Skip to main content

View Diary: A tale of two New Yorks on race (58 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  like what you said, except "at the head of a (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BentLiberal, Ian Reifowitz

    multi-racial family." Why is he at the head?
    Census long ago dropped the "head of household" designation from its surveys (used to be the male was automatically given that label).
    How about instead: "election of a man who is the father in a multi-racial family."

    While Democrats work to get more people to vote, Republicans work to ensure those votes won't count.

    by Tamar on Sun Sep 15, 2013 at 10:00:28 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  In the context of this campaign, (0+ / 0-)

      he's the one running for office, so his position is central to the discussion, he's the one "out front." Had his wife been running, I'd have written that she's at the head. From a writer's perspective, that's why I chose that language.

      •  Ian -- wasn't talking about what you said (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ian Reifowitz

        (head, meaning leading in campaign is not a problem) but what Wildthumb wrote -- I was surprised no one else noticed it:

        we seemingly take steps forward with the election of a man at the head of a multi-racial family.
        My reply was about that.
        Your diary is excellent and I enjoyed it greatly!

        While Democrats work to get more people to vote, Republicans work to ensure those votes won't count.

        by Tamar on Mon Sep 16, 2013 at 02:21:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thanks for the kind words, I'm glad you enjoyed it (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Tamar

          And I do hear what you're saying. My reply to your comment did refer to the quote you just mentioned.

          And I did refer to him as standing at the head b/c he is the candidate, and I would have referred to a female as standing at the head of her family as well, if she is the candidate, in a similar post.

          I didn't put him at the head of the family because he's a man, but because, from the perspective of this article -- with him as the subject -- he's at the head. I thought of it visually, on stage on election night. He's the center of attention, at the head of his flock/family.

          I'm glad you brought it up, I'll be sure to be aware of gender concerns as I write.

    •  Because that's kind of awkward to say? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ian Reifowitz

      How about "...we seemingly take steps forward with the election of a multi-racial family's father"? I'm not quite happy with that either :/ Then again, perhaps I'm taking it in this direction.

      •  how about "election of a man who is a member (0+ / 0-)

        of a multi-racial family" or "election of a man who is the father in a multi-racial family."
        Why "head?" There's no reason to think he's the one in charge rather than his wife, or what is most likely --- both of them. That's a reversion to outdated norms and obsolete notions (it's what Pat Robertson or one of the other right-wing dinosaurs would say).

        While Democrats work to get more people to vote, Republicans work to ensure those votes won't count.

        by Tamar on Mon Sep 16, 2013 at 02:25:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm not keen on this kind of Sapir-Whorf stuff (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Ian Reifowitz

          Replacements usually just gets substituted by the original term. Conversely, an antiquated term can be substituted internally with a better meaning. Developing thought such that this happens, and doing so openly and honestly by argument (be that intellectual, intuitive or experiential) is better than language policing, which can easily "become the story" and detract from consideration of the underlying issues.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site