In this article, as in many others I’ve read, the term “self proclaimed” is used. What is the appropriate stylistic context to use this term? In newspaper and magazine articles doesn’t use of the term “self proclaimed” seem to impute that the assertion or “proclamation” is highly questionable or open to interpretation?
Aren’t they saying is essence that it’s questionable that she’s really a lesbian? Does a claim of this nature really require verification or backup?
Is the term “self proclaimed” being used properly in this story?
It’s not being used properly, it’s used to belittle her in this case. She’s only 18, she can’t make decisions about her sexuality, despite the fact that it has no effect on the story. Maybe it just lends more characterization of the fascist high school.
Basically using self-proclaimed to describe someone’s aspect reduces the amount of credence that person has. Giving yourself a title automatically makes you a little bit silly, e.g. I’m the self-proclaimed Lord and Master of Westphalia, but in this case (the article) the adjective probably should not have been used. George W. Bush may have been the self-proclaimed compassionate conservative in the 2000 election, but no one said it like that… it would have undermined him.
I was taking it another way. Some people are considered by other people to be homosexuals even though they’ve never publically stated what their sexual orientation is. So calling someone a “self-proclaimed lesbian” is a easy way of saying “we not just saying we think she’s a lesbian because of the way she acts, she says she is one.”
Yes, it is normally used in conjunction with a title or descriptor that would either not be self-assigned due to ordinary modesty (“self-proclaimed champion”) or that simply isn’t verifiable or correct (“self-proclaimed messenger of God” perhaps).
I think that in this case, given the subject’s age, the paper wants to make it clear that the young women herself has said that she is a lesbian. I don’t think the term self-proclaimed was meant to be perjorative.
Her sexuality has nothing to do with story at all, and I would imagine it’s only included in the story because she has made a public statement to that effect.
"Self-proclaimed" the word “proclaimation” carries a tinge of self-importance. As we remember from the Anne Heche/Ellen Degeneres “proclamation” of their union, “proclaiming” what one does with one’s reproductive organs is as silly as doing so about what one does with one’s evacuatory organs. A “self-proclaimed” wiper from front-to-back!?
**“Self-avowed”/b] Nuns take strict vows. Lesbians do not, given the number of adolescent lesbians who break their vows after graduation from college.
"Self-admitted" Journalists can no longer use this: although we may not live in a truly enlightened age, to use this phrase would be a throwback to an unenlightened age.
No, “Lesbian” is probably the best; sums the situation up, saves the most ink. Of course, in this not yet enlightened/not unelightened age, with that caption, when one looks at the picture, one doesn’t look at the bow tie, one looks at the face and says “so that’s what a Lesbian looks like!”
(Look at the next human face you see, and say to yourself “so that’s what someone who performs oral sex looks like!” And then try to not laugh at the absurdity of it. Sick crimes exposed: "so that’s what someone who fries hamsters on a grill looks like; “Before” movie clips of Sharon Tate “so that’s what a murder vicitim looks like”).
However, if I were the journalist, I would avoid the appearance of bias by usage of “self-proclaimed,” and neither would I seek out corroboration by investigating the particulars of anyone’s sex life, student or teacher alike. This should be a story about a kid who wants to wear a bow tie, and let the readers draw such inferences as their levels of sophisitication dictate. “What about the lesbians?” is even more of a pointless tangent to the story as is the much more pressing question “why would any teenager willingly wear a bow tie?”
In this case, I think “self-proclaimed” is quite appropriate. It makes it clear that the sexual orientation of this individual has been made public by her own choice. No one will read the article and think this girl has been “outed” by the reporter or by people from her school.
If it were relevant to the story, a better locution perhaps would be “self-identified lesbian.” Although not as frequently encountered as self-proclaimed, it doesn’t have the somewhat grandiose connotation that others have mentioned.
Self-Identified would be good. But if I were writing the story I’d probably look for something like ‘openly lesbian’ or some such. That makes it clearer that she’s out of the closet and it wasn’t some announcement for the article. It’s just background and not ‘news’.
It’s utterly useless information that has no correlation with the rest of the story. God knows what the writer is getting at, if anything. Try it like this:
"Kelli, a straight-A student with no discipline problems, is a self-proclaimed heterosexual. She said she was uncomfortable to have her chest exposed in the photo. "
You think reporters throw details into their stories for fun? It’s not totally detached from the issue of the picture, and the “because that’s me” quote implies the student thinks it’s related oar part of the issue.
“Self-proclaimed” is not derogatory. It’s there because she outed herself. “Self-identified” might be better, but the intended meaning is the same.
Her sexuality is irrelevant to the story. It’s included as near as I can tell because the reporter seems to think it’s the only thing that would explain her choice of attire for the photo. Not wanting to wear a stupid drape and stupid pearls can only be explained by her being a dyke, not because the idea that in 2005 girls should have to wear drapes and pearls in yearbook photos is ridiculous.
That’s all that needed to be said.
Of course “uncomfortable to have” is awkwardly phrased. It should be “uncomfortable having”.
It could have been worse - “Kelli, a straight-A student with no discipline problems, is a notorious lesbian.” “Self-styled” would be another option.
The use of “denies” is a problem here too : “Davis denies it’s about her sexual orientation”. “Denies” makes her sound defensive and implies that she’s refuting an accusation of wrongdoing.
Better : “Davis says it’s not about her sexual orientation.”
Medium : “Davis claims it’s not about her sexual orientation.”
Just plain mean : “Davis refuses to acknowledge it’s about her sexual orientation.”
I was taught in J-school never to say “claims.” “Claims” implies that whatever the person is saying is false, which is why we’re supposed to use “says.”
The implication does exist that her lesbianism is related to her wearing the tux. The reporter does perpetuate that, but he/she didn’t create it, Kelli Davis did.
That’s interesting. So would you say that the general rule taught by journalism schools is to avoid editorial spin when reporting news items ? I guess that makes sense, though given the realities of the market I always assumed there would be courses like “Spin 101”.
In this particular case I assumed that the lesbian angle was brought in to provide some sex to hook the reader. I guess it’s equally likely though that the journalist was simply dispassionately reporting the product of some interviews, and that the hot-button issue provided by Davis herself is what gave the story legs.
Yeah- I don’t want to generalize about what “everybody” does, because I don’t know. Although you’d hope everybody learns the same thing, and I don’t see “claims” very often in news stories. But yes, we’re definitely supposed to avoid editorializing in a news story, and staying away from words with prejudicial connotations is part of that.
Clearly it is referring to the fact that she has not been certified lesbian by one of the official certification bodies set up to do just that.
At her age, it suggests to me that she has not even taken the test for said certification. I imagine if she had, the identification in the story would have read “provisional” lesbian.
I will grant that often the certification process is slow, but that is one of the reasons that there has been so much discussion recentlty about updating the process, but a discussion on stream-lining that process belongs in Great Debates and not here.
No, I feel until it becomes official, the reporter’s identification of her is adaquate.
