| Issue: 2.05 | May 1, 2001 |   by: 
        Joe Klock Sr. 
       | 
  ||||
![]()  | 
      Political Correctness or Piscatorial Polemics?   Okay, I agree wholeheartedly that "Down Syndrome" was a welcome and humane 
substitute for the cruel label of "Mongoloid Idiot" that preceded it, and I'm 
struggling to accept the hyphenation of certain American citizens, and I may 
even live long enough to personfully face the fact that gender 
specificity properly belongs only on restroom doors. But it seems to me that, in 
some instances, political correctness has gone 'round the bend and beyond the 
parameters of common sense and adult behavior. I read recently, for example, that a clergyman (well, he WAS male in this 
instance) drew criticism for repeatedly saying "please stand" at various times 
during the service. It was strongly suggested that he show sensitivity toward 
those in the congregation who might be physically challenged (formerly 
handicapped) by substituting "all those able to stand, please do so." In my own 
experience on the lecture circuit, I was once fire-hosed by an indignant 
feminist for noting the achievements of certain "ladies" in the audience. They 
were, I was informed in no uncertain (but, in part, unladylike) terms that the 
only proper designation was "women," and the use of any other synonym marked me 
as a male chauvinist pig. It was then that I began to discover the dark side of political correctness: 
what's sauce for certain geese is not necessarily sauce for certain ganders - 
"women" and "pigs" being cases in point at that time. The latest example of this 
selective correctness appeared last week in the Florida Keys section of the only 
daily news bladder in the Miami Metropolitan Area. Therein was reported, as 
straight news and under a bold headline, a stunning announcement by Professor 
Joseph Nelson, of the University of Alberta. He's Chairperson (although he, too, 
is a male) of the Committee on Names of Fishes. Said committee, which represents 
"two prestigious fish societies" decreed a new name for an endangered species 
that has had the same one for centuries. As of this Fall, say they (and, apparently, they have the say in such 
matters), the familiar Jewfish will be called the Goliath Grouper. Explains 
Nelson: "We received petitions which lead us to strongly believe that the name - 
while not offensive to all Jews - is offensive to a great number." It is 
noteworthy that the by-lined author of the article was able to stir up no such 
resentment among spokespersons for the local Jewish community, although she was 
able to quote a University of Georgia ecology prof who said he didn't want his 
two kids "growing up and asking why there was a fish named after their 
religion." One is tempted to paraphrase Tevye's comment in "Fiddler On The Roof" and 
observe that, while it's no great honor, it's no disgrace, either. Actually, as 
practitioners of the faith that was first organized under a working fisherman, 
and the followers of which for years chomped sea food almost exclusively on 
Fridays, my Catholic brethren (and sistren, I hasten to add) might well 
feel put down by the fact that we never HAD a fish named after us. The nearest 
thing I can recall to recognition of our contribution to that industry was the 
pejorative label of "mackerel snappers" laid upon us by Non-Harps (that was 
another one) in the Philadelphia of my boyhood. The committee, by the way, had 
acted similarly only once before - this being a half-century ago, when the 
Squawfish was renamed Pikeminnow, at the behest of Native Americans (formerly 
American Indians). Curiously, their objection had nothing to do with proper 
respect for their women; they were just pissed off at the Squawfish for scarfing 
up huge quantities of the Salmon on which West Coast squaws and their families 
depended for food.  Getting back to the Giant Goliath Formerly Known As Jewfish, an ichthyologist 
named James Atz spent three years tracing the history of the species and found a 
1697 book in which was recorded as fact that it was so named because it was a 
favored kosher offering among the Jewish community in Jamaica. Somehow, though, 
Atz sides with those who regard it as an implied ethnic putdown. My personal 
research, more than somewhat less extensive than the individuals previously 
noted - actually amounting to conversations with a few Jewish friends - leads to 
the conclusion that, given the horrors of the Holocaust, centuries of 
persecution and volumes of mean-spirited jokes, a fish's name is likely to cause 
them less stress than a cold bowl of chicken soup. Their typical reaction was: "Nu?" 
(Loose translation: "So this is a big deal?")  On the other hand, there's a nifty bit of irony in renaming this nearly 
extinct species after a big, ugly anti-Semitic Old Testament bully who got his 
ass kicked by a little Jewish boy with a slingshot.  | 
  |||||
|  
       | 
    ||||||
Joe Klock, Sr. (The Goy Wonder) is a freelance writer and career curmudgeon. To read past columns (free), visit http://www.joeklock.com  | 
  ||||||
|  
        | 
  ||||||