very level-headed response- ignore the partisan wankers.

This is a good response, WG. The post above is to highlight the challenge of removing words from the lexicon.

If "master" cannot be used in a sentence like "master bedroom", can it still be used to refer to a Zen master? What about in a hypothetical conversation between two dogs, one of which has a master? Can I still watch MasterChef without sounding racist?

Admittedly I have not read the entire thread and I am conscious that my sensitivity may not be like other people's. But I think I am a pretty balanced guy and I believe sometimes things are taken a bit too far.

Do I need to read the whole thread? Will that educate me more?

That's hierarchical and clearly insensitive to the rank-challenged.

Takes more energy to appease these miserable pricks. So I go out of my way to annoy them. It’s just low status people trying to feel power by telling other people what to do and say. Losers mostly

That sounds fucking sad, dude. Just go live your life.

My clients who first brought this to my attention are very successful--one is managing partner of Boston Consulting Group, a large investment firm (and she has a doctorate) and the other is a Harvard-educated HR director. In the several years I've been asking clients what term they want to use, I'd say roughly 25% care, 50% consider it a nice gesture but don't care, and 25% think it's stupid (and usually prove to be my worst clients). I may not be an architect but I charge like one and my clients are all reasonably successful.

At first blush this sounds ridiculous, but it might be a code language thing. I've had a couple of checksheet comments in the past to change "Hallway" to "Corridor" because the code has no definition for "Hallway" (even though anyone with two brain cells could tell they're synonymous). Once the law gets involved, word choice becomes extremely, obnoxiously, important.

woke is the BS term.

different contexts- stop being intellectually lazy and use your brain a little.

No, I want to know the woke term for masterplanning, damnit!

Also, please lets start calling HISTORY as THEIRSTORY. 

Isn't that a little specie-ist?

dang... got me... hurry! someone tell justin trudeau!

That handsome bastard

Jla, google Doug Ford if you want a palate cleanser.

Woke as newspeak has officially reached the end of its life as an insult that has sting. Y'all sound like a bunch of Boomers trying to bully the cool kid.

Thanks for kicking at this open door!

^great expression.

Thanks for whipping this into shape!

Referring to it as a "sleeping room" seems insensitive to insomniacs. I'm hurt and offended. Fetch me my smelling salts and therapy blanket, please.

I’ve just crossed out master with a sharpie on my grad degree. What should I write instead?

Primary!

Getting it On Room. Getting your sleep on. Getting your clothes on.

Doctor, NS, Doctor

NS: How about white Oppressor of Architecture degree? Notice that I didn't capitalize white. Must n't do that either.

^architecture also does not deserve a capital A.

Xrchitecture.

The reason for using Sleeping Room is more for code-based language and using the terms used in code so the (possibly an) idiot reviewing the plans for issuance of permits knows what the occupancy use of the space and associate with the particular code provisions like 30 psf live load instead of 40 psf live load. Technical drawings aren't meant for clients. Rendering and simplified layouts of rooms and associated labels are for your client. Therefore, you can use other terms that are acceptable to your client. Also, another thing to bear in mind, the client is likely only going to live in the home for 5-10 years which is likely to be under 10% of the 'life' of the building (with periodic renovations/remodels/etc. and some upkeep). Homes may be around 70 to 100+ years but the client is likely to live in it for maybe a decade given the general way people tend to move from place to place instead of staying in one place for their entire working career and retirement.

ok Rick.

It's not like "sleeping room" label is the only option but at the end of the day, you are labeling rooms based on its use of the space like Kitchen for example. Sure, if your client is one that takes offense to the word 'master' in 'master bedroom' don't bother using the term. Do you want to spend your time arguing with a client over the use of the word 'master' especially if the room may end up being the "home office" or another storage room whether by this client or a subsequent owner of that house? Why give a sh-t about giving the room any special titles beyond their intended use for things like building codes and plan review process.

Hey, you have one of my bedrooms, are you AH'waaaare?

I miss Mitch.

Mitch is one of two celebrities whose death actually made me cry. The other was Anthony Bourdain.

Not John Lennon?

He died years before I was born.

Bourdain and Robin Williams were rough.

