The meat industry has been using a ground mixture of scrap parts—mostly connective tissue and fat—as meat filler for years. But it was only after a microbiologist created the moniker “pink slime” that social media took note.
Yes, pink slime is a two-word combo designed to get your attention and cause worry.
But if two simple words can cause such frenzy in the media, how often does our choice of words trigger similar negativity and angst in daily life? For example, do we refer to people as poor listeners, master manipulators, classic underachievers? Do we perhaps frame others as an unbelievable klutz or incredibly lazy?
If so, don’t those (and similar) word combos have the same adverse effect on people as the media calling meat filler pink slime?
In truth, there are hundreds of thousands of words at our disposal. So, we decide whether we choose word combos that reek negativity or those that show insight and compassion.
For example, it’s possible that people have difficulty listening and completing tasks because they have incomplete lower brain development. It’s possible that people are uncoordinated because they have poor proprioception. It’s possible that people are tired because they are already compensating 24/7 for a brain that is not functioning as intended.
And if so, then why throw “pink slime” at them? Yet, that’s what we do when we frame people with negatively charged words.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m glad that a mere choice of words—pink slime—made a story on meat fillers explode. From what I’ve read, it seems like it was something worth investigating.
Just don’t think there’s any justification for flinging “pink slime” at kids.