Euphemism Use vs. Saying What You Really Mean

 

By Lilian H. Hill

 

Euphemisms are mild or indirect expressions that soften the harshness or bluntness of reality and often reflect cultural sensitivities and societal norms. While they can serve a compassionate role by helping to protect feelings or maintain social decorum, they are also used to conceal uncomfortable truths, obscure responsibility, or sanitize morally questionable actions. We often use this kind of language to be tactful, polite, and to reduce confrontation or negativity—cooperative strategies that are generally positive for communication. Avoiding a direct linguistic approach makes the language seem more neutral and objective, creating a sense of distance from personal involvement (Luu, 2020).

 

Unfortunately, euphemisms can be obfuscation tools in political, corporate, and everyday conversation. Governments might refer to civilian casualties as “collateral damage,” corporations may describe mass layoffs as “rightsizing,” and healthcare providers might call death a “negative health outcome.” These substitutions can distance the speaker and the audience from the emotional or ethical weight of what is being described, reducing the potential for public outrage, guilt, or resistance (Davis, 2025). One method of creating euphemisms is to use passive voice so that the actor is concealed. For example, passive constructions (e.g., “she was found dead from the gunfire,” “mistakes were made”) can obscure who is responsible, making actions seem as if they occur without human agency. Other linguistic strategies, like existential constructions (“there was a shooting”) or transforming active verbs into impersonal nominalizations (such as “incarceration”), similarly deflect attention from the actors involved. Euphemisms may be nebulous, long-winded, or employ non-specific comparisons. These techniques are common in technical jargon, often minimizing the perceived impact of the actions themselves (Luu, 2020).

 

Euphemisms can obscure racist intentions or actions, making them appear less overtly racist and, therefore, more palatable to a wider audience. Code words and euphemisms allow individuals to express racist ideas without explicitly using racist language, providing them with a degree of “plausible deniability.” The repeated use of euphemisms can normalize racist concepts, subtly reinforcing prejudiced attitudes and beliefs over time (Wexler, 2020). 

 

Euphemisms exist on a continuum: at one end, they are acts of empathy; at the other, acts of deception. Euphemisms can desensitize people or help authorities evade accountability by masking the real nature of events. The ethical tension lies in whether they are used to protect the vulnerable or to shield the powerful. Language can reshape our emotional, ethical, or political responses to serious issues. When euphemisms conceal, they don't simply reframe reality; they can fundamentally distort it. They create a linguistic buffer between action and consequence, potentially delaying necessary confrontation with injustice, failure, or harm. They can shape mentalities, societal values, and worldviews (Csathó, 2024). Over time, habitual euphemistic language can erode trust, making communication seem insincere or manipulative.

 

Influence of Euphemisms and Plain Language Compared

The following table compares the influence of euphemisms with plain language based on several aspects:

Words are powerful, and their impact has only grown as technological advancements make communication faster and more widespread.

 

Euphemism Use vs. Plain Language

Euphemisms are often used when speakers want to protect themselves from legal liability, political fallout, public anger, or to minimize emotional disturbance for listeners. The cost is that they can erode public trust, obscure facts, and delay justice or informed decision-making. The Plain Language Program, formally approved by the U.S. government in the Plain Writing Act of 2010, aims to strip away bureaucratic jargon and misleading terms to make communication accessible and truthful. The mandate emphasizes writing that is clear, concise, and well-organized; avoiding jargon and overly complex sentences; and bureaucratic terminology so that the intended audience can comprehend and act confidently based on the information. Underlying this initiative is a commitment to government transparency, accountability, and accessibility because democracy depends on informed participation. Government agencies are now required to train staff, maintain compliance, and regularly review communications to meet plain language standards.

 

Confronting Euphemistic Speech

Confronting euphemistic language involves recognizing when words are being used to obscure meaning and actively working to uncover and name realities more directly. Euphemisms often arise when the truth is uncomfortable (e.g., war, injustice, racial discrimination, corporate failures, or public health crises). While they can soften emotional blows, they frequently serve to minimize accountability, urgency, or harm (Luu, 2020). The Associated Press updated its guidance to promote a stronger approach by encouraging reporters to directly identify racism and provide context, helping readers understand why a statement or system is considered racist. Relying on euphemisms weakens the message and can be especially damaging when used to soften the portrayal of racist remarks made by those in power.

 

Confronting euphemistic speech effectively requires the following actions:

• Educate ourselves and others about the history and impact of euphemisms and coded language. 
• Identify the euphemism. Listen for vague or softened expressions that seem to sidestep who is responsible or what really happened.
• Ask clarifying questions. Push for concrete details: Who? What exactly? How much? When?
• Restate plainly. Translate euphemistic phrases into clear, direct language to expose the core reality.
• Name the stakes. Highlight why clarity matters for justice, public safety, informed decision-making, or ethical action.
• Directly naming and calling out racism when it occurs, without resorting to euphemisms. 
• Challenging and disrupting the normalization of racist ideas and language. 

 

Challenging euphemistic language is not just about semantics; it’s about reclaiming honest communication, promoting accountability, and ensuring serious issues are neither diluted nor ignored.

 

References

Csathó, Z. L. (2024, September 26). Euphemisms in everyday language: A linguistic perspective on their role in shaping thought, society, and therapeutic reframing. Medium. https://zitalucacsatho.medium.com/euphemisms-in-everyday-language-a-linguistic-perspective-on-their-role-in-shaping-thought-9f0d1b28653e

Davis, B. (2025, February 13). How to blur the lines: Euphemism and erosion. Democratic Erosion Consortium. https://democratic-erosion.org/2025/02/13/euphemism-and-erosion/

Luu, C. (2020, September 30). The ethical life of euphemisms. JSTOR Daily. https://daily.jstor.org/the-ethical-life-of-euphemisms/

Wexler, C. (2020, September 23). (Wexler, 2020). Mainstream media need to stop using euphemisms to describe Trump’s racism. Media Matters. https://www.mediamatters.org/new-york-times/mainstream-media-need-stop-using-euphemisms-describe-trumps-racism