NationStates Jolt Archive

I got this idea today while I was skimming a George Carlin book.

Do euphemisms irritate you? If so, which ones in particular? If not, why not? No fair copying others (unless the unlikely happens and this thread goes past... oh, I don't know, ten pages).

I'll start. Yes, they irritate me, because they obscure the real meanings of ideas with the ostensible purpose of preserving some sensibility. Being sensitive to one another's feelings or notions of purity is okay to an extent, but when we thinly veil a lie in order to avoid some truth we've gone too far IMHO. For example, people don't pass away. They die. No one's offended by using the d-word.

Particularly irritating are political ones. It's not pro-life, goddammit. It's anti-abortion. Pro-life is so vague that it means little outside the context of the abortion debate. Capital punishment opponents are pro-life.

If I wasn't a euphemism, I'd be offended.

However, I can't say they particularly irk me.

They amuse me. And they sometimes sound worse than the thing they obscure. Like calling a penis a "ding-a-ling". That's just dirty talk right there.

I got this idea today while I was skimming a George Carlin book.

Do euphemisms irritate you? If so, which ones in particular? If not, why not? No fair copying others (unless the unlikely happens and this thread goes past... oh, I don't know, ten pages).

I'll start. Yes, they irritate me, because they obscure the real meanings of ideas with the ostensible purpose of preserving some sensibility. Being sensitive to one another's feelings or notions of purity is okay to an extent, but when we thinly veil a lie in order to avoid some truth we've gone too far IMHO. For example, people don't pass away. They die. No one's offended by using the d-word.

Particularly irritating are political ones. It's not pro-life, goddammit. It's anti-abortion. Pro-life is so vague that it means little outside the context of the abortion debate. Capital punishment opponents are pro-life.

No, based on what you've said, Capital punishment opponents are merely anti-capital punishment. Pro-life is to vague to even apply to that, by your own line of reasoning.

The Italian place in town called "Zizi's" amuses me highly, that's for sure.

For example, people don't pass away. They die. No one's offended by using the d-word.


The Victorians were. They created that euphemism. It has a lot to do with Romanticism and an increased attention to sensibilities and emotion. They thought euphemisms like that would ease the pain. It also marks a departure in religion of fire and brimstone concern with hell and death. Cemeteries become memorial parks that people picnic in. Funerary symbols move away from skulls and crossbones and more towards cherubim, weeping willows, and cut down trees.

Cemeteries become memorial parks that people picnic in.

Picnic.... at a cemetery? http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/eek3.gif

I got this idea today while I was skimming a George Carlin book.

Do euphemisms irritate you? If so, which ones in particular? If not, why not? No fair copying others (unless the unlikely happens and this thread goes past... oh, I don't know, ten pages).

I'll start. Yes, they irritate me, because they obscure the real meanings of ideas with the ostensible purpose of preserving some sensibility. Being sensitive to one another's feelings or notions of purity is okay to an extent, but when we thinly veil a lie in order to avoid some truth we've gone too far IMHO. For example, people don't pass away. They die. No one's offended by using the d-word.

Particularly irritating are political ones. It's not pro-life, goddammit. It's anti-abortion. Pro-life is so vague that it means little outside the context of the abortion debate. Capital punishment opponents are pro-life.

My main gripe with euphemisms is that they work sort of like cuckoos. The euphemism becomes so widespread in use that it becomes the original word so that it's just as offensive as the word it was supposed to replace and now you can't use either word, and you no longer have a word to describe the original meaning of the euphemism without confusion.

Anyone know what "explicit language" means? It means language that states clearly its intended meaning. But you'd never know that if you learned it from context in the news. It's always used to mean "dirty."

But none of that bothers me half as much as what I call disephisms. Words that are designed to make things sound worse than they are, or manipulate the emotions of the listner. Frank Luntz's "death tax" or FOX news's "homicide bomber." Those make me want to strangle Luntz and Murdoch with each other's intestines.

