Out of the loop, again
Well, maybe i've been so busy raising kids for the last 20+ years that i missed it, but when did "childless" become a politically incorrect pejorative?
Labels: Durham bloggers
About
Since 1949, Durhamites have slept soundly, secure in the knowledge that, in our town, erection can be depended upon. Now, thanks to the power of the internets, we can spread that security all over the world.
About Me
- Name: Barry
- Location: Durham, North Carolina, United States
For such an enlightened, tolerant guy, I sure get pissed off easy. Contact: DependableErection AT gmail DOT com
11 Comments:
Pay no attention -- they're just acting like... well, children.
By
Joseph H. Vilas, at 3:08 PM
That has got to be the stupidest thing I've seen this year - including (any/all) of Mr. Bush's speeches...
By
Anonymous, at 6:21 PM
It's just Seth getting his undies in a bunch. Ignore him...
By
Unknown, at 10:18 PM
Well, just call me "intelligence-free" I guess!
Hey, wait a min...
I understand the desire to put an end to language that doesn't work the same for everyone. But to me "child-less" seems more like simple numeration. I can see where "child-free" might originate, to help people with hurt feelings or their anger/disappointment as their potential as parents gets passed over by events in life.
Will a single person insist on being called "partner-free"? Somehow, I don't think so.
As a student of language, "child-free" resembles an ingredient pitch used for soap or food. "Sugar-free" or "fat-free" for example.
"Free" is a word that can be short-hand for "freedom" or it's something you get by not paying money for it. So "sugar-free", I guess can mean "freedom from sugar" to those who desire not to have sugar as a sweetener. But I'm not sure "child-free" adults who've tried to have kids feel they're "free of children." So I'm not sold on this as being any better than "child-less". Yes, it does remind everyone in the room about your deficit of children, but are you asking the world to change the way it thinks about families and kids?
I think the 2 questions I get asked the most at parties is "what do you do?" and "got kids?" I prefer other conversation starters myself, like the weather or when oyster season is set to arrive.
Instead of making a big deal about it, how about just using the term you want others to use and leading by example? Durhamites get lectured 8-10 times a day by various groups on the proper lexicon of the moment and can use the break.
Me? I'm still trying to come up with a polite way to say "Duke Lacrosse".
Keep those cards and letters!
8-)
By
Tony, at 10:40 PM
Great holy Mary mother of God (speaking of parents), is someone kidding me? Are we (not "we" here, "we" in general) going to get caught up in yet another semantics discussion? Childless, child-free? Who frigging cares? How about non-parents? Offspring-challenged? Non-breeders? Stretchmark deficient?
By
Anonymous, at 10:51 AM
I prefer to be called "lucky"
By
Anonymous, at 1:49 PM
Is there a difference between sugar-free and sugarless? So why between child-free and childless?
I figure that if you're awake 16 hours a day, that makes 960 minutes. Which means we all have 960 opportunties EVERY SINGLE DAY to be offended by something. Some people just maximize those opportunities more that others.
By
Anonymous, at 9:46 PM
Actually the difference is similar as between childish and childlike.
They both speak of the same state (more or less) but one is a pejorative and the other is not.
Childless implies that the person is LESS without a child. Child-free implies a choice to not have children.
By
skvidal, at 10:39 PM
How would you describe a person who is childless, but not by choice? For example, any of the many people i know who would like to have children but have not been able to conceive?
Don't you consider that "child-free" might be at least somewhat insulting to that group, which, at least in my experience, is at least as large as those who are without children by choice?
By
Barry, at 10:53 PM
I never said childless was politically incorrect, you said that. I said childless was inaccurate.
There are a lot of people who are not childLESS they are child-free.
Childless is an accurate description for a number of people but just not having children isn't the only defining characteristic.
But you've made a valiant effort to turn the discussion into something it's not.
By
skvidal, at 8:58 AM
As i recall, the original discussion whence this came was about the inadequate family locker facilities at the downtown Y.
Admittedly, my recollection may not be accurate, as i am both caffeine-free and gingko-less this morning (or is that caffeine-less and gingko-free? i can never get those right.)
Anyway, Kevin said "Our correspondent suspects the policy may be in place due to concerns from older, childless members who don't want to hear young children being, well, young children in close proximity to them." And then went on to ask:
"I'm curious what the parents out there think -- has this new policy impacted you? Have you switched away from the Y as a result, or are you okay with the current workarounds?"
To which the first and almost immediate response was:
"Some of the older people you make mention of are not necessarily childless. They are child-free. My partner and I are not unable to have children we simply have no desire to have them. Your pejorative term and snide remark do nothing to improve your case."
So really, let's have no more of this nonsense about "valiant efforts to turn the discussion into something it is not." That ship sailed a couple of weeks ago.
Most of my dictionaries describe childless as "without offspring," or "having no children," or "the state of being without children." Whatever pejorativeness the word has acquired, has been attached to it by people of extreme sensitivity.
You may argue about the terms of the process by which a condition of pejorativeness becomes attached to an otherwise useful word, but for the most part, that process is known as "political correctness," and has been at least since i was a young left-wing radical in the anti-nuke movement back in the late 70s. (My first exposure to "politcally correct" terminology was the effort to replace the word "handicapped" with the phrase "differently abled.")
As someone else has noted, there are 24 hours in a day. If you try hard enough, you can find something to offend you in every one of them.
By
Barry, at 9:33 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home