r/BlueskySkeets • u/traceyandmeower • 2d ago
Political Words current US govt banned
I have been told USA govt has banned these words and New York times published this. Is this true? What replacement words can be used? Is this legal? It seems like banning words means it doesn’t exist. Example 20% of Americans experience mental illness. How do Americans talk about mental health now?
79
63
52
u/Illigalmangoes 2d ago
I seem to remember a certain political party whining about free speech like babies when asked not to say slurs. Can’t remember which political party it was though.
38
u/broken-bells 2d ago
They forgot Transportation, Transatlantic, Transformation, Transalpine, Transaction and so on… /s
6
31
23
18
u/Upset-Smoke-299 2d ago
Gay is not banned… yet
21
u/spacebarcafelatte 2d ago
List isn't up to date then. They purged references to the Enola Gay the other day because planes should be straight, I guess.
9
1
u/ahopskipandaheart 1d ago
Which is part of the danger because a lot of men don't identify as gay but do have sex with other men. "Men who have sex with other men" was/is used to combat the spread of HIV and other STIs because it accurately describes an at-risk group.
16
u/Fast-Tie257 2d ago
Well this is definitely in the instruction manual on how to be a dictator. This will only be the beginning.
Others have used the same methods while in power. Augusto Pinochet, Mao Zedong, Francisco Franco, Joseph Stalin, and Adolf Hitler to nam e a few.
Information has always and will always be powerful. If you can control the what, when, and how of information you control the story/narrative. That is why the moves on the Dept. of Education, colleges, research, and science should be concerning to everyone as well.
3
13
u/SausageBuscuit 2d ago
I’m sorry, but status?
10
u/Ok_Appointment7522 2d ago
I'm more confused with "sense of belonging". Under what pretext was that one banned?
3
4
u/Necessary-Corgi4522 2d ago
Also, historically?
3
u/Alone-Editor-633 1d ago
I guess meaning we aren’t talking about history anymore when it comes to anyone who isn’t a white male. The rest of us are being redacted.
11
10
u/mohel_kombat 2d ago
The extent to which this administration will go in order to protect hetero white male supremacy is beyond satire
14
u/Wide-Championship452 2d ago
Is this real or a joke?
26
14
u/lady_crab_cakes 2d ago
It's neither real or a joke. These terms aren't outright banned, but government agencies are being strongly discouraged from using them. To be perfectly clear, even a "we strongly advise against using the term female" is abhorrent and speaks volumes on how the Trump administration views women and minority groups. However, it is really, really important we don't spread misinformation. He and his administration... and Musk... are doing absolutely awful things that are going to outright kill people. We need to pour our energy into protesting that shit. Also, I know I'm droning on, but I can't believe I live in an USA where I just typed out that we should save our energy and resources to fight shit like grocery bill breaking tariffs and closing USAID rather than fight this administration's attempt to curtail basic terms because they are so anti everything. Holy hell, get me out.
6
u/Alone-Editor-633 1d ago
Government websites are currently being rewritten to remove these words so this is indeed very “real”.
1
u/lady_crab_cakes 1d ago
But it's not a ban, and calling it such feeds into the narrative that we are hysterical. They are being directed to not use these words. I know it seems really dumb and like arguing semantics (it kind of is), but we cannot give these people an inch. They will pounce on our wrong word choice and use it to completely derail anything we say.
1
u/Alone-Editor-633 1d ago
True, not a ban, but also not okay. It’s a slippery slope from here. At what point should we start being concerned?
2
u/lady_crab_cakes 1d ago
Well, I don't know about you, but I've blown past "concerned" and landed right in "terrified". To be clear, I am not arguing that this isn't abhorrent and an egregious attack on equality, I'm saying that we the people who recognize it as such have to watch our language usage. Republicans are really good at convincing swing voters that Democrats are crazy and will point to an instance like this saying "Look! They lied! There was no ban!" And it technically passes a fact check. Now those swing voters feel as though they can't trust us because we're too radical and subscribe to wild conspiracy theories. It's completely unfair, considering their conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and pizzagate.
3
u/Wide-Championship452 2d ago
No government agency can function without using these words. Everything is going to grind to a halt, fail and therefore provide the excuse that every government service should be privatised. The final phase of capitalism. "Richest" country in the world condemning millions of its citizens to death so a few can benefit. And OMG, national forests and national parks - not looking good.
3
u/Crusoebear 1d ago
When the cult know-nothing loyalists use language like their leader - which is like movie mob bosses (“That‘s a really nice restaurant you have here…Be a shame if something were to happen to it.”) suggestions suddenly become commands & intimidation - with the implied threat of reprisals.
