what's the inverse of a dog-whistle?

[kaigou]

Okay, so a "dog-whistle" is the expression for intentional use of a seemingly innocuous word or phrase, that has a double (usually negative/reversed) meaning for a segment of the audience. Is there a word for the unintentional use of a word or phrase that has loaded meaning for a segment of the audience, of which the speaker/writer is unaware?

Frex, if I say, "his economic ideas are a fast track to a green and pleasant land," the use of green and pleasant land is a dog-whistle, to, uhm, anyone who knows their Blake, I guess. (It's an epithet for England.) To the broader audience it sounds positive; to a smaller, in-the-know audience, the combination of "economic" + "england" = "socialism" -- which in the US is currently a Very Dirty Word. It's a way to appear positive (or at least harmless) while signaling a different meaning to a limited part of the audience. [See comments below for alternate/better take on this phrase.]

But what if a segment of the population finds the phrase, hrm, "shades of gray" to be loaded with historical and cultural negativity? If I unintentionally (ignorantly) use this expression such that I create a dual-meaning statement -- one that's positive to the broader audience but potentially negative to a smaller segment, what would this be?

I'm thinking perhaps "land mine".

Granted, if I know of the negative secondary connotations, then I suppose it might be a dog-whistle, but I don't think that really fits -- that expression is most often used to signal to like-minded folks, to draw them closer, like calling in the pack. It's not the same thing when the purpose is to alienate members of the audience. Then it's more like one of those truck deer-whistles that's supposed to warn deer to stay away.

Any ideas? Or is there an existing catchphrase for an reversed dog-whistle? Does that catchphrase imply knowledge even if the speaker denies such (deer-whistle), or does it presume ignorance (land mine)?

Comments

[arkessian.livejournal.com]

Totally off the point but green and pleasant land doesn't signify England to me (I am a mixture of English and Welsh, still and always residing in the UK). It signifies a particular middle-class rose-tinted view of England... And not the Socialist aspects of it either.

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

(Well, I didn't say it was a good example... but the actual examples I could think of, I find highly offensive. So I was trying for a duller version.)

Although in itself, your reply right there illustrates why it might be a dog-whistle (though not for the reasons I listed, obviously). If you're the intended sub-set and expected to respond, "oh, yeah, surrrre, idyllic, yeah, right" --- then we're still talking a double meaning, one in which the superficial reading is positive (or at least neutral) while the underlying meaning is potentially quite different.

[arkessian.livejournal.com]

Glad to provide a useful illustration! Land-mine seems to me to be an excellent expression... Or maybe trip-wire?

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

Hrmm, trip-wire could work, too, I think.

I was thinking land-mine because sometimes the ignorant use of a word or phrase will, ahem, blow up in your face. Especially if you're on the intarweebs and someone decides to wank about it... *whistles nonchalantly* Not that this ever happens around here, right?

[arkessian.livejournal.com]

(pondering here; bereft of conclusions). Both land-mine and trip-wire sound too *intentional* to me. And booby-trap is too one-sided (affecting the audience but not the source)...

Goes to think some more. Not confidently.

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

Trip-wire, yes, but land-mine, no -- especially since land-mines are things that can be set in the ground by some unknown person and completely forgotten -- until a lucky person stomps their foot right smack down on it.

Given that use of some phrases (ignorantly) can, and do, blow up in the speaker's face and usually result in the speaker being the one taken out... I think land-mine, on further thought, fits quite well.

[arkessian.livejournal.com]

I see (understand) your thinking, if the speaker/source is the person detonating the land-mine (or tripping over the wire), not the person laying it. I was coming from the viewpoint that land-mines (and trip-wires) are set deliberately to do *somebody* some harm, even if the person setting them does not know who will be hurt, and the person triggering them does not expect them to be there.

*Goes to do more thinking*

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

I'm looking at land-mine more in the sense of something embedded that you don't know is there and only discover when you step right in it -- and it's the one who uses it that often gets the worst of the brunt. IOW, the 'explosion' is the angry retaliation of the audience -- which in a way also works to illustrate why the speakers often consider themselves the victims, and may have trouble seeing past their 'injury' to understand the validity of the anger in that explosion.

