Nobody needs to be told how to use the lounge chair. "Users" of any age, background, or degree of sophistication can immediately comprehend it: take it in, in almost all of its details, at a single glance. It is self-revealing to the point of transparency, and the same can be said of most domestic furniture: you lie on a bed, put books and DVDs and tchotchkes on shelves, laptops and flowers and dinner on tables. Did anyone ever have to tell you this?
The same cannot be said of the iPod - which, remember, is one of the best-thought-out and comparatively simple digital artifacts ever developed, demonstrating market-leading insight into users and what they want to do with the things they buy. Take off your power user hat, try to imagine life without the chops you've earned over the course of your involvement with these complex artifacts, and you'll see that to people encountering an iPod for the first time it's not obvious what it does, or how to get it to do that. It may not even be obvious how to turn the thing on.
You don't have to configure the chair, or set preferences. You needn't worry about compatible file formats. You can take it out of one room or house and drop it into another, and it still works exactly the same way as it did before, with no adjustment. It never reminds you that a new version of its firmware is available, and that certain of its features will not be available until you do choose to upgrade. As much as I love the iPod, none of this can be said for it.
misnomers
miscegenation, miscarriage, miscue, misnomer.
Do names matter at all? Does language matter? If we agree to call parenting between people of different skin colors MIScegenation, don't we linguistically and semantically concede that there is something WRONG with it? If having children with someone of a different skin color was outlawed out of skin-color aroused animus and was named in a way that would purposely make it seem scary and dangerous, don't we need to stop using the linguistic framing of those who enslaved us in the first place?
Likewise, I think it would behoove us to stop using the word "racism" entirely, if only because the word presupposes the existence of "race," which is a delusional "scientific racism" concept. There's just as much evidence that the world is flat as there is that race exists. "Race" is based almost entirely on visual cues and similarly we can "see with our own eyes" that the earth is flat, not round.
Fortunately for science, we have integrated other information that tells us that the world is NOT flat, even if it seems to be. We have also integrated scientific information that contradicts the "different species" theory, like the fact that our blood and organs are interchangeable regardless of skin color and depending more on other factors that have nothing to do with skin color.
But obviously there are a lot of people who are very invested in pepetuating our believe in the fallacy of race. Even worse, every time we use the word "racism" we enable those liars by conceding that "race" exists and that we are from a different "race."
If I say, "You hate me because I am a vampire, then I am implicitly asserting and conceding both that vampires exist and that I am a vampire. Likewise, if I say, "You hate me because of my Black "race," then I am conceding both that Black "race" exists and that I am an example of that different "race." Once you concede that you are of a difference race/species from white people, you will find it impossible to convince them that our species is anything similar to or as good as theirs. And you also invite endless comparisons of one "race" to the other. And that is the merry-go-round on which we find ourselves, with even Black people insisting that the delusional concept of "race" is central to our reality.
Unfortunately, that means we're just as sick as are the "racist" because we, too, are "racists," by my definition. I believe that a "racist" is simply a person who believes, in the face of all scientific evidence to the contrary, that "race" exists in the first place.
My skin color, facial morphology and hair are different from that of many other people, just like I am taller and shorter than some, fatter and skinnier than some, more muscular and less muscular than some, regardless of skin color. But that's ALL color is biologically: one of many physical characteristics.
I will NEVER, EVER concede again that "race" exists, because to do so facilitates and enables that which we most hate - that which we incorrectly and misguidedly call "racism."
The English language is certainly variable enough that we can describe that phenomenon with a word or phrase - ANY OTHER WORD OR PHRASE - that does not concede a priori that we are from a different species than white people. As much as we might want to disown them, the similarity of our biologies and our common origins in the Fertile Crescent simply do not allow us to disown whites (or them us) any more than we can disown our own parents.
As a matter of biology, when we are born into the human species, we must accept our shared familyhood with all others who share our species, regardless of color, like it or not.