FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Oxfams new language guide.
Oxfams new language guide.
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I haven't seen these guidelines but are they saying that you can't say people but you also must say people if a person is pregnant? What are you supposed to say instead of local or people? Are you allowed to use these words in Britain? I understand the power of language and if these words are genuinely offensive I will happily not use them around people but I need to understand why. " If you do read the guidelines you will see that they are intended to HELP their workers and enable them to communicate with diversity in mind. Knee jerk reactions/misinterpretations like this are where the harm comes from. | |||
| |||
"I haven't seen these guidelines but are they saying that you can't say people but you also must say people if a person is pregnant? What are you supposed to say instead of local or people? Are you allowed to use these words in Britain? I understand the power of language and if these words are genuinely offensive I will happily not use them around people but I need to understand why. If you do read the guidelines you will see that they are intended to HELP their workers and enable them to communicate with diversity in mind. Knee jerk reactions/misinterpretations like this are where the harm comes from. " Hmmm. Not sure me wanting to understand why is a knee jerk reaction | |||
| |||
"I haven't seen these guidelines but are they saying that you can't say people but you also must say people if a person is pregnant? What are you supposed to say instead of local or people? Are you allowed to use these words in Britain? I understand the power of language and if these words are genuinely offensive I will happily not use them around people but I need to understand why. If you do read the guidelines you will see that they are intended to HELP their workers and enable them to communicate with diversity in mind. Knee jerk reactions/misinterpretations like this are where the harm comes from. Hmmm. Not sure me wanting to understand why is a knee jerk reaction" My fault N.C. I meant the O.P. Not you ....... I can see why you thought I meant you though. | |||
| |||
"I haven't seen these guidelines but are they saying that you can't say people but you also must say people if a person is pregnant? What are you supposed to say instead of local or people? Are you allowed to use these words in Britain? I understand the power of language and if these words are genuinely offensive I will happily not use them around people but I need to understand why. If you do read the guidelines you will see that they are intended to HELP their workers and enable them to communicate with diversity in mind. Knee jerk reactions/misinterpretations like this are where the harm comes from. Hmmm. Not sure me wanting to understand why is a knee jerk reaction My fault N.C. I meant the O.P. Not you ....... I can see why you thought I meant you though. "  | |||
| |||
"I'm off out now but there's a perfect example of a structured reply that was in need of a reframe. Stop hunting me down now !!!"  | |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
"The guidelines are about being able to include people and not other them. It's a great resource." "Knee jerk reactions/misinterpretations like this are where the harm comes from. " Thanks Granny. I’m glad someone popped in here and said that. | |||
"The guidelines are about being able to include people and not other them. It's a great resource." I don't think inclusion should be done by alienating others. I'm pro lqbtq and think that recommending against the use of mother and father creates more of a devide than it attempts to bridge. Headquarters isn't known as a colonialistic term and is not being made to be one. The use of people, localz and youthz they aren't decisive. The problem is identity politics. The right see this as a 'woke agenda' and the left see it as something to put their full weight behind and champion no matter the sense in it. And as I said before with all their recent controversies I don't think anyone should be taking Oxfam's lead. | |||
"The guidelines are about being able to include people and not other them. It's a great resource. I don't think inclusion should be done by alienating others. I'm pro lqbtq and think that recommending against the use of mother and father creates more of a devide than it attempts to bridge. Headquarters isn't known as a colonialistic term and is not being made to be one. The use of people, localz and youthz they aren't decisive. The problem is identity politics. The right see this as a 'woke agenda' and the left see it as something to put their full weight behind and champion no matter the sense in it. And as I said before with all their recent controversies I don't think anyone should be taking Oxfam's lead. " I agree with everything you said. All I will add is that sometimes when including marginalised people, other people may then "feel" marginalised because they now have to change their current norms and practices to accommodate others. Whenever there is change, whether the change be good or bad, there will always be pushback. My personal opinion of the Oxfam Inclusive Language guide is that there are probably areas where they have probably gone too far but it is a 90 plus page document which none of us has read fully yet. My guess is they picked the most extreme and sensational examples to highlight in the article. Probably the majority of examples of inclusive language in the document are less headline catching and common sense. Although apologising for ot being in English makes no sense as we live in an English speaking country. I'm sure they can provide translations into other languages as required. | |||
