Late last year, Stanford University (one of those ritzy U.S. colleges that parents spend fortunes to send their kids to so they can brag their kid went to Stanford), issued a list of “harmful” words. The Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative list was directed only at information technology students, but the list took on a life of its own when it was released, and was widely and properly ridiculed. It has since been taken down and the college has pretty much disowned it.
Well, Stanford put a lot of thought into this, and I think it’s a shame that such an important document is now hidden from view. Clearly, a lot of deep thought and research went into this. So now, for the benefit of my regular reader(s), I present some of Stanford University’s harmful language words. I emphasize that I am NOT making any of this up. (The list, by the way, begins with a boldface warning that it contains terms that are offensive and harmful, and suggests easily offended readers “engage in this website at your own pace”. I guess that means taking a break after suffering a case of the vapors.)
The 100+ words are divided into sections. For example, there is ‘Ableist’ language, which is defined as being offensive to people with disabilities. According to the list, the term ‘tone-deaf’ is bad because it is “ableist language that trivializes the experiences of people living with disabilities”. Use unenlightened instead, Stanford kindly suggests. Don’t say anyone is a ‘basket case’ because it refered to people who had lost all four limbs and had to be carried around in a basket. Use ‘nervous’ instead. Calling someone ‘lame’ trivializes people living with a disability; use ‘boring’ or ‘uncool’ or ‘Stanford University Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative’.
Colonialism is a hot topic these days, but Stanford only has one suggestion. Stanford says you should not refer to the Philippine Islands, because the term is somehow “politically incorrect and denotes colonialism”. Use Philippines instead.
‘Culturally appropriative’ language misuses terms that hold meaning to particular cultures, Stanford tells us. Most of the examples refer to Indigenous people (low man on the totem pole, on the warpath, bury the hatchet, pow wow). The greatest stretch is calling anyone a ‘guru’ because “in the Buddist and Hindu traditions, the word is a sign of respect” and using it “negates its original value”. I assume they are referring to that terrible Mike Myers movie, The Love Guru.
Not surprisingly, there are a lot of gender words. The report goes all in on eliminating any references to males or females. Don’t use ‘guys’ because it “reinforces male-dominated language”. If you see a group of ladies lunching, do NOT call them ladies because “binary language does not include everyone”. Just call them everyone. And do not ask anyone what their ‘preferred pronoun’ is (not that I ever would) because the word ‘preferred’ “suggests that non-binary gender identity is a choice and a preference”. Don’t suggest anyone is ‘ballsy’ because it “attributes personality traits to anatomy”.
The report really goes crazy (sorry, that should be surprising/wild) in the ‘imprecise language’ section. You should not enjoy an ‘Indian summer’ because it “infers that Indigenous people are always late”. Ever heard the term ‘peanut gallery’ to refer to cheap seats? Sorry, that’s offensive because that’s where black people sat in the vaudeville era. Calling someone a ‘thug’ takes on “racist connotations when used in certain circles”. And for heaven’s sake (can I say that?), don’t say ‘abort’ because it can “unintentionally raise religious/moral concerns over abortion”.
And finally, we have institutionalized racism. You should not use black hat, black mark, black sheep, blacklist and even blackbox because they “assign negative connotations to the color black, racializing the term”. Don’t say ‘brown bag’, because it is “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.” Saying something is a ‘cakewalk’ is also a no-no because “enslaved people covertly used exaggerated dance to mock the enslavers. This turned into ‘balls’ that the white enslavers would hold for entertainment where the prize was a cake”.
So, in summary, as a rule of thumb, you should … oh, wait. ‘Rule of thumb’ is a phrase attributed to an old British law that allowed men to beat their wives with a stick no wider than their thumb.
I give up. Is that OK?
In This Corner 