So California has taken it upon itself to censor the English language and remove whatever the “woke” people think might be sensitive.
Never mind that their reasons are in the context of their own opinion and judgement, not having anything to do with the historical context of the phrase. I guess it is too difficult to find people smart enough to understand the historical context of the phrase. The default seems to be offended if you can possibly find a way, it’s good virtue signalling.
“The Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative (EHLI) is a multi-phase, multi-year project to address harmful language in IT at Stanford. EHLI is one of the actions prioritized in the Statement of Solidarity and Commitment to Action, which was published by the Stanford CIO Council and People of Color in Technology affinity group in December 2020,”
Some examples:
- “Beating a dead horse,” which the university claims “normalizes violence against animals.”
- Changing “prisoner” and “convict” to a “person who is or was incarcerated” to “not define people by just one of their characteristics.”
- Avoiding the phrase “brown bag” when referring to a lunch because “historically associated with the ‘brown paper bag test’ that certain Black sororities and fraternities used to judge skin color. Those whose skin color was darker than the brown bag were not allowed to join,” the school’s website said.
In my opinion, none of these examples are legitimate. None of the phrases are in the least offensive given the innocuous, inoffensive history of each.
I’m offended by all of this. I think whoever came up with this is an idiot and should be fired.
Why is it that academics think they know better than the rest of us?
