[Linganth] CDC Language ban

Mon Dec 18 02:53:03 UTC 2017

An update:
@CDCDirector tweets:

“I want to assure you there are no banned words at CDC. We will continue to
talk about all our important public health programs.”

https://twitter.com/cdcdirector/status/942423509124427776

On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 20:39 Judith Pine <Judy.Pine at wwu.edu> wrote:

> Dear Bill,
>
>
> Thank you for this response. I clearly have not communicated my position
> very effectively, and I welcome the opportunity to clarify what I intended
> to say.
>
>
> I do not mean in any way to imply that the discriminatory practices of the
> current administration, and those of the GOP more generally, are in any way
> acceptable, nor that we ought not to fight them with ever weapon at our
> command. I just want to be quite careful of where we aim our weapons, to do
> the most damage to these pernicious and toxic policies.
>
>
> Clearly, we need to address this, and, if it is self-censorship, to point
> out the fact that there is no neutral option here. If it is the case, as it
> may perhaps be, that people are being told their budgets are at risk if
> they use particular language, we must make a statement against this. My
> point was only that we would want to consider potential unintended
> consequences of our actions, and to avoid accidentally having a negative
> impact on funding for programs that we value.
>
>
> I may be over-cautious here, but I certainly am not saying we should do
> nothing, nor that this sort of censorship is acceptable, even (or perhaps
> especially) if it is self-censorship.
>
>
> - Judy
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Linganth <linganth-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf
> of William L. Leap <wlm at american.edu>
> *Sent:* Sunday, December 17, 2017 6:48:18 AM
> *To:* Steven Black
>
> *Cc:* LINGANTH
> *Subject:* Re: [Linganth] CDC Language ban
>
> “So it’s a pre-emptive sort of thing, not a prohibition coming from the
> administration but rather a bureaucratic strategy to deal with (probably
> quite accurate) anticipation of the administration’s response.”
>
> Judy et al. *please* reread Lal Zimman’s excellent posting re the
>  implications here for “transgender.”
>
>
>
> This  administration has affirmed its prohibition on the transgender
> question.  Eliminating the category eliminates possibilities of services to
> transgender women and men. People’s lives will be affected, all the more so
> if the “health care mandate” options are eliminated and related options
> curtailed under the new tax plan. This is a bit more systematic than
> discrimination.
>
>
>
> (Sorry if Trump bashing offends, but in this case,  Trump and his people
> have made their call and they are not on our side of the struggle.)
>
>
>
> Wlm L Leap, PhD
>
> Professor Emeritus, Department of Anthropology, American University,
> Washington DC
>
> Affiliate Professor, Center for Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies,
> Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton FL
>
> Senior Founding Editor, Journal of Language & Sexuality
> http://www.benjamins.com/#catalog/journals/jls
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Linganth [mailto:linganth-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Black
> *Sent:* Sunday, December 17, 2017 8:36 AM
> *To:* Janina Fenigsen <jfenigsen at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* LINGANTH <LINGANTH at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Linganth] CDC Language ban
>
>
>
> I’ve been looking for good ways to incorporate health-related issues into
> the committee on Language and Social Justice, and this certainly looks like
> a good topic for that group. I will raise the issue with the group.  From a
> public health/ global health discourse perspective, there is a lot going on
> here. I agree with Judy that there seems to be an element of
> self-censorship here (which is also disturbing).
>
>
>
> Exclusion of “transgender” is obviously discriminatory. The replacement of
> “evidence-based” with some phrase about science and community is more
> opaquely problematic. A core anthropological critique of contemporary
> public/ global health is that health interventions prioritize “data-driven”
> interventions to the exclusion of cultural/ community perspectives.
> Addressing this critique is clearly NOT the intent of this censorship, but
> any op-ed or statement writers need to be cognizant of this anthropological
> critique even as they/we call out the many problems with the word banning
> (whether it is self-censorship or other-censorship).
>
>
>
> If anyone who is not on the social justice committee is interested in
> working on issues of health, language, and social justice, you should join
> the committee! It is an open group.
>
> Please excuse any typos (sent via mobile device)
>
>
>
> Steven P. Black
>
> Department of Anthropology
>
> Georgia State University
>
>