| |||
"I’m glad some people have mentioned actually reading the damn thing instead of just reacting to a newspaper’s clickbait reaction. Secondly, the clickbait from The Times et al about using ‘parent’ instead of mother/father is taken completely out of context. It’s specifically a recommendation on how to refer to transgender parents *if* they have chosen not to adopt traditional gender roles in their relationships." Having read the guidelines thats not what it says. It says to use parents because it could affect Trans parents. It also recommends using mother and father if a trans parent requests it. This is where I feel it's devising as stated before. | |||
"Having read the guidelines thats not what it says. It says to use parents because it could affect Trans parents. It also recommends using mother and father if a trans parent requests it. This is where I feel it's devising as stated before. " I recommend reading it again. Page 39. First column. “If trans parents have a preferred specified gender role, such as ‘mother’ or ‘father’, this should be respected. If unsure, it is more inclusive to use ‘parent’.” “… if individual parents have a preference for a role name, respect their choice.” | |||
| |||
 | |||
"The point it’s making is to use the terms people would like you to. Most parents will want you to call them mother or father. But if you’re not sure, especially with trans or non-binary individuals, it’s kind to say ‘parent’ just in case. That’s all." Yes, once we're aware of the situation, I agree. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Was there anything about not exploiting vulnerable people sexually while on charity business?" | |||
"Having read the guidelines thats not what it says. It says to use parents because it could affect Trans parents. It also recommends using mother and father if a trans parent requests it. This is where I feel it's devising as stated before. I recommend reading it again. Page 39. First column. “If trans parents have a preferred specified gender role, such as ‘mother’ or ‘father’, this should be respected. If unsure, it is more inclusive to use ‘parent’.” “… if individual parents have a preference for a role name, respect their choice.”" I recommend reading it in context and not selectively quoting what you have quoted is the caveat to the sentence above it. Parent/parenthood. To describe the role in raising children without directly ascribing gendered roles. And the second quote is directly attributing to Trans parents. I absolutely agree that Trans parents or whomever should be called whatever they please but to advise against using mother and father directly adds to the horrible culture war we are currently seeing. | |||
"Was there anything about not exploiting vulnerable people sexually while on charity business?" | |||
"I absolutely agree that Trans parents or whomever should be called whatever they please but to advise against using mother and father directly adds to the horrible culture war we are currently seeing. " You’re reading something into it that simply isn’t there. They don’t advise against using mother and father. In most cases you’d still use those words. They advise using parents instead *if* the parental roles aren’t clear, so that you don’t piss someone off by calling them the wrong thing. | |||
"Oh look, another "culture war" post from an already-UNLOS account. " It is interesting that the OP is really angry at what is intended to be kind and inclusive. What is behind that anger? | |||
| |||
Bess x | |||
"It's nice that Oxfam has surplus charity money to research and produce this kind of thing. The insignificant problem of world hunger must have been solved, so yay for them
Bess x"They’re a big organisation with a huge responsibilities. Would you rather they were unprofessional about what they do? 11% of Oxfam’s spend goes on admin and support - including things like this but also staff wages, shop leases, etc. 11% is a hell of a lot lower than you’d find in most organisations. | |||
"It's nice that Oxfam has surplus charity money to research and produce this kind of thing. The insignificant problem of world hunger must have been solved, so yay for them
Bess x
They’re a big organisation with a huge responsibilities. Would you rather they were unprofessional about what they do?
11% of Oxfam’s spend goes on admin and support - including things like this but also staff wages, shop leases, etc. 11% is a hell of a lot lower than you’d find in most organisations.
