University of New Hampshire No Longer Asking Students to Fix Problematic Speech

Bias-Free Language Guide removed from UNH website.

|

Dreamstime

Administrators at the University of New Hampshire have taken down the Bias-Free Language Guide, likely in response to widespread mockery from an ideologically diverse range of critics.

The guide—a list of "problematic" words and phrases so comprehensive that a screenshot of it should appear on the Wikipedia page for political correctness—could previously be found on UNH's website as a resource for students and faculty. Campus Reform first drew attention to it earlier this week, pointing out the guide's contention that the word "American" was a problematic way to describe a U.S. citizen:

The guide notes that "American" is problematic because it "assumes the U.S. is the only country inside [the continents of North and South America]." (The guide doesn't address whether or not the terms "Canadians" and "Mexicans" should be abandoned in favor of "Residents of Canada" and "Residents of Mexico," respectively.)

The guide clarifies that saying "illegal alien" is also problematic. While "undocumented immigrant" is acceptable, the guide recommends saying "person seeking asylum," or "refugee," instead. Even saying "foreigners" is problematic; the preferred term is "international people."

The subconscious theme here is that every conceivable way to describe someone can and should be made longer. Thus the obese become "people of size," Caucasians become "European-American individuals," the rich become "people of material wealth," etc.

UNH President issued a statement on Wednesday clarifying that obedience to the guide was not mandatory; he even confessed to disagreeing with parts of it. By Thursday, the guide had disappeared from UNH's website altogether. The following statement was issued:

The associate vice president for community, equity and diversity removed the webpage this morning after a meeting with President Huddleston. The president fully supports efforts to encourage inclusivity and diversity on our campuses. He does not believe the guide was in any way helpful in achieving those goals. Speech guides or codes have no place at any American university.

President Huddleston has ordered a review of UNH's web posting policies in the weeks ahead. He was surprised and unhappy to learn that the university does not have practices that make clear which web pages include UNH policies and which pages include content that reflects the opinions of some members of our community.

The university has more than 1 million web pages on its site; university administration was not aware of the "language guide" until this week. 

It's good to hear that UNH leadership does take concerns about free speech seriously. As a reminder, it's fine for universities to educate students about offensive language, although such lessons should be reserved for the classroom. But administrators at a public university can't force students to sanitize their language.

NEXT: Yes, Using Cops To Snatch Money from Citizens Via Petty Fines is One of the Roots of the Police Violence Problem

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Wow, that statement sure rips the “associate vice president for community, equity and diversity” a new one. It’s the academese equivalent of “get out of my office, imbecile, and don’t embarrass me again!”

    1. I can’t for the life of me figure out why college costs so much!

      1. In general (not speaking of any particular University President), it’s not the fact that they’re so expensive that bothers the administrators, but the fact that consumers (or enough of them) are cottoning on to it.

        So they have to swallow hard and offer less expensive versions of their product (“get an online Harvard degree for our unbelievable prices!”)

        And when some silly incident reveals the money they’re wasting on Associate Vice Deans for Multicultural Affairs, they really don’t like the public drawing conclusions about the expense.

      2. The fact that they have an associate vice president for community, equity and diversity means that somewhere in those hallowed halls there probably lurk a vice president and president for community, equity and diversity; not to mention whatever they hired to work under them.

        1. It means “the associate Vice President [of the university responsible] for community, equity and diversity”.

  2. Uh huh. He had no clue it was there….unless it was beloved by enough people. Then it’s practically law.

    1. I can believe he wasn’t aware of it. University presidents don’t always supervise every little detail of campus administration, they’re more likely to be off fundraising. But they can and do put out fires, and this was putting out a fire. “Those idiots said WHAT?”

      1. Good to see Huddleston doing something good. He was president of Ohio Wesleyan when I attended and was unremarkable, but then again the school seemed to have been poorly managed for awhile and funds were pretty low any improvements. Tuition was already in the low 30s in 2003 when I started, but their newest dorm was from 1955 (it was new when my dad attended in the 60s). They demolished the on campus bar and bowling alley to build an Econ building and sadly didn’t replace them. Plus, the anti-fraternity vibe from the administration was pretty annoying since the most supportive alumni were greek members and then former athletes, in which I was both.

