(I didn't even know the "Ban Bossy" campaign existed, so I guess my comment is more about that and goes along with what the article is saying.) Looking at the

(I didn't even know the "Ban Bossy" campaign existed, so I guess my comment is more about that and goes along with what the article is saying.) Looking at the videos - to an outsider like myself, they look massively ridiculous. So there is a societal problem where girls are either not empowered to lead or are discouraged from leading by others. To stop that practice, we will get rid of calling them a specific word. Words only have the meaning that we put into them. "Bossy" can be applied correctly or incorrectly. How is the word at fault? I think "only in America" applies here. Instead of understanding that this is a complex, complicated issue in society, let's find a catchy campaign title and rail against intangible things. Oh aren't we all happy we have dealt with the problem in a format that we can easily post to our facebook wall instead of, you know, doing the hard work of actually figuring out and dealing with people on a deeper, personal level. And yes, I get it, the campaign uses a reductive catchphrase to get a foot in the door and then deliver a more nuanced message. But I think a campaign set on a weird, possibly destructive premise may do more harm than good. It may lead people to think they're doing something when they're actually doing nothing apart from perpetuating a meme. How about we all just stop and check ourselves before reducing others to adjectives in general? Grown-ups and children, women and men alike? Maybe this tendency to grasp for the simple answer, the quick phrase at all times is the root of the problem and should thus not be utilized as a solution.