I'd like the entire context of the statement before passing judgement. When, why and in response to what question was this statement made?
Lets flip the statement into a positive one and analyze it - "Every child is a potential superstar."
Are all children superstars? No.
Will all children become superstars? No.
How many children become superstars? Less than 1%
Then why say children are superstars? Key operative is "potential". Potential is a probability operative not a certainty operative. With the right environment, upbringing, education and resources children could become superstars. Even then to become an actual superstar is a long shot. Such statements are made to inspire children to believe in themselves and aim high.
Let us look at Nandita's statement in similar framework. "All men are potential rapists"
Are all men rapists? No.
Will all men become rapists? No.
How many men become rapists? Less than 1%
Then why say men are rapists? Key operative is "potential". Potential is a probability operative not a certainty operative. With the wrong environment, upbringing, education and resources men could become rapists. Even then to become an actual rapist is a long shot. Such statements are made to caution men to understand the risks and avoid stooping to that level.
In the same light - "All humans are potential killers"
Negative verbiage has a negative connotation garnering knee jerk reactions. That is why we are taught to avoid double negatives, passive statements etc.
Flip the statement to avoid negatives.
Every man - > No man
potential rapist - > certain rapist
No man is a certain rapist. (Upbringing and environment turns some into rapists).
See how much more palatable the statement is?
Grammar tricks and tips. It works bitches.
Edited by return_to_hades - 9 years ago
comment:
p_commentcount