I’m disabled, my disability is part of me. Insisting on person first language just lets me know that you think my disability makes me less of a person and you need to be actively reminded that it doesn’t.
i once called my friend a moron and my teacher told me that could offened mentally disabled people and its like why are you assuming that would offend disabled people but moron means dumb so she was kinda assuming that disabledpeople are dumb
Certain words are negative, and that doesn't change by using euphemisms. It just highlights that you're afraid to speak the truth. Being retarted or to have special needs are just as negative things.
@@Mallory-Malkovich It is fascism when enforced. There's a million things a person can be sensitive towards. I constantly see people like you who say this crap then go on to say very rude and offensive things and be completely oblivious because the things you're being insensitive about cannot be discussed openly. People like you always think you have it all figured out but you don't. No one has the perfect formula, just different perspectives on what constitutes acceptable speech and they all conflict with one another. This is why speech must be as free as possible.
This isn’t about self-expression, but self-obsession. Instead people need to tidy their rooms, find a useful job, and get on with life without this mumbo jumbo.
These problems happen mostly in english-speaking countries, you don't see delusional people being celebrated that much in other reasonable countries, central america is a fine example where people is not that kind of crazy.
These critira change like every 5 years, lending itself to more of a fashion or hip way of speaksing to signal that they are PC, than actually causing MEASURABLE change. if they even retrospectily review to see if its working.. Much of this newspeak came about in 2012 when identitarianism and intersectionality hit the mainstream. Compared to the 90s and 2000s have things gotten better from a racial, gender standpoint? do we even ask the questions or just assume this must work. This also creates cognative load on the public that have to constantly adpot new language. It also keeps these types in a job.
Talking of language, "homophobic" is and always has been a silly term. I myself am 100% fine with homosexuality, but someone disagreeing with it does *not* mean or imply that they fear, hate, or even dislike you. Similarly, "hate speech" seems to be a very ill-defined if not arbitrarily defined phrase. And the vast majority of the time I've seen the phrase used (to censor dissenting viewpoints) it was being used incorrectly. Also, "people of color" is indeed reminiscent of the offensive term "colored people". But you're wrong about exactly why it's offensive (still). It's offensive because we are *all* people who have colored skin. And when you refer to black people, hispanics, etc. as "people of color" you are lumping them up in a group of their own unnecessarily. It is often used by people who proceed to stereotype members of these ethnic groups in terms of their beliefs, values, etc. and it should stop. Transgenderism also remains a wholly incoherent worldview. Whenever I ask a trans person/advocate how they "know" they're the opposite gender (or no gender), they inevitably answer by confusing gender with the inclination/disinclination to adhere to certain gender roles or norms. That, or they say something like "I just (don't) feel like a man/woman". And this is incoherent as well since we've no basis for that comparison. We've all only been just the one gender. So we'd have no way of knowing the difference between "feeling like" a man vs. "feeling like" a woman, or indeed if there is even such a feeling at all.
You are so deeply wrong it's hard to know where to start. Yes language changes how we think, but it doesn't change reality. While I agree not using slurs is a good thing, this obsession with minute and basically random changes in language is a distraction to actually doing anything. It has much more to do with bullying and self promotion than confronting actual problems. And no one has or should ask for the right to self identify! You are saying that people must pretend to accept things about others that are plainly not true. This is not progress this is authoritarianism. This is such a profoundly toxic idea, and accepting this in society is devastating for the rights of women, children and LGB people, and don't kid yourself, in a few years people will be self-identifying their race, so for people of color as well.
