the newest politically correct BANNED LIST... is TFU

ok boils and ghouls, this is for now the list of things added to the list of already banned things for not pollitically correct...

Adam and Eve (replace with "Eve and Adam," to demonstrate that males do not take priority over females)

Blind, the (banned as offensive, replace with "people who are blind")

Blind leading the blind, the (banned as handicapism)

Bookworm (banned as offensive, replace with "intellectual")

Boys' night out (banned as sexist)

Busybody (banned as sexist, demeaning to older women)

Cassandra (banned as sexist)

Chief Sitting Bull (banned as relic of colonialism; replace with "Tatanka Iyotake")

Confined to a wheelchair (banned as offensive; replace with "person who is mobility impaired")

Courageous (banned as patronizing when referring to a person with disabilities)

Craftsmanship (banned as sexist)

Cult (banned as ethnocentric when referring to a religious group)

Deaf, the (banned as offensive; replace with people who are deaf" or "a person with loss of hearing")

Devil (banned)

Dialect (banned as ethnocentric; use sparingly)

Differently abled (banned as offensive; replace with "person who has a physical disability")

Dogma (banned as ethnocentric; replace with "doctrine" or "belief")

Drunken, Drunkenness (banned as offensive when referring to Native Americans)

Duffer (banned as demeaning to older men)

East, Eastern (banned as Eurocentric)

Egghead (banned as offensive; replace with "intellectual")

Elderly, the (banned as offensive; replace with "older people")

Extremist (banned as ethnocentric; replace with "believer," "follower," or "adherent")

Fairy (banned because it suggests homosexuality; replace with "elf")

Fanatic (banned as ethnocentric; replace with "believer," "follower," or "adherent")

Founding Fathers, the (banned as sexist; replace with "the Founders" or "the Framers")

Fraternize (banned as sexist)

God (banned)

Heiress (banned as sexist; replace with "heir")

Hell (banned; replaced with "heck" or "darn")

Heretic (use with caution when comparing religions)

Heroine (banned as sexist; replace with "hero")

Huts (banned as ethnocentric; replace with "small houses")

Insane (banned as offensive; replace with "person who has an emotional disorder or psychiatric illness")

Inspirational (banned as patronizing when referring to a person with disabilities)

Jungle (banned; replace with "rain forest")

Junk bonds (banned as elitist)

Lame (banned as offensive; replace with "walks with a cane")

Limping along (banned as handicapism)

Little person (banned as offensive; replace with "person of small stature")

Lumberjack (banned as sexist; replace with "woodcutter")

Majority group (banned as offensive)

Man of war (banned as sexist; replace with "warship")

Mentally ill (banned as offensive; replace with "person with a mental or emotional disability")

Middle East (banned as reflecting a Eurocentric world view; replace with "Southwest Asia"; may be acceptable, however, as a historical reference)

Minority Group (banned as offensive)

Mother Russia (banned as sexist; replace with "Russia, vast land of rich harvests")

Navajo (banned as inauthentic; replace with "Diné")

Old (banned as an adjective that implies helplessness, dependency, or other negative qualities)

Old wives' tale (banned as sexist; replace with "folk wisdom")

Ombudsman (banned as sexist)

One-man band (banned as sexist; replace with "one-person performance")

Pagan (banned as ethnocentric when referring to religion; replace with "nonbeliever")

Paraplegic (banned as offensive; replace with "person with paraplegia")

Past one's prime (banned as demeaning to older persons)

Pollyanna (banned as sexist)

Polo (banned as elitist)

Regatta (banned as elitist)

Roving the land (banned as reference to Native Americans)

Satan (banned)

Sect (banned as ethnocentric when referring to a religious group, unless separated from an established religion)

Senile (banned as demeaning to older persons)

Senior citizen (banned as demeaning to older persons)

Slave (replace whenever possible with "enslaved person")

Snowman (banned, replace with "snow person")

Soul food (banned as regional or ethnic bias)

Stickball (banned as regional or ethnic bias)

Straw man (banned as sexist; replace with "unreal issue" or "misrepresentation")

Subgroup (banned as offensive reference to cultural differences)

Sufferer of cerebral palsy (banned as offensive; replace with "person who has loss of muscle control")

Suffragette (banned as sexist; replace with "suffragist")

Tomboy (banned as sexist)

Turning a deaf ear (banned as handicapism)

