Who are “They”
They are the real problem. They do this. They won’t let us do that. They don’t want us to know the truth. They have another agenda.
In listening to social commentary, radio commentators, dinner parties, church lessons, and talk on the corner, I find that “they” are always up to something and seem to be the cause of most things. I have had my scientists and pollsters research the issue and they have found that “they” is the most used word by anyone in any conversation about news, society with all its ills, explanation of any event involving conflict, and especially in any explanation of conspiracy or events behind any proverbial curtain. This is my new second favorite statistic (second to the fact that 80% of people believe they are above average).
Who are “they”?
In our current climate of economic, racial, political, and cultural division there are lots of “they” being referred too. People are very comfortable talking about “they” and very less comfortable explaining who “they” are (is would be the appropriate word for this usage but I can’t bring myself to write it). “They” is a crutch used to describe the faceless other without having to name them.
If I say “they” in any conversation or diatribe, my listener has the liberty of filling in the blank of whom the “they” are to fit their liking. I exercise the right to assume the listener understands whom I am referring to while still allowing them to misunderstand of their own free will. “They” allows me the comfort of either deniability if my statements cause trouble, or the comfort of not having to name names and officially become a finger pointer on uncomfortable issues.
How would communication change if the word “they” were no longer available?
At risk of offending the Hemmingway sensibilities of some, and the joy of brevity, we should begin filling in the blank of the “they”.
Any time one is heard referring to they, inquire who “they” are. Any time one is engaged in conversation and about to use the word, stop and explain the “they”, maybe even using a name or some other defining description. Listen and see how accurate my pollsters are (should I mention my distrust of polls and their relevance).
It is time we are called on the carpet in our description of or references to others. Let us try the honesty of direct address in our own speech and call on it from others.
“They” will never change unless we demand action!
They are the real problem. They do this. They won’t let us do that. They don’t want us to know the truth. They have another agenda.
In listening to social commentary, radio commentators, dinner parties, church lessons, and talk on the corner, I find that “they” are always up to something and seem to be the cause of most things. I have had my scientists and pollsters research the issue and they have found that “they” is the most used word by anyone in any conversation about news, society with all its ills, explanation of any event involving conflict, and especially in any explanation of conspiracy or events behind any proverbial curtain. This is my new second favorite statistic (second to the fact that 80% of people believe they are above average).
Who are “they”?
In our current climate of economic, racial, political, and cultural division there are lots of “they” being referred too. People are very comfortable talking about “they” and very less comfortable explaining who “they” are (is would be the appropriate word for this usage but I can’t bring myself to write it). “They” is a crutch used to describe the faceless other without having to name them.
If I say “they” in any conversation or diatribe, my listener has the liberty of filling in the blank of whom the “they” are to fit their liking. I exercise the right to assume the listener understands whom I am referring to while still allowing them to misunderstand of their own free will. “They” allows me the comfort of either deniability if my statements cause trouble, or the comfort of not having to name names and officially become a finger pointer on uncomfortable issues.
How would communication change if the word “they” were no longer available?
At risk of offending the Hemmingway sensibilities of some, and the joy of brevity, we should begin filling in the blank of the “they”.
Any time one is heard referring to they, inquire who “they” are. Any time one is engaged in conversation and about to use the word, stop and explain the “they”, maybe even using a name or some other defining description. Listen and see how accurate my pollsters are (should I mention my distrust of polls and their relevance).
It is time we are called on the carpet in our description of or references to others. Let us try the honesty of direct address in our own speech and call on it from others.
“They” will never change unless we demand action!