I'd call an ignorant but harmless double-meaning a trip-wire, like okaasan's example below, of the person who described the Obama's bumping fists as "fisting" -- something that isn't necessarily going to make anyone angry/explode, but does make the speaker look like a seriously ignorant fool. Heh.

A dog-whistle, in contrast, is to make some folks in the audience twig on your second meaning, and almost always for the purposes of assuring them that you're "on the same page" with them, like a political in-joke that everyone else misses.

A deer-whistle (or whatever other term works) is intended to alienate certain members of the audience -- like stepping into a land-mine on purpose, just to set listeners off. At which point the speaker disingenuously proclaims he just had no idea, goodness, people are so touchy, or whatever defense is used.

Granted, damn hard to distinguish between landmines and deer-whistles as an outside observer, but in context, sometimes it's not all that difficult. And, too, the more there's purposeful use of a land-mine (and the ensuing claims of innocence), the more it'll cast significant doubt on those folks who honestly did step ignorantly into it. Not only do they are now trying to grapple with the unexpected anger, they're also forced to defend themselves and their ignorance, which is always an uncomfortable position (to realize one's ignorance, that is).

[arkessian.livejournal.com]

That makes perfect sense.

[autopope.livejournal.com]

"Land mine" works well enough.

Like George W. Bush making that speech in which he proposed a crusade against terrorism, on September 12th or 13th of 2001. (Sorry George, but that "C" word is likely to be understood in a very specific way by muslims, whether you intended it or not ...)

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

Eheheheh... yes, that would one example I decided not to use -- because dog-whistles are, when you deconstruct them, so often really freaking offensive.

Although the intentional use as a counter-punch isn't as common, I do think Obama used it to some degree in his inauguration speech in speaking of "putting away childish things" -- a specifically biblical quote (thus a type of dog-whistle to the Christians in the audience) yet one with a reprimanding tone. Like instead of saying "here, this secondary meaning assures you of X while everyone else thinks it means Y," it's "everyone gets the meaning of X but I'm using specific language to drive home that this X is pointing at you, the sub-set."

At least, that's the way I read/heard it... and I admit, I thought it was a skillful and subtle counterpunch... deer-whistle? Because it was anything but ignorant/unintentional.

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

Although on second thought, that specific example (of "crusade") is both dog-whistle and its inverse -- because if 100% of the population knows the word, but the xtian sub-set sees "crusade" as "war sanctioned by god to wipe out infidels" and the islamic sub-set sees "religiously-motivated war for the purpose of culturecide" -- then it's a divisive statement in a very literal way, and incredibly so if we assume that the majority of listeners will be in either one camp or the other.

I mean, wow. There's "you either with us or against us" but I've never thought of being able to boil that attitude (and goal) down into the use of a single word. Sheesh.

[autopope.livejournal.com]

His use of that word in that speech marked the moment when I -- as a non-American -- realized that there was no longer any room to doubt that he was either a loathsome racist, or terrifyingly incompetent, or both.

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

Well, as an American, I think I spent the first few minutes trying to figure out whether it was a quote from the Onion or something because no one in this day and age could be that obtuse (if unintentional) or that freaking offensive if intentional... right? And then I realized and my brain broke some and my heart broke a lot.

It's not an easy thing, to realize your own freaking president could utter words like that. It feels personal, like you're to blame for it, somehow. (Yes, well, partially, yes: but also partially no, because I personally can't control ever blooming word a politician says, none of us can, but still, the guilt/shame does feel personal.)

This icon has really been getting a workout lately

[rachelmanija.livejournal.com]

If ignorance is inherent in the definition, I prefer land-mine. For instance, textual evidence suggests that the author of that horrible novel I read the other day intended readers to get warm and fuzzy feelings every time Mammy Ida was mentioned, not to think "WTF Mammy??!"

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think land-mine probably covers it.

The problem, of course, is when someone knows exactly where the issue is, and plays at ignorance-as-defense when called on it. That, I guess, would be a deer-whistle (or whatever the inverse of dog-whistle is, if there's one already).