What does Ayn Rand think?

Nothing she's dead.

ummm... you have a point. More so, what about the 3 slave hard drives in my current tower vs the one master?

I have a lot of software dev friends and the Master/Slave terminology is very much the topic of an ongoing heated debate. If you think discussions of word sensitivity in architecture are a thing... hoo boy go check out some git hub comment threads.

I wonder if the conversations there are more intense because the barrier to entry in the field is lower and the gatekeeping might be getting overwhelmed by the new representation?

I think it's a combination of that & the fact that folks in the tech industry are relatively well paid and can afford to take time between jobs & hold out for better morals.

I'm not sure if anyone else is aware of the huge fallout / implosion at Basecamp over the past couple of weeks but that's been an interesting example of a group of employees with the independence to make their voice heard, even (and in some cases because) if it means leaving their job.

Sure, why not. Man Door is definitely one I've been trying to avoid.

Cover your manholes so nobody gets hurt.

I avoid "man door." I also cringe a bit when I have to say cripple stud but I haven't found a suitable alternative yet.

Midget stud.

As a stutterer (I'm supposed to say, "a person who stutters") I sometimes say that stuttering and dwarfism are the only two afflictions it's still ok to make fun of. And I'm not sure that's still true in the case of dwarfism.

I've started saying person door. People hesitate and look confused, then move on.

I've been using "person door" for years without even thinking about it. Sometimes I use "entry door" or "passage door" but those have specific meanings that sometimes confuse people. Sometimes I use "swinging door." (Offensive to swingers??!)

ok Rick.

not really, this was pertinent and made sense.

You forgot wanker.

Sorry for the bad paste job. Can’t edit

Dictionaries are record books, not rule books. If the definition evolves over time the dictionary will catch up. That's it's whole purpose.

Laws are rule books by social application of socially regulating the language but surprise.... courts uses dictionaries for words not explicitly defined when it is warranted and judges are authorized by law but that's another story. Building officials are likewise authorized so dictionaries do have some power and effect when it is applied to laws and rules in terms of law/regulation empowered interpretation authority. The French language is regulation and they regulate what the words means and therefore is the canonical dictionary with official meaning. English is unregulated and therefore in order for there to be an orderly manner of being able to communicate with one another, we must use dictionaries to define words, what they mean, and so forth and we by social rule regulate the meaning socially versus by regulatory edict. Statutes in laws may have meanings defined to words but laws are only meant to define words within the context of applying a specific meaning for purposes of interpreting statutory text. We do likewise with administrative rules and regulations so the intended meaning is communicated as effectively as possible so that there is some degree of consistency of interpretation so interpretations are not as widely interpreted if it was not defined in the regulations. While there is permitted latitude, we also try to contain the latitude of interpretation in legal/regulatory matters. Because English as a language has been misused, abused, and so forth.... largely because of uneducated morons being a significant factor of the language having so many different meanings like all the slangs.

Even if historically or etymologically it is perfectly explainable to keep using the term (not saying that it is or isn’t here), if some people make other associations than you and are feeling genuinely hurt because it refers to a very dark and negative period in history for them...why keep on using a term that is hurting people? Why hold on to such a term, out of spite? Out of enjoyment to cause others pain? Be the bigger person in such a situation, no? Even if you think it is bollocks, wouldn’t you do that for your fellow man (m/f/x)?

If I actually believed that it was causing someone pain then absolutely I would. Thats not the case though. The people that are complaining about words are just trying to boss people around. this is nothing more than a power trip. So no I don’t play into this silly shit.

language is a manifestation of power - people speak the language of a country's ruling class. english was not the native language of the britons, nor of any of my ancestors, yet we eventually came to respect and love it because we (they) found a way to fit into the society set up by the anglo elite. i think the reluctance to embrace changing usage reflects a fear that the old power structures no longer operate and can't defend the lexicon we have taken for granted. working in a second language will always be uncomfortable for people who didn't select it voluntarily.

i actually agree with x-jla it's not an issue that causes visceral hurt to people - it's a symbolic request that reflects newfound power among certain groups. where i disagree is in viewing that as a valid and ordinary cause for change in language
usage.

