ANOTHER problem is the stretching/dillution of the definition of the word. Which is happening all over the place.
Rhetoric has replaced thinking.
Just like how people have jumped the gun on calling “racism” (sometimes just for attention/sympathy, other times trying to use it as a political weapon… “see? my opponent is racist! vote for meeeeeeeeeeeee!”)
[[You get that a lot in retail, you know
Woe be to ye who refuses to give out a refund / exchange when the seeker is a minority. Nevermind that they didn’t have a recipt, nevermind that they were asking you to break company policy and endanger your job. You were RACIST, pure and simple.]]
[Notice how this dilutes and obscures the seriousness of racism and leads to a backlash against this crying of wolf that hampers the cause of victims of true racism? Good, cuz there’s gonna be a pattern, and you’ll be asked about it on the essay portion of the exam.]
Everyone who says “no” to somebody of another race is a racist.
Everyone one the other side of the political spectrum is a Nazi/Fascist (if you’re on the left) or a Hippie/Communist (if you’re on the right).
Everyone with any inclination of militancy or activism from either side is a terrorist.
Applying this to the subject at hand, looking at someone becomes sexual harrassment, and any sort of physical contact becomes rape. And the backlash, everyone flashing X ammount of skin is “acting like a slut and asking for it.”
Rather than discuss and debate, people are busting out the dirty buzzwords of rhetoric to try and “defeat” the other side. And they cry wolf with such vehemence and conviction – and/or hear others crying wolf with such vehemence and conviction – they start to think the wolves really are there.
(I dunno if I ended up anywhere near close to conveying what I wanted to say and translating what I mean into language y’all actually understand. :P)