All hail political correctness: UK university wants to control the words students use


From BBC: Cardiff Metropolitan University‘s code of practice on using inclusive language encourages the use of “gender-neutral terms”.

Author Dr. Joanna Williams said they were “unnecessary” and “authoritarian”. The university said it was committed to “providing an environment where everyone is valued”. The university recognised language “can be a contentious issue” and developed its code of practice to “promote fairness and equality”.

It recommended using gender-neutral terms and avoiding generalisations or assumptions based on stereotypes. The university checklist makes alternative suggestions:

  • Best man for the job – best person for the job
  • Fireman – firefighter
  • Housewife – shopper, consumer, homemaker
  • Manpower – human resources, labour force, staff, personnel, workers
  • Tax man – tax inspector (I use a completely different word for anyone associated with the IRS)
  • Sportsmanship – fairness, good humour, sense of fair play
  • Gentleman’s agreement – unwritten agreement, agreement based on trust

Dr. Williams, author of Academic Freedom in an Age of Conformity, told BBC Wales the guidelines were “very authoritarian” and universities “should trust academics to be able to communicate with each other without being permanently offended”.

She said language changes and evolves and many of the words on the university’s checklist were “falling out of fashion”.

“If you look at their origins they are not really based on an exclusionary idea,” she said. “The words have come to encompass more than just men. They are more general.”

Cardiff Metropolitan University is not the only university said to have freedom of speech restrictions. Spiked magazine, of which Dr. Williams is the education editor, recently published the results of its latest Free Speech University Rankings.

Of 115 UK universities surveyed, 63.5% were found to “actively censor speech” and 30.5% were found to “stifle speech through excessive regulation”.

Dr. Williams said universities need to stop restricting freedom of speech and that their codes of practice “demonstrate a shocking lack of trust”.

“Schools wouldn’t publish such a list for children, yet they are being used for adults,” she said.

A spokeswoman for Cardiff Metropolitan University said it makes “an unequivocal commitment to providing an environment where everyone is valued as an individual, and where students and staff can work, learn, flourish and develop their skills and knowledge in an atmosphere of dignity and respect”.

She said the code of practice on using inclusive language “sets out a broad approach to promoting fairness and equality through raising awareness about the effects of potentially discriminatory vocabulary”.

“It makes suggestions for the avoidance of inappropriate generalisations and provides some illustrative examples of gender-laden vocabulary with some neutral alternatives.” She added complaints about the “excesses of so-called political correctness” and their impact are not new.

“For Cardiff Met, though, academic freedom and the celebration of diversity are cornerstones of university life – and are entirely compatible with each other.”



9 responses to “All hail political correctness: UK university wants to control the words students use

  1. Gender-neutral:

    Liked by 4 people

  2. Kevin J Lankford

    I still ain’t figured out where the notion that gender specific terms are offensive comes from. If one insist they are what they are not, they should accept the term, or label that goes with it. That would save any confusion.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. This article is so important that I emailed the author to ask for copyright permission to upload it everywhere I could. This PC business is what is causing all of our problems.
    Crucify Political Correctness on the Altar of Freedom of Speech
    The West will either reject the logic of Political Correctness or suffer a catastrophic failure of vision, will, power and influence, destroying civil society as we know it. This may sound drastic, and of course it is. But why is it being claimed here? Because the ideas in the doctrines of Political Correctness and related notions like Multiculturalism are so destructive that—much like magma—these cannot long be held safely before spilling over and causing tremendous damage, chaos and destruction of our society.

    The reason it must be eliminated is because Political Correctness is a Trojan horse for Marxism, which always destroys everything it touches. PC is a curse which must be denounced before it mangles its host society, especially since it is the very opposite of Free Speech. More importantly, individual responsibility is eliminated by PC standards which make irrelevant personal morality. This is the subject of this essay.

    I. Definition of Political Correctness

    Political Correctness (PC) is shorthand for an ideology which implies ethical or moral superiority for various positions which challenge traditional morality. defines PC as

    Of, relating to, or supporting broad social, political, and educational change, especially to redress historical injustices in matters such as race, class, gender, and sexual orientation.

    PC has become, in practice, a set of standards by which communication is purified from unacceptable content. But PC has also deeply affected public policy and law, and ultimately ideas about morality, itself. For example, against the longstanding notion of the right of free expression, even thinking many forbidden thoughts would break PC norms. And for this reason, PC has evolved from being rules for “sensitivity” training into a set of un-breachable social mores.

    One author sums up this idea:

    Political correctness has 3 features. First, political correctness is a set of attitudes & beliefs divorced from mainstream values. Second, the politically correct person has a prescriptive view on how people should think & what they are permitted to discuss. Third, & most importantly, political correctness is embedded in public institutions, which have a legislative base, & which have coercive powers. It is this third aspect that gives political correctness its authority. Without this capture of power the views of the politically correct would simply be another view in the marketplace of ideas. A person, an institution or a government is politically correct when they cease to represent the interests of the majority, & become focused on the cares & concerns of minority groups.

