I would probably say “regular boy next door type” without a thought but now, thinking about it, I’m conscious that the phrase reflects a view that’s narrow to my experience and could easily be seen as such by others. Glad to have my perspective broadened.
I have a friend who is on a campaign to eliminate ‘normal’ and ‘regular’ when describing people or behavior. She would prefer neuro-typical or another word which doesn’t indicate that another person isn’t normal. It’s okay if you say someone is ‘twice exceptional’ or gifted, but not normal.
In your other thread http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/2177322-high-school-decision-private-parochial-or-selective-public-p1.html , you state:
There are probably lots of cohorts of middle school students where someone who is any one of:
- 99th percentile test taker
- math lover
- kid of parents who are alumni of Northwestern and an Ivy League school
- multiracial
- kid of parents who have enough money that cost of private high school is not a major issue
- kid of parents who aspire for him to get into a top 10/20 college
would not be in the middle of the bell curve.
Sounds like you are the same type of person who thinks it’s out of control political correctness to have people refrain from using the “N” word and calling adult women, “girls”?
As a society I think it’s important to progress and not be stuck in the past just because we always have done things a certain way.
To the OP, I hope you can learn from this situation and see how, just maybe, choosing different words and phrases might have resulted in a more constructive conversation.
There are
Well…that escalated quickly…
it was OP who initiated the communication and was seeking information.
I think it was an innocent and innocuous way to describe what could be described as average. Versus regular or normal.
And playing video games and sports make no reference to sexual orientation, gender identity or world view.
He’s an average kid. Nothing wrong there.
However it did bother the person, so you politely thank them for their time and move on.
It’s their right to feel whatever they feel. If I felt attacked, i also have the right to immediately disengage.
Going forward I would not try to upset her needlessly.
I am curious, if we remove “regular” and describe someone as “like a boy next door”, is it still appropriate?
I don’t think that is the lesson at all. But it does seem like socaldad2002 and the OP’s acquaintance might get along.
There aren’t too many people who can point to an “average” “boy next door” who is a 99th percentile test taker, math lover, multiracial, and from a high income family with parents who are both alumni from super selective private universities.
“Boy next door” is an idiom for a person whose manner is “pleasant, respectable and likeable. A typical young person who exemplifies wholesomeness and approachability.”
Using idioms like “break a leg” or “kill two birds with one stone” does not mean you wish harm to humans or animals.
Trust me, #26 , I will not seek her out in the future!
So… You asked a question about a word that offended someone, people gave very constructive answers about different words you could use, but really you were just waiting for people to side and agree with you. What’s the point?
I agree that the person could very much have been offended because of her personal experience, or a range of reasons and since you seem like one of those “we can’t say anything anymore!!!” people, why would you bother to ask for constructive answers from people? It makes very little sense. Also makes me think that you exaggerated the other person’s reactions to fit a pov.
I think sometimes when selecting language it’s helpful to consider what the antonym of the word you’re using is:
Normal/abnormal
Regular/irregular
Typical/atypical
Average/not average
If your selection of a word leaves those who do not fit it described by a pejorative word (e.g., abnormal) IMO it’s best to rethink it.
I’d take privatebankers’ advice, move on, and not have any conversations with this person in the future. It’s entirely unclear what set her off, so who needs that?
I think it’s very clear what set her off, but I also think you’d do best to avoid her as you will likely set her off again.
I am NOT trying to stir the pot here, but I do find that a lot of people are very proud wearers of the “perpetually offended” badge these days.
Odd. I think of “regular” as an insult. Implies someone is boring.
Calling your own kid “regular” is a way of not bragging. Calling someone else’s kid “regular” is rude.
But it is all about intentionality. It can come across as false modesty, or it can come across as being exclusionary. If your words don’t match your intentions, then getting that feedback is good. If the listener misunderstood you, you should want to know. But the listener shouldn’t lecture or belabor the point.
What bugs me about the word police is when people decide that a word is 100% bad or 100% good. Words are neutral. Even the worst words have their place.
I’m the mom of the four most “woke” girls in the world. I’m regularly chastised for my vocabulary and they have never said anything about this. I’m not sure it’s a “thing.”
I believe that someone is perfectly allowed to be offended by whatever bothers them. It’s ok. It’s their perspective.
It doesn’t necessarily mean they speak with authority on behalf of all mankind.
What’s not ok is to the offended person to then think it’s ok to berate and offend in reverse out of moral superiority.
One can offend innocently and the person or friend can kindly point out how that made them feel and why. They can both move on together without further injury.
Note also that there are lots of things that seem “regular”, “normal”, or “typical” on these forums, but really are not in the larger context of the US (or the world).