In my last article, I listed off some words that I believe we should drop from our vocabulary. For the most part, the words I listed off should be dropped because I find them personally annoying (and because I believe they are sloppy). In this article, I'm presenting another list of words we should drop but for much better reasons. All the words listed in this article have moved past their original meaning and morphed into something different. Please enjoy another list of words we need to ditch before 2018:
Alt (as a prefix):
"Alt" was first introduced, to me, in the term "alt-rock". I understood immediately that it meant an alternative to the mainstream rock music of the time. The next prominent usage of "alt" that I saw was in 2016 when I was introduced to the term "alt-right". The alt-right started, contrary to popular belief, as an alternative to being right-wing socially while maintaining some of the economic values of Republicans. Quickly after it became a mainstream term, "alt-right" became associated with White Nationalism.
Only a year after "alt-right" became a mainstream term, there have been offshoots of the term, such as "alt-lite" and "alt-left".
I don't believe we need to fully get rid of the term "alt", we just need to utilize it correctly. The original incarnation of "alt-right" was a proper usage, but now it's got nothing to do with right-wing ideas (only with White Nationalism). The alt-lite and alt-left aren't alternatives either because they remove themselves totally from the root of what they are trying to be an alternative of. Alt-rock doesn't remove itself from the realm of rock music, so why do we think that shoving "alt" in front of words (and then acting exactly opposite of what the root word is) magically makes it valid?
Gate (as a suffix):
There is one acceptable usage of the term "-gate" being a suffix: Watergate. I get it, the Watergate scandal was a huge deal. Why does this mean that "-gate" has to be slammed onto the back of any slightly scandalous news headline (or even some that don't involve a scandal)? Pizzagate, gamergate, contragate, russiagate, and over 40 other instances of "-gate" have nothing at all to do with the Watergate hotel. I don't understand how this became a popular thing to do, but unless Donald Trump is caught snorting drugs in the Watergate hotel, let's stop using the term.
Snowflake:
Obviously, a snowflake is one of those pretty little fractals that comes down from the sky during the winter. Over the past few years, the word has come to describe people who use identity politics to get their point across. I think the term is actually fitting for that group of people (those who think they are as unique as a snowflake is).
Today, the term "snowflake" has surpassed even describing someone who uses their "uniqueness" to push their views on others. "Snowflake" has been taken, by the right-wing trolls of the internet, to the extreme. The term has now come to be a blanket statement describing anyone that identifies as left-wing.
I don't agree with divisive political terms, but I do think the original iteration is hilarious and accurate. If we could take the term back to the original roots and not just lob it as a baseless insult towards anyone that agrees with left-wing ideas, then maybe the word can stick around.
"Dear...":
In my previous list of words I want to abandon, I included the phrase "we need to talk about..." (in reference to article headlines). I stand by my reasons for disliking that phrase, but I have to admit that there is an even worse click-bait type title: the "Dear..." title.
Usually, when people start off a letter with "Dear (insert name)", the letter is intended for someone that the author holds "dear". I use the headline when writing to my family, friends, and acquaintances.
Nowadays, if you see someone starting an article or public letter with "Dear...", it's a slam-piece. There are numerous articles and open letters to Donald Trump, other politicians, religious sects, certain races (especially white people), and other groups that begin with "Dear...", and then what follows is pure vitriol aimed at the supposed "dear" person.
This is such a petty and passive-aggressive way to try to get your point across. I will stand behind people expressing their ideas through the press, but there is a right and wrong way to go about it. Anytime I see someone start off a smear campaign with "Dear...", it makes me automatically lose a lot of respect for the author. If you intend to write a hate-filled article about someone, be sincere. Don't beat around the bush or frame it in a way that makes it look as if you're doing a favor or writing to someone that you admire. There isn't more a more childish headline you could pick.
