"Blond" is a Politically Correct Insult

For the current, “cultured” American society, there are quite a few words that are considered inappropriate; ranging from the innocuous “fart”, to “sugar tits”, to “dickbreath”, to...yeah, this list could actually become my entire blog... You get my point, Reader. 

There are also words that are not used –and rightly so– because they target specific groups of people for uncontrollable characteristics, like skin colour or “ethnic” features. If these words are vocalised, then it is in a negative light and, in a fictional setting, usually by the detestable character or antagonist. (In the case of the anti-hero, using these terms is one of his/her less than favourable traits.)

Perfectly understandable.

Some could make the argument that politeness is censorship, sure, but in general, I am of the opinion that it is beneficial for society to acknowledge derogatory terms and as such to use them carefully. Words used as labels can foster detrimental stigmas, and those stigmas can inhibit society's growth by limiting perfectly capable groups of people. Within my life time, there has been a sweeping movement to curtail the “acceptable” prevalence of these terms. What was once widely said with little regard is now publicly shamed; for the ablest there's “retarded”, “spazz” (from spastic), or “lame”. And gendered terms like “bitch” or the C-word have received similar argument against usage. “Gay” has probably the most publicised debate against its usage as a derogatory term. So savvy parents are now encouraging kids to say “asshole” and “shithead” instead, because these apply to the population at large and do not single out – oh wait...sorry, children are not supposed to name call. I forget that we only want them to be like adults in some ways.

Anyhow, aside from children (for some reason), it is commonly expected that in certain situations, from time to time, people will use insults. “Good guys” do call names – just as long as the “bad guy” really deserves it. Even elitists have their high-brow insults, like “asinine”, “biased”, and "public school".  Like I said, “asshole”, too, though not for polite conversation, also remains a free-for-all term. It does not offend any particular group, therefore it's insulting, but universally so. Everyone wins!

Except for the person being insulted (like Sauron or Hitler. Assholes!).

Bad guys deserve to be insulted. For instance, this UCLA student deserves to be confronted for being a condescending, ignorant, hateful person. Wallace complains that Asian students (somewhat specifically those who speak Chinese, given her terrible imitation) are incredibly rude and disruptive because, unbelievably, they keep company in groups and use cell phones. Rather crassly, she also spews the disclaimer that she is “not racist” and does not mean to “offend” anyone, especially her apparently 'dignified' Asian friends. I will say that Wallace has a right to her opinion, because she is a citizen of the United States, and this country (at least superficially) still allows individuals to think for themselves. However, by recording her opinion on a public forum, she has inherently invited an audience to either applaud or (vehemently) pan her statements. She opened herself up for criticism, and shockingly, some of it is rather harsh. She qualifies as a total buttwart. She is a xenophobic, inarticulate, egotistical, blond windbag!

Ah. Hold up. One of those things is not like the other... Blond. I get that she does have blond hair, but how is this fitting with the insults? I will mention she also receives an outstanding amount of hatred directed towards her as a woman, because she is clearly -read not a legitimately substantiated fact at all- a slut, but there's already a substantive movement against sexism. Blond though, remains popularly uncontested.

Blond is a naturally occurring hair colour. It has no correlation between IQ, skills, habits, or opinions.... but somehow, there is a widely accepted, unfavourable relationship with blond. There has been some attribution to Marilyn Monroe as the matron of the quintessential “dumb blond”, but how has this term survived the political correctness movement when so many others have not?

Stop right there, Reader! If you are thinking only bleached blond hair qualifies a person as a frowned-upon-blond because it represents something “fake” and effectively shallow or materialistic about said person, then...how? How does bleached blond hair somehow signify vanity more than cosmetics, acne-treatment, trendy gadgets, luxury brands, zip codes, dog breeds! Ah, another unending list.... What makes being blond so distinct and worthy of vilification? (Should I cite Hitler again?? That asshole.)

Blonds are targeted for a purely physical trait, but I am not aware of any popular movement against the stereotype. To be fair (pun intended), there are plenty of examples that refute (Hillary Clinton, Beatrix Kiddo) or subvert (Luna Lovegood) the “dumb blond” image, so it is not like Blonds are without hope. It's just that the media seems quite comfortable with reiterating the negative (see Play Boy, Legally Blond, or post-Fox News Gretchen Carlson) and no one is bothered enough to demand an end to this unjust practice. Blonds have feelings ok, they do. Deep inside – under the dried out scalp and shrivelled brain.