Use of the passive voice has been attacked [sic], not just because it so often lacks clarity, but because it permits oppressors to hide behind their acts. For example, linguist Julia Penelope Stanley contends that the sentence "Mary was abused as a child" obscures the fact that she was abused by her father. In his essay "Racist Stereotyping in the English Language," Robert Moore points out that the sentence "slaves were brought to America" obscures the role of slave merchants and the consequential destruction of African families and culture. Likewise, the sentence "the continental railroad was built" fails to mention the role of Chinese laborers or the oppression they, too, suffered.

However, others complain that the active voice attaches [sic] "excessive importance to the capacities of a single individual to effect change" (according to a Princeton University pamphlet), and that it champions self-interest over the broader interests of one's community as a whole. New York media critic Josh Ozersky offers as an example of "distasteful" usage the sentence "I do not see this as a sexist text." A more "enlightened" version would be: "It is seen as a sexist text, by some."

†