During a recent social media debate on Natick's upcoming vote to change terms like "Board of Selectmen" to genderless terms like "Select Board," I was referred by a proponent as a "Redmen Forever tier townie." Aside from the failed attempt at a slight, I would like to thank that resident for bringing some intriguing parallels between the two issues to light.

The Word Police are Back in Massachusetts, particularly Natick. In 2007-2008, the issue was the "Redmen" name, because it was considered "offensive," and politically incorrect. This year, the gendered terms, "Board of Selectmen" and "Chairman" will be voted on in Town Meeting (Warrant Article 39), based on that same basic reasoning.

The parallels between the "Redmen" and "Board of Selectmen" issues are as follows:

When the Word Police first came to Natick, it was part of a nationwide whitewash of Native American Sports mascots, based on the belief that the mascots were a source of disrespect and racist insult to indigenous Americans. It was an extremely emotional time. By 2008, numerous Massachusetts school boards and committees had made the painful decision to swap decades of unifying and energizing tradition with years of indignation and whispered division.

Eleven years later, the Word Police are back. Although Warrant Article 39, specifically, does not elicit nearly the emotionality the "Redmen" issue did, there is a distinct commonality in the attitudes, behaviors, and intense emotional response by opposing sides to debates surrounding PC language regulations.

A rough definition for each of the following terms is required to understand the behavior of all the parties involved: the Word Police, the PC Crowd, and the Silent Majority.

The Word Police: A nationwide political activist movement, which tells us that words have oppressive power, and, therefore, the ability to violate human rights. It names/advocates for victim groups that theoretically suffer oppressive and harmful effects from certain verbiage. It follows that First Amendment freedoms must be forcibly limited to prevent oppression of said victims. It further lists acceptable replacement language, a form of speech conformity, that society must adopt.

The PC Crowd: This group includes the Word Police activists and a portion of people in the community who believe the Word Police, and push for language regulations, because they genuinely believe it's necessary to end cruelty. They are generally intelligent and educated. The majority of youth also gravitate to the PC crowd.

The Silent Majority: These are the people in town, who seldom buy into the claims of the Word Police, unless they believe the arguments are based in facts and common sense. They are reluctant to sacrifice their freedoms and long-held community traditions without a valid reason.

They know that serious issues with gender-based language issues are extremely rare, if they exist at all. The Silent Majority view such anxieties as personal issues, rather than a community responsibility. Members of this mostly Silent Majority are generally thoughtful, kind, intelligent, and educated. But, their dissent is unfairly vilified as ignorant, heartless, inflexible, and rude by members of the very vocal PC crowd.

Unfortunately, the Silent majority is perhaps not "rude" enough. In fact, they are far too polite to people who are steamrolling their freedoms with nasty vengeance. They back down very quickly: "Let someone else fight... I don't have time… I'm not political." An outspoken handful will, but even they eventually get discouraged, making the extra time, and taking all the flack for the do-nothing, lazy majority.

That may seem harsh criticism, but it's nothing compared to how the Word Police and even some of the well-meaning PC crowd in Natick have treated anyone who dissents to PC language change suggestions, past and current.

Many members of the PC Crowd feel justified in verbal attacks, ranging from passive-aggressive to aggressive. They feel they have a moral duty to vilify and silence dissent. Many are convinced that those who disagree with them are bad, lacking in enlightenment and even cognitive skills. Thus, dissenters should be discredited and intimidated into stillness.

Sadly, hostile attitudes are not limited to the PC crowd. They resonate on both sides of the political spectrum in these modern times, primarily due to the lack of one-on-one communication and the constant deluge of overly-biased information which leads to myopic thinking.

In short, neither side should be a side. Communication breakdown through intimidation and name-calling divides and harms communities. Any benefit to the "word victims," who may or may not exist, evaporates, and the entire effort is just not worth the permanent divisive scars left behind on towns, who yearn for greater cohesiveness.

Back to the parallels between the "Redmen" and "Board of Selectmen" name issues:

The "Redmen" tradition had been a part of Natick history for 52 years. "Board of Selectmen" is a 1633 New England term, that centuries later, became an office in Natick's town government. History is important. It tends to unite communities through a sense of mutual pride.

We have been told in both cases, that "Redmen" and "Board of Selectmen" are offensive, obsolete, and hurtful terms. Yet, neither term, in the history of its existence, had a single official complaint recorded.

In 2008, Two local Nipmuc Indians were on the committee that fought to keep the "Redmen" name. These Native Americans should have been seen as an authority on the subject, but their views were ignored.

Today, the vast majority of Natick women have never registered a problem with the name, "Board of Selectmen" and feel that gender-neutral language regulations are unnecessary PC nonsense. Will they be viewed as an authority on this issue, or will they, too, be ignored?

The "Redmen" proponents were labeled heartless, racist, ignorant "townies," too stubborn to make a sacrifice to make the obvious moral choice.

The same strategy and attitudes are being applied by the PC change crowd today. They just swapped out the "racist" label with "intolerant."

None of those negative labels accurately depicted the "Redmen Forever" majority. Nor, do they during this "gender-neutral" language debate.

Yes, the Word Police have become increasingly adept at silencing the majority. But, make no mistake. The anti-PC language crowd are the majority.

A final interesting parallel:

There was significant statewide peer pressure on Natick's School Committee to make the PC name change away from "Redmen," just as there's current political pressure on Natick's town government to follow the lead of 60 other Massachusetts towns, to "morally update" to gender-neutral language. How would it look if Natick didn't do the woke, inclusive, tolerant thing?

Despite a 2/3rds referendum in favor of keeping the "Redmen" name in 2008, was it the right thing to do in the long run? Would Natick be seen as a glaringly racist town of ignorant people that refused to make the change, or as a town that stood strong against a tough PC crowd?

Politically correct language issues are always radioactive. It's always more difficult to vote "no." No one wants to be viewed as intolerant, un-inclusive, and anti-victim. But, elective office is a responsibility that should not be taken lightly. Every language regulation takes a language freedom away from the people and imposes penalties for nonconformity. There was a time when we all considered such an idea un-American. The Article 39 gender-neutral language regulations, in particular, pose a very slippery slope to future laws that intimidate open speech and punish people for word violations.

Once we limit speech, the free flow of ideas is always the next casualty.

11 years after the "Redmen" name change, national polls indicate that 90% of Native Americans have no problem with Indian mascots used by schools and athletic organizations. The whole debacle was caused by a fad, based on erroneous, exaggerated information.

This unpopular push for gender-neutral language regulations appears very likely based on erroneous and severely exaggerated information as well.

It would be better if Natick and other towns did not go down this PC gender-neutrality rabbit hole.