Almost all these impersonal forms of address end up with some connotation that defeats the original purpose of neutral politeness. Often they’re gendered, or too associated with age (son, ma’am), or with particular ethnicities (cuz, auntie), or they’re over-friendly and can sound barbed (buddy, pal).
It seems like the common thread is that we can’t imagine a generic relation with another person that doesn’t assume something about roles, and that assumption itself is a cause of friction. That’s why the only term that’s ever really worked is “comrade”.
So much this, put more eloquently than I put above. I ultimately decided that it’s up to the speaker though, if that’s how they choose to address me, so be it - it’s not really about me being comfortable, they’re the ones that have to address tens or hundreds of people a day.
Now, if someone is “encouraged” or “required” to use that wording against their own preferences, however…
Or more relatable stories to tell if nothing else.
Maybe when certain entertainers reach a certain level of success they should just try booking speaking gigs at Davos instead of attempting to sell their newly privileged brand of observational humor to the masses.
I, for one, am looking forward to his next segment about not being able to get a decent baguette on his twice-a-year return to the US. “The so-called baker returned clutching a ficelle in his sweaty, Yankee hands. I told him,‘If you expect me to walk out with that, you’d better be hiding a le cremeux du Mont Saint-Michel in your apron.’”
I like ‘friend’ for singular, or ‘folks’ collectively, but yeah, it’s weird. I also don’t particularly like being called sir or boss, but I’m not going to be weird about it either.
There’s a story behind that one, though. Early Americans subverted sir to specifically avoid that. By referring to all citizens as “sir”, they were tacitly devaluing the aristocracy. Heaven forbid you call someone serving you “sir”!?
Can’t remember the title of the text, but it’s the one where you’ve got a French visitor to the newly-independent US remarking on all of the differences in the national character. (Gets mentioned in every US History class)
Edit: To be fair, I can understand Sedaris’s distaste at “boss”. You can’t just reverse that dynamic so easily.
I have no opinion on David Sedaris because I hardly know who he is. I can relate, though, to his distaste for “boss.”
It bugs me because I grew up inundated by old Hollywood movies in which “boss” was how African American men were expected to address their white “betters.” The term grated on me then and it grates on me now. Most of those calling me “boss” are men in service industries: cashiers, service station attendants. From my standpoint they demean themselves by calling me boss. From their standpoint, I don’t know. Do they think they’re being respectful? Are they passively expressing contempt?
I was taught that one showed respect by saying “sir” and “ma’am.” Now I understand the problems with gendered terms of address, including the way women were subdivided into “Ma’am” and “Miss” according to perceived age or marital status. It’s way past time for that to change. What generic terms of address don’t carry some sort of baggage? Mate? Mostly male. Buddy? motion picture cabbies. Comrade? Commies!
Incidentally:
I actually heard some grumpy boomer say
It seems to me that “boomers” are one of the few groups that it’s still okay to stereotype and demean on BB. The year of my birth doesn’t automatically determine my personality, my politics, my attitudes, or for that matter my grumpitude rating. This whole business of slicing people up by “generation” seems to me less of a description of reality than a marketing tool.
Time is time.Those who came before me lived lives I’ll never understand yet their choices shaped my world. My actions now are shaping a future I’ll never know for people I’ll never see. We all face a different set of challenges but I can’t help thinking they’ll be easier to handle working together rather than accepting arbitrary divisions designed to sell people more cellular phone plans.
So, one thing I do is address any Person of Color as Sir or Ma’am as often as I can think to do it as a sign of respect (but not the white folks). It’s nowhere close to reparations, but as long as the gender is obvious and/or I already know their pronouns, is this not even being recognized as respect? I seriously want to know.
I’m just glad people mostly stopped referring to any plural inanimate objects as puppies, may it never return. “Gimme two of those puppies over there, with sauce.” “Stick a couple a them puppies on my 440 and watch it burn!” “How’d ya like to have them puppies in yer face?”
Nothing against baby doggses, mind you!
I can see the appeal of trying to make “friend” happen, but it’s the same problem as “pal” or “buddy” – not all encounters with strangers are friendly, and if you call someone “friend” when they just rear-ended you or spilled your coffee, they could very easily take that as mocking. So you’d still need another option.
The various New Testament verses about being servants to each other are definitely the kind of thing America’s founders would be into. But, again, calling anyone “sir” still reifies the idea that people relate to one another firstly in terms of social roles, even if you consciously invert those roles compared to what you grew up with.
That is, if people go round calling each other “sir”, it’s a constant reminder of master/servant relationships, and as long as those relationships still exist materially, you end up highlighting them. If a cop calls you “sir,” it reminds you that someone is the master here, but it’s not necessarily you.
