- This topic has 3 voices and 4 replies.
-
Posts
-
According to the State Department, there is a likelihood that you are probably using expressions in your speech which are racist or misogynist.State Department: 'Hold down the fort,' other common phrases could be offensiveThe expressions cited in the article which are associated with claimed negative historical origins are these, and the explanations from the State Department Chief Diversity Officer:hold down the fort - "To 'hold down the fort' originally meant to watch and protect against the vicious Native American intruders. In the territories of the West, Army soldiers or settlers saw the 'fort' as their refuge from their perceived 'enemy,' the stereotypical 'savage' Native American tribes." Going Dutch - "negative stereotype portraying the Dutch as cheap." rule of thumb - connected "to an antiquated law, whereby the width of a husband's thumb was the legal size of a switch or rod allowed to beat his wife." handicap - some "believe this term is rooted in a correlation between a disabled individual and a beggar, who had to beg with a cap in his or her hand because of the inability to maintain employment." Reading the article carefully, it seems that certain groups are behind the crusade against such terms ("women's activists" make the claim about "rule of thumb", and "disability advocates" make the claim about "handicap"). Now, I had read in the past that the term "rule of thumb" referred to the beermaking process, by which a brewer would measure something in the beer with this thumb; hence, it was the "rule of thumb".
I believe with regard to begging the relvant phrase is “cap in hand” not handicap. Given that my great-grandfather fought in the Indian Wars I am pretty cool with “hold down the fort” as a phrase. As a matter of fact, i am going to start using these phrases more often so they are not lost in a fit of PC foolishness. The PC crowd ARE the modern Thought Police.
"Choose your words thoughtfully," Robinson wrote. "Now that you know the possible historical context of the above phrases, perhaps you will understand why someone could be offended by their use. "
No, I really think people should just get over it, they have done enough damage to the language already.
One wonders how much money goes to pay the salary of a “Chief Diversity Officer”, and the entire “Diversity Office” at the State Department.
The Army has a “diversity office” as well. It's efforts usually amused me as it tried to justify it's existence by coming up with the craziest plans to increase “awareness.”
I have long since thought that these types of “departments” in different sectors of society greatly contribute to the high cost of doing things and low levels of achievement. Think about how much education costs in America, and then think about how much money goes to these modernist departments. Then think about what they “produce”, like what is found in the article above.
