We study words so they can become tools instead of unwitting weapons.
March 22, 2015 2:48 PM Subscribe
Conscious Style Guide is a simple and accessible community resource for anyone curious or serious about conscious language.
Less a style guide than a collection of links to posts of interest on "terminology for various communities and... links to key articles debating usage." Categories include ability + disability, age, appearance, ethnicity + nationality, gender + sexuality, othering, and more.
The site is a creation of copyeditor Karen Yin. Yin also writes the AP vs. Chicago blog, where she discusses differences between the two most prominent American style guides.
According to Copyediting, Conscious Style Guide is in a "soft launch" phase ahead of its official introduction this coming weekend. More development is planned. I've only followed a few of the links so far, but it looks like a good starting point. (via CopyEditing-L)
Less a style guide than a collection of links to posts of interest on "terminology for various communities and... links to key articles debating usage." Categories include ability + disability, age, appearance, ethnicity + nationality, gender + sexuality, othering, and more.
The site is a creation of copyeditor Karen Yin. Yin also writes the AP vs. Chicago blog, where she discusses differences between the two most prominent American style guides.
According to Copyediting, Conscious Style Guide is in a "soft launch" phase ahead of its official introduction this coming weekend. More development is planned. I've only followed a few of the links so far, but it looks like a good starting point. (via CopyEditing-L)
In the spirit of working through my own unperceived biases:
A lot of this seems useful and understandable, but I do wonder about going so far as to restrict the use of the word elderly. Is that considered a negative or derisive term? Every restricted synonym makes writing well harder. For hateful, hurtful and derisive terms, I understand. For generally positive and laudatory terms I also understand -- it's just another flavor of the argument that women should be put on pedestals. But elderly is neutral, isn't it? Well I guess when you say the elderly it sounds vaguely positive or endearing.
I guess the point is that it's othering language? Like, it's a class of people instead of a sliding scale thing?
posted by JHarris at 3:42 PM on March 22, 2015 [3 favorites]
A lot of this seems useful and understandable, but I do wonder about going so far as to restrict the use of the word elderly. Is that considered a negative or derisive term? Every restricted synonym makes writing well harder. For hateful, hurtful and derisive terms, I understand. For generally positive and laudatory terms I also understand -- it's just another flavor of the argument that women should be put on pedestals. But elderly is neutral, isn't it? Well I guess when you say the elderly it sounds vaguely positive or endearing.
I guess the point is that it's othering language? Like, it's a class of people instead of a sliding scale thing?
posted by JHarris at 3:42 PM on March 22, 2015 [3 favorites]
The third link on the page about Age seems to address a lot of that. People don't like being called elderly, is the main point, and there's a pretty good precedent for not using language to describe people that they don't like, even if it's not overtly hateful ("Asian-American" rather than "Oriental," "Black" or "African-American" rather than "Colored," etc.).
I think it's also usually worth thinking about why one is mentioning another person's age. There are situations where it's certainly necessary, but probably fewer than situations in which it's mentioned.
posted by jaguar at 3:58 PM on March 22, 2015 [6 favorites]
I think it's also usually worth thinking about why one is mentioning another person's age. There are situations where it's certainly necessary, but probably fewer than situations in which it's mentioned.
posted by jaguar at 3:58 PM on March 22, 2015 [6 favorites]
For me, at least, "elderly" tends to connote frailty (physical, mental, or both). (Also, on preview, what jaguar said.)
Note—because this tripped me up at first, and perhaps I'm not alone—that the working hyperlinks for the papers and articles cited are before the pipe symbol; clicking after the pipe gets you the top page for the source.
e.g.: click on the first part of
“Use of the Term ‘Elderly'” | Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy
to read the article in question, rather than a long list of journals.
posted by Shmuel510 at 4:01 PM on March 22, 2015
Note—because this tripped me up at first, and perhaps I'm not alone—that the working hyperlinks for the papers and articles cited are before the pipe symbol; clicking after the pipe gets you the top page for the source.
e.g.: click on the first part of
“Use of the Term ‘Elderly'” | Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy
to read the article in question, rather than a long list of journals.
posted by Shmuel510 at 4:01 PM on March 22, 2015
A lot of this seems useful and understandable, but I do wonder about going so far as to restrict the use of the word elderly. Is that considered a negative or derisive term? Every restricted synonym makes writing well harder. For hateful, hurtful and derisive terms, I understand. For generally positive and laudatory terms I also understand -- it's just another flavor of the argument that women should be put on pedestals. But elderly is neutral, isn't it? Well I guess when you say the elderly it sounds vaguely positive or endearing.
