Re: Origin of PC terms

["Dave L. Meek's User Account" <dave -at- ROGUE -dot- DISC-SYNERGY -dot- COM>]

John Renish wrote:

>The lesson in all this for writers is that we cannot be politically correct
>over time. If I wrote 'black' in 1950, I would have been offensive; if I
>wrote it in 1970, I would have been sensitive; if I write it today, I would
>be offensive. PC is a sucker's game where writers are concerned because we
>cannot know how long our work will remain in circulation. Best we find the
>most neutral terms possible and stick to them: we can only hope that we will
>not have to turn all our writing so bloodless.

I agree, and I'd like to add to it.

I must admit that I enjoy discussing this particular issue; I
find it incredibly interesting (maybe I should get a better life
:)).  But I must also admit that my area of technical
writing--documenting application developer software--strays into
the PC realm only on the s/h/it level.  Even that is rare, since
I strive to write directly to the reader using "you."  So, in
summary, to PC or not to PC has little or no direct impact on my
technical writing (though that may not be true for others on this
list).

However, I am getting indirect value from this thread.  I'm
learning about what things I *can* control in my writing and what
things I *cannot* control.  I have a responsibility to be
accurate, clear, effective, transparent, and professional.  In my
technical writing, I do not intentionally write offensive things;
that would be unprofessional.  So these areas are where my
concerns lie.

If a reader should actively
distort what I wrote in a hunt for bias or offense, there is
exactly *nothing* I can do about it.  Because I have no control
over that, I waste no time fretting about it.  I need that time
to learn more about usability, audience analysis, information
mapping, etc.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Dave Meek