femminista: thoughts of a feminist rhetorician

Yesterday, I spoke with my students in English 420E: Business Writing for Entrepreneurs about ethics. Frequently, I have been told that undergrads don't get the nuances of ethical and moral situations. Yesterday ,I found evidence to both support and refute that hypothesis. Using Steven Katz's example of the Nazi memorandum, I discussed the ethical implications of using language that is too technical, that is dehumanizing. In the Nazi memo, which addresses the need for changes to the vehicles used to transport Jewish people to the death camps, people are referred to as "loads." Specifically, the memo uses such terminology thus: "it has been observed that when the doors are shut, the load always presses hard against them when darkness sets in. This is because the load naturally rushes toward the light when darkness sets in, which makes closing the doors difficult" (qtd in Katz 196). Some students clearly agreed that such language was atrocious, a fact evidenced by not only their verbal responses but by the drain of color from their faces. Other students I am less sure of. Many seemed unmoved by the horrors of the Holocaust, to the extent that I wondered if some were Holocaust deniers. I hope that this fear of mine is not a reality and unfortunately we did not have the time to discuss their beliefs in depth nor was I certain that it was proper to do so in the context of this class. Needless to say I was left feeling uneasy at having broached a topic that could not be more deeply explored.

We went on to discuss the kind of military language brought to attention by Carol Cohn in her article, "Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense Intellectuals." Cohn discusses the use of words like "target" and "collateral damage" as ways of obscuring the humanity of those who will be killed by bombs. This is something that I am very familiar with having read Cohn some time ago. One of my students astutely brought to our attention a slogan that I had not considered. I realize that military language dehumanizes victims of war and warlike activities. However, I had never thought of how certain military slogans might also do so. As one of my students pointed out, the Marine slogan "The few. The proud. The marines." does just that. It doesn't say the few men and women or as my student suggested "our sons and daughters." This one moment of realization, of reciprocal learning gave me hope that undergraduates not only are willing to discuss ethics but that they have independently astute insights into the subject.