  3. And these pussies aren’t hypersensitive ninnies, they’re “people of sensitivity.”

    1. “People of self-righteous outrage.”

      1. Plenty of those where Huddleston worked before moving to UNH.

  4. I’m pleased and surprised that this was actually reversed. Maybe there’s hope after all…. naaaaaahhhh.

    1. This^^^^…this shit will arise again when the next mouth piece is hired.

  5. The president fully supports efforts to encourage inclusivity and diversity on our campuses. He does not believe the guide was in any way helpful in achieving those goals. Speech guides or codes have no place at any American university.

    Moral suasion or GTFO. None of this proto-fascist “suggestive” material published on university letterhead.

    1. Observe the phrasing – not “in any way helpful.” This is one pissed-off Pres. He didn’t bother with mealy phrases like “to avoid further misunderstanding” or “pending wider community consultation.” He’s like “you interrupted my trip to the strip club to deal with *this* nonsense? What’s wrong with you?”

      -Note to University lawyers – the part about the strip club is totally a joke.

      1. As far as I know.

        1. I assume some of them are good people.

      2. Remarkable, innit? Typically when they’re forced by popular censure to reverse course it’s an excuse to retool and reintroduce. So they issue modest little handwaving mea culpas which always affirm their superior moral vantage. They had the concept right, but needed more focus group testing. There’s never a hint of inclemency or failure. This, on the other hand, is an unapologetic repudiation. This is an unasked-for admission. I think there’s a term for that, something legal. Maybe a lawyer could help me out. It’s the opposite of never asking questions for which you don’t have an answer, this was disclosing information he absolutely didn’t need to.

        1. Oh, on the skid row police shooting, the cops may be guilty, but as even the sympathetic GQ reporter discusses at length, the guy who got shot was a convicted bank robber wanted on a parole violation.

          http://www.gq.com/story/skid-r…..ly-keunang

          That doesn’t make everything done to him OK, but it’s a factor in trying to figure out what happened. What if instead of “unarmed homeless man,” the headlines called him a “fugitive bank robber.” All about the framing.

        2. “This is an unasked-for admission. I think there’s a term for that,…”

          I believe that an unintentional statement of truth is known as a “gaffe.”

  6. “Shitweasel fuckstickist grieftarded butt monkey’ is the preferred term for these people.

    1. PEOPLE OF SENSITIVITY, SHITLORD

      It is NOT my job to EDUCATE YOU. But I’ll take every opportunity to do so anyway.

      1. You are a harsh but fair master.

        Happy fucking Friday, Reasonoids. See you in the Friday “Funnies”…

  7. Completely off topic, is that crying kid in the photo missing his right arm?

    1. Nah, pointing at something behind him. His little sister, probably. If he’s anything like I was.

      Also, uninspired alt text, Soave.

      1. I don’t know, I still say that looks more like an arm stub. But I guess I am reading it on my phone.

        1. Foreshortening.

      2. “Also, uninspired alt text”

        I liked it

    2. PP only needed a limb that week.

  8. Oh, on the skid row police shooting, the cops may be guilty, but as even the sympathetic GQ reporter discusses at length, the guy who got shot was a convicted bank robber wanted on a parole violation.

    http://www.gq.com/story/skid-r…..ly-keunang

    That doesn’t make everything done to him OK, but it’s a factor in trying to figure out what happened. What if instead of “unarmed homeless man,” the headlines called him a “fugitive bank robber.” All about the framing.

  9. Question =

    Is there a word for “complaining about something you think might offend someone else

    iow, ‘taking offense on behalf of others’.

    The key to what i’m looking for is the projection of yourself into some other person’s identity and assuming it for your own purposes of ‘being offended’

    I was discussing ethnic slurs the other day with some people, and how many people make assumptions about what they mean and whether they’re *supposed* to be offensive or not, regardless of how they’re actually used in regular practice, or regardless of the supposedly-offended-group’s opinion.