If language is a manifestation of power why then stick to certain wordings that reflect a power dynamic from a past wherein people were believed not to be created equal? Isn’t that a justified reason to actually let language evolve instead of clinging on to a certain usage as if life itself depended on it?

random- i agree, it seems natural to expect that and healthy to accept it, without much concern for the particular meaning of the change in question.

Because this is not evolution! Evolution is organic. This is an attempt at social engineering by a new wannabe tyrannical class comprised mostly of “elites”, a few low status HR types that feel power by dictating what others get to say, and a bunch of grifters that gain status. The hilarity is that, in this game, calling out the smallest sin shows others that you are the most sensitive, therefore the most virtuous. So we get lectured about how PBJ sandwiches are racist, how we should say “birthing humans” rather than “mother”....and the gifts that keep on giving...it’s very funny. I don’t take it seriously. 99% of actual normal people who are not indoctrinated into this nonsense cult just laugh at this. It’s hard to see maybe if you live in a costal elite or academic bubble...but it’s true. We are all laughing.

Sorry, if you don’t understand that “man” has more than one meaning...including the original Latin root meaning “hand”...as in creatures with opposable thumbs...then too fucking bad. I’m not bowing to uneducated lowest common denominator thinkers that say “man=oppressive male”. I’m not doing it. Too bad too sad. Happy Mothers day for all the humans who birth other humans!

"seems like a whole lot more effort to make a big deal about it than to just change the wording and move on with my life." 

Called it.

“If thought can corrupt language then language can also corrupt thought” ———Orwell. if you care about the future, you can’t let wanna be dictators get a foothold. This is what they call a “foot in the door” technique. The Chinese did something similar during the cultural revolution.

It's your foot in the door though x-jla :-)

How so?

How so? You’re the one dwelling in the past, keeping your foot in the door to prevent the natural evolution of language taking place...just read here how many professionals have already moved on. 

This is how language and the use of it progresses, even if the term is scrapped for the wrong reasons (in your opinion) it is still going to happen. 

There is no client that will say, "please change the use of 'primary bedroom' to 'master bedroom' in my drawings”, but there are more and more clients who won’t like the use of the term 'master bedroom’ any longer and so it goes.

But why do you even bother, is there such a thing as a master flowerbed or master patch of shrubbery in your field of expertise that you’re keeping your muddy boot in the fence like this? 

Let it go...

j-lax you could look at this conversely: we agree it's an assertion of power to change the language. and you're saying people who don't like a certain phrasing shouldn't have the power to change something most of us are indifferent about. you fear this phrasing will be lost like "scullery" and irredeemably date certain designs as old fashioned.

I'm waiting for Daniel Webster to explain the etymology of n*****. Can't wait.

First, The majority of people are not indifferent. The majority of people view this PC thing as problematic, annoying, unhealthy, and generally don’t want to be lectured by the elite and holier than thou crowd.

Second, by foot in the door I mean that it starts with small annoying power grabs, then once they get that it becomes something bigger. This is how bullies operate. I honestly believe this is a form of social bullying. Only one way to stop a bully is to metaphorically punch them in the nose the first time they try to pull something. Like a school yard bully, you cower once to their demand, they will continue and continue. These are not caring people. These are power hungry grifters.

Third, words naturally fall in and out of fashion. That’s the path of least resistance. This happens naturally all of the time. No one talks like they’re in the 1930’s anymore. We don’t need to social engineer language from the top down.

Read your Orwell, folks.

lol

Every once in a while, one needs to actually give the bully a 'cock shot' or punch in the nose.... the latter being applicable to those cockless bullies where the prior would not be applicable.

I have seen a single person in here "lecturing." Everyone else seems to be stating their opinion/approach and moving on. Nobody is bullying anybody. Most people are just fine with "PC" because they understand that "PC" means caring whether their words hurt someone else.

"words naturally fall in and out of fashion. That’s the path of least resistance. This happens naturally all of the time." 

This appears to be what's happening. 

"We don’t need to social engineer language from the top down."