    Yet, when peeling back the layers of the onion of PC, one cannot help but notice a strongly socialist or Marxist bent to these rules. And this is no coincidence. As Bill Lind says,

    Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are very obvious.

    So PC is a method for transporting Marxist ideas into traditional cultures.

    II. History of Political Correctness

    Political Correctness seems like the type of thing that would arise of its own merits. How misleading! Instead, the Frankfurt school of Marxism, from Frankfurt Germany, created PC as a way to disseminate their ideas in the Institute for Social Research. Bill Lind gives a brief history of this,

    In 1923 in Germany, a think-tank was established to translate Marxism from economic into cultural terms. This created Political Correctness as we know it today. This institute, associated with Frankfurt University was originally supposed to be known as the Institute for Marxism. But the people behind it decided at the beginning that it was not to their advantage to be openly identified as Marxist. So instead they decided to name it the Institute for Social Research.

    Then, when these Marxist professors fled Hitler, they applied to emigrate to America and were accepted. The Germans brought PC with them. As Lind says,

    Members of the Frankfurt School were both Marxist and Jewish. In 1933 the Nazis came to power in Germany. Not surprisingly they shut down the Institute for Social Research. Its members fled to New York City, were the Institute was reestablished in 1933 by Columbia University. These shifted their focus from Critical Theory about German society, to Critical Theory directed toward American society.

    III. Multiculturalism

    Related to PC is Multiculturalism—but what is that? defines Multiculturalism as “The preservation of different cultures or cultural identities within a unified society, as a state or nation.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says:

    Multiculturalism is a philosophical theory regarding the proper way to respond to cultural and religious diversity. Mere toleration of group falls short of making minority groups equal citizens; recognition and positive accommodation of group differences are required through “group-differentiated rights.” While multiculturalism is an umbrella term to characterize the moral and political claims of a wide range of disadvantaged groups, including African Americans, women, gays and lesbians, and the disabled, most theorists of multiculturalism tend to focus their arguments on immigrants who are ethnic and religious minorities, minority nations, and indigenous peoples.

    The West is beginning to understand the problems with multiculturalism, as described in the article The Netherlands to Abandon Multiculturalism. States the author:

    A new integration bill (covering letter & 15-page action plan), which Dutch Interior Minister Piet Hein Donner presented to parliament on June 16, reads: “The government shares the social dissatisfaction over the multicultural society model and plans to shift priority to the values of the Dutch people. In the new integration system, the values of the Dutch society play a central role. With this change, the government steps away from the model of a multicultural society.”

    IV. Effects of Political Correctness

    So it is clear that PC is a Marxist ideology which is meant to help ripen the West for socialist takeover. But what are its impacts? Here are some pernicious effects of the PC movement which prove we must drop this false standard.

    A: PC Opposes Freedom of Belief
    Clearly, if PC blocks the expression of “bad” statements—this is because these ideas are inherently unacceptable. In other words, one should be ashamed at having these thoughts. As individuals lose their freedom to express their beliefs, they lose their ability to think freely, as well.

    B: PC Allows an Ideology Without Standards of Right & Wrong to Establish Morality
    There is no locus of morality in Marxist or socialist thought—merely a demand to equally distribute all world goods. Therefore, PC beliefs, rules and judgments can only be subjective.

    C: PC Assumes Moral Excellence is Achievable Without Debate
    The chief presumption of PC is that all serious moral debate about the human condition has already taken place and arguing about it is redundant. This is related to the philosopher Hegel’s (Marx’s role model) insane idea that history was over now that Hegel had come on the scene.

    D: PC Presumes Moral Bravery is Unobjectionable
    An absurd result of the PC fiction is that all moral struggles have now been solved, and the outcome is not only clear, but unremarkable. Yet, if this were assumed in the past, many irreplaceable debates would have never happened, including over democracy, sufferagism, slavery, women and children’s rights, etc. But this is a nonsensical conclusion.

    E: PC Sanctions Mere Words
    PC seeks to make illegal every insensitive use of language. Yet only for socialist or Marxist causes.

    F: PC Predetermines Truths & Stops Honest Moral Analysis
    Perhaps the most audacious presumption of PC is that all truths are already known and have been processed by PC thinkers and writers. So it eliminates the idea that truth be debated since it has already been decided beforehand. In doing this, it makes all moral debates redundant.

    G: PC Keeps People From Talking Honestly so Cripples Free Debate
    PC means one cannot freely discuss any controversial topic since such a debate presumes honesty. But if moral positions are predetermined, then it is simply unacceptable to announce or advent for any positions not already blessed by PC. This stops people and societies from dealing with the most pressing problems.