I'm not sure how old you are but languages constantly change, even from Canada's founding a hundred years ago. A lot of the time, language reflects the speakers and is constantly being updated, hence why new version dictionaries are still being printed. More specifically, it's not 'progressive' to avoid calling people derogatory terms or something they considered offensive, It's just common courtesy. I mean, the Canadian government (incorrectly) called Indigenous peoples "Indians" until the 80's. For example, my father who grew up in Sarnia Ontario in the 60's was not around anyone who wasn't white or straight so he never had any reason to learn new words for different people outside of some pretty nasty terms for to-days standards. He didn't hate anyone at all, just wasn't educated enough to know what to call people other than an offensive word he learned from his parents. Only until he moved to Toronto and met diverse people, he learned that they don't like specific words that were once used by our own government. I think you incentivized that PC culture is overkill, but if no one had fought to get a change of terminology for specific Canadians, we might still call Indigenous peoples "Indians". It's only "too far" if you like to use some controversial terms on the daily. Being educated is one of the best ways to prevent needing to talk about this topic at all. Just don't say something that could hurt someone...
@@jeb1691 that's my exact point though They're only "controversially because overly sentisitve pc culture has decided what words are and aren't "problematic" to control people and language police. It's insanity People should be allowed to say Indians or redskins for example
@@buttermepancake3613 I wish you had fully read my comment because I talked about that a little. That's actually not true, the term "Indian" was changed because of Indigenous protesters pushing for their actual terms. Not every group cared, but it was a movement made of primarily Indigenous and Metis groups. Names hold significant power over people and can seem harmless but have loaded meanings. The same reasons why Asian people don't want to be called 'yellow skins, they're more than a colour and an object, albeit not even their actual skin tone. They want an identity that isn't from labels that races created for them. "Indians" was only used because Christopher Columbus was so egotistical and didn't want to be wrong about missing India but hundreds of Kilometers. They never called themselves that before then. Kinda like someone calling us "whitey." It's just a word, but it still doesn't feel good. It's more so about courtesy than being ''correct''. I'm like 80% sure Liberals actually created the most racist terms back in the day too...
There are only 2 genders. Also, language doesn't change, new words are added. Moreover, when we add words to our lives is from a place of logic, not whatever the alphabet people believe to be true.
I am dismayed at the number of dissenting comments here. Nobody deserves to be insulted or made to feel inferior because they asked for what they need to feel respected. Yes, marginalized groups are asking you to make a small sacrifice for them, but that's not so they can have a privileged life. It's so that they can feel equal. Please check your privilege.
I’m disabled, my disability is part of me. Insisting on person first language just lets me know that you think my disability makes me less of a person and you need to be actively reminded that it doesn’t.
i once called my friend a moron and my teacher told me that could offened mentally disabled people and its like why are you assuming that would offend disabled people but moron means dumb so she was kinda assuming that disabledpeople are dumb
I have a name, i like my name, i like hearing my name. Since, as far as I'm aware, everyone has a name, i think I'll use a persons name.
as long as you don't *excessively* use one's name, i don't think this is necessarily a bad idea.
These people should get a psychologist. They want us to carry all their traumas.
Ikr??
"These people," means a bigot is about to spew their hate. Do better.
No body cares if someone felt disrespected, the inclusive language is trash
@@Justanotherdog-ek6qp that was a joke, chill
This sounds more like exclusive/exclusionary language
Certain words are negative, and that doesn't change by using euphemisms. It just highlights that you're afraid to speak the truth. Being retarted or to have special needs are just as negative things.
the ability to speak does not make you intelligent
Lots of disabled people prefer identity first language. I think it is important to understand this as we've been saying it for years.
Ah yes. Language policing and censorship. What's next? Thought crime? 🙄😐
Yes, thought crime is next. You nailed it. Asking you to think about other people before you speak is basically fascism.
@@Mallory-Malkovich you're saying be polite and respectful, regardless of who you encounter ,scenarios, or if you're being disrespect by them? Huh?
@@CMTT Is that what I'm saying? Read it again.
These individuals are insane, they want to force logical thinking people into their delusional ideologies.
@@Mallory-Malkovich It is fascism when enforced. There's a million things a person can be sensitive towards.
I constantly see people like you who say this crap then go on to say very rude and offensive things and be completely oblivious because the things you're being insensitive about cannot be discussed openly.
People like you always think you have it all figured out but you don't.
