If Black Is Capitalized But Not White, Shouldn't Woman be Capitalized But Not Man?
RSS
Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments
List of Bookmarks
The American news media has recently engaged in what Bible translators call “reverential capitalization” when it comes to Blacks but not to whites in order to show which caste is highest ranking. But what about sex? How come nobody has yet demanded reverential capitalization for Women?
A newspaper article might soon read:
Joe Biden’s potential vice presidential nominees include Susan Rice, Karen Bass, and Kamala Harris, who are Black Women, and Elizabeth Warren, a white Woman, plus longshots like Pete Buttigieg, a Gay white man, and even Sherrod Brown, a straight white man.
You had to go and say it, didn’t you, Steve?! Now, all hell is going to break loose… again!
The Capitalization Riots!
Black white
Lesbian straight
Transgender cisgender
Victim oppressor
Whiner pollyana
Looter buyer
Jogger living
Stupid smart
Okay.
I’ve been capitalizing White and Black here for some time now. You know why. Every other identifier of demographic cohorts is capitalized. As a White person, I feel it, but I also see that Black should logically receive the same status.
What is so hard to understand about this?
It’s okay to be White, and it’s okay to capitalize it.
As for man, I leave you with this:
https://youtu.be/iT0pWOldIjc?t=55Replies: @Reg Cæsar
I understand the point of your comment, though.Replies: @Joe Stalin, @Captain Tripps
Here’s the deal: The Really Smart people think White working class people will always follow orders from the supercilious crowd who appear to running this “USA” thing. They think young White men will always be eager to be a part of our great military and kick ass world wide.
But … the opportunities for White people are drying up. Federal jobs, Chevron jobs, etc, are increasingly difficult, especially for White men. So, while they may have an instinct for loyalty, once they see their prospects in life are bleak, I suspect we may see a major shift.
Fixed it for you
Way ahead of you….
https://www.unz.com/isteve/nbc-news-right-wing-terrorism-is-the-biggest-threat-to-us-and-europe/#comment-4062981
https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-if-biden-ran-on-re-fund-the-police/#comment-4066485
And in your own comments threads! Who moderates these, anyway?
We will give Reg Cæsar the proper motivation.
So white people are complaining because white is not capitalized in an article?
How pathetic. What else are white people going to whine about next?
Yes, that pretty much sums up the state of things. Actually, it won’t be much longer before no one is allowed to utter the “w” and “m” words at all.
Nah.
If it were that easy White hetero males could capitalize by identifying as Capitalized.
Look, of we want to, we can just start capitalizing everything, as the Germans do.
If you don’t know, basically they capitalize most every noun. At least that’s what I remember from high school German class, right before I dropped out of school.
It just doesn’t matter.
What we’re Left with is the question of whether it’s right to capitalize Left but not right.
It can extend to people as well: President Barack Obama, but president donald trump.
Using the adjective ‘male’ as a noun while not using ‘female’ as a noun but the more respectful ‘woman’ has been common in UK media for a long time.
Aim being to degrade and dehumanise.
Bible translators don’t call it “reverential capitalization.” That’s a very low-use secular neologism, like BCE/CE for BC/AD.
B.C. after so there is no doubt what you mean BCE B.C. both com after so If you drop an e you can appreciate how clever clever academics are.
If you don't know, basically they capitalize most every noun. At least that's what I remember from high school German class, right before I dropped out of school.
It just doesn't matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9mf3Bypyk8Replies: @Percy Gryce
In fact, if anything, the trend in American English for the last few decades has been away from the German practice of capitalizing common nouns.
I guess you were still up there in the lander module and didn’t catch all this, Buzz, but, per The Right Stuff and common sense, Mr. Armstrong screwed up that line (some say maybe it was radio static). S/B “That’s one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.”
I understand the point of your comment, though.
He shook his head to say "No" he didn't say that. No radio static; he just didn't say it.
But they already figured out how to “x” out “man” — i.e., “womxyn.”
Proverbs tells us that it's better to live on a corner of the roof during these periods, but that's the problem with some of the advice there. It's not been updated in years, and the author ass/u/me d that people would be building single-family dwellings with flat roofs forever. You'd think at least one of the Prophets would have foreseen modern wood framing ...Replies: @Dr. X
How can Biden be a serious candidate if he is still considering straight white men?
Unless of course he’s some sort of degenerate or criminal. Maybe he’s secretly a pervert? He’d be acceptable then but otherwise it’s just an insult.
I love Steve’s practice paragraph. Hilarious, even if it will be true in the near future.