    H: PC Forces Individuals to Accept Ideas Against Their Conscience
    Even a few years ago, a person of a religious mindset could espouse opposition to things of which they disapproved. Now to do so would mean public sanctions and possibly criminal penalties. All for merely disagreeing with certain thoughts or activities.

    I: PC Makes Certain Groups Above Criticism
    A dangerous aspect of PC is the tendency to defend the actions of individuals not by virtue of their inherent morality, but instead by association of their tribal source.

    J: PC Makes Logic, History & Ethics Subservient to Lesser Concerns
    PC forces socialist mores and standards upon individuals even though history reveals such ideas always fail, and common sense indicates these beliefs lack all ethical soundness.

    K: PC Creates Distrust Between Races & Cultures
    Since the PC movement has created special categories and rewards for those of exemplary status, other groups feel suspicious of these persons. This refusal to accept meritocracy can only breed unsoundness and destruction in such sacrosanct groups.

    L: PC is Anti-Efficiency, Rewarding Status Over Achievement
    If groups are rewarded not by their good works, but merely by being a passive member of a protected class, this action will certainly increase indolence and incompetence.

    M: PC is Backwards Looking
    The PC movement seeks to repay groups on the basis of things denied their predecessors which is not just irrational, but also unfair to those amongst the living.

    N: PC Breaks Down Potential for Democracy
    Since PC opposes free speech, it harms democracy since democracy is based upon free political choice.

    O: PC Claims Coercion More Important Than Persuasion
    Clearly, since PC spends so much time and effort to silence “insensitive” speakers—it cares more about shutting people up as opposed to persuade them. Therefore, PC can lead to conflict by bottling up anger, ignorance and misunderstandings.

    P: PC Invalidates All Religions Which Claim Timeless Morality
    If the PC movement is correct, all traditional—meaning biblical religions—must be false, since they regularly argue against PC standards. Therefore, PC is not just anti-religion but also against traditional morality. Therefore it is very destructive of society.

    V. If Not for PC, Barack Would No Longer be in Office

    It is obvious that Obama has received many kudos for being the first true minority elected president. Yet, it is also doubtless that he gathers enormous sympathy and pity for this status, as well. Yet, if we are honest, we must admit that another president would not have received the same support and forgiveness for his many mistakes. So, since Barack is destroying America through ignorance, laziness or even ill-will, the PC movement is likewise dissolving the US.

    Therefore, we must destroy PC before it destroys us. And the only way to eviscerate this intellectual parasite and moral blight is to demand Free Speech be regarded as more important than PC and its countless restrictions. Further, that PC is the mortal enemy of Free Speech and only one of them can survive. These leftist codes must be permanently dismissed in favor of our ancestral liberties and rights, or bondage will be established as surely as night follows day.

    Kelly O’Connell
    Most recent columns

    ​​Kelly O’Connell hosts American Anthem on CFP Radio Sundays at 4 pm (EST).
    Kelly O’Connell is an author and attorney. He was born on the West Coast, raised in Las Vegas, and matriculated from the University of Oregon. After laboring for the Reformed Church in Galway, Ireland, he returned to America and attended law school in Virginia, where he earned a JD and a Master’s degree in Government. He spent a stint working as a researcher and writer of academic articles at a Miami law school, focusing on ancient law and society. He has also been employed as a university Speech & Debate professor. He then returned West and worked as an assistant district attorney. Kelly is now is a private practitioner with a small law practice in New Mexico.
    ​​​​​​Kelly can be reached

    Liked by 3 people

    • Kevin J Lankford

      To me “politically correct” is just one more senseless oxymoron. Just two words thrown together in attempt to insinuate there is something righteous in politics or sincere about politicians.

      If in the last nine years, there existed a trustworthy politician, an honest judge, or ethical law enforcement agency obama would be an unknown entity.

      Only the ignorant, traitorous liars, or cowards,…..referred to obama as president.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. The term “manhole cover” needs to be repealed and replaced by the term “personhole cover.”

    Liked by 3 people

  5. Come on people, get a grip! PC will kill you. What exactly does ignoring gender have to do with inclusiveness? Pathetic statement from MS Williams.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. No more Manic-Depressive-it’d be Personic-Depressive,also wealthy people would be living in Persontions,there would be no Managers,they’d all be Personagers,and Women would become Wopersons (or Wopeople)
    And thus begins the parade of documentation of the absolute craziness PC would force on us….
    I’ve been at war with PC since the beginning,but only because I believed it was a product of recent Liberal-Butt-Hurtedness,pushed by the Democrats’ disability to deal with not getting their way,losing the Election,hearing people being called what they actually ARE. I never imagined it was an issue so far back,or with such far-reaching implications. WOW!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  7. GEEZ FEAKIN LOUISEeeeee—have ANY of you ever READ (not watched the movie) the MIDDLE SCHOOL book….”The Giver,” where minds and societies were controlled by the regulation of language?????? Read the danged thing before you sign on to this BS.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s