This is language theory not pandering or looking to excuse the use of deliberately discriminatory language or racial epithets, but a master class on understanding the nuance between offensive language and inoffensive language and the damage that disingenuously taking offense at inoffensive language does in stifling legitimate discussion of the topics and the disingenuous censorship of legitimate inoffensive language at the behest of a failed education system.

Case in point.

Fireman and policeman in English are also not offensive because they aren’t referring to gender or sex.

Human - Group
Humans - Collective Individuals
Man - Individual
Men - Collective Individuals (Non-sexed)

Not to be conflated with

Men - Collective (Sex Male)
Women - Collective (Sex Female)
Wo - Female, men - collective individuals (non-sexed).

Keep in mind these are all traditional definitions and were constructed before sex and gender were determined to be separate and before intersex was a classification.

We now often conflate those in common English with human and man and person being interchangeable. As man (individual) with man (sex). And many others conflate sex and gender.

Firefighters - Group
Fireman - Firefighting Individual
Firemen - Firefighting Collective (Non-sexed)

Police - Group
Policeman - Policing Individual
Policemen - Policing Collective (Non-sexed)

The arguments for removing gender from professions is based on the misapprehension that the professions were ever related to gender and as a result mass illiteracy has made it an “issue”.

I answered that for you 3 hours ago, now you’re just being belligerent.

Yes. We can talk about racial slurs without directing them at anyone. We can talk about the history and origin or racial slurs like spic and wog and (dare I say it in the hopes that people actually understand my point) removed. (edit: Lol, fuck censorship, but this helps prove my point below because you don’t even need to see the word but you know what it was and what it represents due to context)

We can talk about these words, the concepts and hate they represent, the pain they are meant to inflict and all of that context without being offensive or using those words in an offensive manner.

Here’s a little secret to offensive words, you can make any word offensive because as stated in my previous comment, it’s not the word itself that’s offensive it’s the intent it’s used with.

Fairy princess is offensive if it’s used to derogatively represent someone, and endearing when your 3 year old daughter wants to be one. Does that mean ‘fairy princess’ is a slur? Yes, but only when it’s used that way.

The difference that racial slurs have over other offensive language is that they are specifically created words for being derogative, unlike other derogative speech which reappropriates existing words and medical terms as insulting metaphor. But even then you can talk about racial slurs without being offensive as previously explained. Like we’re doing right now.

Ask yourself, is there anything in this comment you find “offensive”? Or maybe offensive words just make you uncomfortable. I’m comfortable around offensive language because I understand it and can recognise the difference between objective use of language and directed insults.

Removed by mod

So… hold onto your teeth instead.

If you still don’t get it let me know what you don’t understand and I’ll bust out the crayons and we can get to figuring out which ones you like the taste of. (Clue: This is offensive but uses no offensive words, because context)

Reported and blocked.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Your idiocy is uncivil.

No one said it was. Learn nuance.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

In my original comment. Because I don’t discriminate you’ll notice that I didn’t specify who should choose adoption, that means everyone should. I get that are you just being disingenuous because you’ve never seen someone with conviction of morals before, but please, try to catch up.

Yes.

Cool, I just hope that coincides with the highest rates of adoption in the world.

Why discriminate?