To think that "wokeism" is for the privileged few?

[Mooscow]

Wokeism and identity politics seems rife at the moment in the UK. But Canada and the US seem even worse. There is this massive push to avoid the possibility of ever offending anyone, ever. For example, I work for a North American company and we've just been given a long list of words never to use. This includes "female", "blind", "deaf", "blacklist", "homeless", "rule of thumb" and it goes on and on and on. So you can't say things like "turn a blind eye" or "tone deaf" etc. any more in case it offends a blind or deaf person. Really?!

I've just read an article in the FT (sorry can't share) that says the US has only sent 111million out of its pledge to send 1 billion vaccines to poorer countries. The US has 2 and a half times the amount of vaccines it needs for itself and Canada has ordered 8 times what it needs.

I know that vaccines and wokeism has little in common but it just struck me how so much effort is put into this new purity culture whilst at the same time demonstrating utter selfishness and lack of compassion for anyone else.

It's also like the push to remove the word women from healthcare such as cervical screening in case a transman, as a "cervix haver" 🤮 is offended at being grouped with women, while 40% of women (especially those without English as a first language and those in lower socio-economic groups) don't even know what a cervix is. But screw them, let's let them get cervical cancer while we pat ourselves on the back and virtue signal at making sure we don't offend by telling the truth the tiny, tiny proportion of trans people.

I wonder if the whole work/identity politics stuff is based in the fact that privileged people can effortlessly virtue signal to feel better about themselves whilst remaining selfish, uncaring and apathetic towards people who are actually in need or vulnerable. AIBU?

'Politically Correct' was used as an insult against people that hadn't labelled themselves as anything but were suggesting that maybe people shouldn't be using the n-word in offices or joking about rape.

Some people tried to reclaim PC by calling it polite and considerate, but obviously that didn't take.

So you're attacking people for being labelled by the people who attacked them in the first place @duckonabike?

@DameFanny

I don't know what you're trying to say *@DdraigGoch*. What's been obliterated? Link? Example?

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women/royal-college-of-midwives-postnatal-people-b1969087.html

The guidance, published on Wednesday evening, made no reference to women, instead referring to mothers as “postnatal people”.

That took me all of two seconds to Google.

@DdraigGoch

Don't you think it's great that people try to do stuff better, to be better, share how they're trying to make things better, *@DameFanny* why don't they try and do something about the things which really matter? You know, starvation, lack of clean water, violence, poverty etc.

But then I suppose that an employer coming up with a document on how "turning a blind eye" is offensive is so much easier and cheaper than adapting the workplace so that blind people may be able to find gainful employment there.

They do. I know I do. But you know it's possible to support a local DV charity, give money to social enterprises in Africa, sign petitions against Nestlé stealing another water source, write to my MP about sewage discharges AND suggest that people read some history before they say there's no such thing as white male privilege. All in the same week! It's amazing. It's almost as if these concerns interlink in some, oh I don't know, intersectional way...

What did you do?

Well I'm not setting up an account to read the whole thing @DdraigGoch, but one withdrawn pamphlet does not obliteration make

@DdraigGoch

"Homefree" is apparently allowed but "homeless" isn't. How obscene. "Free" is a word with positive associations, therefore "homefree" conjures up images of travelling Europe in a VW Camper on some trip to "find yourself". Whereas "homeless" clearly describes someone who is missing a basic human right, and would not be in that situation by choice (real choice; not "you chose to walk out on the man who beat you").

Yes, this seems particularly awful. Especially since "homefree" actually is a term with positive connotations of winning at a game.

I now typically see "unhomed persons" which is at least not directly offensive, but it's clumsy and completely silly, as it's not any better really than homeless.

I don't know how people can be quite so naive, but someone who thinks poorly or dehumanizes the homeless isn't going to have some kind of epiphany because they are called something different. The new phrasing will soon have the same connotations.

@DameFanny

'Politically Correct' was used as an insult against people that hadn't labelled themselves as anything but were suggesting that maybe people shouldn't be using the n-word in offices or joking about rape.

Some people tried to reclaim PC by calling it polite and considerate, but obviously that didn't take.

So you're attacking people for being labelled by the people who attacked them in the first place @duckonabike?

Sorry, that should have been to @LobsterNapkin

@DameFanny

Oh, and you should point out to them that rule of thumb has nothing to do with DV and everything to do with estimating measurements. Perhaps if you say you're offended by their associating the phrase with DV they might do something.

But go on, what are the recommended alternatives?

And what's your evidence that the Scottish government have 'erased' women?

Google "scottish government erases women" and you'll find lots of examples.

E.g. First result is www.thetimes.co.uk/article/lgbt-activists-get-word-mother-axed-from-government-policies-q6q6bxtf6

DameFanny It was never the case that the kind of language policing that was called PC was only about people being polite and not making racist jokes. Any more than that's what is going on now. In fact the warnings about that attitude to language control were concerned with preventing the situation we have now.

Sure, there were some people who just wanted to be jerks, and some who just wanted to be polite, but that was never the substance of the issue.

Again, I'm not giving money to the Times to read the whole article, so have you got a link to the actual document?

And if it's a document about parental leave then yay, let's include the fathers as well, who need to step up more and may be put off if all the documentation is geared at mothers.

What was the substance of the issue then?

Oh and @Mooscow I'm still waiting with bated breath for your examples of what your company will use instead of 'female'

Examples or it didn't happen

@DameFanny

Go on then, what was the suggested alternative for female *@Mooscow*? And 'rule of thumb' and 'tone deaf'?

