New and inclusive

Oh goody, it’s Inclusive Terminology Guidance time again.

Its new ‘Inclusive Terminology Guidance’ instructs members to stop using words and phrases including ‘elderly’, ‘female politician’ and ‘mothers and fathers’. Also discouraged are ‘able-bodied’, ‘sex-change’, ‘homosexual’, ‘a nutter’, ‘youngster’ and ‘sexual preference’.

The guidance recommends replacing ‘gendered job titles’ with ‘gender-neutral terms wherever possible’. Members should say ‘chair’ instead of ‘chairman’, ‘police officer’ instead of ‘policeman’ and ‘parents and carers’ rather than mothers and fathers.

I agree with the part about not saying ___man when the meaning is generic, i.e. it’s not referring to a specific male cop but to a general sex-unknown cop. Same with mailman, delivery guy, etc. I’ve agreed with that for decades. But what does that have to do with mothers and fathers? The words “mother” and “father” are not job titles. Some kids lack one or both, so in some contexts it might be best to say “parents”, but that doesn’t mean canceling the words entirely.

A section is also devoted to what members should do if they inadvertently commit a linguistic transgression. In a relief to those who may struggle to navigate the party’s lexicon, the guidance reassures them that ‘it’s okay to make mistakes from time to time’ – provided they are trying. Those who fail to use the sanctioned language are advised to apologise, thank whoever pointed out their error, and ‘adjust your language moving forward’.

Mmmno. Way too Stalinist. Sorry.

Comments

4 responses to “New and inclusive”

  1. Lady Mondegreen Avatar
    Lady Mondegreen

    I assume the terms “homosexual” and “sexual preference” are out because they imply that sex is a thing.

    I wonder what’s wrong with “youngsters” and “the elderly.” Perceived as ageist, I suppose. Personally I’d rather be called “elderly” than “Boomer.”

  2. maddog1129 Avatar

    The “guidance” goes on to say:

    The Inclusive Terminology Guidance warns that using the wrong words, as determined by the party, ‘can create environments that feel unwelcoming or exclusionary’. This, in turn, can contribute to bullying and harassment – a breach of the Green party’s code of conduct.

    What is this, Opposite Day? We prevent unwelcoming and excluding behavior, by unwelcoming behavior of our own, designed to exclude certain members of our party? We prevent bullying and harassment by bullying and harassing the unwelcome members we want to exclude?

  3. Ophelia Benson Avatar

    Yes, plus also, some “exclusion” is inevitable, unless the party is The Inclusion Party, whose only creed and only goal is inclusion of everyone and everything. But then it will have to include The Exclusion Party, so now what do we do?

  4. drncc Avatar

    So do they, the nominal Green Party, exclude oil barons? How about coal mine owners? Seems like excluding the polluters is kinda exclusionary.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *