Minor peeve

[cjsmith]

Minor peeve: people who are not military, police, or firefighters using the word "civilians" to describe those-who-are-not-them in a self-serving, I'm-better way.

I'm fairly content when I see it used in a way that just sort of looks like the writer couldn't figure out how to say "outsider" because he'd forgotten there was a word "outsider". That's just somebody being a bit dorky, and God knows I have enough dorkiness myself. I forget words all the time.

The peeve for me is people who use it to puff themselves up somehow, like they're extra total macho cool because those OTHER people are CIVILIANS. To me, that kind of puffing up is valid for -- yet almost never bragged about by -- folks who put their lives on the line in some seriously shitty situations in order to serve or save or protect others. Don't try to fake that status with this ex-military gal. It no worky.

Comments

[cjsmith.livejournal.com]

I love your idea of the "minus pejorative meaning" tag. It would be so useful! Heck, there are even days when I wish it were mandatory, so that people wouldn't be able to produce deniable underhanded little snidenesses, and would have to own up to being a snot or a jerk.

Honestly, I get annoyed any time I see people puff themselves up by comparisons to others, whether they use the word "civilians" or say "Well I'M from CHICAGO so..." or any other form. I want to say "Get the bleep over yourself, buddy, and get down off that pedestal. We're all human." It seems so common to deny the snobbiness afterward, too. "Oh, that was just in fun. Geez. Lighten up." Yeah, it may have been just in fun, but how many times has he mentioned Chicago in the last week? He thinks there's something to it, all right, or he'd lay off it. Ugh. I'll go talk to someone other than him, know what I mean? I don't need more "joking" one-upmanship in my life.

[moriamerri.livejournal.com]

oh... now you are getting into rich territory! If we somehow could reinvent language such that descriptive words and evaluations were separate --- well, it would be ONE step closer to a kind of clarity that would make for a nicer life. I think there are some other things I'd want beyond that -- it feels like a good "1st step" of a bigger desire (for me). But, sure, I'd go along with mandatory separation of pejoritive.

I'm puzzling out what to say about the "snot or jerk" part and the "one-upmanship" part. I have some unresolved questions in this area -- maybe some that you are pointing to and others that may contrast (or maybe conflict?) with what you're saying, I'm not sure.

Like, um, I have the idea that people REALLY LIKE to have their preferences acknowledged. Call it "values" if you like. Tastes, values, preferences..... Is it that we identify with these? Is it that we think we are better? Or something else? If I want to relate to people who share my value about [cats, flowers, chocolate, world peace] OR if I want to relate about [cats, flowers, chocolate, world peace] at what point am I being a jerk? Is it only when I'm against [anti-cat-activities, war, anti-chocolate-propaganda]? Or is it more about feeling disconnected from people who dislike cats? When is it "being a snot or a jerk"? I DO think my prefered things are "better" -- that's why I prefer them. I DO like to know others who see the extreme valueableness of cats and who may understand the significance of some of the cat-related events in my life. I'd go so far as to say that my valuing cats can even be a way to express other (unstated) values (the stuff I call "cat values".)

The underhandness part -- ug. This is a really sore spot for me. I wish there were always a way to know (or even inquire and find out) what people mean. I can't give you a list but I'm sure there are dozens of cases where asking gets "that was just in fun" or equivalently beyond-useless responses. (Could we make a list of these forms of speech, and then figure out how to ask and get actual clarity?)

For me ambiguous meaning is hard to respond to. (I'm trying some new ways.... but it is certainly a tough area.) My guess is that probably under the underhanded presentation (1st layer) there's the one-upmanship, but that under that there's probably a couple other layers -- maybe feeling scared or alienated or lonely around all the non-Chicagoans?-- from which comes the part you called "snotty" -- and maybe more that's past that. One option is to skip past the snottyness to what else is going on. I wonder where "what are you wanting me to know about people from Chicago?" would take you [assuming here that this is asked with genuine curiousity]. [I'm not saying it would take you far, I'm just WONDERING.]

OK, lots o' grist in the mill.

Moria