I've
been listening to the radio intently over these last several weeks.
And it's been, of course, the usual stuff for this point in our time:
North Korea, the presidential campaign, the stock market plunging
over three hundred points, etc. All of it is likely to rub someone
the wrong way eventually. But I keep hearing one thing in many
stories that's just generally angering me: “gentrification.”
That
word bothers me. I know that people are trying to be politically
correct, and they're making a conscious effort not to hurt the
feelings of others. But the word is making the airwaves as if it's a
completely acceptable term for everyone. Like it's a given. Not a
thought.
Really?
Let's do the opposite, and just stop and think about it for a moment.
What does it really mean?
From
my perspective, I think it means what everyone else thinks it means:
old people. But I also think it means more than that. I think it
means: more old people than I'm comfortable with. And, for whatever
reasons, no one seems to be responding to that ill-conceived PC
speak. It's just floating around on the airwaves without a dignified
question or response.
So
here goes mine: If “gentrification” is acceptable, and not
offensive in the least, then why not “blackification,” or
“jewification,” or “infantification,” or “maleification,”
or “twenty-somethingification,” or “thirty-somethingification?”
Am I to believe that we can use this one PC word, that's obviously
ageist, and all of the other racist, sexist, or any other “ist”
words, and place them on the airwaves without a second thought, but
we can't simply say what those words really mean? They really mean:
“I'm not comfortable with all of the black people here.” “I'm
not comfortable with all of the Jews here.” “I'm not comfortable
with all of the babies in this area.” “When did all of the
younger people move in?”
How
can it be that so many people's mouths and minds have become
completely divorced? We obviously can't say "jewification."
If we did, the PC venom response from the very same "gentrification"
users would spit from their pores. So why is it that a person can
publicly state one's ageism on the airwaves in a semi-polite PC form, but stating
the very same “isms” in any other way is somehow racist, sexist
or ageist? I just don't get it. Who do they think they're fooling?
When they state: “gentrification,” we all know they're talking
about what they believe to be too many old people for their personal
comfort. Does softening the wording somehow negate its intention?
This
is where I'm reminded of a favorite quote from one of my favorite
authors: “There is no denial of reality that can change reality.”
I
love the intention of being kind to other people. I want people to be
kind to me. I'm kind to them. All of them. And that's why I'm also
honest. I respect honesty, and the people who are honest enough with
themselves to be honest with me. Honesty is respectful. It saves
time. It conserves energy. It simultaneously vaporizes worthless
ideas and relationships, and reinforces solid ideas and
relationships. A few words of truth are far more valuable to me than
a mountain of PC garbage.
So
stop coating your words with sugar, and state your personal truth.
Don't lie to me. Don't lie to others. And please don't lie to
yourself. As I said a moment ago, you're not fooling anyone.
When
you say: “gentrification,” we know all too well exactly what
you're really trying to say.
No comments:
Post a Comment