Weightism survivors and seasonal employees

The Official Politically Correct
Dictionary & Handbook
Henry Beard, Christopher Cerf
Grafton

IT is these days quite fashionable to consider oneself politically correct. Look around you. You don't have Red Indians any more, only Native Americans. Though you might consider Barack Obama as America's first black president, you must be extra careful in avoiding using the old, denigrating 'Negro' while describing him or any of his kind. It is African-Americans that you have today. On a lighter level, do you realise that there are no housewives any more today? There are only homemakers, whatever that means. It tends to remind you of a rather pernicious term, home-wreckers, one that you associate with men and women who have nothing better to do than making a mess of other people's lives by falling in love, or lust, with other people's spouses. And then there is the way you describe a child whose intelligence is obviously of a poor quality. But, no, you cannot suggest by any means that he is unintelligent. He is merely one who has an attention deficit disorder.
It all makes you wonder whether there is any correlation between political correctness and euphemisms. And while you think, you might wish to rush through this exhilarating work from Henry Beard and Christopher Cerf and end up knowing all you need to know about political correctness. Of course, it might get to be too grating on your nerves at times. But what eventually matters is that through all this process of political correction you learn how not to upset feelings. Or look at it another way. You could end up saying things tongue in cheek. Whatever. How is this for a beginning? A dishonest person in our times is not dishonest, see? He is simply 'ethically disoriented' or 'morally different.' Observe the element of respectability that thus comes to those whose pursuits in life have been shaped by cunning or a patent resort to immorality. But then, when you are reluctant to say that someone has died and instead settle for the phrase 'passed away', why must you complain about dishonesty and morality and how you choose to couch them in new language?
Never mind the answer. Simply move on. And what do we have here? A person does not die when he is dead. He is simply 'terminally inconvenienced', 'no longer a factor', 'nonviable.' Choose any or all three ways of describing the one who has stopped living for all time. And here's another. When you bump into a pervert, or hear of one, do not use that term. It might be considered too gross for hearing. How about 'sexually dysfunctional'? See how vulgarity is carefully sliced out of the situation altogether? A migrant worker is a 'seasonal employee', a prostitute is a 'sex care provider', a drunk is a 'person of differing sobriety.' The list is endless. The discovery of the sheer richness the English language is home to is absolutely staggering. When next you are tempted to describe someone as a spendthrift, pause awhile. You just might want to tone down your imminent harshness by describing him as a 'negative saver.' The worst thing you may have done in life was actually the 'least best.' Doesn't such a way of looking at the situation give you comfort of some kind? Besides, it is also evidence, for your friends if they need any, of the remarkable facility with words that you happen to be developing.
Words are power. And phrasing and rephrasing them is an absolute delight. That is what political correctness is all about. Watch all those politicians smile into the cameras and coolly offer a 'no comment' to a question. That very response is actually a load of comment, for it says much more than if the one questioned had come up with an emphatic answer. Back in 1967, asked if he planned to seek a second term as president, Lyndon Johnson replied loftily, 'I shall cross the bridge when I come to it.' That was impressive, much more so than a mere 'I don't know' would have been. Come down to things a little more banal. You do not call anyone a fat person or fatso these days. That would be rude, socially unacceptable. Simply call him a 'horizontally challenged person' or 'weightism survivor.' And then observe that such a fine way of putting reality across hurts no one. Therein lies the beauty of the English language. When you wish to kiss or smooch someone, avoid that very kind of language. How about employing 'liplock' to describe your moment of passion? Do not ask for an extra large piece of cake. What you need is a 'generously cut' slice. In the wars the two Bushes have waged since the 1990s, it was not civilian casualties that occurred during spells of targeted bombings but only 'collateral damage.' The horror you might have felt at hearing about the murder of the innocent is thus swiftly minimised through making you feel that the dead were more like buildings and similar structures.
And that, again, is political correctness for you. Never seek to describe one as illiterate. You would only be insulting him. How about making matters safe for everyone around by appending the term 'alternatively schooled' to the person? And here's another for housewife, assuming of course that her conditions are really dire: she is a 'domestic incarceration survivor.' There is here, despite everything, that certain whiff which once came of places like Auschwitz or Buchenwald. But why should you bother? People are not ugly but 'cosmetically different'; and nations are not underdeveloped but 'overexploited.' You are really not unemployed. You are 'involuntarily leisured' or 'indefinitely idled.'
The list goes on and on. And as you hop from phrase to another phrase, you tell yourself that the world around you has changed. Are you losing hair? Well, you are not bald. You are only 'follicularly challenged.' And you are not getting old but only getting 'experientially enhanced.'
Sorry if all this has been boring for you. Ah, but why must we use that cliché, boring, when we might as well use the politically correct 'charm-free'? Have a good day!

Shahan Huq is a gentleman of leisure who indulges in unconventional reading.