This does not appear to be what's happening.

the suggestion is to punch people who disagree with you to prevent bullying, correct? this will prove to them that you are in fact the more powerful one, and thus what you say is virtuous truth. i feel like you worship 1984 without having picked up on the deep criticism of hypocrisy which makes it meaningful.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/572581/ “People are just fine with PC”. Not according to studies I’ve read. 80% don’t like it.

Midlander, you are putting words in my mouth.

You missed the “metaphorically” apparently. And it’s not people who “disagree”. It’s people who attempt to boss other people around, as if they have some moral authority.

So, if someone says that you can’t say “manhole”. I would just reply, “yes I can, manhole manhole manhole”. Or,

I’d say “my bad I meant womanhole”

what is a metaphorical punch though? isn't this just a foot in the door towards real action if the potential bullies continue to resist?

https://manwhohasitallshop.com/product/womankind-top/

Midlander, I don’t know what “real action” means, and I don’t know what “resist” means? If someone says something, say something back...if someone yells in your face, yell back... if someone pushes you, push back...

And if someone says that people are offended say “what people?” “Who said that?” Lol

haha i know ;)

anyway i have nothing more to say, this has been nice. off to sleep chamber #1 for me.

People may not like the term or idea when called "PC," which has become a pejorative term. Try asking people if they could chose between two equivalent terms, one of which makes a significant number of people feel bad, and another that has the same meaning but hurts nobody.

Who said that it makes them feel bad?

How about stop being a dick head? This applies to all. It is a two-way road. On one hand, don't boss others because there's that saying, who that is without sin cast the first stone. Therefore, if anyone is truly without sin in thoughts, words, or deeds is the only one with the moral authority to impose on another. Since not a single human being meets this test.... no single person should impose a rule on another person. This is why there is a process of law and legislation of law because it is proposed, reviewed in public meetings (but we can find in history failure of that but if we do this openly and transparent then we won't have issue here). When the vote is made. In my book, the people should be the ones voting to certify any new law or substantive amendments to existing laws. When the people vote the laws, they have ownership of the rules established.... in other words, an agency in the rules adopted and this is for societal order which rules and societal order is absolutely a requirement of any civilization to stand otherwise, they fall apart, chaos and disorder ensues.... hence anarchy. When people as a collective body impose rule, there is no need for a moral authority of any single individual but that the collective morality of the majority and the transparency of process and the process of a public hearing is key here because then it's tested by the majority rule standard where the majority sets the standard. The bar moves with the makeup of the people and their values but it is the majority. Rules must be official and canonized in the record of voting where the rules are put forth. When there isn't a record of approval via a public vote that is on the record, then media & politically induced social manipulation of values stimulates social bullying which is itself a problem because the people didn't vote. Where's the ballot? Where the voting records for these rule on these so-called "unwritten rules" which is an oxymoron and is not a rule at all. It's just what someone says to justify imposing their views and values on someone else which is bullying and harassment. In my opinion, its just bullying from each side. That is what we have and what it really is. When have social rules been voted upon by the people for the social civil order for the people to coexist? To this date, all of it except only those codified in law and even then a lot of it was done via crooked practices. While this needs to change for the betterment of society, rules must be codified otherwise, it's not rules. Just because schools have rules where they define student behavior and conduct, those rules have no jurisdiction outside the confines of the jurisdiction of schools which is very limited. A lot of the social rules we have are the rules we are taught in school but not all those rules are codified in the laws and rules outside of school and student code of conduct rules. We are taught in school an interpretation of what is "politically correct" via the rules we are required to obey on campus. However, what is really politically correct? One says that is taking the initiative of caring about not saying something that would offend others. That would be nice and ideal but also unrealistic to perfectly achieve but that isn't exactly what political correctness is, either. Political correctness is itself political in nature. It's political. I think most people are not strongly political or care about politics. I agree that we should strive to not offend others but we also should not jump to conclusions of malintent. There is all kinds of baggage associated with just about every word in the English language. We should strive to be good people to others but that street goes in each direction. This means to also not go wild and belligerent when someone inadvertently says something that may have some associated offensive meaning to you. Some words are clearly understood as derogatory and vulgar and have always been that. There are others that have been co-opted for bad use yet also have positive good meaning when applied in good use. There is socially appropriate ways to say to someone that a particular word has offensive meaning and explain why because a lot of people are literally unaware of some of the history and baggage associated with many words in the language. Some grown-up using the masculine form of the language because when they went to school several decades ago, it was masculine form even when using such masculine form is not meant with ill intent but that was the grammatical rules of the language. So it would be by subconscious rote that they would use that word form. When we look at the term.... "master bedroom", that it has been used for so long that no one alive are even aware of some historical baggage of the word 'master' and they always had known the main bedroom where the parents (property owner & spouse) sleeps in as the master bedroom but that the word 'master' has little authoritative meaning when used. It's just indicating it's the largest bedroom in the house and usually has extra amenities like maybe its own bathroom directly accessed by that bedroom and a walk-in closet. This being the differentiation to the bedrooms for the children which likely would not have a 'walk-in closet" and would not have its own bathroom but may access a bathroom shared between it and a neighboring bedroom. Residential design often reflects the domestic life and values. We have seen domestic life and values changes and domestic architecture has adapted and changed to reflect those values .