As a small d democrat I’m of the mind to lower case everything. But the language/capitalization choices reveal interesting insight into intent and worldview that the barrage of verbiage attempts to conceal.
At first I read “reverential capitalization” as “revenge capitalization,” which I think would be equally if not more fitting here
This made me laugh out loud.
Wait, maybe this is better
:
This made Me laugh out loud.
I agree.
Because we call them, “People with Cervixes,” now.
I understand the point of your comment, though.Replies: @Joe Stalin, @Captain Tripps
I recall seeing Buzz Aldrin comment on this controversy when NA said ‘What he really said was…’
He shook his head to say “No” he didn’t say that. No radio static; he just didn’t say it.
And let’s not forget the difference between news and News.
(Sorry, I get a good line so have to reuse it…)
Sure, but we haven’t figured out “menopause” and “menstruation” yet. As a Doctor, with a Capital D, perhaps you could help, Dr. X. I’m sure we’d all really appreciate your help … not with the spelling … I mean with the actual menopause and menstruation.
Proverbs tells us that it’s better to live on a corner of the roof during these periods, but that’s the problem with some of the advice there. It’s not been updated in years, and the author ass/u/me d that people would be building single-family dwellings with flat roofs forever. You’d think at least one of the Prophets would have foreseen modern wood framing …
But I can tell you that Aristotle stated quite clearly "The male is by nature superior, the female inferior."
:
This made Me laugh out loud.Replies: @Steve Sailer
Are you Black? Only if you are white, you aren’t allowed to capitalize your personal pronouns like “me.”
(This is fun.)
i was born white, but I identify as a Black Man.
(This is fun.)
How pathetic. What else are white people going to whine about next?Replies: @Captain Tripps
We are going to whine about your dumb handle: “Tor597”.
WTF is that about?
Don’t answer; just rhetorical…
I understand the point of your comment, though.Replies: @Joe Stalin, @Captain Tripps
AEN, Occam’s razor. Armstrong was pure Midwest Ohio, USA, born and died. Spoke the standard rapid fire Midwest English, so “That’s one small step for a man…” comes out as “That’s one small step fer-a man…”. The “fer-a” was spoken in one breath, quickly, as the guy was about to take a step on to another world that was not Earth. I mean, just a few minutes before, he was piloting the LM to the landing spot with seconds of fuel to spare.
Sure, it would have been great if he spoke like Sir Laurence Olivier, and pulled it off with the King’s English rhetorical flourish. I am glad the he said it as he did, probably the greatest triumph of the era of the modern common man, which appears to be ending.
Proverbs tells us that it's better to live on a corner of the roof during these periods, but that's the problem with some of the advice there. It's not been updated in years, and the author ass/u/me d that people would be building single-family dwellings with flat roofs forever. You'd think at least one of the Prophets would have foreseen modern wood framing ...Replies: @Dr. X
Well, unfortunately I’m a doctor of philosophy, not an M.D.
But I can tell you that Aristotle stated quite clearly “The male is by nature superior, the female inferior.”
The trouble is you only have two case options for letters, while the number of genders is multiplying faster than Africa’s population.
The most important question is whether capitalising the word Women would oppress Women Without Vaginas. Wouldn’t it just be emphasising Women With Vaginas privilege?
It’s the same with Lesbian – does capitalising that word discriminate against Lesbians With Penises?
(Hey, Rosie, how you doin?)
Men have cervixes too, bigot.
Aim being to degrade and dehumanise.Replies: @Rosie
I cannot abide the use of male and female when referring to humans, though I have very rarely slipped up and used “male.” That said, “woman” is fine. I don’t need it capitalized. OTOH demonyms have always been capitalized as proper nouns in English.
It's the same with Lesbian - does capitalising that word discriminate against Lesbians With Penises?Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
Women Without Vaginas? What would the point be?
(Hey, Rosie, how you doin?)
I have worked out something that is very woke and crazy, but I repeat myself.
Suppose that there are 50 genders, apart from male and female. To show proper respect to them, we need new pronouns for each one. In fact we need three new pronouns for each one, to cater for the grammatical cases of subjective, objective and possessive. Thus we need 150 new pronouns.
Of course female is better than male and the other 50 genders are better than female. The best way to indicate this would be:
Male pronouns: lower case
Female pronouns: upper case
Other pronouns: upper case and bold.
One other thing: to show proper disrespect to himself, a white man should use a lower-case “i” instead of “I”.
