Perusing my feed in Reddit, one person posted a question as to whether freelancing resists age discrimination, ageism being a common obstacle faced by many workers in their 40s and 50s (or older) looking for new employment. The overwhelming response agrees that older workers find freelancing resistant to age discrimination: what matters most to t their clients is quality, not the writer’s age.

The same cannot be said for other types of discrimination, specifically “reverse discrimination” favoring BIPOC and LGBTQ+ writers. It’s becoming increasingly common to see solicitations for writers expressing blatant favoritism toward those groups. Society would rage if any company released a job description specifying that the freelance or contract writer be a white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant male. However, discrimination that clearly indicates such a disfavored applicant submitting a proposal would be discounted based on his demographics rather than the quality of his work draws nary a blink of surprise.

I find that offensive and insulting. Such blatant discrimination implies the lowering of standards, that  others who do not match the desired demographic cannot possibly produce the quality or type of work requested. In short, it implies that BIPOC and LBGTQ+ folks can’t compete.

When I apply for a gig, I make no mention of my sex, the color of my skin, my religion, or anything else that has no relevance to whether I can do the work and complete the project. Frankly, that demographic data is none of their business. What I do mention is my experience and direct potential clients to my portfolio for writing samples. If a potential client cannot determine whether my skill is sufficient to perform the work, then there’s no need for discussion.

When I do seek to hire someone, I don’t ask for his or her demographics. I want to know whether (1) that person can they do the work at the level of competence I require and (2) will we get along? Just as I respect the client’s expertise and knowledge in his or her field, I expect the client to respect my expertise in the work he or she hires me to do. When applying to edit more technically oriented content, I make a point of stating that I am not the subject matter expert. The subject of the document is the author’s expertise; my expertise focuses on improving the quality of language in written material.

I am convinced that 2020 in large part succeeded in the attempt to reduce American society to an age of discrimination by demographic. It’s not pretty and it hurts more than the people whom it excludes.

People don’t use proper grammar when speaking. True, that.

This is why, when editing a writer’s manuscript, I correct little if any of the grammar in dialogue. What I will do is highlight the grammatically incorrect phrase and explain in a margin note what the grammatically proper phrasing would be. The author then has the option to leave the dialogue as originally written, to accept the grammatically correct version, or to revise.

When it comes to reading dialogue, I expect better standards from characters representing higher social strata of civilization, as they’re more likely to have received extensive instruction in manners, deportment, academics, etc. In short, they have an image of social superiority to uphold and the oftentimes stuffy phrasing and cadence of correct grammar supports that image. Lower caste or class individuals may be forgiven their broad slang, crude idioms, and sloppy sentence construction in dialogue.

One of my favorite movies is Auntie Mame, starring Rosalind Russell. In the scene where Mame’s beloved nephew hires a ghostwriter, Brian O’Bannion, for her, the gentleman immediately flatters her with a short sentence: “I was asked to drop by to meet the fabulous Mrs. Burnside. You are she, of course.”

Combined with a look of admiration and casual elegance of appearance, the ghostwriter’s exacting grammar hints at superiority: a superior mind, a superior man. He’s a fortune hunting cad, of course

Another favorite movie, Last of the Mohicans, has a scene in which Nathaniel Poe and company come across a burned-out cabin with its former inhabitants slain. Nathaniel, Uncas, and Chingachgook proceed, but Cora Munro objects to leaving the dead without a proper Christian burial, even though they’re strangers. Nathaniel replies, “They are not strangers …. and they stay as they lay!”

The grammarian in me winces at that, wanting to correct lay to lie. The bodies lie (present tense) on the ground. However, use of the incorrect verb testifies to the character’s lack of education, if not his honor and savvy.

Those two examples show how grammar can be used to play upon social perception and conceal the true character of the person speaking such dialogue.

Using correct grammar in speech isn’t necessarily easy nor does it come naturally. It can help clarify meaning, but often gets short shrift in the interests of economy of expression or brevity. More than most prose, dialogue embedded within the story receives leeway, wiggle room, and lenience because people don’t converse in correct grammar.

‘Nuff said.