Personally, I feel that “person-first” terminology is more demeaning, not less. It’s a sort of construction that’s very rare in English, which means that it’s calling attention to the differences. And further, it’s never used for traits that are considered positive or neutral, only for terms that are often considered negative. If I need help getting something off a high shelf, I don’t ask for a “person of height”; I ask for a tall person, because that’s how English works.
The fact that you live in an area with a significant Native American population might be the reason why you’ve never encountered it used in other contexts, because the folks there have been told better.
I suspect “powwow” getting used as slang was on its way out, not necessarily because people are more enlightened about race, but because Westerns aren’t a huge fixture in our popular culture anymore, and terms that entered the lexicon through Westerns don’t feel relevant anymore. It would never occur to me to refer to a meeting as a “powwow,” not because I’m particularly sensitive to the feelings of Native Americans, but because I don’t have first-hand memories of the Eisenhauer administration.
I barely remember “Ike” except his very catchy election button phrase. But yeah, I would never think of using the term that way. I think we used it in Boy Scouts, but again, that is different.
You know they’ll just find another dogwhistle, right? And this is how we all hop aboard the euphemism treadmill. We switch to a new word or phrase because the old one has negative connotations, but eventually the new word has similar connotations to the old word, so we switch again. Languages change, so I guess that’s okay.
Who the hell is triggered by the phrase master bedroom? Or has triggered pretty much been diluted to mean anything someone doesn’t like? Like if I go to my mother’s for Sunday dinner, can I be triggred by her meatloaf?
Nobody (I think). I suspect it’s a kind of hypercorrection going on - a desire to avoid use of the word slave, hence avoiding it where it’s used in the master-slave construction, leading to people wondering if master bedroom is problematic. It does seem like rather pathetic window dressing, but nobody wants be that guy who deprecates appropriate changes just because there are also much bigger issues.
A “dutch oven” is NOT a “cheap alternative”. It’s a very specific type of cooking gear. The name derives from a metal-working process to produce them that was of Dutch origin and is in no way a slur or insult, no more than calling ceramic dinnerware “china” would be insulting.
No, it’s not. It’s a type of cooking pot. While they can be used in something like a campfire they can also be used in a conventional oven. Honestly, it’s like saying a wok is a “make-shift frying pan” because it can be used over a variety of heat sources.
To agree with a poster above, “Indian giver” would very much be considered offensive these days, at least around here. I also haven’t heard it in at least a couple of decades. We also sat “Indian style” (cross-legged) as kids in the 80s, but I haven’t heard that term since then. My kids were taught “criss-cross applesauce” or just “cross-legged.” While we’re at it, I also have not heard anyone refer to “Indian summer” in awhile, either. Like maybe 10-15 years or so.
True. While the “person” in the title aspect is likely a thing, though, I think the more important aspect of this terminology is that it emphasized that someone enslaved them. It was an action done to them, rather than just something they were. Likewise, there’s at least some people using “enslavers” instead of “slave owners” and I can see where they are coming from. Though I suppose some may debate whether an inheritor actually enslaved someone.
Gotta admit to still defaulting to the language I grew up with in that respect, though. And in a few others. I’ve definitely changed some terms, and will try to continue to use those that make sense to me.
There seem to be 4 or 5 hypotheses for the origin of this. None of them strike me as offensive per se, so I assume that deprecating this is just because we don’t use “Indian” at all now?
“Dutch” in those old phrases seems to be a way of saying “not quite standard” - whether talking about an oven, an uncle, a door or a treat.
It’s similar to the way that “Indian” is used - “Indian corn” isn’t regular corn, Indian summer isn’t a regular summer, etc. (note in other countries similar weather is called “poor-man’s summer”).
So both uses are somewhat dismissive, suggesting that the foreign folk aren’t quite normal and neither are things associated with them.
I blame the British! (note they are also responsible for phrases like “French leave,” “French postcards,” "the French disease, etc.)
I’m not sure about Dutch oven - but the “going Dutch” and Dutch apple pie have as much to do ( or more) with being fake or inauthentic as cheapness. " Going Dutch" refers to “Dutch treat” which is no treat at all , as each person pays for themself. " Dutch apple pie" refers to something that has only one crust so it’s not really a pie. * A “Dutch uncle” is someone who makes critical comments while “avuncular” more or less implies kindness and patience. “Dutch courage” comes from being drunk .
* Dutch Apple pie is not a lot of things - I don’t know of and haven’t found anything else that has a pastry crust on the bottom and a streusel/crisp topping. Cobblers and crisps and crumbles don’t have a bottom crust and tarts have only a bottom crust.
