“Canoe man” John Darwin<\/a> seems to have set a precedent for naming people. At first it seemed as if the new media naming convention involved identifying people by their last known mode of transport. (As in “canoe man”.)<\/p>\n But that principle must have fallen by the wayside when some canny sub-editor realised that “car man” or “train woman” would be used too often to have much explanatory value. So, other objects have had to be mentioned.<\/p>\n In today’s BBC, there are stories headed:<\/p>\n (Some of these designations seem insensitive, to put it mildly.)<\/p>\n Plus the traditional “mother”, “father”, “husband” and so on. These designations are so ubiquitous in the headlines, that I can’t link to them, lest this blog lose any residual authority, on the grounds of spam-linking. <\/p>\n There’s something even more pathetic about the relationship identifiers. At least the “canoe man” isn’t just a “son”, which would make him basically indistinguishable from every other male on the planet. (Although, I suspect eh has been “canoe husband” and “canoe dad” a few times. His wife is definitely “canoe wife”.)<\/p>\n However, my all-time favourite is “resident.” <\/p>\n This means more or less anyone. It’s inevitably used gets used in any mention of neighbourhood crime or flooding. It carries a whiff of the twat-o-tron in most cases, with the scent of the “Residents Association” the suggestion of constantly-outraged decency and the subtle implication that inhabiting a property gives you an automatic Lawful Good alignment.<\/p>\n\n
\n(This was a couple who murdered someone by forcing his walking stick down his throat.)<\/li>\n
\n(A girl is defined by the last set of public exams she sat.)<\/li>\nShare this:<\/h3>