hope, use racial slurs like "nigger" or "polak" or "spic". And we are learning not to use sexist words like "congressman" or "councilman" when referring to women. These words are inaccurate and deny women the recognition they have earned. The Associated Press Style Book several years ago established "congresswoman" and "councilwoman" as the correct forms of address. So did the United States Congress.
Of course, we still bounce back and forth over the line a lot. I must admit that "differently abled" for "physically handicapped" is quite a leap. And while I personally dislike "little old ladies," I can live with it, but I think that "chronologically advantaged" is going too far.
My friend the philosopher says that the move to make fun of Politically Correct Language is essentially a way to make it legitimate to be insensitive. Somewhere along the way we have to find the difference between labels that are simply traditional and those that hurtful and disparaging.