West, Western (banned as Eurocentric)

Yacht (banned as elitist)

STEREOTYPED IMAGES TO AVOID IN TEXT; ILLUSTRATIONS, AND READING PASSAGES IN TESTS:


Girls and Women / Boys and Men: Images to avoid

Women portrayed as teachers, mothers, nurses, and/or secretaries


Women of achievement who are domineering, aggressive, lacking in desirable personal attributes


Women aging less gracefully than men


Women as more nurturing than men


Men as active problem solvers


Men playing sports, working with tools


Men and boys larger and heavier than women and girls


Father expressionless or relaxed in trying circumstances


Females more preoccupied with their appearance than males


Pioneer woman riding in covered wagon while man walks


Women as passengers on a sailboat or sipping hot chocolate in a ski lodge


Girls as peaceful, emotional, warm


Boys as strong, rough, competitive


Boys as intelligent, logical, mechanical


Boys as good at math, science

People of color: Images to avoid


People of color being angry


People of color as politically liberal

African-American people: Images to avoid


African-Americans who have white features or all look alike


African-Americans in crowded tenements on chaotic streets; in big, bright cars; in abandoned buildings with broken windows and wash hanging out; or living in innocuous, dull white-picket-fence neighborhoods


African-Americans who are baggage handlers

Native American people: Images to avoid


Native Americans performing a rain dance


Native Americans who are not part of the American mainstream


Native Americans living in rural settings on reservations


Native Americans with long hair, braids, headbands


Native Americans portrayed as people who live in harmony with nature

Asian-American people: Images to avoid


Asian-Americans as very intelligent, excellent scholars


Asian-Americans as ambitious, hardworking and competitive


Asian-Americans as having strong family ties


Chinese people who have great food


Korean-Americans owning or working in fruit markets

Hispanic-American people: Images to avoid


Hispanics who are migrant workers


Hispanics who are warm, expressive, and emotional


Hispanics in urban settings (ghettos or barrios)


Hispanics wearing bright colors, older women in black, girls always in dresses


Mexicans grinding corn
Persons who are older: Images to avoid


Older people in nursing homes or with canes, walkers, wheelchairs, orthopedic shoes, or eyeglasses


Older people as ill, physically weak, feeble, or dependent


Older people as funny, absentminded, fussy, or charming


Older people who have twinkles in their eyes, need afternoon naps, lose their hearing or sight, suffer aches and pains


Older people who are retired, are at the end of their careers, have lived the most fruitful years of their lives, or are engaged in a life of leisure activities


Older people living with their offspring or with other relatives


Older people who are fishing, baking, knitting, whittling, reminiscing, rocking in chairs, or watching television.

I'm banning this list because I find it offencive to my freedom of speech and other constitutional rights as a free American...

Also its agist and racist in that you cannot show peoples cultures lifestyles or show the older folks doing damn near anything anything.

Also you can no longer show women as achieving good things, holding honorable possitions or being strong in anyway which I find sets the womans rights movement way back. Ands whats with not showing men as smart strong or good at sports, what are we a bunch of ignorant, stupid cavemen?!

This list is TOTALY f**ked UP

Wow! Where did you find this list, Endless?

RedAngel wrote:

Wow! Where did you find this list, Endless?

I got it from my mother and she got it from one of her classes.

endless dark wrote:

RedAngel wrote:

Wow! Where did you find this list, Endless?

I got it from my mother and she got it from one of her classes.

What class was that? There are some words that I recognize as being incredibly offensive, but eventually we would have to just use grunts and gestures lest we offend someone--but then that would be offensive.

Fairy (banned because it suggests homosexuality; replace with "elf")

Because elf is that much better

Nsane now needs to be called Person who has an emotional disorder or psychiatric illnesslilmunky Politically correct & all these days.

Ginger_Snaps wrote:

endless dark wrote:

RedAngel wrote:

Wow! Where did you find this list, Endless?

I got it from my mother and she got it from one of her classes.

What class was that? There are some words that I recognize as being incredibly offensive, but eventually we would have to just use grunts and gestures lest we offend someone--but then that would be offensive.

I'm wondering about that class too? Just wanting to verify the source -- no offense to your mom, but it sounds like something Fox News would put out there to stir up anti-lefty sentiment.

