According to the Washington Post, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has determined that hungry is an imprecise name and has made the move to represent this population as food insecure. I can’t imagine why this wonderful idea didn’t surface before now. Apparently, we don’t need to solve problems. We just need to rename them so that they are less emotionally charged. After all, people may galvanize to help hungry people. But when the same people have low food security, it seems much less pressing.
A fictitious Bush insider gave insight to other changes following this colossal break-through.
The homeless will be referred to as the housing insecure.
The poor will be the monetarily challenged.
Even the word poverty itself is making a change.
The fictitious Bush insider spoke on the issue. “We’re changing the accent on the word poverty, so it will now be said as poverté. We’ve noticed how Target improved its image when people started saying Targét — even gaining a couture line. We’re hoping for the same thing with poverty... I mean poverté.”
He adds, “We’ve also been looking at other ways to change the feeling about the monetarily challenged. With the popularity of the word “extreme” — as in extreme sports — along with the rise in the simplicity movement, we’ve decided to combine those concepts in regard to poverty. We see positioning these folks as living an eXtreme simplicity lifestyle, which adds a little cachet to their condition. Certainly they’ll find being fashionable a suitable alternative to wage increases or health benefits."
Posts
1 comment:
I want to know who has the time to come up with these "politically correct"(or incorrect terms)? In my district this year, librarians can "meet" once a trimester but we can get together for "trainings" more frequently. Now it doesn't compare to calling hungry people being f"food insecure" but egads...who thinks of these things?
Post a Comment