☮
And many people will need more than three pronouns. Gender is fluid you know! Today is Monday and I'm asexual cisgendered but tomorrow I might well be polyamorous genderqueer. By Wednesday who knows what I'll be. It should be a criminal offence for anyone to refer to me by my demisexual polygender pronouns on days when I'm feeling allosexual aporagender.Replies: @Adam Smith
I don’t use male and female much as nouns because I think it’s a bit clumsy but I can’t say it bothers me. I try not to police my own use of language too much. I’ve even been known to refer to women as girls. Mind you, I’ve used the word boys to refer to men. And on rare occasions I’ve even used the term chick, as in, “Is that a chick thing?”
I think it’s a pity that the good old Australian term sheilas has gone out of fashion. Even bloke isn’t used much these days.
I really like the slang terms used in old American movies, like “janes” and “frails” to refer to women.
All that really matters is whether you use the words in contexts where it’s obvious you’re being respectful or affectionate or jocular, or on the other hand where it’s obvious you’re intending to be insulting or demeaning. You can use the most politically correct words and still manage to sound insulting, and you can use the most politically incorrect words and still be respectful. There’s not much the Language Police can do about that.
I’ve seen people here at UR say incredibly demeaning things about women whilst still using approved politically correct words.
I think it's a pity that the good old Australian term sheilas has gone out of fashion. Even bloke isn't used much these days.
I really like the slang terms used in old American movies, like "janes" and "frails" to refer to women.
All that really matters is whether you use the words in contexts where it's obvious you're being respectful or affectionate or jocular, or on the other hand where it's obvious you're intending to be insulting or demeaning. You can use the most politically correct words and still manage to sound insulting, and you can use the most politically incorrect words and still be respectful. There's not much the Language Police can do about that.
I've seen people here at UR say incredibly demeaning things about women whilst still using approved politically correct words.Replies: @Steve Sailer
I typically use male and female rather than men and women or boys and girls when referring to people both younger and older than the age of adulthood.
What about mulatto?
☮
Suppose that there are 50 genders, apart from male and female. To show proper respect to them, we need new pronouns for each one. In fact we need three new pronouns for each one, to cater for the grammatical cases of subjective, objective and possessive. Thus we need 150 new pronouns.
Of course female is better than male and the other 50 genders are better than female. The best way to indicate this would be:
Male pronouns: lower case
Female pronouns: upper case
Other pronouns: upper case and bold.
One other thing: to show proper disrespect to himself, a white man should use a lower-case "i" instead of "I".Replies: @Adam Smith, @dfordoom
i think you may be on to something…
☮
Anyone who has a uterus and ovaries could become pregnant and give birth.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/can-men-become-pregnant
Should we capitalize Man if that Man is a person with a uterus?
☮
https://youtu.be/iT0pWOldIjc?t=55Replies: @Reg Cæsar
I would no sooner capitalize white than go out in high heels and lipstick. It would be a drag either way.
When the (((media))) sees its path to winning its political agenda to be a necessary lecture on arbitrary capitalization, it has already lost.
This will rust the intellectual gears of the masses more assuredly than mandated sympathy for Jews and desegregation.
In the absence of god we have Blacks.
Suppose that there are 50 genders, apart from male and female. To show proper respect to them, we need new pronouns for each one. In fact we need three new pronouns for each one, to cater for the grammatical cases of subjective, objective and possessive. Thus we need 150 new pronouns.
Of course female is better than male and the other 50 genders are better than female. The best way to indicate this would be:
Male pronouns: lower case
Female pronouns: upper case
Other pronouns: upper case and bold.
One other thing: to show proper disrespect to himself, a white man should use a lower-case "i" instead of "I".Replies: @Adam Smith, @dfordoom
I think you’ll find there’s already more than a hundred genders and the number is growing constantly. Soon there will be as many genders as there are people. The ideal solution would be for every person to have individualised pronouns.
And many people will need more than three pronouns. Gender is fluid you know! Today is Monday and I’m asexual cisgendered but tomorrow I might well be polyamorous genderqueer. By Wednesday who knows what I’ll be. It should be a criminal offence for anyone to refer to me by my demisexual polygender pronouns on days when I’m feeling allosexual aporagender.
Absorgender is a gender that changes to conform to the genders of those around you. As you are around more people, even if some leave, they continue to add to the genders you feel. You remain as the genders that you have taken in until you hit a max of some sort. At that point you become like a blank slate, being only one gender (it doesn’t have to be agender or neutral, it can be any gender and the base gender can be different each time).
