The first 2 definitions for “wild” that are presented by Google are in the context of living things and the environment. First, “wild” is defined as something that is living in nature undomesticated. Secondly, a region of uninhabited or otherwise inhospitable land is defined as wild. Humans have also called each other “wild” at times, usually in reference to certain unusual or unrestrained behavior. “Wild” usually means something that exists in nature in a way that humans don’t control or expect or approve of.
The overarching theme that I’m noticing here is that something is considered wild if it has not been cultivated for whatever purpose we (humans) need it. Domestication is literally the process of changing an animal or plant to be more useful to humans. A region is considered inhospitable when it can’t be used by humans in its current state. Human behavior or appearance is usually labeled as wild when it is unexpected and/or deviates from the norm. Since our society is riddled with capitalism, ableism, & many other -isms, humans are labeled “wild” when their appearance or behavior doesn’t specifically fit into the norms of what capitalism has taught us is valuable or productive. I would argue that “wild” human behavior is just an extension of the idea that something is “wild” if it hasn’t been successfully changed to serve whatever purpose humans have imposed on it. In other words, something is wild if humans haven’t successfully changed it to serve their specific purposes at that time.
– Tsion Teffera
I loved your perspective of the meaning of the word “wild.” I agree with your statement that us (humans) believe wild to be something that has not been changed to better serve humans. I too believe we live in a world that is constantly looking and categorizing things to better fit our norms or serve our lives as humans. I thought your post was very well said. Great job!