Picnic.... at a cemetery? http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/eek3.gif

I eat dead people...

No, based on what you've said, Capital punishment opponents are merely anti-capital punishment. Pro-life is to vague to even apply to that, by your own line of reasoning.

That was rather the point. To call one's self pro-life would mean an opposition to any event that could be described as contributing to death. Abortion, capital punishment, war, cutting food stamps, not funding medical care.

If you describe yourself as "pro-life" then which of these policies are you talking about?

Pointing out that it would also mean an opposition to the death penalty is just one example of how it's a stupid label for a political movement.

Political euphemisms piss me off, though sexual euphemisms piss me off more.

Political euphemisms piss me off, though sexual euphemisms piss me off more.

Sometimes sexual euphemisms sound so cacophonous.

I thought euthanization was a medical surgery to make someone younger...

That was rather the point. To call one's self pro-life would mean an opposition to any event that could be described as contributing to death. Abortion, capital punishment, war, cutting food stamps, not funding medical care.

If you describe yourself as "pro-life" then which of these policies are you talking about?

Pointing out that it would also mean an opposition to the death penalty is just one example of how it's a stupid label for a political movement.

Thank you. I had to set up my wife's laptop, so you got to it before I did. But I woulda said the same thing. :D

Picnic.... at a cemetery? http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/eek3.gif


http://www.illinoistimes.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A6816

It's not so different from Dia del Muertos or any number of other cultural practices that include a feast with one's deceased ancestors...the Victorians however, didn't need a religious day to do it. This was a form of recreation, a good way to spend a weekend afternoon.

But the thing to remember is that any cemetery that might have been a memorial park in Victorian times is probably much fuller and crowded with tombstones as dead people are shoehorned in. In the past, it was really a park that had room to well enjoy without stepping on graves.

Do euphemisms irritate you?Yes... but I absolutely love dysphemisms.

"Pass away"? Go fuck yourself.

But... "CROAK"?! Haha, now we're talking!! :D

Euphemisms can be fun sometimes. Take the game Heavenly Sword for example; though I've only played the demo and have no idea how many more there may be in it I do know that the main character turns to an autistic furry in an opening cutscene and says "We may need you to play 'twing twang'" which I can only assume is a cutesy euphemism for lesbian cunnilingus.

Euphemisms for sex? Fun and hilarious. But, lately, I've had people try to have serious discussions who constantly use euphemisms for the problems at hand instead of saying directly what they mean. It's infuriating.

So, yeah. If you're trying to get it on, they're acceptable. If you want to have intelligent discussion, for Christ's sake, say what you mean.

Well, how shall I say, euphemisms aren't quite my favorites, and I usually politely offer the person(s) using them in my presence to be excused to touch themselves privately if they so desire.

In all seriousness, I believe euphemisms to be a terribly ineffective tool for covering up taboo topics at their best, and a dangerous tool for hiding malicious content or intentions at their worst.

As far as the first one goes, I mainly ignore it and try not to use them myself. If one feels that sex, death, stupidity, mental/physical illness, certain money and employment issues, foreigner etc. are taboo topics, then one ought to just shut up about them instead of talking about "making love", "passing on/away", "being special", "being physically challenged" or, my favorite, "being differently gifted", "being relieved of one's duties", "our ethnic fellow citizens" etc.

In the second case, however, I feel there's a lot more at stake than just clarity of expression. If especially politicians talk about "centers to help making the journey home easier (Heimreiseerleichterungzentren)" in my country when in fact they mean deportation/removal camps for "illegal aliens", or about "resource shifts due to internal necessities" when what they really mean is lay-offs because the managers are in desperate need for even higher profits, or there is talk about the "quieting of unrest" when there has, in fact, been cruel and massively deadly police/army force used against widespread, peaceful, popular demonstrations, then I think there is a much deeper and serious issue of truth avoidance and malicious deception to be contemplated.


But none of that bothers me half as much as what I call disephisms. Words that are designed to make things sound worse than they are, or manipulate the emotions of the listener.