Tried to break it up into smaller paragraphs but must have taken a minute or so longer than the very limited amount of time to make edits including some grammatical refinements. It should be set to 15 minutes which is reasonable.

Because there is no reason to “let go of the word”. No one is offended. It’s just a control thing. And let’s not pretend that this is limited to “master”. Congress was or tried to remove all references to gender. Brother , sister, mother, etc. “Omg, did you refer to the woman that birthed me as my mother! I’m soooo offended”. No one ever said that. If they did they are too weak to be useful.

I wonder what the left would think if the religious right wing bible thumpers tried to change “offensive” words. We don’t say “damn” anymore! Lol. Oh wait, that happened at some point and no one liked it. These woke people honestly believe that they have moral authority. It’s not too different, because it’s a religion after all.

Congress was or tried to remove all references to gender. Brother , sister, mother, etc. “Omg, did you refer to the woman that birthed me as my mother! I’m soooo offended” 

Big ol' [citation needed] there buddy.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/proposal-eliminate-gendered-language-house-of-representatives-2021-1%3famp

The elite telling the peasants how to speak. The Latinx thing is funniest. White peolle telling Hispanics, who’s entire language is gendered, how to speak. Looks like upper class whites ran out of land to conquer...now they are trying to conqueror language and thought. Mental imperialism? Yeah I’ll go with that term

Congress was or tried to remove all references to gender. [from their rules] 

This is a good thing. "Chair" rather than "Chairman." If you disagree feel free to explain why a woman should be referred to as Chairman.

Related, we realized only a few years ago that a lot of our specs referred to consultants/inspectors/etc. as "he". It's old language that persists through inertia, but ignores (therefore erases) an entire set of the population. 

 “Omg, did you refer to the woman that birthed me as my mother! I’m soooo offended” Literally no one is saying this and moreover it's not even the intent of the rule change.

I mentioned this in the politics thread but it bears repeating here because it holds true for essentially 100% of the links you post: You link to analysis/interpretation/opinion about a fact instead of the fact itself. All of your information seems to come from other people's conclusions, rather than primary sources. If this were an academic course your sources would not hold up as valid. Learn to do research.

Latinx is unrelated to what you said earlier but I will say for the record I only hear white people using that term. That one is silly, imo, but bears no relevance to non-gendered congressional rules.

The Latinx thing is white people trying to be more inclusive and less male-oriented in what is a pretty logical approach, not "trying to conqueror language and thought." It clearly was not a good idea but the intentions were noble. And tduds is right--you are throwing out strawman arguments, typical of Fox news viewers who regurgitate what they hear instead of actually thinking for themselves. And it's "whose," not "who's." I thought you cared about language... lol.

Tduds, there is a direct link to the actual proposal in the fist paragraph of that article. I’m not reading the article for opinions, but for a summary. My conclusion is that this is a waste of tax payer money, and amounts to nothing but elitist virtue signaling. The peasants don’t give a fuck.