    “Wog” for instance, makes brits blush because its considered a very-derogatory term they used to use in reference to non-English, brownish people – particularly the middle east/india

    However, in Australia, it sort of morphed into a generally convivial term for Aussies of non-Western-European origin…. once offensive, but now used by almost everyone in casual conversation.

    The point there is that any American who knows nothing about the term, and lists it as “something you can’t call people” because, you know, OFFENSIVE… is effectively imposing the negative POV on any use of the term, just because its the one that gives them the power to control speech.

    which is really what all of this is about – accepting that “the right people” are allowed to dictate what words “really mean” (regardless of intent) so that they can identify Wrong People, and use their authority to destroy them.

    1. Is there a word for “complaining about something you think might offend someone else”

      I think this is what is meant by “check your privilege.” Recognizing that you might not be offended by a thing but somewhere, somehow, soomeone might be. Because other people are weak. Or thin-skinned. Or inferior in some sort of overly-sensitive way.

      1. “I think this is what is meant by “check your privilege.””

        That would be the intent of people using that phrase.

        But i’m looking for a verb describing the act.

        “Pecksniffian”, or “Sanctimonious” are adjectives that describe the specific quality of, “ostentatious assertion of moral authority”- but not really the act itself.

        Dickens description of Pecksniff nails the attitude =
        (paraphrased)
        “Like someone constantly giving directions to a place they’ve never been”

        1. Try whinge. See if it suits your taste. I like it.

          complain persistently and in a peevish or irritating way

          1. Whinge is just low-grade complaining with a british twist.

            These people think the stuff they’re talking about needs to be Taken Seriously. “Holier-Than-Thou Grandstanding”…

            …but that fails to capture their arrogant assumption of the right to be offended on behalf of any others, usually others that they have zero actual connection with.

            1. I might start having to make up words or terms this is so tough.

              oral fartation?

              fartatious effluvient?

              I must ponder this… challenge.

              1. “Umbrage-mongering”, maybe

                1. griefjection

            2. “dolezaling”

    2. A SJW would just say “empathy” and maybe roll their eyes at your lack of sensitivity. But maybe you need a term, like “empathic __________.”

      1. dissociative narcissism

        1. Nah, probably just narcissistic projection

  10. Note, I will agree that Caucasian isn’t that good of a term for white people. Most of us do not originate from the Caucuses. The term comes from a discredited attempt to classify human races.

    1. Also, I’m whiter than all you people.

      As in, less melanin. Which means *superiority* motherfuckers! We Irish make y’all Caucasoid, Euro-descended people look like freaking Oompa Loompahs. So you can just shut up about that “i’m white” stuff. You’re not. You’re sorta beige. Real White People, Represent! Peace out to my homies up in Krypoton, one love to Zaxxor, we know how you do.

      1. +1 Chieftan o’ the Puddin’ Race*

        *close enough – fuckin’ Celts are Celts, for fuck’s sake

      2. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      3. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      4. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      5. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      6. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      7. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      8. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      9. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      10. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      11. How much Viking you got in ya, bro?

      12. omg, “squirrels”

        1. Impressive !

  11. “the obese become “people of size”

    Yes, but *what* size?

    One of the first few (and only) useful things i learned in college = clarity means using *fewer words*.

    ergo: ‘fatties’

    “Caucasians become “European-American individuals”

    I guess the maker of that Documentary is re-titling as we speak?

    1. Give them credit. The actually used the word “individual”.

  12. OT: Lion murderer has done more for conservation than you have.
    http://indefinitelywild.gizmod…..1720901473

    1. In no way excuses the assnuggetry of his most recent act.

  13. The subconscious theme here is that every conceivable way to describe someone can and should be made longer.

    Not necessarily. “Administrators at the University of New Hampshire” become “people of bullshit”.

    1. In Berkeley/Oakland, “Grove Street” became “Martin Luther King Jr. Way.”

      In San Francisco, “Army Street” became “Cesar Chavez Boulevard.”

  14. Conservatives are Retarded, Exhibit infinity.

    Conservative idiots claim that Norway started deporting ‘Muslim extremists’ and their crime rate dropped 31%! Gee, that’s just wonderful! Unfortunately, the article links to no outside sources and provides no evidence for this assertion, so you just have to take the conservatards word for it!

