Anonymous #1 11h

When an issue is generally highly inconsequential…yes

3

Anonymous OP 11h

we don’t really label countries as “first world” / “third world” etc anymore though, at this point that’s been broadly recognized as an incoherent system of categorization that leans too heavily on colonizer logic

3

Anonymous OP 11h

like, even NPR brought this up over a decade ago https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/01/04/372684438/if-you-shouldnt-call-it-the-third-world-what-should-you-call-it

4

Anonymous #1 11h

Ok, but I’m not trying to say this is an issue limited to “first world” countries as they have been historically defined. “First world problem” literally just refers to any issue that pales in comparison to larger global issues like poverty, war, world hunger, etc. Your sock slipping in your shoe, your coffee order being wrong, your hair being an inconvenient length, all first world problems.

5

Anonymous OP 10h

but where exactly do you think the wording of “first world problem” would come from if not the sloppy categorization of countries based on stereotyped notions of economic prosperity? the issues with the concepts of “‘first world’ vs ‘third world’” are baked directly into the phrase “first world problems”—there’s not really any way to use it without reinforcing the application of outdated & negatively racialized language

1

Anonymous OP 10h

I’m not just pulling this out of my ass or nitpicking as a power play. here’s another article, also from over a decade ago, on why it sucks to use the term “first world problems” rather than just the “first world” / “third world” dichotomy https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/oct/02/why-phrase-first-world-problem-is-condescending-to-everyone

1

Anonymous #1 10h

If I had to phrase this post differently, how would you say it?

2

Anonymous OP 10h

something like “inconsequential queer problems” or “a comparatively trivial inconvenience that still has my queer ass seething”

1