Regardless of where in our society such words might be used, there’s a good chance too many people would consider them harsh, maybe even insulting.
Yet, we have reached the point when such language should be considered not only in order, but encouraged when appropriate. They speak of courage, commitment, and a call to action at a time when hardness stemming from character is being replaced by permissive softness.
I need look no farther than myself to find a good example.
The small rural high school I attended fell far short in preparing me for the scholastic standards I was to later encounter at Purdue University. So although expected, it was deeply disappointing that after the first semester I was placed on scholastic probation.
My dad asked me if I wanted to quit. No way, I told him quietly but defiantly. Even at age 18, it wasn’t my style to get out the crying towel, be angry, or look for someone or something to blame. Instead, I faced up to what I had to do, braced myself for what would be required, then replaced all the usual emotional cushions with rock hard absolutes cemented in place with logic.
I had only one semester in which to redeem myself, and I did. I performed even better the next semester, and the one after that. Then came a two-year break of military service after which I returned to campus more determined that ever. At the end of two more semesters I was, and for the first time, a solid scholastic achiever.
As my graduation neared, the Dean wrote a letter on my behalf to a potential employer. In it he pointed out that from a precarious beginning I had courageously put forth the effort needed to graduate with a respectable grade average. He stressed how valuable that demonstrated quality could be in the workplace.
I faced many such challenges during my working years including my insistence that true success is possible only when one thoroughly enjoys what they are doing. That stance is difficult to maintain, especially in big corporations and government entities where bloated and distorted structure often tangle with the identity one wishes to establish.
The ultimate irony is that a work environment that agrees with what the employee most enjoys also helps other employees who must demonstrate the shear quality of accomplishment that can result.
To hold today’s youth responsible for what they believe is wrong. After all, they have little to no experience on which to base any belief or justify any action in the workplace. Instead, and far too often, the blame goes to parents and teachers who push aside determined purpose and toughness in favor of ploys strongly suggesting how to get something for nothing.
A present example of that is the use of the term “reaching out” instead of “contact,” an act implying “okay touchy-feely” while shifting the caller’s dominance to the person being called, an act so subtle it tends to hide the reality that in the real world, position, title, and authority count.
To have this be a temporary fad is bad enough, but to give it a permanent seat in the procedure of how we communicate with each other would be much worse. It affects how we accept or complete important assignments to both the provider and the receiver of the service rendered.
There’s nothing unique about any of the problems facing our nation. Nor are any of the requirements for solving those problems any different from what they were a hundred years ago.
Instead of delusional and coddled softies, we need those willing to face up to what must be done then activate themselves toward a deeply satisfying perhaps even unprecedented result.
Just yesterday, I met such a person—a disciplined 23-year-old who knows who he is, what he wants to achieve, and not only how to get there, but also how to stay there.
I would hire him in a New York minute.