No one has the perfect formula, just different perspectives on what constitutes acceptable speech and they all conflict with one another.
This is why speech must be as free as possible.
This isn’t about self-expression, but self-obsession. Instead people need to tidy their rooms, find a useful job, and get on with life without this mumbo jumbo.
Language evolves from bottom to top, Stop this enforcing
A person of color includes everyone, as everyone is of a certain color. Therefore using that definition is rather vague.
Black isn’t a color. Nether is white. lol
@@saintjabroni I think it's a colour
@@22yardsofficial23 That’s fine. Just technically speaking, both black and white are not colors.
The Lantino community told you they don't like the woke term latinx, yet you still use it. Why aren't you listening to the community?
These problems happen mostly in english-speaking countries, you don't see delusional people being celebrated that much in other reasonable countries, central america is a fine example where people is not that kind of crazy.
These critira change like every 5 years, lending itself to more of a fashion or hip way of speaksing to signal that they are PC, than actually causing MEASURABLE change. if they even retrospectily review to see if its working..
Much of this newspeak came about in 2012 when identitarianism and intersectionality hit the mainstream. Compared to the 90s and 2000s have things gotten better from a racial, gender standpoint? do we even ask the questions or just assume this must work.
This also creates cognative load on the public that have to constantly adpot new language.
It also keeps these types in a job.
Is the NAACP going to change the name of their organization to keep up with this?
Do you happen to have links to the documents you talked about in the video?
Talking of language, "homophobic" is and always has been a silly term. I myself am 100% fine with homosexuality, but someone disagreeing with it does *not* mean or imply that they fear, hate, or even dislike you. Similarly, "hate speech" seems to be a very ill-defined if not arbitrarily defined phrase. And the vast majority of the time I've seen the phrase used (to censor dissenting viewpoints) it was being used incorrectly.
Also, "people of color" is indeed reminiscent of the offensive term "colored people". But you're wrong about exactly why it's offensive (still). It's offensive because we are *all* people who have colored skin. And when you refer to black people, hispanics, etc. as "people of color" you are lumping them up in a group of their own unnecessarily. It is often used by people who proceed to stereotype members of these ethnic groups in terms of their beliefs, values, etc. and it should stop.
Transgenderism also remains a wholly incoherent worldview. Whenever I ask a trans person/advocate how they "know" they're the opposite gender (or no gender), they inevitably answer by confusing gender with the inclination/disinclination to adhere to certain gender roles or norms. That, or they say something like "I just (don't) feel like a man/woman". And this is incoherent as well since we've no basis for that comparison. We've all only been just the one gender. So we'd have no way of knowing the difference between "feeling like" a man vs. "feeling like" a woman, or indeed if there is even such a feeling at all.
You are so deeply wrong it's hard to know where to start. Yes language changes how we think, but it doesn't change reality. While I agree not using slurs is a good thing, this obsession with minute and basically random changes in language is a distraction to actually doing anything. It has much more to do with bullying and self promotion than confronting actual problems. And no one has or should ask for the right to self identify! You are saying that people must pretend to accept things about others that are plainly not true. This is not progress this is authoritarianism. This is such a profoundly toxic idea, and accepting this in society is devastating for the rights of women, children and LGB people, and don't kid yourself, in a few years people will be self-identifying their race, so for people of color as well.
Wrote this comment before watching to the end, so you are already saying people can self-identify their race. WTF. You need help.
Oh - this is Canada news... Ugh. No thanks.
Was there something that I was supposed to gain from this video?
Yes, instructions how to be brainwashed and dumbed down by newspeech.
Definitely not. Other than maybe a gain of sheer annoyance.
Confucius say:
Squirrel who climb up woman’s leg will find no nuts
If I identify as an english lord,, can I demand that everyone calls me “your lordship”? God knows my sensibilities would be hurt if I wasn’t
Two yrs have passed, are you still a childish bigot?
find something better to do
I would never think of saying anything unkind to you. Yet you suggest that white people with privilege are apt to say unkind things.
