5 ms·

>Why not "human fonts" or "people fonts"? If the road to hell is paved with good intentions, then the lanes are striped with "person first" language (and all o

by iamdave 12y ago

>Why not "human fonts" or "people fonts"? If the road to hell is paved with good intentions, then the lanes are striped with "person first" language (and all of its mutations).

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
Mz 12y ago
I really don't know what you mean. This is an area I have studied, both formally and informally. How it is framed matters. The history of what went wrong with the American welfare system is deeply rooted in the fact that it was designed to "help poor, single moms" in an era when having a child out of wedlock was scandalous and just not done. It changed the social contract to frame it that way and made it far more acceptable to have children out of wedlock. That framing occurred at a time when most poor, single moms were widows -- ie "the deserving poor" -- not women who had given birth outside of wedlock. It was done in an unthinking manner and we are still living with the consequences decades later.
- iamdave 12y ago
  It's mostly a sound-byte of cynicism targeted at people who promulgate 'person first' correctness without the backdrop of understanding the nuanced impact rhetoric has, or the willingness to dig into those impacts like you have. I personally have little patience for those who simply say "You shouldn't say that, say this instead" without the fortitude or intellectual honesty to back up what they're invariably ordering me to say or not say. But this really isn't the venue for that kind of discussion. I respect that you took the time to understand these different sociological phenomenons, so I apologize if it seemed like my comment was a dig at you personally-it wasn't.
- barrkel 12y ago
  If you think having children out of wedlock is linked to US welfare system incentives, how do you explain global trends? I think it has more to do with female equality and increased earning power. But it's a complex multi-vectored phenomenon not really suited to an off-topic thread here.
  - Mz 12y ago
    I haven't studied global trends. Nor am I suggesting that trends in the U.S. have only one factor influencing them. That's kind of a bogus rebuttal.

by iamdave 12y ago

>Why not "human fonts" or "people fonts"? If the road to hell is paved with good intentions, then the lanes are striped with "person first" language (and all of its mutations).

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Mz 12y ago

I really don't know what you mean. This is an area I have studied, both formally and informally. How it is framed matters. The history of what went wrong with the American welfare system is deeply rooted in the fact that it was designed to "help poor, single moms" in an era when having a child out of wedlock was scandalous and just not done. It changed the social contract to frame it that way and made it far more acceptable to have children out of wedlock. That framing occurred at a time when most poor, single moms were widows -- ie "the deserving poor" -- not women who had given birth outside of wedlock. It was done in an unthinking manner and we are still living with the consequences decades later.

iamdave 12y ago
It's mostly a sound-byte of cynicism targeted at people who promulgate 'person first' correctness without the backdrop of understanding the nuanced impact rhetoric has, or the willingness to dig into those impacts like you have. I personally have little patience for those who simply say "You shouldn't say that, say this instead" without the fortitude or intellectual honesty to back up what they're invariably ordering me to say or not say. But this really isn't the venue for that kind of discussion. I respect that you took the time to understand these different sociological phenomenons, so I apologize if it seemed like my comment was a dig at you personally-it wasn't.
barrkel 12y ago
If you think having children out of wedlock is linked to US welfare system incentives, how do you explain global trends? I think it has more to do with female equality and increased earning power. But it's a complex multi-vectored phenomenon not really suited to an off-topic thread here.
- Mz 12y ago
  I haven't studied global trends. Nor am I suggesting that trends in the U.S. have only one factor influencing them. That's kind of a bogus rebuttal.