az language post

I originally left this forum because I felt that it was becoming to insular in its toxic attitudes towards anything remotely "SJ", including dragging in perfectly reasonable things under the "dreaded evil tumblr SJ" umbrella, because they pointed out privileges you might refuse to acknowlege, or because you felt it was unreasonable to treat another human being with respect just because you refuse to understand their sexuality or gender identity, and do not do any research on your own beyond glancing at the first or second link on google. But mostly because they were using words you are not used to and refuse to learn, claiming they are "too hard" or "too silly" or "too random" to be used, or because you believed them "made up" by teens and young adults or "special snowflakes" on tumblr, or not "academia" enough to meet your apparently so very high standards.

I came across a nice little posting that summed up my thoughts on the matter perfectly, and after venting to a fellow AZ user whom will not be named, I was urged to post this here



[quote]    In my QPOC class I started seeing the language I’d see on tumblr all the time: “white privilege,” “cis-sexism,” “microaggressions,” “POC,” “WOC,” the definitions of racism and sexism as only targeting POC and women respectively, etc. And I discovered the community organizers and woman studies majors in my class knew and used this language, too. Some of this language, I previously thought, was just part of the tumblr community. And I think a lot of people have this misconception. That this is stuff people on tumblr made up. When Ethnic Studies courses, Women Studies courses, Queer Studies courses, and POC community organizers etc USE THIS LANGUAGE. [b]This is the language legit activists and academics use—and have used long before tumblr.[/b]

    I don’t want to give the impression that language only used on the internet has no legitimacy or significance—new and important movements in social justice are being made on one of the most democratizing forces the world has seen: the internet, which has allowed people who are often excluded from the media and academia to communicate their unique messages to others.

    But I think it’s important that the anti-social justice movement understand that this language exists out there in the world—and is used by people who study these issues for a living. Teens on tumblr didn’t make this shit up. It’s just that the language that was once mostly limited to classrooms and academic journals and woman-only/poc-only/queer-only spaces is reaching a more mainstream and younger audience. And if you don’t understand it or know it? It only reveals your ignorance.[/quote]

Bolding mine for emphasis.


And to continue from that, I'd like to mention something else I had brought to my attention recently. As I said before, most of the excuses I see thrown around on this forum, especially this thread and text screenshots thread, are that words like "cisgender" or various neutral pronouns and what not are somehow too hard to remember or pronounce, or because you disagree with the origin of the root of the word or something, you believe that takes away its validity, or that you think they are too silly and made-up sounding, or that the word itself or the roots of the words somehow depart from the original meaning too much for you to handle.

So, then, why do you only bring up these arguments when words are "made up" for non-straight/male/white/abled/cis/etc issues? I haven't seen anything even close to similar arguments when it comes to things that interest you. You all so very quickly grew attached to silly words like tumblr, facebook, twitter iPad, brony(at you mlp fans), pokemon(and all the names of hundreds of them, to boot, some of you even managing to memorize every single one. even just memorizing the first 150 is impressive though some pokefans consider it average), swag, baller, hipster, ratchet, basic, hoochie, grill/e(as in teeth covers and in some cases personal space), and etc.

I also see many of you pulling out the dictionary in your arguments. Even ignoring the issue that the people who are in charge of what's written in dictionaries are generally straight/men/cis/able/etc, why do you place such high regard for the bible against "silly" words, when in 2012 Merriam-Webster added to it's dictionary words like: man cave, mouse potato, soul patch, ollie, unibrow, manga and qigong, sexting, earworm, mash-up, aha moment, and f bomb. And in 2011 Merriam-Webster added tweet(in regards to twitter), bromance, cougar(in regard to an older woman seeking romance with a younger man), parkour, fist bump, and helicopter parent. And in 2010 they added fan fiction, earmark, flash mob, frenemy, vlog, webisode, staycation, and sock puppet(in regard to people who create a fake identity online for devious purposes, such as if someone here made a second account to try and weasle out of trouble.) These were all added in just the last three years, and words like "cisgender" have been in use online and in academia for much longer. These words all fall under the exact same categories you use to refuse to use words that are used to describe non-heterosexual and non-cisgendered sexuality and identities and so on and to demean the people who use them.

And in regards to academia, you feel that these words are too "made-up". I want to ask you- where do you think most of the words used in academia came from in the first place? [b]They were made up.[/b] Previously they were made up by generally white, straight, cisgendered men, and hardly a fuss was raised. When people who are women, trans*, nonbinary, POC, etc, try to join in the party with words that accurately described their identities and lived experiences, suddenly you all throw your hands up and say "wow no that's going too far".

As I said to the person who urged me to post this here, I doubt posting this will do any good and that the majority of you will plug your ears or huff and stamp your feet, cry "SJW!"(while completely missing the point i made in the very first sentence of this post) like it somehow invalidates what I have to say, or come up with further excuses that fall flat against the fact that the dictionary and academia both includes words that are too hard to pronounce or remember, that have origins you may disagree with or whose roots have changed from the origin entirely and have found new use, that are silly and made-up sounding(and in many cased actually are silly and made-up), and the fact these very same words actually [i]have[/i] been used in academia and activism, and not just the dreaded tumblr, for quite a while.

I'd just like you all to think about what I've said, about how you accept and embrace hundreds of words that are "silly" or "made-up" or "unacademic" or "difficult to remember" so long as they involve your interests, and yet as soon as someone mentions a completely valid word like "cisgender" or a similar vein, one that accurately describes identities or struggles, you raise a fuss and dig your heels and throw out every ad hominem and logical fallacy(false equivalence and slippery slope seem to be a favorite) in the book. Ask yourself, why do those categories mean nothing when its a word that describes your interested, but those categories are inherently bad when you claim words like "cisgender" fall under them?