    This piece is from back in April, but I literally just saw someone tweet it out. The thing is, you can find conservative websites making this claim going back months, and I literally wrote about this ridiculous argument back on March 2nd. Like this article, the article I was writing about provided no outside links to any sources supporting this claim and was basically just right-wing agitprop.

    Well, it’s nice to know leftists aren’t the only ones who keep repeating false statistics for months and years after they’ve already been disproven. Hint: If you believe deporting 800 Muslims caused crime in Norway to fall by 30%, you’re a moron.

    1. “The left does it too”

      /BEARDED GILLESPIE

    2. Conservatism isn’t the problem. It’s how many modern conservatives want to force their conservative beliefs upon others. In a free society it’s likely that most people would be “conservative” in their personal lives because it would provide them with more stability. This anti Muslin[sic] immigrant strain is not conservative in that sense at all. It’s collectivation of guilt and no conservative should accept that.

      1. *collectivization.

        1. Nonsense. It’s not “collectivization” to group together people who believe in the same over-arching belief system. Sure, within large groups there are individual variations, factions, etc., but anyone with any sense can tell that different religions are different. They don’t all instruct their followers to do the same things. If you’re a Muslim, by definition you believe in what Muslims believe in, and Muslims believe in a lot of dangerous shit. (Assuming you agree that yearning for a worldwide totalitarian religious dictatorship is “dangerous shit.”)

          It’s conservative to want to leave other people alone. It’s also conservative to not want your culture to import a lot of archaic and often violently-expressed religious nuts who consider your culture to be bad, and the culture that they are refugees from to be good.

      2. Well, it’s collectivization of statistical risk, but that’s sort of an aggregate thing anyway.

    3. The thing is, *anyone* can be a conservative. I basically think it means being a non-prog, or being against at least a couple key points on the prog wish list.

      But you don’t have to be particularly intelligent to reject key prog policies. The badness of many of these policies ought to be obvious even to idiots. And sometimes these idiots get into the conservative movement.

      1. And there’s also the populist, I’m-no-egghead strain in conservatism, which sometimes attracts genuine idiots like moths to a flame.

        1. Which is quite interesting, since many of our most learned intellectuals have been, by most definitions, conservative.

    4. Sorry Irish, but the people pushing that story are no more conservative than Camille Paglia.

      How to Explain Conservatism to Your Squishy Liberal Friends: Individualism ‘R’ Us

      Conservatism has much more in common with libertarianism than anything related to liberalism, websites claiming such notwithstanding.

      1. That is the dumbest thing I’ve read today. It’s just sticking your fingers in your ears and hoping collectives of people will somehow disappear from the repertoire of the universe. People can be referred to individually, which is useful for limited purposes, or collectively, which is useful for any political discussion ever, since that’s what political discussions always deal with. There is no argument here. There is certainly not even an attempt to consult empirical data. It’s so goddamn mind-numbing it makes me embarrassed for my country.

        1. Collectivism doesn’t work because it’s based on a faulty economic premise. There is no such thing as a person’s “fair share” of wealth. The gross national product is not a pizza that must be carefully divided because if I get too many slices, you have to eat the box. The economy is expandable and, in any practical sense, limitless.

          Under collectivism, powers of determination rest with the entire citizenry instead of with the specific citizens. Individual decision-making is replaced by the political process. Suddenly, the system that elected the prom queen at your high school is in charge of your whole life. Besides, individuals are smarter than groups, as anybody who is a member of a committee or of a large Irish family after six in the evening can tell you. The difference between individual intelligence and group intelligence is the difference between Harvard University and the Harvard University football team.

          Think of all the considerations that go into each decision you make: Is it ethical? Is it good in the long run? Who benefits? Who is harmed? What will it cost? Does it go with the couch? Now imagine a large group – imagine a very large group, say, 250 million people – trying to agree on every decision made by every person in the country. The result would be stupid, silly and hugely wasteful – in short, the result would be government.

        2. That is the dumbest thing I’ve read today.

          I take it you don’t read your own stuff, then?

