<div dir="ltr"><div class=""><div class="">
<h1 class="">Prince-ton, you’ve got a problem…..</h1>
<p class="">
<br>
</p>
</div></div>
<p><a href="http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Princeton1.jpg"><img class="" src="http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Princeton1.jpg" alt="Princeton1" width="700px"></a>In
an attempt to advance the cause of political correctness on college
campuses, Princeton University adopted guidelines last year for a new “<a href="https://www.princeton.edu/hr/progserv/communications/inclusivelanguage.pdf" target="_blank">gender-inclusive language policy</a>” that attempts to end the usage of “<strong>gender-based</strong> <strong>words”</strong> like “mankind” and “freshman” to be replaced by “<strong>gender-inclusive words”</strong> (more accurately described as <strong>gender non-specific, or gender-neutral words</strong>) like “humanity” and “first-year students.” The gender <del>inclusive</del> <strong>non-specific</strong>
language policy at Princeton apparently first appeared on the
university’s HR website in March 2015 (see the bottom of each page in
the HR document “<a href="https://www.princeton.edu/hr/progserv/communications/inclusivelanguage.pdf" target="_blank">Guidelines for Using Gender Inclusive Language</a>“), but just recently received a new wave of media attention, see recent article <a href="http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28540/" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/08/18/princeton-wants-students-stop-using-word-man/" target="_blank">here,</a> <a href="http://heatst.com/culture-wars/princeton-man/" target="_blank">here</a>, and <a href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-19/princeton-university-kindly-requests-you-stop-using-gender-binary-hate-speech-freshm" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>From the Princeton guidelines:</p>
<blockquote><p>Gender-<del>inclusive</del> <strong>non-specific</strong>
language is writing and speaking about people in a manner that does not
use gender-based words. Gender binary is the traditional view on human
gender, which does not take into consideration individuals who identify
as otherwise, including and not limited to transgender, genderqueer,
gender non-conforming, and/or intersex.</p></blockquote>
<p>From the section on <strong>Tips</strong>:</p>
<blockquote><p>Use gender-neutral occupational titles and gender-neutral generic terms instead of the generic term <em>man</em>, generic words, and expressions that contain the word <em>man</em> and the use of man as an adjective or verb. Avoid expressions like <em>career woman</em>. Instead, be specific: <em>artist</em>, <em>director</em>, <em>doctor</em>, <em>professor</em>, etc. The top table above (“Occupations”) provides a list of gender-inclusive generic terms to use instead of the generic term <em>man</em>, generic words and expressions that contain the word <em>man</em>, and the use of <em>man</em> as an adjective or verb.</p></blockquote>
<p>The bottom table above provides additional examples of the new
preferred “gender-inclusive language” for “Generic Terms and
Expressions,” e.g. “spouses or partners” instead of “man and wife.”</p>
<p>And in the section on <strong>Job Postings</strong>, the Princeton
language police now require the use of “gender-inclusive language in all
job postings.” Traditional terms in job postings like he/she, he or
she, h/she, and his/her are now banned, to be replaced with “gender-<del>inclusive</del> <strong>neutral</strong> language<strong>.</strong>”
See examples below of how job postings are expected to be revised to
become “gender non-specific.” Actually, what it is about the terms
he/she, he or she, h/she and his/her — terms that include both genders —
that are not “gender-inclusive”?</p>
<a href="http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Capture.png"><img class="" src="http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Capture.png" alt="Capture" height="151" width="681"></a>
<p>But, I’d have to say….. “<strong>Princeton, we have a problem.</strong>” Actually, Princeton has several problems, some minor ones and one very big one.</p>
<p>The minor problems are that many of the new “<strong>gender non-specific/</strong><strong>gender inclusive</strong>” terms that are supposed to be stripped of all “<strong>gender-specificity</strong>” still contain <strong>gender-based, male references</strong>: per<strong>son</strong>, chairper<strong>son</strong>, businessper<strong>son</strong>, foreper<strong>son</strong>, layper<strong>son</strong>, <strong>man</strong>ager, salesper<strong>son</strong>, hu<strong>man</strong>ity, hu<strong>man</strong>kind, hu<strong>man</strong>s, hu<strong>man</strong> beings, <strong>man</strong>ufactured, and per<strong>son</strong> hours.</p>
<p>Those terms still seem pretty “<strong>gender-based</strong>” to me….</p>
<p>And who issued the gender inclusive language guidelines? It was Princeton University’s Office of Hu<strong>man</strong> Resources! That’s a pretty <strong>gender-based</strong> name of the office that wants to end <strong>gender-based</strong> language?</p>
<p>But there’s an even much bigger problem for <strong>Prince-</strong>ton University…… Need I say more? The irony here is very, very deep and very, very rich.</p><p><a href="http://www.aei.org/publication/prince-ton-youve-got-a-problem/">http://www.aei.org/publication/prince-ton-youve-got-a-problem/</a><br></p><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">**************************************<br>N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its members<br>and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal, and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message. A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)<br><br>For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to <a href="https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/" target="_blank">https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/</a><br>listinfo/lgpolicy-list<br>*******************************************</div>
</div>