My conclusion is that this is a waste of tax payer money,

As of this post it is. A few posts ago you thought it was an overstepping of moral authority. Nevermind that essentially no money was wasted on this. The people who drafted this and voted on it and amended language would get paid the same whether or not it existed. It's an innocuous procedural vote that the right blew out of proportion and you - as always - took the bait.

 and amounts to nothing but elitist virtue signaling.

If it amounts to nothing why are you so angry about it?

The peasants don’t give a fuck.

You clearly do.

Anyway we're basically back to this: 

So I'll see myself out.

I’m not angry about anything, I simply refuse to play along with these silly language games. It’s a waste of time that these useless people are thinking about this rather than something more important. Time=money.

And, the people don’t care about gendered language. They do care about being lectured by a bunch of grifters

Can you explain why you speak for "the people" when as far as I can tell, none of the people on Archinect agree with most of what you say? You obviously have a right to your opinion, and you might even be right, but the numbers here say you aren't.

Claiming to speak for "the people" is a fatal error. Not that I have any idea what x-jla wrote. Or care. 

WG, I know a broad spectrum of people...the only ones I hear eco this stuff are upper middle class white people who spend 12+ hours a day on fb and Twitter.

Last I checked it was considered good empathetic conversational style to mirror the person to which you're talking physically. I do it verbally as well. If the person to whom I am speaking uses gender neutral language to speak of themselves, I do as well. If I need to use a pronoun or adjective before I have a firm understanding of the values of my client, I use language that is least likely to assume their views. It's good business and good human.

A bunch of educated upper class white people telling minorities what is acceptable verbiage...if I were a Marxist id say this looks like colonialism...hmm

I bet they said that about the N word once too. I certainly remember hearing it when we mostly decided the slur for gays and the slur for mentally disabled people had fallen out of fashion. Things change, language evolves, who cares. Move on, live your life, chill the fuck out.

I think that’s a little different.

Exaggerated, perhaps. There are less extreme examples that nonetheless aren't really used anymore to zero negative effect: Stewardess, secretary, Indian-style. I'm sure there are others. Point remains: Things change, language evolves, who cares. Move on, live your life, chill the fuck out.

x-jla, if they are upper middle class, they don't spend 12 hours a day on facebook & twitter unless they are a trust-fund baby and don't have to work at all. That's only a small percentage of those in the upper middle-class. Otherwise, they actually have a job/career and are too busy with their career to be spending that much time. Sure, they may like most anyone else make intermittent visits to FB and Twitter throughout the day but they aren't on it continuously. Otherwise, they won't have a job before long when they goof off on personal stuff and not do the work they are paid to do. 

Now, of course there are some individuals whose job is to be on social media because that makes sense for the type of work they do like public relations, media relations, social media director, etc. You know.... those types of occupations. The rest have other things to do than to goof off on social media for half the day or around 3/4 of the time a person is awake during a day. 

You know, when people sleep typically around 7-10 hours a day. That leaves you 14-17 hours a day. I know some people may do a few day stretches of less hours of sleep and sleep in on the days off to regain loss sleep during the week and so forth. Still... the normal average is in this range. A person gets a couple 15 minute breaks and then they have their lunch time off as a break and then there is time before and after work. 

For most work day weeks, they are up maybe 14 to 15 hours from wake up to sleep and so they may spend their last hour winding down to sleep and their first hour getting up so you have the 12-13 hours a day which you;re active. What you claim is flat out idiotic for the majority of working upper middle-class individuals who are doing their 8 hour work day over a roughly 9 hour time frame from what is typically 8AM to 5PM with noon to 1 being for lunch break. That's a typical work shift is like for most jobs which in the upper middle-class level would be salary jobs. 

Sure, many in the workplace these days will multitask like you might take to reading this forum while the computer is rendering so you aren't just sitting there bored waiting for the rendering to get done. Sure, that's fine and all for workers to do as long as they are being reasonably productive and performing their job duties otherwise, they would be in the unemployment line and guess what.... they won't be upper middle-class when they are now in the poverty level until they get a new job which is a variable length of time.