          Makes a bit of sense, though. You just vomiting out whatever comes to your mind and onto your keyboard without stopping to think about what you’re typing explains a great deal about your posting history.

        3. When have you ever consulted empirical data, Tony tard…..oh, wait, never. LMAO.

        4. You are the dumbest thing on the innertubz today, just like yesterday, the day before that and every day your insipid mumbles are online.

          If there was a Nobel award for idiot of the year, you’d be in the running.

    5. What the fuck does this have to do with anything?

    6. I did see the Norway/Muslims story back then. but couldn’t find a good source for it, so I ignored it.

      1. OK, here’s what looks like a decent source for part of the story, but not the crime drop: Norway deports record number of immigrants

    7. “If you believe deporting 800 Muslims caused crime in Norway to fall by 30%, you’re a moron.”

      I guess then that they’re feeling pretty silly they didn’t deport another 1866.

  15. As a reminder, it’s fine for universities to educate students about offensive language, although such lessons should be reserved for the classroom.

    Robby, have you ever written an article Where you haven’t covered your ass? Stop being a fucking pussy.

    Universities, particularly public ones, have no business telling students what’s politically correct speech and what isn’t.

    Oh, I’m sorry, you are a copulating kitty cat. Didn’t mean to damage your tender psyche.

  16. it’s fine for universities to educate students about offensive language, although such lessons should be reserved for the classroom.

    What classroom? Where and when are all these PC reeducation courses taking place? I don’t remember ever hearing a political opinion from a prof inside a classroom, let alone time taken away from the subjects they taught for basic manners lessons.

    If it takes a university-level course for people to understand how to speak like decent human beings, then maybe things have gotten out of hand. Of course let’s not pretend that terms like “illegal alien” are neutral and without political connotation. Or that “Caucasian” is a relevant term. I’m gonna have to actually meet someone offended by “American” though. Every country needs an adjective form.

    1. Tony|7.31.15 @ 12:29AM|#
      “If it takes a university-level course for people to understand how to speak like decent human beings, then maybe things have gotten out of hand.”

      You miserable fucking piece of shit, as a lefty ignoramus, you have no idea what you’re posting about. Fuck you with the most rusty farm implement we can find and feed you to a wood-chipper, asshole.
      Spoken as a decent human being, sleaze bag.

    2. Fuck off Tony. Hows that for PC. =)

    3. Of course let’s not pretend that terms like “illegal alien” are neutral and without political connotation

      wtf? What is a “neutral” term for an alien here illegally, then?

    4. Of course let’s not pretend that terms like “illegal alien” are neutral and without political connotation

      wtf? What is a “neutral” term for an alien here illegally, then?

    5. I don’t remember ever hearing a political opinion from a prof inside a classroom

      I’ll bet you don’t know anybody who voted for Nixon, either. My Political Science prof told us on the first day of class that it was her job to convert us to Liberalism. She was pretty much a walking stereotype. Fortunately, it was a core class with hundreds of students, so nobody paid attention to her.

  17. Posted earlier since the local gossip columnist claims Country Joe McDonald is somehow involved in the organization (could be Joe’s press guy trying to puff ol’ Joe). Here’s the link:

    “Free Speech Movement 50th Anniversary”
    http://www.fsm-a.org/FSM 2014 50th Anniversary.html
    From the link:
    “When Values Collide – Room 100. an informal debate about free speech vs. social justice. Moderator: Adam Hochschild, prize-winning author, UC School of Journalism, panelists: FSM vets Paul von Blum Senior Lecturer, African Studies Center, UCLA; and Kathleen Piper, community activist, and Current Cal students.

    Building a Movement against Economic Inequality, Room 110: Moderator: Arlie Hochschild, Professor Emerita, Dept. of Sociology, panelists FSM Vet Barbara Garson, author, Down the UP Escalator, How the 99% live in the Great Recession; FSM Ex Comm Stephanie Coontz, Co-chair, Council of American Families, History & Family Studies, Evergreen State College faculty; Zumi Mizokami of ROC-LA”

    I’m betting that freedom of speech gets a ‘but’ treatment. And, no I’m not willing to waste time reporting on it; Reason got a local staffer or stringer?

