Woke words don't exist - language changes and so should attitudes

It feels sometimes as though there is a never ending pile of relatively benign social topics that are jangled in front of us like keys in a baby's face to distract from matters to which we should actually devote outrage and ire.

READ MORE: Two Doors Down's Doon Mackichan on refusing a nude scene

The people who get paid to write the headlines know if they prime their readers with words like WOKE, LEFTIE, and PROGRESSIVE, it won't take long for people to fill in the gaps with assumptive rage. It seems all we need to do these days to cause a cheeky wee bit of controversy and outrage is to call any attempt to be inclusive, accepting, or kind, woke.

The very people who cry out in favour of freedom of speech don’t seem too happy when people utilise that freedom to choose language which isn’t inherently exclusionary. When asked why these changes were made, Staffordshire police simply responded, "The guidance was produced alongside external consultants to ensure we treat each other and our communities with the utmost courtesy and respect.”

Language might seem simple, but it’s incredibly nuanced and relies heavily on a combination of intention, subtext, context, and connotations. Referring to someone as a survivor rather than a victim may seem pedantic, particularly if you’ve never had a violent crime perpetrated against you, but there is actually a subtle difference in the way these terms are used, and perceived.

The term “survivor” helps to restore some agency, which can be sorely needed following abuse, assault or other traumatic experiences. While ‘victim’ is often used throughout the course of legal proceedings, many activists and organisations which provide support to people who have experienced violent crime have been using “survivor” for years as it emphasises that what someone has gone through was a survivable experience, and that they have a future outwith and beyond the trauma and pain they have endured.

Language might seem simple, but it’s incredibly nuanced and relies heavily on a combination of intention, subtext, context, and connotations (Image: free)

There are more genuine, pressing issues than semantics that deserve our outrage when it comes to survivors, for example Rape Crisis reports that 5 in every 6 women, and 4 in every 5 men will not report a rape or sexual assault which has been committed against them, and low conviction rates demonstrate that it can be extremely hard for those who do report to see any kind of justice. Terminology is not the issue here, ideology is, and taking more care in the way we refer to each other is a small, but necessary sign of respect which is sorely needed by survivors navigating the criminal justice system.

Conservative MP Nigel Mills said of the changes, "You'd think the police have enough on their plate without spending time worrying about which perfectly acceptable, normal language they can and can't use."

“Perfectly acceptable”, and “normal” are both value judgments being presented as objective facts, and that these changes are seen as something people are “worrying”about, rather than a simple internal policy update to reflect the values and goals of what are public servants, is unnecessarily inflammatory language designed to divide society, and demonise anything remotely progressive or forward thinking.

It's also worth noting that this issue isn't even new or worthy of controversy, as Hot Fuzz, a film that came out in 2007 built an entire scene around the fact that referring to both male and female staff as police officers was a more respectful way to do things. After all, why does a job profession need to be gendered and why does the male have to be the default? Women were only allowed into the police force in 1915, and until the 1970s were segregated from the male officers. It wasn’t until this year that Police Scotland appointed its first female chief constable. We no longer have police matrons, and since 1999 we no longer require female officers to preface their rank with “woman”, something male officers never had to do.

Each linguistic distraction is designed to instigate divisive squabbling, diverting attention away from genuine issues. An example of this is those who take issue with schools addressing letters to “parents and carers”, rather than “mums and dads”.

People who genuinely care about issues affecting parents care more about the fact LGBTQ+ parents are being removed from the birth certificates of their children in many places across the world, parents throughout the country are unable to feed their children, 1⁄4 of children in Scotland are living in relative poverty, and 68% of those in poverty live within a working household.

READ MORE: Grangemouth: Will Scotland one day have its Geert Wilders?

Parents and carers, something used even back when I was in school without issue, is more inclusive than mums and dads, and there is nothing to be gained by making things more exclusionary. Deviating from a rigid “mums and dads”, isn’t just including LGBTQ+ couples, but a whole host of other circumstances and family dynamics children might have and experience. Heaven forbid we make kids feel included and validate their circumstances. Language changes all the time to be more inclusive, depending on societal norms and conventions of politeness and respect, and that's OK.

If you see a headline designed to cause outrage over a ‘woke’ language change, ask yourself who the change is being made by, and who it’s being made for. Is it a change which levels the playing field and removes something as the ‘default’, or ‘correct’ way, is it something which uplifts a marginalised or oppressed community, or is it something which represents the natural progression of language within a more equal, diverse and inclusive society?

The language we use, or don't use, is integral to our interactions with one another. Language has the power to build connections, facilitate emotional bonding and create community. We use people’s preferred terms as a show of respect all the time, we call priests father, we use a different name when someone gets married, or graduates, or holds a particular job, we use nicknames for the friends we love, and terms of endearment for the people we cherish. We put the effort into language when we care about the people who hear us. Though it seems small, there is no limit to the positive change that you can make simply by choosing to include, to validate, to respect someone else, purely with your words.