Semantics as an activist: climate change vs. climate crisis, pro-life vs anti-abortion, and more

Sometimes semantics result in irrelevant arguments and unnecessary divides. But the names we give things have a lot of power. They are marketing for movements, whether for better or for worse.

Think about the (racist) phrase that has been circulating recently: "all lives matter". From a marketing standpoint, this is genius. Because it is technically true (although the messages, motives, and context behind it are very flawed). If the all lives matter was branded as "white lives matter" instead (which is more the concept they're trying to get across), it would be easy to recognize how racist this stance is. But, from a surface level, "all lives matter" is easy to agree with.

This, of course, isn't some handy coincidence for supporters of the phrase. It is a very specific choice to make racist views digestible for the average person, a strategy that has been used countless times.

Let's look at some other wording choices revolving around activism that matter.

climate crisis vs. climate change

Throughout the years, this term has morphed from global warming (which has been used less recently since warming isn't the only thing happening) to climate change. Nowadays, climate change is the widely recognized term for the crisis that us and Earth are currently facing. Personally, I've used 'climate change' in blog posts, in day-to-day language, on climate strike signs, and you likely have used it, too. But this term doesn't reflect the seriousness of the situation. In fact, the term 'climate change' was encouraged by Republican political strategist Frank Luntz since it "suggests a more controllable and less emotional challenge", according to Luntz.

Unlike some items on this list, using the phrase climate change is not inherently wrong, and isn't terribly misleading. However, using climate crisis is much more appropriate and better reflects the severity of the issue.

pro-life vs. anti-abortion

The pro-life movement (people against women's right to get abortions) is also a very strategically marketed one. This term 'pro-life' sounds very nice and positive, despite the fact that it is a movement entirely centred around taking away rights.

However, those who are part of the pro-choice movement (the opposite movement, centred around allowing women to get abortions) often continue to label the opposing side as 'pro-life'. A small, but impactful way to fight for women's right to abortions is to switch your language over from 'pro-life' to 'anti-abortion' (a phrase that supporters of the pro-life/anti-abortion movement notably aren't fans of).

euphemisms and history

It's also important to use the right words when talking about the past. When speaking about past issues, we often try to tone down the atrocity of them by using toned-down language. However, using less intense language makes these issues feel, well, less intense.

These euphemisms were also used during historical events - for example, Nazis during the Holocaust used countless euphemisms, such as calling the killings of handicapped people "mercy deaths" or calling genocide "cleansing". More of these terms here.

Although few people would ever use the phrases seen above anymore, we commonly use problematic words today when speaking about slavery. For example, it's rather commonplace to use the term "slave-owners" (which verges on the edge of condoning and rationalizing the "ownership" of people) as opposed to the more correct "enslavers". Many also use "plantation" as opposed to "slave-labour camp" (the latter focuses much more on the harsh reality of it, as opposed to the former, a much tamer term).

Making these small switches in your vocabulary is easy, but important. Don't overlook the power of language, especially within activism.