You keep saying unknown and unaccountable people, which leads me to believe that you don’t know have meaningful relationships with anyone that is affected by racist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic language.

Just because you don’t know how equitable language came/comes about, does not make it what you think it is. You’re making it sound like there is some cabal that want to use language that is more equitable and inclusive.

Ok you clearly lost the plot

I’m just following you’re logic after I asked a question that was not related to Reddit, and you brought up Reddit. You even brought up the N word shrugs

distant, unknown, and unaccountable figures? You mean, women, queer people, disabled people, who ask you to not use a word like the R word or hysterical to describe a woman? Which then got picked up by style guides to inform writing and reporting?

This sounds like you believe in the fallacy of cancel culture

Lol ok the point was about fascism, surveillance, and oppression. Asking people to use language that respects others is neither of those things

You said orgs, I asked orgs. You said Reddit.

You are complaining that subreddits that have moderation ban certain words. Subs have mods who moderate/create/curate a sub which you accept to follow when you join. If you wanna say the N word so badly and not be censored, go to 4chan or something

Give an example of a social org forbidding words

it's really weird how in a sub about books, people are equating this to 1984 and it saddens me that people don't know (don't seem to want to?) how to critically read a source. Despite the incendiary tactics of the article, this IS NOT 1984 for many many reasons.

So you think a style guide to writing and using language that is preferred by some groups, is equal to the structural hegemonic oppression of by a fascist surveillance state? I think you missed some of the points of the book. Ever read Gramsci?

You really missed the point of that book

Apparently... a style guide = BAN, OPPRESSION, PC CULTURE, WOKENESS ...

100% agree with this. I read it in full and I was confused by that excerpt he rewrote. It encapsulates the whole spirit of the article: "being purposively obtuse about language change".

It just reeks of right wing propaganda, because I have read several fiction books recently with topics that have content warnings and more equity language and the impact of the horrible actions is not lessened by the language use, because the authors are good writers and not relying their plot on lazy stereotypes/language.