My first question is always 'to whom does this effort to restrict language give power'?
posted by Sebmojo at 4:44 PM on March 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
My first question is always 'to whom does this effort to restrict language give power'?
posted by Sebmojo at 4:44 PM on March 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
I can tell right now, what's going to enrage me to cane-shaking levels is being called a "senior". I'm OLD AS HELL, I'll want to say - I haven't been a 'senior' since '89!
posted by thelonius at 5:04 PM on March 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by thelonius at 5:04 PM on March 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
Well, these are interesting points and worth thinking about. Thanks for the input.
posted by JHarris at 5:22 PM on March 22, 2015
posted by JHarris at 5:22 PM on March 22, 2015
Thanks for posting this--it's a great resource for a class I am teaching right now.
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 6:47 PM on March 22, 2015
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 6:47 PM on March 22, 2015
This is great. I've got to figure out how to introduce this to my freshman
Comp students.
posted by apricot at 8:10 PM on March 22, 2015
Comp students.
posted by apricot at 8:10 PM on March 22, 2015
I know a few self-identified seniors who really dig the word, but mostly when it comes to discounts. "Excuse me, I am a senior citizen".
posted by cotton dress sock at 9:45 PM on March 22, 2015
posted by cotton dress sock at 9:45 PM on March 22, 2015
This is... Not amazing when it comes to trans stuff. It suggests using "the other sex" rather than "the opposite sex" for example, which yeah, implies less opposition and perhaps comes with less inbuilt misogyny, but is in no way friendly to non-binary people in the way they posit ("an other sex" perhaps, but really, just fucking call straight marriage straight marriage and stop fucking about!)
posted by Dysk at 2:37 AM on March 23, 2015
posted by Dysk at 2:37 AM on March 23, 2015
Also I was really hoping for something more like an actual style guide, rather than a very loosely categorised set of articles on language use in general and with regard to a very few very specific things ("age" touches only on anti-old ageism and does not at all examine attitudes to young people, "appearance" seems to be a stand-in for 'weight', and so on).
I mean, I'm sure it's a good collection of articles, but in presenting it as something that I really want to see but which it totally isn't, it sets itself up to disappoint.
posted by Dysk at 3:04 AM on March 23, 2015 [3 favorites]
I mean, I'm sure it's a good collection of articles, but in presenting it as something that I really want to see but which it totally isn't, it sets itself up to disappoint.
posted by Dysk at 3:04 AM on March 23, 2015 [3 favorites]
I know a few self-identified seniors who really dig the word, but mostly when it comes to discounts.
Most discriminations also have perks. E.g. "Women and children first"
posted by Obscure Reference at 5:51 AM on March 23, 2015
Most discriminations also have perks. E.g. "Women and children first"
posted by Obscure Reference at 5:51 AM on March 23, 2015
but really, just fucking call straight marriage straight marriage and stop fucking about!
Except that tends to erase bi people. I so far haven't seen a great alternative that doesn't erase trans/intersex/genderfluid/genderqueer people. "Mixed-gender marriage" seems to be the most careful phrasing I've seen.
posted by jaguar at 6:57 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
Except that tends to erase bi people. I so far haven't seen a great alternative that doesn't erase trans/intersex/genderfluid/genderqueer people. "Mixed-gender marriage" seems to be the most careful phrasing I've seen.
posted by jaguar at 6:57 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
I so far haven't seen a great alternative that doesn't erase trans/intersex/genderfluid/genderqueer people.
