Do you think maybe it would help to start a multi-option crowner on this one as opposed to the current yes/no one that's up? I think it has been demonstrated quite sufficiently that the name is not working
as intended; nothing about the word "humanity" actually suggests other species need to be taken into consideration. Only in context does the distinction become clear, and context is all too often lacking.
As I see the options are:
1. Rename. Homo Sapiens Are Bastards
would be my suggestion, as this singles us out as one species among many. This option got voted down in a single-prop, but without making it clear what drawbacks came with it part-and-parcel. I think people vote differently when their choices are between a clear option with upsides and downsides, and a nebulous "other" which need not have the same problems. (I remember, for example, in 2004 people polled consistently put "Any Democrat" ahead of Bush. When the pollsters started listing specific names — Kerry, Dean, Edwards — Bush took the lead.)
2. Split. Humans Are Bastards
changes its definition to match its more prevalent misuse. A new trope, Homo Sapiens Are Bastards
(or whatever name consensus approves) becomes the trope this was originally intended as. This option has been shouted down by some extremely vocal types as the proposed new version of Humans Are Bastards
is simply a rehash of Crapsack World
, but I don't think that they speak for the majority. Personally I think you could draw a distinction.
3. Leave everything exactly the way it is. Go through a massive
cleanup of bad wicks and keep a constant eye out for reappearing misuse. In voting down option one, and ignoring option two, this was the implied option we voted for,
its massive drawbacks left unsaid. It is the most labor-intensive and least practical in my view.
edited 23rd Jul '11 5:56:08 PM by Tyoria