Derec
Contributor
Stanford can retaliate against students and employees who fail to submit to this language diktat by keeping them from advancing at Stanford, to name just one example.
-
Features
Stanford University Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative (EHLI)
- Thread starter thebeave
- Start date
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 12,283
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
Yes, the Communist Party was so well known for its tolerance of racial minorities and non-psychonormative folks. How do you manage to write this stuff without your keyboard jamming from the drool? There are no communists on staff at Stanford Law. You are dredging up witch-scare nonsense from the McCarthy era, and everyone can see that you are doing so.
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 12,283
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
What "retaliation"? If using outright racial slurs doesn't stop you from becoming a full tenured member of the faculty, what does?
The professor called somone an "American"?!? Outrageous!
Derec
Contributor
What "outright racial slurs"? Look at the Stanford list. It includes a lot of innocuous language.
Elixir
Made in America
Yes, Poli is right.
But asking RW trolls and bigots to “consider using” is just an invitation to the kind of derisive crap our RW representatives are spewing right here.
Like I said, people will say stuff to hurt other people. Sometimes it’s purely malicious, and often it’s mixed with ignorance (e.g. “kaffir isn’t an insult where I come from!“).
southernhybrid
Contributor
Let me add that the words on the list that I found crazy weren't the ones that were related to racism. We should all know better than to use racist words, but some of the words that are now unacceptable were never considered insulting in the recent past.
Another thing I found goofy was that now the term "Black" is an acceptable term. A few years ago, we were told to refer to Black people as "African Americans", which I always thought was silly. The older Black females I know hated that term and want to be referred to as Black. I'm of European heritage, afaik. Should I be called a European American? My husband is of Arabic descent but has always been considered white. Now, a lot of people consider him a "person of color". He doesn't care what he's called as long as nobody tries to harm him. Besides that, a lot of people mistake him for Jewish, which makes sense since Israel and Syria are neighboring countries and the people from those countries have similar physical features. Can't we all start referring to each other as Humans and stop making such a big issue of the origins of our ancestors? Yeah. I know that's a dream, but I'm really sick of this shit. A white friend of mine who has 4 mixed race children always puts "human" on any form that asks for her race. I can understand why she does that, even if we are a long way from simply viewing each other as simply members of the human race.
I'd prefer to discuss the really silly words on the list. We all know that racism is wrong and most of us try hard to avoid using racist terms. It's a lot of the other things on the list that are goofy, imo.
I don't care what you call me, as long as you don't tell me that I'm too old to do something. That's ageism. I know my limits and most of them have nothing to do with my age. Using slang terms isn't offensive to me, but making assumptions based on my age is insulting, although I rarely let what other people think of me bother me. I can't speak for every older adult, but imo, it shouldn't be the words that are so offensive. It's the stereotyping that is the most offensive. And, even the woke sometimes make ageist stereotypes.
Another thing I found goofy was that now the term "Black" is an acceptable term. A few years ago, we were told to refer to Black people as "African Americans", which I always thought was silly. The older Black females I know hated that term and want to be referred to as Black. I'm of European heritage, afaik. Should I be called a European American? My husband is of Arabic descent but has always been considered white. Now, a lot of people consider him a "person of color". He doesn't care what he's called as long as nobody tries to harm him. Besides that, a lot of people mistake him for Jewish, which makes sense since Israel and Syria are neighboring countries and the people from those countries have similar physical features. Can't we all start referring to each other as Humans and stop making such a big issue of the origins of our ancestors? Yeah. I know that's a dream, but I'm really sick of this shit. A white friend of mine who has 4 mixed race children always puts "human" on any form that asks for her race. I can understand why she does that, even if we are a long way from simply viewing each other as simply members of the human race.
I'd prefer to discuss the really silly words on the list. We all know that racism is wrong and most of us try hard to avoid using racist terms. It's a lot of the other things on the list that are goofy, imo.
I don't care what you call me, as long as you don't tell me that I'm too old to do something. That's ageism. I know my limits and most of them have nothing to do with my age. Using slang terms isn't offensive to me, but making assumptions based on my age is insulting, although I rarely let what other people think of me bother me. I can't speak for every older adult, but imo, it shouldn't be the words that are so offensive. It's the stereotyping that is the most offensive. And, even the woke sometimes make ageist stereotypes.
TSwizzle
Let's Go Brandon!
"goofy" could be construed as demeaning to dogs, you monster!!
laughing dog
Contributor
From what I can tell, the Information Technology area of Stanford has started a project to inform the IT community to avoid possible offensive language. At this writing, this project consists of identifying possible offensive terms and offers possible alternatives for those terms. There are no punishments or enforcement. This is not an university wide initiative.
To summarize, this is perhaps a ham-handed attempt to get the IT community to be a bit more considerate.
So can someone explain why anyone has their knickers in knots over this?
To summarize, this is perhaps a ham-handed attempt to get the IT community to be a bit more considerate.
So can someone explain why anyone has their knickers in knots over this?
Derec
Contributor
What makes the Stanford admins similar to communists is the attempt to control language very tightly. After all, the concept of political correctness emerged in the commie circles.
I am sure there are some, but I was not even calling the admins literal communists. It's just that their desire to control speech is evocative of communists.
laughing dog
Contributor
What evidence do you have to support the claim of possible retaliation?
Derec
Contributor
"More considerate" by not using such nasty terms as "American", "Hispanic" or "black hat"?
Derec
Contributor
Are you denying that Stanford admins have power to retaliate in such fashion?
My point is that just because they do not have power to prosecute you does not mean that they lack power to punish you in other ways.
laughing dog
Contributor
In other words, your claim is projection.
Derec
Contributor
No, it's an explanation. Criminal prosecution is not the only form of retaliation.
laughing dog
Contributor
Your reply snipped out a relevant part of my post that any rational and literate reader would recognize as the answer to your question."
I will repeat it for you
"From what I can tell, the Information Technology area of Stanford has started a project to inform the IT community to avoid possible offensive language. At this writing, this project consists of identifying possible offensive terms and offers possible alternatives for those terms. There are no punishments or enforcement. This is not an university wide initiative. " Please point out the words that you do not understand.
laughing dog
Contributor
You are babbling. I made no mention of criminal prosecution. There is no evidence whatsoever of any explicit or tacit enforcement mechanism. None. You are literally pulling explanations out of the air.
Derec
Contributor
You did not. But the side discussion you inserted yourself in started with a mention of a criminal prosecution. Read the thread before making such inane posts!
The "cancel culture" at US universities is quite strong. I remember the case of a student working at a college radio station who got fired simply for pointing out some non-PC facts about St. Jacob Blake. Like the fact that he had a warrant for his arrest.
Therefore, it is hardly a ridiculous notion Stanford would retaliate to those who do not submit and continue to use such hateful language as "guys".
Derec
Contributor
I bolded the relevant clause here.
And you have not answered my objection that this rather long list includes many rather innocuous terms. What's wrong with "guys" etc.?
laughing dog
Contributor
Take your own advice.
Anecdotes about some student working at some college radio station who got into trouble for something he said is irrelevant. The discussion is about the IT community at Stanford. Please read the thread before babbling.
You have no evidence to support your claim about retaliation. None. It is a conjecture you pulled out of your ass.