WHY “KAREN” IS NOT “THE NEW N-WORD”

At this unique moment in human history, words and phrases are transmitted and evolve at rates unparalleled in any period before.

It’s something we all have probably heard a million times, and something we all probably know. But it’s a truth hard to really sink in for us, at times.

While technological advancement continues to thrive at an exponential rate, our own experience as a species doesn’t seem to change too much at all, however. History repeats itself, as they always say.

And, as history has cursed us from the beginning with the inventions of certain terms and phrases hostile to our fellow man, so then has the continued development of technology maximized the potential to damage each other with said expressions.

Are the latest popular pejoratives, “Boomer” and “Karen,” then, just two more examples of history repeating itself? Words finely sharpened to cut through the dignity of two of society’s most vulnerable demographics?

Yeah, not quite.

“Boomer” – referring to an older, aggressively ignorant individual of the “baby boomer” generation (born in 1946-64), is a word that has seemingly grown both more popular and more negative over time. It must be recognized that it is not used in every context to refer to this specific category of person. “Boomer” is almost exclusively used in labeling one’s behavior of this age group when it appears outwardly selfish, unempathetic, or short-sighted.

Situations such as observing this group’s distinct voting habits and their loudest opinions prompt this word, most of all.

“Karen” can be akin to “Boomer” in terms of similar applicable contexts, but its greatest differentiator is the added specificity of the character “Karen” is to represent: A middle-aged white woman (with a particular hairstyle, interestingly enough) in a constant state of self-imposed victimhood. “Karen” is almost exclusively used to refer to this archetype in food/retail/customer-service situations, abusing staff to exploit their required submission to the whims of said customers.

These are both terms used out of a certain sense of spite, sure. That much is immediately evident by their usage contexts. But this by no means signifies a sign of oppression of any kind for the demographics associated with those words.

The truth lies in the power dynamic these terms highlight. In the previously mentioned customer-service situations, “Karen” holds the power. Anybody that has worked in the industry will tell you there is a certain attitude that will make your existence hell on a regular basis, and sure enough, this reality is instantly understood with the mentioning of that name. A stereotype, to be sure, but nevertheless an actual, observable symptom of the larger disaster that is the service industry.

“Boomers” very evidently hold the actual power in our collective culture, and especially in our voting culture. It is to this demographic’s perspective that our country (and I’m sure others around the world) has to cater to constantly, un-democratically neglecting other citizens in the process.

The groups described by the terms are by no means minorities, or powerless in comparison to specific others. Therefore, one could even interpret the usage of these words as a sort of method of rebellious, revolutionary resistance – the less-powerful pushing back, against even the most potentially trivial forms of overwhelming greater power.

Discourse has arisen comparing these modern pejoratives to older terms like the “n-word” or “f-slur”. But the difference should be made clear: When a white person contemptuously refers to a person of color with a particular expression of negative branding, who holds the power, there?

Because that answer, whether one may like it or not, matters immensely.

Advocate Staff