Whatever You Call Them, They're Still Poor

by Josie Raymond · 2010-01-12 13:10:00 UTC
Topics:

Washington State Senator Rosa Franklin, a Democrat, has an idea. She wants to tweak the language in 54 state laws so that words like "disadvantaged" and "at risk" pertaining to children living in poverty will be replace by the more positive "at hope."

Um, is she mentally at hope?

I can't help thinking that this is a waste of time and energy. And oh yeah, money. A Republican state senator argues, wisely, that the approximate $3,500 it costs to take a bill from idea to printing could be better spent. The legislative body has apparently agreed to introduce the bill, but doubts that it will go anywhere in the process.

Personally, I prefer "living in poverty" to refer to people who are, you know, living in poverty. It just actually means something. And it's not a slur. There's a poverty threshold. When people fall below it they are living in poverty. When they are living in poverty, they are disadvantaged and at risk (of going hungry, of becoming homeless, of dropping out and so on).

Using euphemisms just makes it easier to ignore the problem. If an individual's obstacles are made even more vague ("at risk"? at risk of what?), it's harder to know what that person is facing and, as a result, how to address those problems.

Should this blog be named "At Hope in America?"

Photo credit: Feuillu

Josie Raymond has reported from the streets of the South Bronx, written for several magazines that folded (not her fault) and fixed thousands of typos.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Homeless Politely Asked To Leave Town Before Olympics
NEXT STORY:
Sallie Mae Blinks!

COMMENTS (2)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.