Often heard in relationship quarrels and politics. Prime prominent supplier today is certainly Bush junior, with his brilliant phrases such as the "Axis of Evil".

If one feels that sex, death, stupidity, mental/physical illness, certain money and employment issues, foreigner etc. are taboo topics, then one ought to just shut up about them instead of talking about "making love", "passing on/away", "being special", "being physically challenged" or, my favorite, "being differently gifted", "being relieved of one's duties", "our ethnic fellow citizens" etc.

I don't feel that "making love" is a euphemism so much as... Well, the best way to word it is a "genre" of sex. Sex, fucking, and making love seem like more specific phrases for ways we have intercourse- at least, to me. This could be the wrong place to bring that up, though.

I do hate "differently gifted/abled" though. You're handicapped. There's nothing wrong with that. So why the hell are you masking it with a different label?

I don't feel that "making love" is a euphemism so much as... Well, the best way to word it is a "genre" of sex. Sex, fucking, and making love seem like more specific phrases for ways we have intercourse- at least, to me. This could be the wrong place to bring that up, though.
I'm sorry, I ought to have made myself more clear. Of course, I do not object to the accurate, warranted use of "making love", just as I don't object to someone say that they'll relieve someone of their duties at the end of a shift or something. It's only when one starts to use it too widely (as in "making love") or plain old inappropriately/misleadingly (as in "relieving of one's duties") that I get bothered.

I do hate "differently gifted/abled" though. You're handicapped. There's nothing wrong with that. So why the hell are you masking it with a different label?
You'll notice that very few handicapped people will call themselves that, just as very few foreigners will call themselves "fellow ethnic citizens" (and my experience with old people is limited, but I haven't yet heard one referring to themselves as "senior citizens", "elderly" or "of advanced age/life experience").

P.S. Reeka, you ought to change the link in your sig; SAI has recently moved to a different domain.

I don't see how people can be so annoyed by euphemisms.. They're nothing special, nothing new, nothing out of the ordinary. Just meh.

You'll notice that very few handicapped people will call themselves that, just as very few foreigners will call themselves "fellow ethnic citizens" (and my experience with old people is limited, but I haven't yet heard one referring to themselves as "senior citizens", "elderly" or "of advanced age/life experience").

P.S. Reeka, you ought to change the link in your sig; SAI has recently moved to a different domain.

I've heard plenty old people call themselves senior citizens and elderly, though they usually use senior citizens with a good laugh. "Fellow ethnic citizen" is a new one to me, though. Pretty freakin' lame, too. Looks like a duck, talks like a duck... why not just call it what it is?

And thanks for catching that.. nationals barely touches the website, guess this explains the lack of updates the past year.

I don't understand when it became so offensive to call old people....old. Or anything even connected to age! Now "senior citizen" is out, along with "geriatrics", and others.
Now it is "distinguished gentlemen" or "ladies of a certain age" or any other horseshit they made up while I wasn't paying attention.

What? What is the certain age? The age is OLD. Call it as it is.

PC euphemisms irritate the heck out of me.

Good-ol'-fashioned euphemisms I like.

E.g. smallest room,

Handing in the dinner pail,

etc.

I differently appreciate euphemisms.

Haha. I've just rewatched all of Clone High and I keep thinking of "Verb the adjective noun!" :D

they pissed me off as a kid, when I was about 2 my dog had to be "put to sleep" and then about a month later I had to have surgery, the doctor came in and told me I was going to be "put to sleep" I thought that meant that I wasn't ever coming home. :p I wish my parents had just told me the truth.

I also don't like euphemisms for masturbating, they traumatize me.

flogging the log
choking the chicken

be gentle!

the ones for girls aren't any better. it's more obscene to make up something than to say "I'm going to go masturbate" at least that's what I think.

also, "bumping uglies" ewww! nothing 'down there' (another annoying one) is ugly!

