I'd argue that it's way more effective, for instance, to say "We have to help the homeless" than "We must address the unhoused." Stuff like that.
I'd argue that it's way more effective, for instance, to say "We have to help the homeless" than "We must address the unhoused." Stuff like that.
How about we have to help the unhoused?
OH FOR FUCKS SAKE!!!! Are you kidding me?? SEMANTICS??! THAT'S your biggest concern??
I used to volunteer at a shelter and never once heard anyone refer to themselves as unhoused. What they feel is a *homeless. The physical body is unhoused but the human being is *homeless.
Ok, let’s hear your argument
Jason Crow - a sensible man! - sponsored this, which is a nice bill but right outta the bucket, that title... crow.house.gov/media/press-...
On the bright side, it's a great bill with bipartisan support.
It is, but if you want to see it on Fox as "government waste from crazy libs," that title was perfect
I NEED TO BREAK IN HERE-Am I the only one who thinks those boxes being carried out of Bolton's house had the same look and feel as an empty milk carton?Like when you think it's full but when you go to pick it up it practically flies you backwards?The alleged Bolton boxes looked brand new & unused!
Perhaps a few Fox viewers would be on board with keeping people and their pets together. I do agree about some of the terminology. I'm a lifelong Dem and have look up some of the meanings.
Wait! I thought only activists used those terms and not actual politicians?
I want a constitutional amendment that bans the use of acronyms in statute titles.
Public health degree here, been dealing with name changing for 50 years. First we replaced the clap with VD. Then VD became STD. Then it became STI. No matter what you call them, someone will say “that’s offensive” Today I saw “differently compromised” being used instead of immune compromised.
Perfect
As long as we don't forget the reasons we switched from homeless to unhoused I guess. But I think our real problem is that historically the GOP have so many resources to overwhelm our side with propaganda. We only have people power so whatever we do we have to do together.
"we switched" Who is "we"?
I agree. But we really have to be aware of meta-communication, you know? The really important thing is to get these fascists out and get policies that help people in place. If we have to use a little bit of archaic language to do that, we got to be okay with it, you know?
We're not trying to communicate "I'm better than you," but that's what voters sometimes hear. It's so important to be aware of that.
It's arcane, not archaic, and it's one of the things which drove otherwise-sensible voters into Trump's arms.
No, I meant "archaic." "Homeless" is a bit old-fashioned next to "unhoused." Arcane language is what we should avoid.
"Homeless" is not a tiny bit archaic. Words don't become "archaic" when 75% of the people are still using them and most don't even know the arcane new word. Heck, our extremely well-educated president was using the word frequently during his presidency (9 years ago). Y'all need to get out more.
I'm arguing for using the older words
I understood and approve. But you did say "If we have to use a little bit of archaic language to do that, we got to be okay with it". I get that maybe you're being polite trying to pull 2 sides together, by labeling the **mainstream** word "archaic" ... but ... it's not. "Itinerant" is archaic.
When I was a kid, they were "bums".
Agreed. I misread your post. Apologies.
No worries. I appreciate the apology, thank you.