Political correctness started well enough -- it started as an attempt at respecting people who are not all alike. But as is the case with so many things, extremist nutjobs within the movement had to go crazy with it, and now PC is a derogatory term and considered an illegitimate practice. It wouldn't be a problem if it was viewed and handled with moderation, but moderation is not part of a culture that values overzealousness and greed in all things. Sigh.

The class its self really isn't important, heres the link to where the list can be fount

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/education/ed0190.html

I know, it says "catholic education" but dont let that be the determaning factor when reading it. This list is happening in schools, Catholic or not

^^ Thanks for the link. I see at the bottom there's an acknowledgement of the source, but the details at the start are still a little sketchy:

"This following list of banned words and stereotypes is an abridgement of a lengthy glossary compiled by a historian from bias guidelines issued by major educational publishers and state agencies. The guidelines are used by writers, editors, and illustrators when preparing textbooks and tests for K-12 students."

OK, which historian? Which state agencies? Are all states following the guidelines? What are teachers or parents saying about this? (I haven't heard anything about this, though I'm friends with several people who are teachers.) How about a link to the unnamed historian's glossary from which this is an abridged list? Where did the bias guidelines come from? And why is a historian tackling this -- the explanation for each change invites the discussion of the terms' historical backgrounds, but those discussions are not there. An online news article would contain this info, but the above link does not.

Replace "snowman" with "snow person"? Between the lacking info and this one sounding like kind of a joke, I think people are only taking the article as fact because of the feathers it ruffles. We can't believe everything we read; I'm sorry to hear that the organizer of your mom's class does. I wish your mom the best in that class, though.

EDIT: I understand now; the writer cited at the end is the historian. I still don't understand where she's getting all this, though. One of my teacher friends had this to say: " From what I can tell this list is from a book by Diane Ravitch, who is an educational historian. She's been on The Daily Show and speaks out against the crazy fervor movies like Waiting for Superman cause. These terms were compiled not in support of their use but to show that a cleansing of the language takes out truth from education. From what I've seen, this terminology is not used in my school. But we also teach in the northeast, which tends to be a different world from other areas of the country."

People are sissies, oh, wait, am I allowed to say that? People are sissies emotionally inept and somehow believe that if something hurt their feelings, then that thing should become illegal as to protect their delicate little feelings from ever being hurt again.

How pathetic.

No one on this planet is above being insulted or becoming the brunt of a joke, nowhere is it stated that people are free from ever being teased or ridiculed. Dealing with stereotypes, teasing, bullying, jokes, etc; this is how someone grows wiser and stronger, moving past these "hurtful words" or thoughts is the way a person finds themselves amidst all the bullsh*t that society and family and media heaps onto you.

I personally feel that people who are paralyzed by the their treatment, (barring some torturous act) are weak, and therefore useless to our species and our planet. Someone unable to get teased without breaking down, or whom dislikes a certain word or phrase so much that it disrupts their lives, is weak, and sadly they're expandable to a point within our species. People who get over things, who take the bad with the good, and grow stronger; those are the people who grow old and do something with their lives. They change the world around them, they help solve problems, they teach others, and they raise children who will usually do the same.

People who get teased and kill themselves, or people who become socially crippled by words or phrases; are stationary, they've ceased to move forward, or they stop moving at all, and therefore are kinda useless. It sucks when you hear about some kid committing suicide, but if some kid can't deal with the nasty little words or actions in highschool or freshman year or college, then they obviously weren't capable of dealing with actual life and actual problems. We hear about kids who kill themselves before age 21: which is awful, but does anyone think these kids could have been strong enough to deal with actual problems during the years 22-98?

There are groups of people out there who obviously take time and effort out of their lives to actively seek out banning words like Deaf, Dialect, Middle East, Wives' Tales ; because with all the problems in the world, banning words is what should take precedence. Who cares about how solar energy and wind energy could power every major city around the world, but a small group of rich men can't make money off something free, so they've enslaved us all by forcing us to buy oil to power filthy engines, or build plants which split atom particles and could potentially kill millions during an accident. Ignore the fact that banks separate from the government of Europe and America making money which the government buys and forces us to pay the difference in taxes is illegal. Forget about endless wars around the globe against ideals, not enemies, are murdering our planets bravest and usually poorest children while politicians and their corporate friends get richer. No, no no, what we need to do is take time to make sure no one says or writes down phrases that makes me feel sad.

