The word 'unemployed' is discriminatory

Should we really define people by what they're not? It's like calling everyone who isn't white 'unwhite'.

 

I'm unlaid...

 

what do we call them then? would lacking employment make you happier? not employed? truly what is the difference?
they all have the same meaning in the end. i don't see a reason this is significant.

 

Perhaps employed people should be called the 'un-idle'. It's the idea that one is the 'normal' state that is troublesome.

 

I think we should all just be people. Classification is the justification of a defecation on the lesser population.

Un-employed or not, were all on our way to the unsure dark ending together. We won't get there at the same time, but were all on the same train here.

 

Well shouldn't a "job" of some kind be the norm? I feel that whether you hold down a traditional occupation, practice a certain craft, or simply work to facilitate the function of a group or household, you should be doing SOMETHING productive with your time. I may be going a little bit against some people's anti-authoritarian and counter-culture ideals here, but I don't think a society can function at it's full potential without equal effort from all involved.
However if you choose a lifestyle where you are technically unemployed but still self-sustaining, then I doubt the tern "unemployed" would really be all that bothersome. I could be wrong though.

EDIT: On the original topic of the thread, I don't think the term unemployed is discriminatory. It is simply a category. Unfortunately you can't be fully P.C. and accommodate everybody's feelings and sensitivities at all times.

 

Work as a means to an end is a normal staple present in every stage of human history.
This thread is a massive exercise in pointless semantics.

 

If I called you 'un-insect' and you objected because you wanted to be referred to as human and not as something that is not an insect, would that be an exercise in pointless semantics? I would personally be upset if I was called the Antichrist.

 

The difference is that in the case of employment there are only two options, employed or not employed.
In terms of what I am as a species, there are billions of options. It makes no sense to call me an "un-insect" because it's an incredibly unspecific way to refer to someone.

If you call something an "un-insect" you aren't defining what it is, only defining what it is not, because there are more than two possibilities.
In terms of employment, by calling someone "unemployed' you are simultaneously defining both what they are and what they are not, because there are only two options.

 

Not really. Everyone works. Work is defined as shifting matter across the earth by the expenditure of energy. Some people work for money, some voluntarily. When I cook my wife breakfast i'm doing work. When I'm mowing the lawn, work. There are billions of ways and degrees of employment and simplifying it to a binary system is bigoted against that diversity by those who are favored within it.

 

So, in other words you are completely disregarding the station of the defining body so you can make a case for discrimination.
That is work defined in the scientific sense. The word "unemployed" does not have scientific connotations. "Unemployed" refers to the social sense of work.

 

thats true but whether or not you do work around the house youre still "unemployed" "not employed as a worker" are you?

you un-insect you

 

Yeah I agree with this completely. Just because all I do is sit on my ass selling stuff on ebay, doesn't mean I don't have a job. So fuck you if you think otherwise

 

I dunno about YOU, but I am, for sure, an un-insect.

The prefix anti does not mean the same thing as the prefix un.

 

Not being in paid employment doesn't necessarily make one idle.

 

You're chatting shit, mate.

 

I'd argue that you ARE employed though. Just self-employed, as many people are. You're still doing work for money, you just do it yourself. Unless you're just temporarily selling some stuff for some quick cash. In that case you're still unemployed.

 

Ya I guess its my job thanks yo

 

The term "unemployed" and "employed" only describes whether or not someone is exchanging work for payment. Neither term defines a person. A person that is unemployed or employed is recognized by the state as such for tax purposes. I don't believe either term extends further into one's life than that.

An unemployed person can choose not to define themselves by that title. If a person's whole being is tied up in the label "unemployed", they create the discrimination themselves by not defining themselves by something deeper and more meaningful.

 

^ This and

I think it's only a little contradictory in the same sense that atheism is; in that the default is described by a secondary, negative term.