Don’t get me wrong. I like lady-like things. I like romantic comedies and baking cookies. I like to keep my house full of fresh flowers. I like feeling tiny when I hug a tall man. I like a lot of feminine stereotypes, okay?
But let’s get one thing straight: I do not like all the effort and expectations. I hate shaving my legs. I hate buying underwear. Men, do you even know how easy your underwear buying experience is? So easy. I know this because my mom still buys my brother underwear for Christmas. It comes in a bulk pack. A PACK! Every pair looks the same, is the same size and shape, and it’s the least complicated experience. Guys. Just—be grateful.
I also have a very un-lady-like affinity for swear words. The F-word, especially. I can’t help it! It’s like candy in my mouth. It’s the cherry on top of a sentence sundae. Sure, you can eat ice cream a la carte, but it’s so much more fun with a cherry.
I know not everyone shares my fascination with the word. I get it. It’s crass and offensive in its very nature. Hear me out, though. The amazing part is the way it’s guaranteed to get a reaction. Depending on its use, context, and listening party one word can make people belly laugh, become offended, or get uncomfortable. It can illicit sexuality and express anger. And it’s only one word! Admit it. That’s impressive. There aren’t many words with that sort of versatility and power.
I could talk about this particular word for longer, but I’ll spare you the nonsense.
I like thinking about language. It’s fascinating. Maybe that’s why I’m a writer. Not only can we string words together, but we can convey meaning based on choices in vocabulary and sentence structure. Have you ever considered how profound that is? The language choices you make daily have a huge impact on the course of your day. If you communicate well, your wife is more likely to feel loved and cared for. If you communicate poorly, the Starbucks barista will get your drink wrong. Your words can bring people joy or fear; they can persuade or manipulate. The way you communicate influences the response you receive in return.
Language is a tool. It’s a vehicle that helps us express ourselves.
Now, we’re friends. Can I be honest? Christians are the worst at language. Just terrible. Our language is outdated and weighed down by connotation. For instance, let’s talk about my least favorite word: sin.
Ugh.
Most of us would agree that “sin” refers to any action incoherent with our intended way of living. We were created for community, but have inclinations towards divisive habits. In other words, “sin” is that which that brings disunity between one another, or between ourselves and our Creator.
For example, greed. Possessions aren’t inherently evil. However, a person can develop an overwhelming desire for material things, which creates blinders from seeing and meeting the need of those around us. In this scenario, the love of stuff trumps harmony between humans. That’s sin, right?
Or, lust. (Side note, I hate that word, too. But, for the sake of argument, let’s pretend I don’t.) We’re sexual beings. Not only do we want sex, but we need it to keep our species alive. Furthermore, attraction is one of the most magical parts of being alive. What’s better than locking eyes with someone you’re into? But, when taken to it’s extreme, sexuality becomes about objectification. It diminishes the qualities that make a person fully human—their ability to feel, reason, love, etc.—and highlighting only their use as a thing, to gratify a want. It’s amplifying one person’s desire over someone else’s dignity. Also sin, yeah?
That makes the idea of “sin” easy to understand. It’s the stuff that gets between us and one another, and separates us from connectivity with our Creator. Basic enough. Just about anyone—Christian, Muslim, Buddhist or non-believing—would agree that finding and sustaining connectivity between one another is important. Naturally, whatever detracts from connectivity is dangerous. You’d be hard pressed to find a mentally stable person that doesn’t believe greed has a negative effect on society.
Now, from a cultural perspective, “sin” has a pretty bad rap. It’s associated with judgement. Ironic, huh? It’s not because the word “sin” is inherently icky. It’s because particular groups of faith have morphed it into something else: a dividing word that classifies who is in and who is out. If you behave, you’re welcome here. You can stick around. If you act outside of expectations, this isn’t the place for you. Instead of helping people learn to understand their inclinations towards divisiveness, and a safe community by which to learn to cope, “sin” became the criteria by which a person’s value was determined. Who wants to deal with that? Nobody.
So, if we know that “sin,” in our modern context, is a misdefined word for people outside of the church, why do we keep using it? Would giving up that term allow us the freedom to more accurately express it’s true definition?
The Archbishop William Temple once said, “The Church is the only organization that does not exist for itself, but for those who live outside of it.”
Then he dropped the mic.
Ok, no he didn’t. But, really. If we are designed to function for the benefit of others, shouldn’t our language—the primary means by which we communicate our purpose—evolve naturally, in order to be as effective as possible in reaching a modern audience?
Here’s another example. A few months ago, I was having lunch with a good friend, discussing political correctness. At one point, my friend mentioned that “retarded” was, at one point, considered a proper term to use. However, as we know, over time it’s become a slur. That development caused us to create new terms—like “special needs”—for clarity’s sake. During the conversation, my friend wondered if, at some point, the term “special needs” would develop an offensive connotation, forcing us to further evolve our language once again.
If that becomes the case, why wouldn’t we? If it hurts someone’s feelings, why would we ever insist on keeping it? That’s just cruel.
Why wouldn’t we alter our language to show compassion? If someone finds a term offensive, isn’t it so much easier to just change the term? Insisting that a person, wounded by cultural insensitivity, should bend towards a new definition is ridiculous. Holding on to broken words is nonsense when we can develop new forms of expression.
If we want to have an impact on culture, we need to take an honest look at the way we’re communicating. Is it efficient? Is it serving it’s purpose? Is it expressing the thing we want it to express? Or are there opportunities for evolution, allowing us to move in step with culture, allowing us speak truth more efficiently?
(I fucking hope so.)