I return to my initial statement, people are sissies.

Oh yeah, I've been anyway working my two jobs, like 16 hour work days 5 days a week, so I've missed you all and felt really wordy.

We've missed you too and yup, people are sissies

Spooky wrote:

People who get teased and kill themselves, or people who become socially crippled by words or phrases; are stationary, they've ceased to move forward, or they stop moving at all, and therefore are kinda useless. It sucks when you hear about some kid committing suicide, but if some kid can't deal with the nasty little words or actions in highschool or freshman year or college, then they obviously weren't capable of dealing with actual life and actual problems. We hear about kids who kill themselves before age 21: which is awful, but does anyone think these kids could have been strong enough to deal with actual problems during the years 22-98?

I agree that the list above is ridiculous, to the point of having seriously questioned its origins. But I don't stand with you regarding the instances of teen suicide as a result of what is essentially abuse from their peers.

The two most notable cases in recent memory: Tyler Clementi and Phoebe Prince. Tyler was videotaped in his own room. That crosses lines of stalking and harassment, but it was categorized as bullying only because it took place at an institution of learning, a college campus. And with Phoebe it was stalking and harassment too, a form from which she literally couldn't escape: it wasn't just at school, these kids would follow her home from school in their car throwing things at her and yelling "Irish whore" -- and then when she got home, they would harass her online too. I should also mention, and this is a biggie: Teachers turned a blind eye when she was bullied at school. She had no respite from this at all; this was her life. But again, the mild term "bullying" is used -- only because it began at school. Bull. This was stalking and harassment.

My points: 1) Call a spade a spade and use terms like stalking, harassment and abuse instead of bullying -- because there are laws in place meant to combat the first three, but not bullying.
2) Schools should adopt a zero-tolerance policy on bullying. It's not acceptable to turn a blind eye because no one actually learns from that. No one will learn that a hostile social environment is unacceptable unless we explain that and enforce that.

(returning to topic)
However: That is NOT the same as outlawing the terms altogether. Open dialogue on these terms and their origins needs to be maintained. Like it or not, we define ourselves largely through the language we use. Words are not meaningless. BUT they are not to be discarded out of FEAR. Only discussion can fight fear.

Another thing I want to mention: You can take a lot of abuse in life if you've got positive sources of support to help cancel them out. But you can't always count on that to undo cruelty that never should have been committed in the first place. And some young people who have never known anything but cruelty/abuse don't have the framework to envision anything better for themselves -- that's why they see only one way out.

RedAngel wrote:

The two most notable cases in recent memory: Tyler Clementi and Phoebe Prince. Tyler was videotaped in his own room. That crosses lines of stalking and harassment, but it was categorized as bullying only because it took place at an institution of learning, a college campus. And with Phoebe it was stalking and harassment too, a form from which she literally couldn't escape: it wasn't just at school, these kids would follow her home from school in their car throwing things at her and yelling "Irish whore" -- and then when she got home, they would harass her online too. I should also mention, and this is a biggie: Teachers turned a blind eye when she was bullied at school. She had no respite from this at all; this was her life. But again, the mild term "bullying" is used -- only because it began at school. Bull. This was stalking and harassment.

When it comes to stalking and harassment A. know your rights and B. document every occurrence. If possible, have some kind of recording device on hand so that you can either get the audio and or visual of the occurrences.

As for words, people need to callous themselves and realize that words are just utterance that we attribute certain symbols to, and those symbols can change drastically over time. Bet they didn't know that "fie" meant the same as f**k or damn back in Elizabethan times but yet they have no problem teaching Shakespeare uncensored.

"Merry Christmas" seems to be headed for the banned list, too.

Ginger_Snaps wrote:

As for words, people need to callous themselves and realize that words are just utterance that we attribute certain symbols to, and those symbols can change drastically over time. Bet they didn't know that "fie" meant the same as f**k or damn back in Elizabethan times but yet they have no problem teaching Shakespeare uncensored.

True. That's why it's important to learn how "offensive" words came to be, what they really mean, and whether the meaning is changing. But considering that grammar has been cut from most schools' curricula, I don't think we'll see that happen.

velvet spider wrote:

"Merry Christmas" seems to be headed for the banned list, too.

