this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
438 points (94.0% liked)

The Onion

6539 readers
805 users here now

The Onion

A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.

Great Satire Writing:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] grue@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Is there a reason you’re so salty about this particular fairly old shift in language? Do tell why.

In a pre-WWII European context (where the only relevant Semites were Jews), letting the meaning shift was one thing.

In this Middle Eastern context (with two relevant groups of Semites), it's entirely different: it's an attempt to "other" and dehumanize Arabs by denying their shared Semitic heritage and instead claiming it exclusively for Jews. It's a fundamentally dishonest definition that facilitates DARVO tactics.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

it's an attempt to "other" and dehumanize Arabs

So using a term the way it's been used for decades is suddenly malicious if we change contexts.

No, I'm not buying that at all.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I mean, if you generalize it THAT far, I'm sure there are many terms that become malicious. The current bad words weren't always bad words in some cases (thinking more like the odd slurs like "idiot" than the tried and true cuss words).

In fact, wasn't f*ggot ONLY a term for bundles of sticks used for tinder until it became fashionable to burn gay people like witches?