I’m Not a Zionist, I’m a Zionistish Person |
Jewish Person, Parent #1, Parent #2, and Other Linguistic Innovations of Our Time
There was a time when English was a relatively simple language. You could say things like “a Jew,” “a woman,” or “a father,” and people would assume you were referring to… well, a Jew, a woman, or a father.
But those days are gone. Today, language has evolved into a highly sensitive descriptive system designed to ensure that no noun is left unmodified, unaccompanied, or emotionally unsupported.
Now we are expected to say:
“a person who identifies as female”
“a person assigned parental status in relation to Child #1 and Child #2 (designated Parent #2)”
Because nothing says clarity like turning everyday nouns into bureaucratic subtitles.
It used to be called “Political Correctness,” but today even the term “Political Correctness” itself has become politically incorrect.
In practice, nouns on their own have become politically inconvenient and increasingly require explanation.
The rise of adjectival identity
One of the most fascinating developments in modern English is the gradual suspicion toward simple nouns. A noun like “Jew” is apparently too… final. Too categorical. Too emotionally decisive. It sounds like you are a thing, rather than a person who happens to be adjacent to a thing.
We upgrade it into something safer:
not “a Jew,” but “a Jewish person”
not “a woman,” but “a person identified as female”
Because apparently identity should now arrive with a full explanatory footnote.
The Parent #1 / Parent #2 breakthrough
Of course, language reform does not stop at ethnicity, religion or gender. It continues into the most sacred domain of human civilization: family terminology.
We no longer risk the emotional volatility of “mom” and “dad.” Instead, we now have:
This is clearly more scientific. It sounds like a software licensing agreement, which is exactly what family life was missing all along.
One can only imagine future bedtime stories:
Goodnight, Child #1, please........