You may be right, VS. Seems like there's such a effort to neuter language that any phrase that expresses a person's beliefs or individuality will wind up on the chopping block. If someone wishes me a happy Hannukah, I won't correct him/her; I just take it to mean "hope your holidays are just as joyous as the one I plan to celebrate." That said, I usually go for "Happy Holidays" b/c it's all-inclusive.

RedAngel wrote:

The two most notable cases in recent memory: Tyler Clementi and Phoebe Prince. Tyler was videotaped in his own room. That crosses lines of stalking and harassment, but it was categorized as bullying only because it took place at an institution of learning, a college campus. And with Phoebe it was stalking and harassment too, a form from which she literally couldn't escape: it wasn't just at school, these kids would follow her home from school in their car throwing things at her and yelling "Irish whore" -- and then when she got home, they would harass her online too. I should also mention, and this is a biggie: Teachers turned a blind eye when she was bullied at school. She had no respite from this at all; this was her life. But again, the mild term "bullying" is used -- only because it began at school. Bull. This was stalking and harassment.

These two of the more recent situations are examples of when bullying and teasing crosses a very real social line, and very illegal line as well. Continuing to call them "bullies" is dismissive I agree, these two young people who ended their lives were victims of far more than the simple cruelness that children can display as they age.

The online thing bothers me, simply because the youth put too much of themselves out on the internet. Yes, I've said this before, that I am a member of this forum and at times have discussed personal feelings and beliefs, as well as facts about my life. But the people between 10 and 20 years younger than me seem to vomit everything of their lives without disregard onto the internet. Leaving yourself and your business so open, leaves you vulnerable, why doesn't this fact get through to the youth. I myself allow only what I am comfortable exposing out, and to a small enough group (yes anyone could find it, but even with the resources, most people are too lazy to look). Why can't people realize that secrets are cool, discretion is cool, mysteries are cool; and should only be told to people who you know and trust.

RedAngel wrote:

Another thing I want to mention: You can take a lot of abuse in life if you've got positive sources of support to help cancel them out. But you can't always count on that to undo cruelty that never should have been committed in the first place. And some young people who have never known anything but cruelty/abuse don't have the framework to envision anything better for themselves -- that's why they see only one way out.

This is completely true, and sadly could be corrected. Trey Parker and Matt Stone's comments on the issue of bullying from Bowling For Columbine always seem poignant to me. Don't you wish you could go back in time and tell these kids that in a few years, when school is over, all those cool kids will be losers because they peaked during the ages of 16-19. That the nerds, dorks, freaks and losers leave that period of their lives, mostly the ones who were uncool and had crappy home lives, and usually have the drive and talent to go on to do great things.

Spooky wrote:

The online thing bothers me, simply because the youth put too much of themselves out on the internet. Yes, I've said this before, that I am a member of this forum and at times have discussed personal feelings and beliefs, as well as facts about my life. But the people between 10 and 20 years younger than me seem to vomit everything of their lives without disregard onto the internet. Leaving yourself and your business so open, leaves you vulnerable, why doesn't this fact get through to the youth. I myself allow only what I am comfortable exposing out, and to a small enough group (yes anyone could find it, but even with the resources, most people are too lazy to look). Why can't people realize that secrets are cool, discretion is cool, mysteries are cool; and should only be told to people who you know and trust.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. I'm not sure why younger people share so much -- I'll bet there's a great anthro-based reason? -- but if I had to guess, I'd say it's a by-product of our own technology. Not necessarily a bad thing; it's certainly helped me open up to people. I think there's a push-and-pull inside everyone: the desire to be accepted while still being protected from rejection. The anonymity of online communication provides a safe environment (or the illusion of one) in which to do that.

Spooky wrote:

This is completely true, and sadly could be corrected. Trey Parker and Matt Stone's comments on the issue of bullying from Bowling For Columbine always seem poignant to me. Don't you wish you could go back in time and tell these kids that in a few years, when school is over, all those cool kids will be losers because they peaked during the ages of 16-19. That the nerds, dorks, freaks and losers leave that period of their lives, mostly the ones who were uncool and had crappy home lives, and usually have the drive and talent to go on to do great things.

Yes. But they'd never believe it. It's interesting that you mention the "peaking" thing -- I have another friend who also put it that way when we were talking about this a while back. I think you're both right -- and it's possible the cool kids unwittingly set themselves up to only head downhill, as a result of thinking they were on top of the world at such an early age.