Ok Rick

It’s the “privileged” ones who push this PC thing because it allows them to have best of both worlds...to keep the very privilege that they espouse to find problematic while simultaneously being the “good guy”. People who don’t feel that privilege, who made it from squalor with hard work, or those who are still broke and struggling, or the classic “greed is good” rich asshole types that just don’t care, don’t feel the need to repent. It’s the ones who grew up upper class and upper middle class that seem to be the most vocal about this stuff...

It’s also cultural. Many Minorities, ethnic groups, neighborhoods, and sub cultures, have a crude sense of humor. A culture that doesn’t take everything literally. I grew up calling friends assholes and grandma saying things like “come here or I’ll break your head”. My wife’s Hispanic family had an incredibly crude sense of humor too...a sort of non-sensitive cultural norm. I remember moving to a white area for first time in my 20’s and it was very hard to fit in. There was a more indirect tip-toe type of communication...a passive aggressive thing that’s was foreign to me. I feel strongly that PC culture is white supremacy with a smile

A modern version of southern manners being dictated as “normal” behavior.

There's a difference between crude and insensitive.

As a good libertarian, I believe that many cultures and subcultures and individuals can coexist with different norms. This PC thing is a sort of call for a homogeneous code of acceptable universal verbiage. I have no problem at all with people changing their norms...I just tend to be skeptical when that change is pushed with a force against the will of whatever group. While it’s not government doing it yet, it’s certainly being pushed by the ruling class.

Tduds, maybe, but what’s insensitive is determined by how sensitive one is to words. I think in certain groups language is secondary to intent...this seems to be especially true among highly social and tight knit groups...in suburbs where things are less tight knit, people have to be more careful with language. Language carries more weight in groups that lack strong familial and community networks (big families, tight urban neighborhoods, etc).

I guess you can say Nuance increases with informality. More formal settings demand less nuance, because the relationships and rules are less defined/established.

My sons gf comes from a pretty Anglo family...he was telling us that she’s not talking to her sister because she called her a bitch. My wife was like “I just called your father a little bitch because he put a bandaid on his finger for a little paper cut...look he’s fine.” lol.

This is a lot of words just to say "Don't be a dick"

xlja, some of us actually just don't want to be assholes. I'm sure that does not compute for you but it's true.

But telling others what words they are allowed to use IS being an asshole. How about use the words that you like and others decide for themselves what words they like. And, if someone says something you find offensive explain why it’s offensive and then they decide whether you made a good case or not...Example: “**slur**is an offensive word because...”. “Oh wow I didn’t know that sorry”....VS....”i don’t think we should say man the deck because women can also...”. “Yeah but the word man has more than one meaning...like...so I think your offense is rooted in ignorance of the word”

And the word woman has the word man in it too soooo...

.

"How about use the words that you like and others decide for themselves what words they like. And, if someone says something you find offensive explain why it’s offensive and then they decide whether you made a good case or not." 

I get the overwhelming impression that this is exactly what is happening in this thread & that's why I'm so incredulous towards your continued protest. I'm probably not the only one.

Tduds, exactly. I had to put it back on ignore. (I'm using the word that I like, without regard to how it feels about it.)

Except no one made a good point why or to whom “master bedroom” is offensive. I want to know...who said that? Who is offended? You guys make frivolous claims that you expect to be taken as gospel, obeyed, and then ask for irrefutable proof for any claim by others that challenges your worldview.

Go reread the top of the thread. The first half dozen or so replies are pretty level headed and full of examples and reasoning. Then you felt the need to say "Takes more energy to appease these miserable pricks. So I go out of my way to annoy them." and it's been downhill since. I really don't know what would have satisfied you. Kinda feels like you're inventing a standard that no one will meet so you can feel more justified in your lonely conclusion.

Off ignore for a moment... I have relayed several times an actual example. I often work for gay couples. A lesbian couple was not offended but found the term "master" simply not appropriate for them. It would be like calling it a purple room when the room is actually yellow. NOT OFFENSIVE, just not accurate. I hadn't thought about it before that but it made me question why we use that term.

I often work for retiring couples who have separate bedrooms, aka "dual masters." By definition there can be only one master, so again, not an accurate term. In most modern families, neither spouse is "in charge" so there is not a master of the household.