Just for you I have fired up my laptop this late on a Friday night. Here are some of the many examples listed:

Instead of rule of thumb we have to say general rule.

Instead of blacklist we have to say banned list.

Instead of tipping point we have to say unstoppable.

Instead of female it says to say women (which doesn't make sense as female is an adjective) and then later down the list instead of women it says to say assigned female at birth. (No mention of male/men).

Instead of young people we have to say younger people.

Instead of homeless we have to say homefree or unhoused.

Instead of poor we have to say economically disadvantaged.

Instead of prostitute we have to say sex worker.

Instead of special needs we have to say disabled.

Instead of turn a blind eye we have to say ignore. Instead of blind to something we have to say unaware of the fact.

Instead of deaf we have to say hard of hearing (wtf?).

Instead of sanity check we have to say confidence check.

Instead of grandfathered we have to say legacied.

Instead of blue collar worker we have to say manual labourer.

Instead of sold down the river we have to say betrayed.

Instead of Dutch courage we have to say bravery induced by alcohol.

Instead of Chinese wall we have to say ethical wall.

Instead of straw man argument we have to say sham argument.

It goes on....

I think manhole is a good example of the problem that could arise from changing commonly used words.

So for example I phone the council to let them know of an uncovered manhole but they can’t log this as there is no such thing but I don’t know what else it is called so leaving the issue of the manhole without a cover.

Now obviously that is taking it to the extreme but it also demonstrates the importance of using words that are meaningful for the target population so continuing to use the word women in important health communications rather than the less meaningful cervix havers as there is a large part of the target audience in this situation who don’t know that they have a cervix.

Oh and there is lots readily online about the Scottish government’s eradication of the word women in their policies, google is your friend here!

@DameFanny

Again, I'm not giving money to the Times to read the whole article, so have you got a link to the actual document?

And if it's a document about parental leave then yay, let's include the fathers as well, who need to step up more and may be put off if all the documentation is geared at mothers.

Just use Google?

My understanding & use of ‘‘rule of thumb’ is about rudimentary measurements & comparisons, e.g. that a thumb approximated to an inch. Another thing the Romans did for us.

More about the urban mythologies about rule of thumb & traces the onset of associations with DV: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thumb

Here's a free one susandalgety.substack.com/p/scottish-government-erases-the-word?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=

So you're working in a healthcare or social services setting @Mooscow? Because most of those examples seen absolutely fine, e.g. sold down the river is a slavery term so just saying betrayed is better. No idea what's wrong with tipping point.

Have you asked them why female is out and not male? Or are you just going to mutter and froth and stir up some more transphobia without ever sense-checking?

You may also find these facts rather eye-opening forwomen.scot/did-you-know/

@Mooscow

To answer a couple of questions. No they did not include males in the forbidden list, only females. One of the many things that pissed me off.

"Homefree" is apparently allowed but "homeless" isn't. And yes rule of thumb is about DV. It's ridiculous. I experienced DV all through my childhood and would never be offended by someone using this phrase. If these people put their energy into actually helping people experiencing DV that would be something but no, they pat themselves on the back that they would never say such an "offensive" thing and think themselves morally superior.

I take the point about the original meaning of woke but I think nowadays it includes all sorts of things, including identity politics.

This company screws us over on pay, appraisals, training, all sorts of things, but thinks it has the right to police our language to avoid any possibility of offence.

In my experience it is only white, middle class professionals who spout about this stuff. And none of them volunteer in homeless shelters or DV helplines like I do - but I don't even tell anyone IRL about that.

I just get really mad about the hypocrisy of it all. Especially the "be kind" message of gender identity politics when it is creating real life dangerous situations for 51% of the population and labelling anyone who is concerned about the safety of women and girls bigots.

Homefree? Oh that get in the fucking sea.

I have been homeless. I didn’t free myself of it. It was taken away.

Homefree sounds like a piss poor attempt to make homelessness seem artisanal

I'm not going to feed more paranoia to search engines by googling Scottish government erases women, to and I'm certainly not going to follow a link to a transphobic blog. I meant the paper on parental leave, not wild exaggerations and worst faith interpretations

How offensive to say that I am muttering and frothing. Please be kind.

What have I said that is transphobic? Please do point it out as Mumsnet will delete it.

No I haven't challenged my company about this as I have already experienced intolerance and misogyny when questioning other things and expect to be discriminated against and called a bigot and transphobe for raising sensible questions. It's entirely predictable, as you have aptly demonstrated on this thread.

No I don't work in healthcare or social care.

So rather than do some research yourself to give you further insight you just shut down the debate and deny it actually exists.

The notion that women are being "erased" by the use of inclusive language, or that "we're not allowed to call ourselves women" is really nonsense.

Muriel you have spent a lot of time this week saying that it is nonsense that.women are no longer allowed to call themselves women, and yet, on another thread woman after woman gave you example after example of them being prevented from doing just that.
How many examples do you need, 20/ 100 ..?

@DameFanny

I'm not going to feed more paranoia to search engines by googling Scottish government erases women, to and I'm certainly not going to follow a link to a transphobic blog. I meant the paper on parental leave, not wild exaggerations and worst faith interpretations

So you only read things that accord with your own false narrative? That's not very open minded or tolerant is it? It also seems to have led to you being woefully uninformed.

The Scottish government document is about MATERNITY leave not parental leave. But if you refuse to do any research then you will continue to make these false assumptions.