May 4, 2020, 1:23 PM

@Tinuviel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

That's not how language works. If the idiots are loud enough, influential enough, or simply large enough their meaning overtakes that which is 'accurate'. Republican already doesn't mean what it originally meant.

I understand this, but that reinforces my belief that we should continue to use the word accurately rather than avoid it and explain why and how we are using it each time, as necessary until the idiots either stop using the term incorrectly or the term's meaning reverts back to its intended definition.

@GreenFlashlight said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

It's important to acknowledge that certain terms can be poisoned by their use as dogwhistles. Yes, people can innocently describe someone as sleepy-eyed or well-spoken or whatever, but I will not assume a person who says such things isn't being racist without evidence, nor ask anyone to assume the same of me.

I understand this as well --

If I do not want to be lumped in with those people, then I have a responsibility to not adopt their language; a much greater responsibility than my audience has to guess at my intent.

-- and I understand this too. But I suppose if I had a point, it would be that I see nothing wrong with using words that aren't known dog-whistles and pushing back against an extremist's attempt to subvert that word's meaning. Terms like "white-knighting" and "virtue signaling" are as easily applied to actions on the political right as the left, if not more so.