Equity language is just another tool to oppress people.
These guides get published to give The Groups something to do. Very few people in the real world --- yes, even the elite whites --- take them seriously. The only durable change I've noticed in the last few years is capitalizing Black, which is something our mutual fave John McWhorter has been advocating for some time.
I would ban public high schools from encouraging a "critique of liberalism". Being a critic takes no skill and doesn't help the world. Critical theory, and critical thinking are extremely overrated skills. We need constructive thinking and constructive communication.
More seriously, as much of a bastion of progressivism as these hallowed halls are, I'm 100% certain we are behind the curve of most blue state schools when it comes to how up to date we are on the appropriate ritual goat sacrifices.
Is this sarcasm? I am not quite sure what this is supposed to convey.
they have no qualms in oppressing and showing intolerance towards cultures that won't play ball with those linguistic impositions, especially when they cannot just ignore them as foreign
they will impose actual systemic intolerance and litmus tests to force their cultural supremacy
the people who say disagreement is invalidating someone's existence will actually deny the existence of the culture they spun from, violently so if necessary
Some discussion here: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-01-27/op-ed-latin...
1) anyone who studies in US university, is "rich educated" for South American standards
2) Quote from article bellow:
> a queer Latina ... mostly from white, right-wing Latino men.
> “When you’re a white Latino ... Black Latino ... transgender Latino, next to a queer Latino, next to an Indigenous Latino
> understand the diversity of our community
Those three paragraphs paint picture that "Latino" is some sort of community. And you can be in-group or out-group (by being right-wing-white-Latino). There is also somebody who speaks on behalf of "our community".
But that is simply not true. It is an ethnic group. Its name may change over a few decades, if new name gains use in South America. Not in a few years, because some US citizens said so, and decided to rename "their community"!
I would be called a Latino in the USA, being a Brazilian of brown skin. That amuses me as I have literally never thought of myself or my fellow Brazilians as Latinos... we're simply Brazilian (we may be region-specific, like carioca - from Rio, or Paulista, from Sao Paulo... but still Brazilian, obviously) and I am pretty sure Mexicans, Guatemalans, Peruvians, Colombians and others are the same... just like white Americans do the same: are you ever a white person when presenting yourself to another American, or e.g. Texan, Californian or whatever??
It pays a lot to actually participate in the community to know what to do. I find that people don't like being labelled in any community, but that they may use terms of art to describe their membership in different groups.
I know no one from these groups that uses this term.
> And the drive for 'Latinx' is coming from rich educated people.
rich educated people, or rich uneducated people pushing a narrative and inventing words that are patently offensive to the speakers of said language?
If I have an experience-- such as walking through the park, this afternoon and picking a blackberry... What is a "lived experience" version of that same experience?
I have lived experience with deafness. I've been deaf in one ear for decades now. However well I explain myself to my family members, there is a degree to which their experience will never be the same as mine, despite their first-hand contact with me.
We can either reserve the word "experience" for me, and try to police it so that nobody can say they have experience without being prepared to demonstrate the first-hand nature of their experience, or we can understand that people will use the word to mean "prolonged exposure" or similar, and add a qualifier when important to people like me: e.g. I have lived experience as a deaf person.
It's a shibboleth that indicates adherence to a certain world view. The speaker is communicating that they are a Good Person and thus you should give their experiences greater weight.
"Experience with" meaning, "Have dealt with this personally, first hand" gradually became, "has been near or studied and feels comfortable claiming authority on that basis." So the new compound word "Lived experience" was created to allow us to still use the first definition reliably.
Many times people who have "experience with" a topic have really "studied" it.
Words change. That doesn't mean everyone is getting stupider. In fact the more literate people are, the faster words are likely to change, since the more situations they'll be put to use in.
Functional literacy means more than simply knowing specific vocabulary words. It includes the shared knowledge to use and understand idioms and cultural references.
Needing to coin a new expression to replace a word we already have a perfectly good word for seems to be a symptom of poor literacy. I suppose the chronic dishonesty and doublespeak involved in corporate jargon could be the source of this phenomenon instead.
And absolutely everything in this World should be about someone oppressing someone else.
I mean someone named them in the first place. The people of Latin America didn't ask to be called Latinos, it was assigned to them, purportedly by a French man.