Plan B Forum

At the University of North Carolina, it’s not just the students walking on politically correct eggshells.

Guidelines issued on the university’s Employee Forum aim to help staff avoid microaggressions in their interactions by cautioning against offensive phrases such as “Christmas vacation,” “husband/boyfriend” and “golf outing.”

The guidebook, first reported by Campus Reform, categorizes examples of potential microaggressions by “social identity group,” including race, gender and sexual orientation.

Under the “Religion” tab, the guidebook says organizing vacations around Christian holidays further “centers the Christian faith and minimizes non-Christian spiritual rituals and observances.”

With regard to “gender” microaggressions, the guidelines discourage comments such as “I love your shoes!” to female colleagues or otherwise complimenting the appearance of women.

any more of this nonsense might just tip me over the edge.

....except to decry something that doesn't impact them.

Big RR wrote:Perhaps, but then there was a time when universities were bastions of free speech and marketplaces of new ideas. Places where anything could be, and was, said, where issues were openly discussed and debated, and where may ideas were initiated and ultimately took flight into the rest of the community. Stifling that by implementing PC speech codes, however well intended, has a much more far reaching impact than just in the university community. Hence, I think discussion of these policies is the business of the community at large.

Big RR wrote:Perhaps, but then there was a time when universities were bastions of free speech and marketplaces of new ideas. Places where anything could be, and was, said, where issues were openly discussed and debated, and where may ideas were initiated and ultimately took flight into the rest of the community. Stifling that by implementing PC speech codes, however well intended, has a much more far reaching impact than just in the university community. Hence, I think discussion of these policies is the business of the community at large.

BoSoxGal wrote:It's kind of ridiculous to hold up university communities as emblematic of PC speech/rules in today's world. The real world is vastly different than academia so the vast majority of people aren't affected by this story except to decry something that doesn't impact them.

There is no such thing as 'PC-ism'.

All of those things are still true except the babies and whiners are complaining louder and louder that stupid ideas are called stupid

Scooter wrote:Tempest, meet teapot.

Scooter wrote:Tempest, meet teapot.

This was an opinion piece posted by someone on the blog of the university's staff association. It was never even so much as proposed as any sort of policy or guideline. We can't read it now as it has been taken down, but if it is anything like other stuff I have read, it is about making people aware of how their use of language can unintentionally cause discomfort. For example, asking a female colleague about her husband/boyfriend, when unbeknownst to you she is a lesbian, puts her in the position of either having to disclose more to you than she may be willing, or to lie.

The only people's speech that was censored was that of its authors, as the piece was taken down when mischief makers began reporting about it as if it was university policy.

So much for the free expression of ideas.

For example, asking a female colleague about her husband/boyfriend, when unbeknownst to you she is a lesbian, puts her in the position of either having to disclose more to you than she may be willing, or to lie.