> On Dec 16, 2017, at 11:03 PM, Janina Fenigsen <jfenigsen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Judy, excellent points, thank you!
>
>
>
> janina
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Judith Pine <Judy.Pine at wwu.edu> wrote:
>
> I’m interested in watching the information come out on this.  At this
> point, my sense is that what may have happened is some bureaucrats, as they
> prepare their budget request, have decided that if they avoid these words
> they will be more likely to get funded, and if they have these words in
> their budget they’ll be less likely to get funded. So it’s a pre-emptive
> sort of thing, not a prohibition coming from the administration but rather
> a bureaucratic strategy to deal with (probably quite accurate) anticipation
> of the administration’s response.
>
>
>
> So this may be an effort to get things funded by re-labelling them without
> changes in content. I think, though, that it is that this strategy will
> backfire, as the labels re-shape the contents and everyone struggles in the
> dark to figure out what they are supposed to be doing. But how do you get
> bureaucrats to avoid “bureaucratic weasel-wording”?
>
>
>
> And if we point out the changed wording and it results in the
> administration and the legislature cutting the funding for the programs,
> where does that get us? Not that weasel-wording is a good thing, but I’m
> not sure pointing it out solves the fundamental problem. Maybe, instead,
> publicize the positive results of programs that use these words, using the
> words in the titles? Ideally, successes in Republican-leaning areas if
> possible?
>
>
>
> -          Judy
>
>
>
> *From:* Linganth [mailto:linganth-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Leila Monaghan
> *Sent:* Saturday, December 16, 2017 1:39 PM
> *To:* Galey Modan
> *Cc:* LINGANTH
> *Subject:* Re: [Linganth] CDC Language ban
>
>
>
> One way to fight this “ban on words” might be to publicize every document
> that the CDC publishes with changed words, pointing out the changes.  This
> ruling hampers everything from getting information about the elderly to the
> fight against Zika.
>
>
>
> Leila
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Galey Modan <gmodan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Any ideas how we as an organization might fight this?
>
>
>
>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cdc-gets-list-of-forbidden-words-fetus-transgender-diversity/2017/12/15/f503837a-e1cf-11e7-89e8-edec16379010_story.html?utm_term=.ad1d1b951b0d
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.washingtonpost.com_national_health-2Dscience_cdc-2Dgets-2Dlist-2Dof-2Dforbidden-2Dwords-2Dfetus-2Dtransgender-2Ddiversity_2017_12_15_f503837a-2De1cf-2D11e7-2D89e8-2Dedec16379010-5Fstory.html-3Futm-5Fterm-3D.ad1d1b951b0d&d=DwMFaQ&c=U0G0XJAMhEk_X0GAGzCL7Q&r=8gvIwdkfYA0asooKAesUKg&m=yuMZGp--44GnEmA6YVM8_uomhvTiRSRtQJjabY4h34Q&s=T254d4iOs_tNTIa4w-uNYLGVnNa1y3MxxRq5FfdtXC0&e=>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linganth mailing list
> Linganth at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/linganth
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__listserv.linguistlist.org_mailman_listinfo_linganth&d=DwMFaQ&c=U0G0XJAMhEk_X0GAGzCL7Q&r=8gvIwdkfYA0asooKAesUKg&m=yuMZGp--44GnEmA6YVM8_uomhvTiRSRtQJjabY4h34Q&s=spsry-WgfECI7-NhBW3pFXOkwvy_T806sUfKsz2JdgE&e=>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Leila Monaghan, PhD
>
> Publisher, Elm Books
>
> Laramie, Wyoming
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linganth mailing list
> Linganth at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/linganth
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__listserv.linguistlist.org_mailman_listinfo_linganth&d=DwMFaQ&c=U0G0XJAMhEk_X0GAGzCL7Q&r=8gvIwdkfYA0asooKAesUKg&m=yuMZGp--44GnEmA6YVM8_uomhvTiRSRtQJjabY4h34Q&s=spsry-WgfECI7-NhBW3pFXOkwvy_T806sUfKsz2JdgE&e=>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linganth mailing list
> Linganth at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/linganth
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__listserv.linguistlist.org_mailman_listinfo_linganth&d=DwMFaQ&c=U0G0XJAMhEk_X0GAGzCL7Q&r=8gvIwdkfYA0asooKAesUKg&m=yuMZGp--44GnEmA6YVM8_uomhvTiRSRtQJjabY4h34Q&s=spsry-WgfECI7-NhBW3pFXOkwvy_T806sUfKsz2JdgE&e=>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linganth mailing list
> Linganth at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/linganth
>
-- 
______________________________________________
Louis Philippe Römer, Ph.D.
Visiting Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
Vassar College
124 Raymond Ave, Box 701
Poughkeepsie, NY 12603
(845) 437-7635
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/linganth/attachments/20171218/6d0f5c41/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IMG_0943.jpg
Type: image/jpg
Size: 340090 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/linganth/attachments/20171218/6d0f5c41/attachment.jpg>