TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: PC or Not PC? That is the Question From:"Dave L. Meek's User Account" <dave -at- ROGUE -dot- DISC-SYNERGY -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 5 Jun 1995 11:03:00 -0700
Arlen Walker wrote:
>Becoming sensitive to what some people find offensive is good. But like all
>things, it can be taken too far. "Avoid offending people" is good advice. But
>it's not always possible. And even when possible it isn't always desirable. It
>depends upon the aim of your writing.
>If I can communicate what I have to say without offending anyone, and still
>achieve the aim, I will. But it is the aim which should come first, not the
>inoffensiveness. After all, the amount of effort made to avoid offending one
>group of readers sometimes is itself an offense to another group.
I agree with every word of Arlen's post and only included the
part that leads to my first comment. I recently read an
interview of an author who is offended whenever she hears people
say, "You wear glasses." She prefers to say that she "uses
glasses." My objection is that her choice is poor
communication. I *wear* glasses, and when I tell people that,
they always know I need mechanical help to see properly. When I say,
"I use glasses," they know I'm using a container to hold
something, be it milk, juice, beer, or spare change.
I have heard and read the following terms: height-challenged,
morally-challenged, mechanically-challenged. I'm still not sure
what these terms mean, because they don't seem to mean anything.
What is their point of reference? Is a tall man
height-challenged when getting inside a sub-compact car? Is a
short man height-challenged on the basketball court? The
Pentagon uses the term "collateral damage." Has a different ring
to it than saying, "civilian casualties." All of the above are
intended not to offend, and all of them are examples of poor
communication.
IMHO, "Political Correctness" shares many of the same attributes
as "Pentagonese" and is a two-word oxymoron the same as "Military
Intelligence."
Flame me if you wish; I won't be offended. I'll assume you're
exercising your right to free speech.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Dave Meek "Imagine Whirled Peas"
