Consider this advertisement scenario: A tourist returning from Pakistan is stopped by customs officials who claim his passport states that he has black spots on his face. However, the tourist’s face is blemish-free. The tourist explains that he used a cream to reduce the spots, highlighting its effectiveness. The advertisement cleverly promotes the cream’s ability to erase freckles and blemishes, with a price tag of only 2.5 rupees.

This advertisement, while creative, poses a question: Would it be accepted in today’s newspapers? The evolution of language and social norms suggests otherwise. The term “black” has now been replaced with “people of color,” emphasizing the need for sensitivity. Although it’s uncertain if the word’s meaning has indeed changed in modern dictionaries, the shift in vocabulary is evident.

We often adopt trends and ideas from Europe and other regions, including advertising for bleaching creams. Previously, these creams were advertised on television using the term “fair.” However, after some modifications, the word “fair” has been replaced with “glu” to maintain acceptability. This rebranding technique is similar to how modern banking is disguised as Islamic banking, where the essence remains unchanged despite the name.

Similarly, cricket commentators have started using the term “batter” instead of “batsman” to avoid gender discrimination. Although it initially seemed like an abbreviation, it was later revealed that the International Cricket Council (ICC) issued a directive to eliminate gender-specific terms in cricket commentary. While some may argue that this logic seems far-fetched, suggesting the use of alternative terms like “batswoman,” it highlights the growing sensitivity surrounding language.

One might wonder if this logic can only be perceived as a joke, as there are alternative ways to address the issue. For instance, using gender-neutral terms such as “individual,” “person,” or “people” would eliminate any gender bias. However, it’s important to note that societal shifts may lead to a decreased use of gender-specific terms like “men” in the future, both in speech and daily life.

To avoid potential backlash, I hesitate even to mention words like “masculinity” in fear of offending any sensitive individuals. It seems that even harmless phrases can be misconstrued and labeled as gender biased. The West has begun editing old books to conform to modern requirements, which includes omitting any praise or ridicule of homosexuality. If this practice continues, Urdu poetry may face similar revision, altering its essence entirely.

If reading this column today leads you to believe that I am a male chauvinist or a racist, then I fear that my efforts have been in vain. My intention is not to perpetuate harmful stereotypes or mock individuals based on their weaknesses. Rather, I advocate for a balance that allows us to appreciate good and creative humor without excessive sensitivity, as long as it doesn’t target specific races, genders, tribes, castes, religions, or colors. Humor should be inclusive, showcasing the power of wordplay and clever jokes.

Let us preserve the freedom to laugh and enjoy humor while being mindful of our words’ impact. We should encourage a society that appreciates wit and puns without hypersensitivity, understanding that the word “man” can exist in various contexts, such as in the character Spider-Man. Perhaps we’ll witness the creation of a Spider-Woman movie in the future!

---

The writer is a teacher of DELTA, The Change Agent. He can be reached at aminwastoo@gmail.com.

---