If you absorb one gender more easily than other genders, you can replace gender in the term with the gender you absorb best. Like absorpolyamorousgenderqueer, absordemisexualpolygender, absorasexualcisgender, absorallosexualaporagender etc.
Absorgender is similar to the term echogender, though while echogender is a temporary feeling that changes after being in the presence of a different gender, in absorgender the genders build up.
Please keep in mind that this gender has not yet been accepted by the inclusive Trans community, peace be upon Them.
https://www.wattpad.com/341462536-complete-list-of-genders-the-complete-list-of-all
☮
Capitialize the letter S for Liberals their all Socalists
Damn, we really did wind up speaking German! Most idiots compulsively capitalize random nouns anyway, so the only people who will remember this dumb, inconsistent rule are the ideologues who wanted it in the first place and the unlucky proofreaders who have to work at a place that uses AP rather than Chicago.
AD comes before the numbers
B.C. after so there is no doubt what you mean BCE B.C. both com after so If you drop an e you can appreciate how clever clever academics are.
And many people will need more than three pronouns. Gender is fluid you know! Today is Monday and I'm asexual cisgendered but tomorrow I might well be polyamorous genderqueer. By Wednesday who knows what I'll be. It should be a criminal offence for anyone to refer to me by my demisexual polygender pronouns on days when I'm feeling allosexual aporagender.Replies: @Adam Smith
Perhaps you’re a member of the absorgender community?
Absorgender is a gender that changes to conform to the genders of those around you. As you are around more people, even if some leave, they continue to add to the genders you feel. You remain as the genders that you have taken in until you hit a max of some sort. At that point you become like a blank slate, being only one gender (it doesn’t have to be agender or neutral, it can be any gender and the base gender can be different each time).
If you absorb one gender more easily than other genders, you can replace gender in the term with the gender you absorb best. Like absorpolyamorousgenderqueer, absordemisexualpolygender, absorasexualcisgender, absorallosexualaporagender etc.
Absorgender is similar to the term echogender, though while echogender is a temporary feeling that changes after being in the presence of a different gender, in absorgender the genders build up.
Please keep in mind that this gender has not yet been accepted by the inclusive Trans community, peace be upon Them.
https://www.wattpad.com/341462536-complete-list-of-genders-the-complete-list-of-all
☮
To unironically use the language of the enemy is to legitimize it; to concede.
I’ve been capitalizing Gay when resorting-to using it in the prevailing sense as a reference to homosexuality. This is to indicate that in said usage, the term refers far more to what is a weaponized ideology and an objectively unwholesome culture than to any mere proclivities or even behavior, per se.[1] This is perhaps best illustrated by a comment I came across some time back at an expressly Gay web site. In response to an article about an individual who had broken ranks with the Gay orthodoxy by expressing a view that was heretical to it*, someone wrote, “He may be homosexual but he is not gay.”
(*Possibly nothing more than support for President or then-candidate Trump. I cannot recall.)
But in a case such as this, one where the weaponized usage of a word has become both universal and exclusive, is mere capitalization sufficient to indicate one’s resistance to such insidious manipulation[2]? Perhaps I should return to my earlier practice of placing the word within quotation marks or otherwise making it clear (if not explicitly, then at least by less ambiguous means than mere capitalization) that I do not acknowledge its legitimacy.
Similarly, should we turn the word racism against the enemy by arguing (as I have begun doing) that if there is “systemic racism”, it would actually be against whites (esp. of the non-cosmopolitan variety)? Or should we respond, as Amy Wax valiantly did when charged with “racism”, that the very charge is illegitimate; that whatever legitimate meaning the word may have at one time had, it has long since become irredeemably tainted? (Much the same as what Orwell declared about the word fascism in his 1946 essay Politics and The English Language.) I have seen both arguments as well as of instances here of people doing the former but I remain unsure and conflicted myself over what is the better approach.
(*How utterly pathetic and cringe-inducing it is to watch one who has been branded a “racist” demean himself by denying it, often while offering groveling apologies and pleas for forgiveness.)
[1] The most salient matter is not so much, as the propagandists deceptively claim, one of mere private sexual behavior but rather of its normalization, promotion and now increasingly mandatory celebration.
[2] I have read, from individuals who proudly identified as gay, that the term was deliberately chosen over homosexual based upon being found to be more favorably received by the public. This makes sense, for it seems fairly apparent that people are more likely to associate gay with the creativity, artistry, wit, entertainment or stylish fashion of an Oscar Wilde, Noël Coward, Yves Saint Laurent, or Liberace, than with the specifically homosexual behavior of such men– behavior that most people would rather not think about at all.