Thoughts: College Activist Jargon

I know better than to read the comments section. We all do. The people going out of their way to have a tiny tirade in the small print aren't doing shit except making me angry, and I do not accomplish anything meaningful through this anger. Nevertheless, sometimes I get sucked into the wormhole.

Online criticism has surrounded Duke's Men's Project, which aims to "explore, dissect, and construct an intersectional understanding of masculinity and maleness, as well as to create destabilized spaces for those with privilege.” I would like to note here that Carolina students started the same thing a few years ago, with a near-identical name. GO HEELS. 

People are outraged! It is basically castration! The feminazis are taking over!  

Of course, this is untrue. Those people are idiots, but non-idiots could easily be confused by what the Men's Project aims to do based on its description, and that isn't their fault. 

The jargon surrounding progressive ideas makes those ideas inaccessible to the everyday person. If you are not currently involved in an activist community, you will not know the new lingo. My office coworkers were confused by the group's goal "to create destabilized spaces for those with privilege.” Is that because they are unintelligent, or simply uneducated? Absolutely not. It is because that phrase makes no sense to someone who has not been surrounded by the meaning of these words in an activism context.  

I tried to clarify with a more accessible definition. Admittedly, I had a hard time staying away from buzz words, being a recent college activist myself. "College activist jargon for saying that the group wants to create an opportunity for individuals whose actions/views are given the upper-hand in these situations at large (in this case, that law and society is more willing to side with the male perpetrator’s story over the female victim’s) to challenge themselves to think about how their everyday actions contribute to a bigger issue. Facing these things down makes people feel uncomfortable (“destabilize”) in a way that they don’t have to on their day-to-day."

Okay, so it's no wonder that they used their jargon-filled definition. It is so much easier. The problem is, anyone who can understand the jargon is already on board with the cause. If the goal is to change society we need to make our argument accessible to those people who may not have had the opportunity to engage with these topics in the same way we do. 

Not only does this jargon-y language disengage people who would like to be on board, it further disengages people who have not had a lengthy education. 

This article does a good job at combating the hostility against the Men's Project. One thing that stuck with me though is the mention of changing the language. We absolutely need to change the language around masculinity, rape culture, etc. but we also need to change the language within our progressive framework. 

Accessibility will promote change. Ostracizing people for not understanding jargon will only create push-back. People should not require a social justice translator.