"Bossy" is just the latest in a long list of words that the politically correct crowd wants to ban. There is even an ad going around showing stars alongside preteen girls complaining that they are irrevocably harmed and their entire lives shattered by an insensitive teacher calling them
Oh puhleese! What ever happened to the old adage of "sticks and stones..."? It's just a friggin' word, people. Yes, there are some very ugly words out there. But are we so afraid of a word that we must tiptoe around them by calling them the N word, C word and B word? You give the word, and the people using it, way too much power by censoring them or fearing to say them. Just ask Lord Voldemort!
I can't help but wonder how traumatized these kids would be if I told them to "suck it up" or worse yet to "grow a pair"! Hell, I wish we were raising bossy kids instead of creating a generation of privileged sniveling whiners. Oh my. Did I just offend somebody's whittle feelings?
Seriously, there is another word for banning things - censorship. And the politically correct crowd no longer stops at banning words but they are also censoring phrases, ideologies and even groups of people because they find their views offensive or simply disagreeable. Seriously. Whatever happened to the wonderful phrase "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"? Instead, we are teaching children that if they disagree with something forget defending someone's right to say it, nope, just take the entire phrase away! And why stop there? Let's ban the people who think that way, too! It's not just irritating but harmful to our tender hearted little students to hear words, ideas or people saying awful things with which they disagree.
I wish I could say that people in the media are blind to the erosion of our freedoms whenever they promote banning of a word or phrase. But some know exactly what they are doing, including a Harvard student who recently wrote an article suggesting that banning opposing viewpoints at Harvard would be advantageous in spite of the loss of freedoms: http://www.thecrimson.com/column/the-red-line/article/2014/2/18/academic-freedom-justice/. At one point she states "if we give up our obsessive reliance on the doctrine of academic freedom, we can consider more thoughtfully what is just.” Huh? She goes on to write “when an academic community observes research promoting or justifying oppression, it should ensure that this research does not continue.” In other words if the facts uncovered via research conducted on campus doesn't fit your world views than ban that research and those pesky facts!
Shockingly, this student is not voicing a unique view. This is especially true in regards to climate change. The LA Times editor admits he will not publish any comments from people questioning climate change and President Obama is just one of a number of people who say that the debate on climate change is settled. Really? Again, the premise is that if someone disagrees with you then simply ban the debates. Another great technique to shut down irritatingly logical debates is to ridicule the other person and their viewpoint. Or revert to a teenager's verbal weapon of "Whatever."
Then there is the growing trend of banning anything remotely connected to religion, specifically Christianity. Are atheists so afraid that one prayer, one cross might contaminate them that it must be banned? The latest example is the drive to ban the Twin Tower beams found in the shape of a cross from being included in the 9/11 museum. No minister, priest or evangelical preacher placed it there, no one is trying to convert anyone, it just happened. And it became a focus point of hope and faith to many many people. It is now part of the 9/11 history and as such a judge ruled it could be kept but an atheist group is appealing this ruling. But what's next? Will all public museums be required to ban any religious painting, sculpture or artifact? Should schools and public libraries ban all books about Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists or even witches? Separation of church and state taken to the extreme would require just that, wouldn't it?
Finally, while we are censoring words and ideas, let's just ban annoying people who disagree with us or hold those annoying views. By now everyone has probably heard the statements by N.Y. Gov. Cuomo who said that “extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault—weapon, anti-gay…have no place in the State of New York”. He has since said he was taken out of context but read his entire statement and judge for yourself: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/23/nyregion/cuomo-comment-elicits-retort-from-republicans.html?_r=0.
Now for everyone jumping on the bandwagon to ban yet another word, please stop and think. It might be the loss of just one word that could be cruel but that is the consequences of freedom. And chipping away, one word, one phrase, one idea at a time will lead to banning freedom, itself.
(And if you're wondering about the exclusion of any conservatives who banned words, ideas or phrases, well, they've been banned. Lol.)