[okaasan59.livejournal.com]

Your post made me think of a sound bite from earlier this week, wherein a commentator was praising the Obamas for their showing of public affection for one another, including "fisting."

Clip is here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neCIg0BiXbE&eurl=http://lj-toys.com/?journalid=7065679&moduleid=12&preview=&auth_token=sessionless:1233338400:embedcontent:7065679%2612%26:f6a239c8ccd700c22da4a7148466f6adb2e972a9)

Since the person who said the word obviously didn't know the sexually explicit meaning, it made me start wondering just what percentage of the populations does know.

And this had nothing to do with your question but my mind works in convoluted ways. ^__^

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

OH YEAH.

Total potential land-mine, though in this sense more of a humorous bent since it's not like it's necessarily an offensive thing to those who know what is meant. Maybe that would be more like a trip-wire -- not necessarily about to cause a major explosion so much as causing the ignorant speaker to end up with face-down in the mud and looking like an idiot.

[tiercel]

In an only peripherally related way, I once knew someone who couldn't see CBT (computer-based training) without thinking of cock-and-ball torture. She spent a lot of time at work giggling under her breath.

There's also the example of the glass-blowing guy at the RenFaire who told us that the hole in the furnace that you stick the glass to heat it is the "glory hole," and if he knew what it meant he certainly didn't let on.

To be on-topic, I've never heard the term "dog-whistle" but I have seen "land mine" used as a metaphor in that way, so I think it's a term where people will probably understand what you mean.

You know what else this discussion reminds me of? That incident with Southwest Airlines and the women who got mad because of the flight attendant using "eeny meeny miney moe" as a joke to get them into their seats - and I learned for the first time that the original rhyme didn't end with "catch a tiger by its toe." It's something that I honestly had no idea had racial implications.

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

That incident with Southwest Airlines and the women who got mad because of the flight attendant using "eeny meeny miney moe" as a joke to get them into their seats...

I can recall learning the original lyrics of that children's song, maybe around the same time I learned that "Ring Around the Posy" was reputed to have originated in stories about the Black Death. (I can't recall whether this was discredited or not, but whatever.) Thing is, if it becomes a quasi-political mess, then it's a definite land-mine: the flight attendant had no idea what she'd just stepped into...

Plus, folks who set off land-mines, I've noticed, often consider themselves the victims, not sure where that explosion came from or what could possibly justify it. I mean, they were just out for a stroll and then suddenly BOOM, y'know?

And some land-mines I think we do know about but seek through adaptation to perhaps defuse them: like "yard ape" and "porch monkey" -- expressions that originated as semi-affectionate (in the imperial/colonial paternalistic sense) yet incredibly racist descriptions of black children. Yet my mother used these terms growing up to describe all children*, which I think could be a way of -- like 'eeny meeny' trying to expand or adapt or defuse an image and grow it away from its origins.

Not saying if that always works, mind you. I'm of two minds whether one should or shouldn't, as well as uncertain whether it makes any difference if I use it with full knowledge of its potential land-mine/history, or if I use it in blissful ignorance.

*Actually, she had a variety she used rather than guessing a kid's age: ankle biters, knee grabbers, porch monkeys, and yard apes. Graduated levels, you could say.

[tiercel]

I hadn't looked before, but Wikipedia says "tiger" is older than the other, which is interesting but makes a certain amount of sense. (It also has a fascinating number of variations in other languages.)

News stories at the time, however, did say that "n-----" was the older version, so it depends on what sources they were using. The two ladies did sue Southwest, unsuccessfully. The flight attendant said she'd never heard of the racist version, in which case she certainly, err, stepped in it. I think "land mine" is probably more appropriate if you're completely ignorant of any potentially offensiveness in the word or phrase you use - after all, you don't step on a land mine you can see! I would hope.

(The plague thing about "Ring Around the Rosie" was made up centuries after the song came into being and is almost certainly not true.)

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

I learned the story about the "ring around the rosie" song on a tour of some wax museum, as a child. Very proper British tourguide telling us in all seriousness these bits and pieces about Fascinating British History. Then, years later, I learned the story had been debunked, and I was CRUSHED. A part of my childhood, and it was all LIES. Damn those Brits!