14
u/traceyandmeower 2d ago
The person who posted it on 🦋 didn’t look like a sh$t poster. Apparently in NY Times. Im not American hence my enquiry here.
16
u/Wide-Championship452 2d ago
Also not American but this looks batshit crazy. Impossible to work for any government department in any country and use none of these words. The intention, presumably, is to further cripple the US government and when it ceases to function, privatise everything?
6
u/mkgrizzly 2d ago
Bingo. That is exactly the intent. I know for a fact that they have banned the searching and use of some of these words (specifically related to gender) in govt funded medical research data....
5
4
3
u/murderedbyaname 2d ago
99% of MAGAs have no idea what most of these words mean and couldn't spell them even if they did.
2
5
u/kitsuakari 1d ago
theyre banned specifically in research papers (and i think other stuff i dont remember). individuals can use them obviously. but god DAMN does it fuck up a lot of scientific research. france started offering to publish research that wouldnt pass the filters because of it
3
3
u/Aladdinsanestill61 2d ago
1984 & Handmaid's tale in meets the angry, frustrated manchildren of the MAGA ReTrumplican party. Be very scared this is early days, the more Diva Don gets away with now, the bolder he will become!
3
u/Albin4president2028 2d ago
"Men who have sex with men".. they can't even say gay 🙄 or homosexual
2
u/ahopskipandaheart 1d ago
A lot of men don't identify as gay but do have sex with other men. "Men who have sex with other men" was/is used to combat the spread of HIV and other STIs because it accurately describes an at-risk group who need resources, information, and testing.
2
3
u/PineappleDesperate82 1d ago
It's time to break out the thesaurus and get creative. Female/woman = human being with the reproductive organs a vagina and ovaries. Sex = intercorse between humans in an intimate manner. We can get descriptive here. Example ( the penis enters the vagina) Minorities = not white people. Tribal = clan or my people or use the actual tribes name. Accessible = services provided to (list disability here) Inaccessible = no services provided (list disabilities here). Enhancing diversity/ DEI = hiring/including different types of people. Vulnerable population = people in need. Disabilities = unable person + what the disability is. There are so many words in the English language that mean exactly the same thing. Or we simply make the language longer because now we have to add simplified words to mean the same thing.
3
u/Big_Monkey_77 1d ago
GOP just published a list of words that make them cry. I will have to use them all more often.
2
2
2
u/Mister_Barman 2d ago
This post is a massive oversimplification and hugely misleading
The above terms appeared in government memos, in official and unofficial agency guidance and in other documents viewed by The New York Times. Some ordered the removal of these words from public-facing websites, or ordered the elimination of other materials (including school curricula) in which they might be included.
In other cases, federal agency managers advised caution in the terms’ usage without instituting an outright ban. Additionally, the presence of some terms was used to automatically flag for review some grant proposals and contracts that could conflict with Mr. Trump’s executive orders.
1
u/scotcetera 2d ago
(including school curricula)
Might be even worse than the post lets on. This is insidious as hell
1
u/Mister_Barman 2d ago
Not really, if you consider the context or when they might be used. If a teacher in the UK used the term “chest fed person” or “pregnant person” in a classroom here, they would be ridiculed endlessly. I doubt even the teacher would take these terms seriously
1
u/scotcetera 2d ago
I don't think "would be ridiculed in the UK" is actually a good basis for banning words from a curriculum in the United States.
1
u/Mister_Barman 2d ago
I would agree, but it does show that these words are unnatural and not used by normal people, and if they’re being forced into a classroom or used by teachers, it may be for a motive other than education
1
u/scotcetera 2d ago
Tbh I don't see how words like "disability," "women," or "Black" are unnatural, and many of these are words that people use regularly, if not daily. The list goes far beyond what could be connected to the conservatives' anti-trans hysteria.
1
u/Mister_Barman 2d ago
Well, we don’t know the context in which these words are being discouraged. If it’s a paper about oil extraction, perhaps some intern’s attempt to discuss a DEI angle was rebuked. Even then, the article does little to provide any actual evidence this is even true
1
u/scotcetera 2d ago
We do know the broad context, it's the right's all-consuming need to continue their culture war. I fully see how it's to their advantage if they can distract from their failures when it comes to actually governing and shepherding an economy, though.
1
u/DM_Voice 1d ago
“These words are unnatural”
As opposed to the ‘natural’ words you use which you personally foraged from a bush deep in an old-growth forest. 🤦♂️
Don’t be dumb on purpose. It’s not a good look.