You'll notice that very few handicapped people will call themselves that, just as very few foreigners will call themselves "fellow ethnic citizens" (and my experience with old people is limited, but I haven't yet heard one referring to themselves as "senior citizens", "elderly" or "of advanced age/life experience").

I don't think there is shame in calling myself a cripple, because (technically) I am. Handicapped... well it's a fair enough word, but that makes me think of golf -- like I'm getting an offset of points to help normalize my score in the game of life. I don't like handi-capable, though. It's one of those words that people use to try to make you feel better about yourself, but which usually just causes you to feel worse.

the ones for girls aren't any better. it's more obscene to make up something than to say "I'm going to go masturbate" at least that's what I think.

I don't know too many euphemisms for female masturbation. In fact, when I looked some up, I only recognized one -- petting the kitty. I guess I'm getting old... or (ahem) distinguished.

Personally, I don't like politically correct euphamisms. They don't drive me crazy, but I can, nonetheless, rant about them.

Take "black" for example. I grew up in a military neighbourhood, which is, despite popular belief, not all white. Not by a long shot. We had Euros, Latinos, Asians, Amerasians, and many, many black people. Yet, I grew up with the term "black". Everyone said it, and no one minded. Including the Black people. But suddenly, It's Black History Month of '06, and it seems "black" has become just as taboo as "n_____". I'm not racist in the least, in fact, I despise racism. But I don't see what's suddenly become wrong with "black". And it's gotten stupid, too. People forget now that not all black people are African-Americans. Hell, some aren't even African. In Junior High, I was once told about how Arab raiders plagued the "African-American civilisations" of Ghana and Mali. In the RP forum, someone said that x% of their population was African-American(As opposed to African-[fictional demonym]).

Other euphamisms that I dislike:

"suspended indefinatelly"- It means "stopped". A way of giving a false hope to the people counting on whatever's being "suspended".

"destroyed" and "put down"- Euthanised.

"Let you go"- Fired ye.

"mentally ill"- Insane/Crazy/Whacky

"Sexually Assaulted"- Raped

And my personal [least] favourite:

When I was in the third grade, I once asked a teacher what this Autism-thing was that we were supposed to raise money for. What did I get?

"It's when people have a special relationship with the world"

Of course, my reaction was, "That's a disease? What's wrong with that?"

Little did I know. Euphamisms.

Euphemisms pee-pee me off.

:cool:

When I was in the third grade, I once asked a teacher what this Autism-thing was that we were supposed to raise money for. What did I get?

"It's when people have a special relationship with the world"

Of course, my reaction was, "That's a disease? What's wrong with that?"

I think those are the worst offenders -- technically true, but saying absolutely nothing about what it really entails. It's the same with pro-life as I was saying earlier.

I don't think there is shame in calling myself a cripple, because (technically) I am. Handicapped... well it's a fair enough word, but that makes me think of golf -- like I'm getting an offset of points to help normalize my score in the game of life. I don't like handi-capable, though. It's one of those words that people use to try to make you feel better about yourself, but which usually just causes you to feel worse.From what I know that's not how these words are supposed to have originated. The purpose of such words is that they are meant to be part of a solution (not the whole of it) that gets people thinking about certain situations differently - such as disabilities. I think the reasoning is that the meaning of the constituent parts of a word biases the way people consider the concept that the word represents. For instance, disability implies that having the ability is normal and therefore society is doing the disabled person a favour by catering to their needs. That is, currently if a paraplegic person can't gain access to a shop then the default view is say that the root cause of the problem is that the paraplegic person cannot use their legs. Instead, what proponents of these words are aiming for is that people consider the root cause of the problem is that the shop doesn't have a ramp or whatever.

Personally I don't care about euphemisms either way. It is amusing to have a conversation where you explicitly use the word the other person is trying to avoid and watch them squirm.

I think those are the worst offenders -- technically true, but saying absolutely nothing about what it really entails. It's the same with pro-life as I was saying earlier.

Seconded.

