this current "Karen" usage

[darkoshi]

I object to the current trend of referring to a certain kind of person as a "Karen". Karen is a common name. Just because a few people with that name have done objectionable things, is no reason to besmirch everyone else who happens to have the same name by associating them with that particular group of people. The same would be the case for referring negatively to any other group of people by any other common (or maybe even uncommon) name.

Besides being a common English name, Karen is also the name of an ethnic group of people from Mynamar.

I've known several people named Karen and it bothers me to think how they would feel reading these things. Imagine your name being used in place of "Karen". How would it make you feel? Please don't do it. Find a better word or phrase if you must.

Brought on by this:
https://twitter.com/Steve_R_Walker/status/1286400379266228227

Comments

[marahmarie]

Yet we have Debbie Downer and Chatty Cathy.

You can see the problem.

Also, the male Karen is Ken, before anyone goes "Ooooh, how sexist".

I also have a thing for calling certain performatively empathetic women (aka "virtue signalers") Becky.

Also-also, has nothing to do with previous offenders named Karen (had to check Google to make sure my memory served correctly hence the edit): https://www.insider.com/karen-meme-origin-the-history-of-calling-women-karen-white-2020-5

[darkoshi]

I don't like those first 2 terms either (they are not very familiar to me, unlike how many times I've heard "Karen" used lately). They don't seem as bad though, as they include a modifier with them, and most people wouldn't even know what your meaning was if you left the modifier off.

I haven't heard "Ken" being used yet, but am against that too. I don't know many Kens; that name mainly makes me think of the barbie doll.

Interesting article - I wasn't aware the usage goes back that many years already.

[marahmarie]

most people wouldn't even know what your meaning was if you left the modifier off.

That's kinda my whole point. No one leaves the modifier off (it wouldn't make sense if they did), so the insult is automatic, whether the name used is someone's real name in that case or not.

So I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of letting that slide but going off over Karens and Kens and Beckys (and I don't mean you personally; I've seen this argument around (there's even a version in the BI article I linked you to*) and it's just been bugging me forever). If anything the Karens/Beckys/Kens are more generically referred to, leaving hope for people without the issues the ones who are called out have.

*BI argues it's bad because it's so generic you'll forget the names of the people who committed the offenses, and on the face of it, that sounds like a good point.

But it's the Dylan Roof argument reversed, so another form of hypocrisy, as if the media's glorifying Dylan Roof by using his name constantly to take a deep dive into all his atrocities then aren't we glorifying the actions of the Karens et al out there by using their real names? Where do you draw the line?

[darkoshi]

I'm thinking of it from the perspective that, if my name is Cathy, and someone else is called a Chatty Cathy, that wouldn't necessarily feel like it applies to me because I might not consider myself to be chatty. Ie, Chatty Cathy is a subset of Cathies, not all Cathies (or a subset of people, not all people). But as there is no explicit modifier used with Karen, then if my name is Karen that usage automatically includes me in the group. But I agree that both usages are bad and should be avoided.

In general, I don't think that insulting people is good or useful anyway, and that calling out / discussing the objectionable actions is more useful.

[marahmarie]

I don't know why I support the usage of Karen/Ken/Becky as much as I do, so should probably think about it some more. "Because everyone does" isn't a good reason; "everyone" does a lot of things no one should do.

I think I'm getting hung up on the fact that everyone against calling people by these real names in the narrowly proscribed instances that they are because it's hurtful or mean (or [insert similar word]) is taking name usage literally, and I'm used to being nearly the only *literal* one in any crowd, so a) my mind's kinda blown and b) I keep circling back to my other bad argument, as described above.

Maybe it'd be better to use generic descriptors rather than real names but I guess to the internet that's "been there/done that/got the t-shirt already" - doesn't go as viral/get as many looks or as talked about.

Which makes the usage of real names kind of helpful for spreading info about what these very similar people have and do in common, which is the one thing I find truly useful about it, even at the cost of some hurt feelings among innocents - it's probably the best verbal shorthand anyone's had in a while to describe a whole range of nasty behaviors that only a certain group of people ever indulge in.

[lhexan]

I think the ultimate result of this linguistic shift is that a name disappears entirely. That may be why no-one is named "Pollyanna" or "Rose of Sharon" anymore. Anyway, I don't use "Karen" because it's stereotyping, and people do not come in types. The fact that it's hurtful is important, but so are all other stereotypes, as far as I know.