    1. free speech vs. social justice

      The modern progressive, in a nutshell.

    2. I’m betting it gets a butt treatment.

  18. for people to understand how to speak like decent human beings

    That’s “decent” as re-defined this week, by a tiny minority of self-selected political activists, who claim to speak for large numbers of other people who they’ve never actually spoken to.

    Sounds legit.

    Speaking for all white males of libertarian persuasion, I nearby declare that only the indecent will use such offensive microaggressing stereotypes and slurs as “white privilege,” “rape culture,” “teathuglican,” “fascist,” and many others, to be named later.

    1. Awesome:)

  19. Hyper intelligent, uncouth barbarians, pushing society into the future.

  20. Is “White Boy” ok?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politic…..tcmp=hpbt3

  21. Here’s Stan Freberg’s 1957 spoof of politically correct language:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLlTlYfqQV4

    1. Ha, that was great, Adam.

    2. And now, Straight Outta Comp…

      BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT! BZZT!

  22. Face it, folks, the educational establishment has become nothing more than a taxpayer funded group of speech and thought nazis. There’s a really simple fix: privatize education. Problem solved!

  23. Funny stuff.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/node/421774/print

    “Over in Williamson County, Tennessee ? just north of my home ? prosecutors actually filed a motion asking the court to order a defense attorney to stop calling them “the government” in open court. Yes, that’s right ? in my home state, it’s apparently now a slur to call the government by its name. In its motion, prosecutors claimed:

    “The State has noticed in the past few years that it has become commonplace during trials for attorneys for defendants, and especially Mr. Justice, to refer to State’s attorneys as ‘the Government,’ ” [prosecutors wrote.] “The State believes that such a reference is used in a derogatory way and is meant to make the State’s attorney seem oppressive and to inflame the jury.””

  24. Meanwhile, in Trump related news…………..

    In 2011, Donald Trump’s sons Eric and Donald Jr. went to Africa to kill wild animals. Their tour company, Hunting Legends, posted images of the pair smiling with their trophies: a leopard, bull, waterbuck, crocodile and even one holding a sawed off elephant’s tail next to the animal’s body.

    PETA responded, saying, “Like all animals, elephants, buffalo and crocodiles deserve better than to be killed and hacked apart for two young millionaires’ grisly photo opportunity.”

    Even Donald Sr. disapproved. He told Access Hollywood: “I’ve never liked it [hunting]. I’ve never liked that they like it ? I’m going to talk to them about it. I’m not a fan of the whole situation.”

    http://www.alternet.org/enviro…..an-animals

    1. Dear PETA: At least the humans waited until the animals were dead before disemboweling and dismembering them. Pedators don’t give that courtesey.

      PS, We have a special vacation offer for anti-hunting advocates. We’re calling it “The Least Dangerous Game” and would like to invite you to participate. By taking part you will be daving the lives of dozens of game animals who would otherwise be hounded and hunted down.

  25. You’re not even pretending to hide your intent when you want to replace “illegal alien” with “refugee”

  26. When people around the world get offended its because their daughter gets legally raped, Son dies by a bomb, father absolutely has no food for his family for 4 days, mother has no drinking water, and more. These people have been so coddled from reality they want others to be as weak as them because they can’t deal with real life.

  27. Re: “It’s good to hear that UNH leadership does take concerns about free speech seriously.”

    There’s a difference between “free speech” and CONSEQUENCE-free speech.

    People get to say what they want (with the exception of incitement to harm), but they don’t get to avoid criticism for WHAT they say.

  28. Making the names of everything longer – double plus ungood.

  29. I strongly believe that colleges and universities should educate students to be real professionals as well as stay polite and decent people. Authorities should create favorable conditions in order to set an example to the younger generation. Modern students are overloaded nowadays and may be because of that they have so many stressful situations that lead to such behavior. They deal with various college papers, dissertations, writing assignments, accomplishing all kinds of essays for college. They need to calm down, to have a rest. So that there will be no need in such odd lessons..

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.