"Sexually Assaulted"- Raped

Sexual assault isn't a euphemism. It's a broader term for any actions (verbal or physical) that bring unwanted sexual contact attention to a person. So if someone comes up to be and gropes me when I make it clear I do not want them to touch me, I haven't been raped, but I have been sexually assaulted. (RAINN says it's any unwanted sexual actions taken against a person that fall short of rape.) This page (http://www.4women.gov/FAQ/sexualassault.htm) says sexual harassment is included in sexual assault.

I do agree on the thing about black. I know one African-American. He is black, his family is from Ghana. African-American is misleading. I know a lot of people who are black who have never set foot on African soil, and whose families are just as rooted in the southern US as mine is.

I don't think there is shame in calling myself a cripple, because (technically) I am. Handicapped... well it's a fair enough word, but that makes me think of golf -- like I'm getting an offset of points to help normalize my score in the game of life. I don't like handi-capable, though. It's one of those words that people use to try to make you feel better about yourself, but which usually just causes you to feel worse.

Same here. I usually don't call myself crippled, but I don't/wouldn't mind if someone chose that word unless it is said with explicit malicious intent - but then I'd be protesting the malicious intent, and not the word. Were someone to say "differently abled" with a spiteful tone, I'd be just as offended.

The purpose of such words is that they are meant to be part of a solution (not the whole of it) that gets people thinking about certain situations differently - such as disabilities. I think the reasoning is that the meaning of the constituent parts of a word biases the way people consider the concept that the word represents. For instance, disability implies that having the ability is normal and therefore society is doing the disabled person a favour by catering to their needs. That is, currently if a paraplegic person can't gain access to a shop then the default view is say that the root cause of the problem is that the paraplegic person cannot use their legs. Instead, what proponents of these words are aiming for is that people consider the root cause of the problem is that the shop doesn't have a ramp or whatever.

I believe that you're right abut how and why these words have originated. However, I vehemently disagree with this reasoning.

I, for example, have not been afforded the luxury of a second hand to go with my quite lovely second arm. Reasoning that using the word "disability" for this situation would wrongfully imply that this is an abnormal situation when it is an undeniable fact the the vast majority of every society is two-handed is absolutely delusional.

The same goes for the "root of the problem" reasoning. The root of the problem that my shirts' and sweaters' left sleeves are always too long is not that 'society' wrongfully tailors sweaters so that their sleeves are of equal length, but that I am missing a hand. The only wrong thing would be of 'society' to say that 'they' would refuse to special-tailor sweaters that fit me well, too, if I asked and agreed to pay for them.

An IMHO valid view is to say that society has a duty to make sure, to the best of its ability, that all its members have reasonable access to the more vital and minimal facilities of life, and this should include wheelie-accessible schools, public offices and transport, and a whole lot of etc.

I got this idea today while I was skimming a George Carlin book.

Do euphemisms irritate you? If so, which ones in particular? If not, why not? No fair copying others (unless the unlikely happens and this thread goes past... oh, I don't know, ten pages).

I'll start. Yes, they irritate me, because they obscure the real meanings of ideas with the ostensible purpose of preserving some sensibility. Being sensitive to one another's feelings or notions of purity is okay to an extent, but when we thinly veil a lie in order to avoid some truth we've gone too far IMHO. For example, people don't pass away. They die. No one's offended by using the d-word.

Particularly irritating are political ones. It's not pro-life, goddammit. It's anti-abortion. Pro-life is so vague that it means little outside the context of the abortion debate. Capital punishment opponents are pro-life.I frequently scan the obits for people who die. Not many. Lots of passed away. But the really funny ones are the "went to be with his heavenly father" "heaven's gates opened for him" "went to his final reward" and that type crap.

I do not mind sexual euphemisms because they are somewhat amusing. However, I dislike most other euphemisms, particularly those having to do with death.





"You got any ideas how you wanna wax this guy?"

"Can't you just say 'kill'? Ya always gotta romanticize it."

-Grosse Pointe Blank

Gosh darn those euphemisms all to heck!