Christopher Ferguson has resigned from the American Psychological Association (APA):

More recently, the APA announced a list of “inclusive language”, adding to the language policing that has become common in left spaces from journalism to the American Medical Association. “Mentally ill” is replaced with the clunky “person living with a mental health condition” and “prostitute” with “person who engages in sex work.” We’ll no longer have the elderly or seniors (“older adults” or “persons 65 years and older”). Just to make the “person with” format confusing, “person with deafness” is out (“deaf person”) as is “person with blindness” (“blind person”). Advocating color-blindness is out, as are caucasians (“White” or “European” is preferred). We’re not to talk about birth sex or people being born a boy or girl (“assigned female/male at birth” is the language of choice now). There are no more poor people just “people whose incomes are below the federal poverty threshold.” We’re not to use words like “pipeline” (“triggering” to Native Americans given controversies over fuel oil pipelines on Native lands), “spirit animal” (use “animal I would most like to be” which isn’t really the same thing) instead, or “tribe.” “Violent” language like “killing it” or “take a stab at it” is to be avoided. A lot of this is obvious safetyism, which I worry that, by treating people like they’re made of spun glass and incentivizing outrage and offense, will contribute to escalating mental health crises. But, as others have pointed out, it’s also elitist as most people couldn’t hope to keep up with the ever-changing language rules of the academic elite.

Well, bad as it is, this is mild stuff compared to what's happening in the academic fields of gender studies and the like.

For the latest tale of US institutions rotting from the head down, see Jerry Coyne's take on Scientific American and its hit job on the late EO Wilson.

Posted in

2 responses to “The ever-changing language rules of the academic elite”

  1. Mar Avatar
    Mar

    These efforts at changing language are absurd as regardless of the expression used everyone will eventually catch up with the real meaning of the words. (The meaning is the same no matter how we attempt to disguise it). The language will then have to be changed again. This madness is worse than the doctoring of economic figures in the ‘socialist republics (which everyone had to memorize and recite on demand). I’m astonished at how many people go along with it as I cannot see how the madness can be enforced. Why are employers allowed to police language? Couldn’t such an act be construed as assault?

    Like

  2. TDK Avatar
    TDK

    @Mar
    There’s another point. It’s common for elitist institutions to use terminology that is not understood by other people and to continually update it to keep ahead. That way insiders can tell if they are dealing with a fellow insider rather than an outsider – the latter can then be treated differently.
    In my youth it was common for left groups to criticise say the BMA, for using Latin terms rather than terms in common usage. Of course times have changed and so has the left.

    Like

Leave a comment