""Oxfam" is short for the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief. How does this leaflet help solve famine? | |||
| |||
"I don't like words that hide the truth. I don't like words that conceal reality. I don't like euphemisms, or euphemistic language. And American English is loaded with euphemisms. Because Americans have a lot of trouble dealing with reality. Americans have trouble facing the truth. So they invent the kind of a soft language to protect themselves from it. And it gets worse with every generation. For some reason, it just keeps getting worse. I'll give you an example of that. There's a condition in combat, most people know about it, it's when a fighting person's nervous system has been stressed to its absolute peak and maximum, can't take any more input. The nervous system has either snapped, or is about to snap. In the first World War, that condition was called "shell shock." Simple, honest, direct language. Two syllables. Shell shock. Almost sounds like the guns themselves. That was seventy years ago. Then a whole generation went by, and the second World War came along. And the very same combat condition was called "battle fatigue." Four syllables now. Takes a little longer to say, doesn't seem to hurt as much. "Fatigue" is a nicer word than "shock." Shell shock. Battle fatigue. Then we had the war in Korea in 1950. Madison Avenue was riding high by that time. And the very same combat condition was called "operational exhaustion." Hey, we're up to eight syllables now! And the humanity has been completely squeezed out of the phrase, it's totally sterile now. Operational exhaustion, sounds like something that might happen to your car! Then, of course, came the war in Vietnam, which has only been over for about sixteen or seventeen years. And thanks to the lies and deceit surrounding that war, I guess it's no surprise that the very same condition was called "post-traumatic stress disorder." Still eight syllables, but we've added a hyphen! And the pain is completely buried under jargon. "Post-traumatic stress disorder." I'll bet you if we'd have still been calling it shell shock, some of those Vietnam veterans might have gotten the attention they needed at the time. I'll bet you that. I'll bet you that. - George Carlin" What you describe there is a little different mostly funded by pharma they create groups to test drugs on but go further creating support networks, publishing material , creating language. Activists and charities work in a very similar way , you create or recategorise something that attracts new funding , services, sells new drugs etc. other examples Bipolar disorder - used to be manic depression ADHD - used to be naughty children Social anxiety - used to be being Shy Gender dismorphia - Tomboy / feminine boy etc Disabled used to be called handicapped Funding follows the drugs , drugs follow the illnesses. If you want to sell more drugs and services you have to create new illnesses and new categories and expand / grow things like disability to include many more customers | |||
| |||
"It's nice that Oxfam has surplus charity money to research and produce this kind of thing. The insignificant problem of world hunger must have been solved, so yay for them
Bess x
They’re a big organisation with a huge responsibilities. Would you rather they were unprofessional about what they do?
11% of Oxfam’s spend goes on admin and support - including things like this but also staff wages, shop leases, etc. 11% is a hell of a lot lower than you’d find in most organisations.
"Oxfam" is short for the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief. How does this leaflet help solve famine?"It helps by: (a) Reducing the chances of accidentally pissing off the sort of people that might help with efforts to relieve famine, ie. the type of person that is often referred to as "woke". (b) Pissing off the sort of people that love to get themselves worked up about anything they can label as "woke", ie. the type of person that has no intention of ever doing anything to help solve famine. | |||
"It's nice that Oxfam has surplus charity money to research and produce this kind of thing. The insignificant problem of world hunger must have been solved, so yay for them
Bess x
They’re a big organisation with a huge responsibilities. Would you rather they were unprofessional about what they do?
11% of Oxfam’s spend goes on admin and support - including things like this but also staff wages, shop leases, etc. 11% is a hell of a lot lower than you’d find in most organisations.
"Oxfam" is short for the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief. How does this leaflet help solve famine?
It helps by:
(a) Reducing the chances of accidentally pissing off the sort of people that might help with efforts to relieve famine, ie. the type of person that is often referred to as "woke".
