Why can’t people just say what they mean instead of using annoying keywords?

People seem to make connections that are not really there or using annoying keywords. For some reason these key/code words used now really bother me. For example, people say the president is “Saber rattling” when he speaks to other nations, or "gaslighting" his wife. No, he is speaking sternly and showing he is not scared, but he has no Saber in his hand and is not rattling it. People say they values “women’s health” in place of murdering unborn children. Some call anything they disagree with “Fake News” instead of simply saying a journalist incorrectly reported or skewed what they are reporting on. People call gay people “funny”, and there’s nothing funny about them (except the jokes Milo makes, he’s cool). People call anything environmentally friendly “green”, but not all green things are and not all environmentally friendly things are green. Or the use of the word “African American” for anyone who is not literally a citizen of a nation in Africa. (I know plenty of people darker than me who are just plain old Americans, never even been to Africa). Others call Hillary Clinton a witch, which has not been fully proven other than evidence in emails leaked by a third party, or they call Donald Trump a Nazi which is a socialist platform. But what really bothers me is when people mistake the word “gate” as a suffix meaning scandal. And don't get me started on political correctness. If you (talking about society, not literally you reading this now) do not like what someone is doing, please just say what they are doing that bothers you, like I’m doing now. That was the one good thing about life in the fictional (so far) book 1984 is the redesign of the language into a perfectly precise language called newspeak where nothing could ever mean anything else. Sorry for the rant.

a reply to: Theocracy4America

Because the fake news media ran by nazis controls the fascist snowflakes by triggering their hashtags....

My favorite is “dog whistle”, where folks claim a speaker is using some type of code to rile up various tribes. If that’s true, why not say exactly what the code is, what it represents, and which tribe will respond? Why keep it mysterious sub contexts?

a reply to: Theocracy4America

I'm ok with the calling Hillary a witch but I agree with everything else you said

originally posted by: Theocracy4America
But what really bothers me is when people mistake the word “gate” as a suffix meaning scandal

Perhaps you are not aware that this journalistic habit was kicked off by "Watergate", which was originally just the name of a building. The first imitation nickname may have been "Muldergate", named after a politician in South Africa. Journalists like the convention because it makes for shorter headlines; if you are writing about a political scandal involving banana-importing consortiums, it is easier to use the nickname "Bananagate".
It isn't always easy to find the most convenient formation. Reagan's administration got into a scandal involving Iran and a fighting group in Honduras known as the "Contras". Journalists were having trouble deciding what to call it (I read at the time), because "Irangate" and "Hondurasgate" were both clumsy and awkward. They finally settled for "Contragate", which flowed more "trippingly off the tongue".

a reply to: Theocracy4America

I knew we were completely screwed when Republicans passed a law titled, "The Clean Air Act" which gutted or removed all regulations on air pollution laws so corporations can pollute more without any consequence.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Dont forget the "affordable" care act......

It's been anything but..

But....buzzwords....buzzwords...buzzwords....look how hip and cool they all sound with their buzzwords.

I blame constant marketing in every aspect of most people's lives for the last 30-40 years at least.

Everything needs to be shorter and catchier, easily digestible.

For a good example of applications of this....check out 1984 and newspeak. Buzzwords and catchphrases are the real world equivalent. Make everything as dumbed down ass possible while allowing no room for explanation.

a reply to: Theocracy4America

Why can’t people just say what they mean instead of using annoying keywords?

What kind of stupid question is that?

Tabloidism at its finest.

It’s now normal journalism.

Like how every storm now has a name.

The media would hype up making paint dry if it had a chance of increasing revenue.

a reply to: and14263

Storms have been named for over 100 years.

a reply to: Theocracy4America

All of this is an overuse of rhetorical cultural euphemisms that are aimed at stirring up people's emotions. It's been a part of political trash talk for as long as we've had politics. The euphemisms might change but the goal is always the same.

You are not a patriot, if you don't like the Patriot Act.

Don't be so harsh, OP. Some people have very poor and inadequate vocabularies, and must resort to 'monkey see - monkey do' to express themselves.

originally posted by: Lab4Us
My favorite is “dog whistle”, where folks claim a speaker is using some type of code to rile up various tribes. If that’s true, why not say exactly what the code is, what it represents, and which tribe will respond? Why keep it mysterious sub contexts?

Because in today’s PC/thought crime environment you need to be careful.

An example, let’s say... oh I don’t know, let’s pick Jewish people.
It is an indisputable fact that Jews are represented way out of proportion to their population % in fields like, banking & finance, the media, academia, law etc etc
Now if a celebrity was to highlight this they would be torn to shreds for anti-semitism, and that’s even though the statement is innocent by itself and 100% accurate.

I understand wolf whistles I just think it’s really sad they are necessary

a reply to: Theocracy4America

We need to bring back sabres. So we can rattle them. Sounds like great fun.

a reply to: Lab4Us

this notion of " dog-whistling " - has always puzzled me

how does the " target tribe " actually learn the code words " true " meanings ????

this is never coherently explained

members of each branch of each nations military forces - develop a unique and identifiable jargon - but this is a " full imersion " learing - that takes time - bplus like all linguistic evolution - it has mutated over the years - to reflect changes in doctrine , technology , the advance of civilian society and other things

but - how do the targets of " dog-whistle " speak keep up

is there a newsletter

a reply to: Bluntone22

i suspect that the person is refering SPECIFICALLY to the UK - " named weather events " - is a definite " new thing " here

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: and14263

Storms have been named for over 100 years.

Oh agreed, but here in the UK it seems every light wind now has a name.

I have heard more names for storms in the last three years than in my whole decades of life.