Small talk at parties, swapping stories over lunch, regaling others with our everyday trials and tribulations, often using a friend as an example, such as, “My friend went to get his tires changed…and here’s what happened, blah, blah, blah.” Simple, innocuous, or is it?

Listen closely the next time somebody tells a story about a mundane daily event. Listen to the descriptions, not of the event itself but of the people involved. Very often, people unintentionally (at least I think it’s unintentional,) use labels to describe a certain set of people. These labels are usually, “black,” “gay,” and “big,” meaning fat.

Don’t laugh, it’s true. Listen closely, the labels slip in unobtrusively. “My friend Bill, at work, he’s black, well he went to get his tires changed…blah, blah, blah.” You NEVER hear the same story told this way, “My friend Bill, at work, he’s white, well he went to get his tires changed…blah, blah, blah.” The labels slip in quietly, with a subtle lowering of the voice, not quite a whisper, but a softer tone, as though the speaker knows this qualifying declaration is an add-on, an afterthought. It’s not only African-Americans whom speakers feel the need to label, it’s gay people (mostly men,) and the overweight, (mostly women.)

“My friend Joe, he’s gay…” and “This girl I work with, she’s a big girl…” Very seldom do you hear, “My friend Carol, SHE’S gay…” the gay label being reserved for men. And when labeling someone who may be overweight, the “big,” label comes with a disclaimer when it’s used about men, “My friend Chuck, he’s big, built like a football player…” as if it’s okay for a man to be big, that it is somehow sporty, but a woman is simply, “big,” no definition, no justification, just “big,” in other words, fat.

Are these speakers racists, homophobes or have a thing against being over-weight? I don’t think it’s that simple, though I do read negativity into labeling, even so innocently. Perhaps they feel the need to let the listener know that they, the speakers, not only know black, gay and fat people, but that they are liberal and open-minded enough to actually talk to and associate with them.

I do believe there is an underlying “ism” to these and other labels. But, I also hear people qualify themselves the same way. One example was on a past season of Top Chef. During the reunion show, one of the chefs, a woman, who was a finalist, was discussing the fact that the audience found her hard and tough, and told a story about being approached at a party, “a lesbian party,” and I listened and thought, what does the fact that it was a lesbian party have to do with the public’s perception of her?

In fact, what do any of these labels have to do with the story being told? Nothing, unless “Joe,” went to get his tires changed and there was a problem because he is black, or gay or that “Susie,” is fat. That is another matter altogether, and the qualifying adjective would be necessary to illustrate the “ism” being practiced. Otherwise, I think there is an underlying judgment and judgement is the first step to prejudice and bigotry.

So the next time you hear a story, and hear one of these labels being used, ask the speaker what a person’s color, size or sexual preference has to do with the story. Then, when you find yourself telling a story, change the rules, “My friend Joe, he’s white, straight and thin, went to get his tires changed,” and my guess would there that there would be dumbfounded stares as the listener asks himself or herself, what White Joe’s race, size and sexual preference have to do with anything.

If we recognize these traits in ourselves and call others on it, we can start changing the behavior, create another crack in the plaster, another chip in the foundation of prejudice. Labels, no matter how seemingly innocent, should not be tolerated, no matter how politely or quietly expressed.

"Remember when it used to all normal people around here, now nobody even speaks English," from the play, "Aberdeen," by John Shea.

For more, visit www.johnsheaplays.com

>