(b) Pissing off the sort of people that love to get themselves worked up about anything they can label as "woke", ie. the type of person that has no intention of ever doing anything to help solve famine."You solve famine by giving starving people food. | |||
"I absolutely agree that Trans parents or whomever should be called whatever they please but to advise against using mother and father directly adds to the horrible culture war we are currently seeing. You’re reading something into it that simply isn’t there. They don’t advise against using mother and father. In most cases you’d still use those words. They advise using parents instead *if* the parental roles aren’t clear, so that you don’t piss someone off by calling them the wrong thing." That's not what it says. It says to use parents or parenthood.To describe the role in raising Children without directly ascribing Gendered roles. It isn't if. It is their advise to use non gendered language as the default. It has it in a big green box with a tick by it. It isnt a guide to how not to offend Trans parents it is an indication on how to talk to everyone | |||
"I absolutely agree that Trans parents or whomever should be called whatever they please but to advise against using mother and father directly adds to the horrible culture war we are currently seeing. You’re reading something into it that simply isn’t there. They don’t advise against using mother and father. In most cases you’d still use those words. They advise using parents instead *if* the parental roles aren’t clear, so that you don’t piss someone off by calling them the wrong thing. That's not what it says. It says to use parents or parenthood.To describe the role in raising Children without directly ascribing Gendered roles. It isn't if. It is their advise to use non gendered language as the default. It has it in a big green box with a tick by it. It isnt a guide to how not to offend Trans parents it is an indication on how to talk to everyone " Anyway. I think we are all inclusivity, and I think that this is very divisive so I don't really want to argue anymore. Have a good weekend everyone. | |||
 | |||
"Too many persons waiting to be offended. "What an outrageous thing to say!! | |||
"Too many persons waiting to be offended.
What an outrageous thing to say!! "then my work here is done.
| |||
"Too many persons waiting to be offended.
What an outrageous thing to say!!
then my work here is done.
" | |||
"Too many persons waiting to be offended.
What an outrageous thing to say!!
then my work here is done.
"not reading any more - im far too offended and will be busy writing to my MP… just a ‘someone should do something letter’ Then im off to trawl social Media to find more material to take offence at!! | |||
"That's not what it says. It says to use parents or parenthood.To describe the role in raising Children without directly ascribing Gendered roles. It isn't if. It is their advise to use non gendered language as the default. It has it in a big green box with a tick by it. It isnt a guide to how not to offend Trans parents it is an indication on how to talk to everyone " I’m afraid you’re misunderstanding. You’re confusing advice with rules. Yes, it advises on how to avoid directly ascribing gendered roles. But nowhere does it say you should be doing that all the time. It’s telling how to do it right if and when you need to. Which, y’know, is the whole point of guidelines. And it’s absolutely not about ‘how to talk to everyone’. None of that little bit of advice is about heterosexual, cisgendered parents. It’s literally part of the chapter called LGBTQIA+ Rights and Inclusion. | |||
"That's not what it says. It says to use parents or parenthood.To describe the role in raising Children without directly ascribing Gendered roles. It isn't if. It is their advise to use non gendered language as the default. It has it in a big green box with a tick by it. It isnt a guide to how not to offend Trans parents it is an indication on how to talk to everyone I’m afraid you’re misunderstanding. You’re confusing advice with rules. Yes, it advises on how to avoid directly ascribing gendered roles. But nowhere does it say you should be doing that all the time. It’s telling how to do it right if and when you need to. Which, y’know, is the whole point of guidelines. And it’s absolutely not about ‘how to talk to everyone’. None of that little bit of advice is about heterosexual, cisgendered parents. It’s literally part of the chapter called LGBTQIA+ Rights and Inclusion." If we include people that reduces my rights, even if it never does anything at all to my life. Or something | |||
"Not reading any more - im far too offended and will be busy writing to my MP… just a ‘someone should do something letter’ Then im off to trawl social Media to find more material to take offence at!! "Not only Social Media but the likes of Daily Mail where their readers look for stuff to be offended about... You jest because you can see how redicilous it is... ... but I know people who read The Daily Mail and have real mental health issues as they are feeling so "out of control". Seriously, they read the Mail while drinking their pod coffee and spit at how we are losing control of our borders due to asylum seekers, risking their lives in small boats. The Mail readers are very angry for some reason? | |||
"Not reading any more - im far too offended and will be busy writing to my MP… just a ‘someone should do something letter’ Then im off to trawl social Media to find more material to take offence at!!
Not only Social Media but the likes of Daily Mail where their readers look for stuff to be offended about...
You jest because you can see how redicilous it is...
... but I know people who read The Daily Mail and have real mental health issues as they are feeling so "out of control".
Seriously, they read the Mail while drinking their pod coffee and spit at how we are losing control of our borders due to asylum seekers, risking their lives in small boats. The Mail readers are very angry for some reason?" | |||