I meant to say, an alternative that recognizes that bi people may be in mixed-sex marriages while still not erasing trans/intersex/genderfluid/genderqueer people. I think talking about legal definitions of marriage hits that point where both gender and sex, as well as orientation, are relevant and so it gets complicated quickly.
posted by jaguar at 7:00 AM on March 23, 2015
I meant to say, an alternative that recognizes that bi people may be in mixed-sex marriages while still not erasing trans/intersex/genderfluid/genderqueer people. I think talking about legal definitions of marriage hits that point where both gender and sex, as well as orientation, are relevant and so it gets complicated quickly.
posted by jaguar at 7:00 AM on March 23, 2015
It's not necessarily that simple. I'm bi myself (or pan, really, what with 'bi' itself being unnecessarily binary for my purposes), and perfectly happy to talk about being in a straight relationship (with another bi person). I just don't feel like that erases anything - my relationship (and hypothetical marriage) is not bi, after all, even if I and/or my partner(/hypothetical husband) is.
Though aye, there are bi people who feel differently about it, and thanks for pointing it out as it is worth considering also.
posted by Dysk at 7:10 AM on March 23, 2015
Though aye, there are bi people who feel differently about it, and thanks for pointing it out as it is worth considering also.
posted by Dysk at 7:10 AM on March 23, 2015
Yeah, a number of my bi friends have been very vocal about not being in "straight" relationships, even if they're mixed-gender.
The best solution, of course, would be to stop legislating who's allowed to marry whom based on genitals, chromosomes, gender presentation, or sexual orientation at all, then we could just say "marriage" and be done with it.
posted by jaguar at 7:13 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
The best solution, of course, would be to stop legislating who's allowed to marry whom based on genitals, chromosomes, gender presentation, or sexual orientation at all, then we could just say "marriage" and be done with it.
posted by jaguar at 7:13 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
And while we're at it, get rid of the age restrictions on medicare.
posted by Obscure Reference at 7:26 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Obscure Reference at 7:26 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
(Of course, "mixed-gender marriage" as a category aside from the controversial and not-universal 'same-sex marriage' does rather put a marriage between, say, a cis man and a genderqueer person in the uncontroversial category, where the genderqueer person's gender is unlikely to actually be legally recognised at all, and the marriage would likely be considered queer by most people, and depending on the binary identity on the genderqueer person's legal documents, might be considered to be a same-sex marriage legally. All of which are shortcomings of the legal system and current culture with regard to non-binary identities, but it does mean that 'mixed-gender marriage' as a synonym for what is elsewhere called "traditional marriage" is not unproblematic in itself either.
Thorny problem.)
posted by Dysk at 7:35 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
Thorny problem.)
posted by Dysk at 7:35 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
it does mean that 'mixed-gender marriage' as a synonym for what is elsewhere called "traditional marriage" is not unproblematic in itself either.
Oh, definitely! I've been using "mixed-gender marriage" as a way of indicating that many woman-man pairings are not "traditional marriage." If we're talking about what the conservatives should be using in order to be honest about what they want for the country, I'll vote for "patriarchal religious unions."
posted by jaguar at 8:26 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
Oh, definitely! I've been using "mixed-gender marriage" as a way of indicating that many woman-man pairings are not "traditional marriage." If we're talking about what the conservatives should be using in order to be honest about what they want for the country, I'll vote for "patriarchal religious unions."
posted by jaguar at 8:26 AM on March 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
Dysk : "Also I was really hoping for something more like an actual style guide"
The Bias-Free Word Finder: A Dictionary of Nondiscriminatory Language isn't perfect (especially since it's 20+ years old), but it's a useful resource.
posted by Lexica at 9:45 AM on March 29, 2015
The Bias-Free Word Finder: A Dictionary of Nondiscriminatory Language isn't perfect (especially since it's 20+ years old), but it's a useful resource.
posted by Lexica at 9:45 AM on March 29, 2015
« Older An American's part in the farewell to an English... | "Sheer Political Retribution" Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:29 PM on March 22, 2015