These people are insane and their gender ideologies are even crazier than them. You can't reason with people like this, believe me, I've tried.
Pc culture is going too far these days
I'm not sure how old you are but languages constantly change, even from Canada's founding a hundred years ago. A lot of the time, language reflects the speakers and is constantly being updated, hence why new version dictionaries are still being printed. More specifically, it's not 'progressive' to avoid calling people derogatory terms or something they considered offensive, It's just common courtesy. I mean, the Canadian government (incorrectly) called Indigenous peoples "Indians" until the 80's.
For example, my father who grew up in Sarnia Ontario in the 60's was not around anyone who wasn't white or straight so he never had any reason to learn new words for different people outside of some pretty nasty terms for to-days standards. He didn't hate anyone at all, just wasn't educated enough to know what to call people other than an offensive word he learned from his parents. Only until he moved to Toronto and met diverse people, he learned that they don't like specific words that were once used by our own government.
I think you incentivized that PC culture is overkill, but if no one had fought to get a change of terminology for specific Canadians, we might still call Indigenous peoples "Indians". It's only "too far" if you like to use some controversial terms on the daily. Being educated is one of the best ways to prevent needing to talk about this topic at all. Just don't say something that could hurt someone...
@@jeb1691 that's my exact point though
They're only "controversially because overly sentisitve pc culture has decided what words are and aren't "problematic" to control people and language police.
It's insanity
People should be allowed to say Indians or redskins for example
@@buttermepancake3613 I wish you had fully read my comment because I talked about that a little. That's actually not true, the term "Indian" was changed because of Indigenous protesters pushing for their actual terms. Not every group cared, but it was a movement made of primarily Indigenous and Metis groups.
Names hold significant power over people and can seem harmless but have loaded meanings. The same reasons why Asian people don't want to be called 'yellow skins, they're more than a colour and an object, albeit not even their actual skin tone. They want an identity that isn't from labels that races created for them. "Indians" was only used because Christopher Columbus was so egotistical and didn't want to be wrong about missing India but hundreds of Kilometers. They never called themselves that before then.
Kinda like someone calling us "whitey." It's just a word, but it still doesn't feel good. It's more so about courtesy than being ''correct''.
I'm like 80% sure Liberals actually created the most racist terms back in the day too...
@@jeb1691 Then, do you have a statistic that say what the majority of American Indians/Native Americans prefers to be called?
There are only 2 genders. Also, language doesn't change, new words are added. Moreover, when we add words to our lives is from a place of logic, not whatever the alphabet people believe to be true.
Inclusivity only for those that agree with you is wrong...
This what causes incivility. Subjective callousness to other.
I've watched this several times now. I get something new and helpful from it every time I see it. Thank you.
What can you possibly get from this nonsense?
Thanks for the info.
Key word personal politics
When she says shape...she means cancel.
I am dismayed at the number of dissenting comments here. Nobody deserves to be insulted or made to feel inferior because they asked for what they need to feel respected. Yes, marginalized groups are asking you to make a small sacrifice for them, but that's not so they can have a privileged life. It's so that they can feel equal. Please check your privilege.
You are a disgrace for your family....
@@albertdd280 How would you know that? Do you know my family? Have you asked them?
@@TheLoveMonkey What is evident don't need to be asked... You're a shame from here to China and in every single corner of the world...
Cry me a river. No one cares about your feelings, your feelings doesn't change biology or reality. Your entitlement amazes me.
Good video, Kelly!!
hahaha, i hope you're joking MAN
Love this!
Love to puc huh? 🤢🤮🤮🤮
who cares?
Cynically bamboozle your way to the top with 'inclusive' lingo.
The kindly inquisitors are back...
🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
People just grow up
I'm white. I have privilege.
I prefer bible language
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Specific and accurate very much means biologically specific and accurate.
Hey @youtube why is this garbage suggested to me?
Man you have way to less problems in your life
Not interested, thanks .