“My clients who first brought this to my attention are very successful--one is managing partner of Boston Consulting Group, a large investment firm (and she has a doctorate) and the other is a Harvard-educated HR director. “. Go figure. In most modern families both people inhabit the master bedroom, so it’s a moot point. If the husband slept in the master bedroom and the wife slept in a broom closet then maybe your point would hold. Like I said, only people complaining about this are indoctrinated academics (check), HR people (check), and a small minority of unsuccessful antifa types who can’t feel power any other way (no check). Your clients fit 2/3 categories of PC pushers. They are in the top 1% most likely. Like I said, if I were a Marxist I’d call this at the very least ethnocentrism...or cultural colonialism if I wanted to be more hyperbolic

You did the right thing wood guy. I’m not criticizing you personally. I commend you bs tolerance. I have a very low bs tolerance. I’d rather offend someone than play into silly untrue things. Unless your a toddler then I’ll entertain your nonsense...but over 12 years old facts and reason come before
feelings.

*you’re. (Before someone calls it)

Do you kinda understand why I see this stuff as being pushed on the masses by the elite?

No, I think your logic is flawed, your observations are incorrect and your motivations are suspect. But I am done wasting energy debating with you. Later.

How about..... DON'T BE A FUCKING DICKHEAD? Being hypersensitive about every fucking word is being a DICKHEAD. Likewise, you are also a DICKHEAD if you are not caring about and you are not taking any effort of thinking about what words have connotations and derogatory meanings that would be offensive to people whom those words had been used against. 

When a word had once upon a time been used in a derogatory/offensive manner like slurs but the word originally did not mean anything offensive (like the word 'gay') but however no longer is used as slurs or in any offensive or derogatory manner (unlike the word 'gay') then we should not get offended or hypersensitive about something that was only over a brief time in history been misused but the word had a long history before that did not have the meaning or any other such words. 

However, the mere use of the word 'gay' does not mean a man who loves other men intimately. The word means 'happy'. However, CONTEXT matters and consideration of how that word is used should be carefully considered. If you can say the word 'happy' instead of 'gay' then perhaps it would be better to do so. 

If you do not care to even consider what you say and the feelings of other people then you are being a dickhead and that applies to everyone and all sides of this issue. I know, the word "DICKHEAD" would be offensive for some but since I am a DICK..... so be it. However, the point matters. I rather not spend time throwing out every alternative word like ASSHOLE, SHITHEAD, ASSHAT, JACKASS, etc. which would apply to the meaning and context of the message.

What did the Dickhead say to the Asshole?

I don't know. Perhaps you are a treasure trove of personal experience in this.

I label it, "W/C" for water closet. I know you're joking but I like logic and there is no logic in calling it a half bath, when there is no bath involved, and the actual reason for calling it a powder room is not its primary use. I prefer the British term of just calling the room, "toilet" but that doesn't fly with US clients.

Don't forget bog, head, can, john, shit house, and throne room.

All of those terms are better than restroom.

https://theweek.com/articles-amp/580173/brief-history-lavatory-language

now knowing the etymology of "throne" for toilet i'm probably going to start recommending it's more widespread use.
James Joyce's Ulysses: "With beaded mitre and with crozier, stalled upon his throne, widower of a widowed see, with upstiffed omophorion, with clotted hinderparts."

I wholeheartedly agree that restroom is offensive. Only weirdos rest in that room. Normal people pee, shit, and get out there quickly.

+++ clotted hinderparts

"Hopefully there is no gunpowder stored in the typical suburban half-bath" - is it ok to store gunpowder in half bath in urban setting though?

The Principal Bedroom is where the principal architect stays when he drops by for weekends. Oh, you think you can kick him out? Read the B101 sucker.

lol.

"I’m sure offline you’re a big cuddly teddy bear" 

I would hope so and may it's not just I. 

Social relationship is a "two-way" road. It is the responsibility of both sides. It is the problem is one-sidedness. While you are right that one should strive to not be insensitive to other people's issues or at least try to make them feel heard but it's not one-sided.

 I would say that it is all-sided. Everyone has that responsibility. It is not only x-jla but also the other side that needs to work to hear each other out and be considerate.

or Masters Degree