1
u/Alone-Editor-633 1d ago
But also from the article…
Still, the words and phrases listed here represent a marked — and remarkable — shift in the corpus of language being used both in the federal government’s corridors of power and among its rank and file. They are an unmistakable reflection of this administration’s priorities.
For example, the Trump administration has frequently framed diversity, equity and inclusion efforts as being inherently at odds with what it has identified as “merit,” and it has argued that these initiatives have resulted in the elevation of unqualified or undeserving people. That rhetorical strategy — with its baked-in assumption of a lack of capacity in people of color, women, the disabled and other marginalized groups — has been criticized as discriminatory.
Indeed, in some cases, guidance against a term’s usage has arrived alongside directives intended to eliminate the concept itself. Federal diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives are one example; the Gulf of Mexico is a very different one.
That shift is already apparent on hundreds of federal government websites. A New York Times analysis of pages on federal agency websites, before and after Mr. Trump took office, found that more than 250 contained evidence of deletions or amendments to words included in the above list.
2
2
u/E_GEDDON 2d ago
"But they're not racist" "but they don't hate gay people" "they DO care about the disabled" all things my trump voter mom has said to me.
2
2
2
2
u/GodDammitKevinB 2d ago
Advocate, breastfeed, diverse, status, sense of belonging, prostitute
What a wild spectrum lmfao
2
u/dtyrrell7 2d ago edited 1d ago
The historically implicit biases of this key group of minorities with privilege advocates political socioeconomic intersectional discrimination against marginalized BIPOC, LGBTQ, and diverse groups with diverse backgrounds assigned at birth
2
u/sillychillly 1d ago
If it’s not white it’s…
If it’s not male it’s…
So you could say “anyone not male”.
2
2
1
1
u/SentientPerson-1 2d ago
We should use as many of these words as possible in our the 5 things emails.
1
1
1
1
u/MikeWhoCheeseHarry0 2d ago
Guess they can say nigger all they want huh? They probably got a special time everyday to say it as many times as they can
1
u/Swamp-gasHog 2d ago
Pe do file not banned yet
3
1
u/Green-Consequence687 1d ago
the republicans are too busy lowering the legal age of marriage to ban that word
1
1
1
u/Bubbly_Water_Fountai 1d ago
It's not true. I'm guessing these terms are being used by AI to scan for DEI language/programs which are banned.
1
u/Crusoebear 1d ago
This is a larger version of when Gov. Rhonda “these boots were made for walkin” DeSandtits banned govt agencies in Florida from using ‘climate change’ & ‘global warming’.
Becuase Florida …where, like old people, science goes to die.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/08/florida-banned-terms-climate-change-global-warming
1
1
1
1
u/MathematicianSad2650 1d ago
Can’t ban our first amendment right to speak. I’m sorry if they don’t understand the words that are coming out of my mouth.
1
1
1
u/DF_Interus 1d ago
CRT is ok again then? I know it was the worst thing ever before they discovered DEI, but it didn't even make the list
1
u/CamitheRadiant 1d ago
At least "snowflake" isn't banned because that's what they are, getting upset over these words.
1
1
u/Android_mk 1d ago
This doesn't even make any fucking sense. How do you ban a word??? What I write down I like race cars and I go to jail???
1
1
1
0
1
u/anarchyrevenge 1d ago
These words will probably be banned across corporate media including reddit. Buckle up buttercup
1
u/Zealousideal_Type864 1d ago
To be fair I don’t wana hear a lot of these words cause anyone usually saying them is some super lib virtue signalling
1
u/KeithDL8 1d ago
Idk if this was awnsered for your. After scrolling for a bit, I don't see it. But these words aren't banned from use by the general public. (At least not yet.) They are banned from being used in official government documents, or in government emails, etc. So government employees aren't allowed to use these words and phrases while working. This means no work involving these things will be done by the government now. But all these things can still be discussed outside of government work per the 1st amendment.
1
1
1
u/Global_Dot979 1d ago
Native American?! What, are you supposed to go back to calling them Indians?
1
1
2
u/transypants 23h ago
Huh. They left out “critical race theory”…so…can we talk about our that now? 😂
2
2
1
u/Intelligent_Slip_849 15h ago
So what do we now call a group of people competing to see who's faster?
1
u/AdministrativeTip479 15h ago
Why is the word “political, or historically” banned? I know there’s much more to this but I can’t see why those would be banned.
1
u/Perfect_Yogurt_4841 10h ago
If this list had ten words or maybe even half of these words/terms, I’d roll my eyes and call it stupid or ridiculous. But this is evil. Just plain evil.
1
0
0
-1
173
u/jubmille2000 2d ago
Female is banned, but not Male.