University of New Hampshire Tries to Ban the Word ‘American’ Because America is Bad

Have you ever referred to a 9th grader as a “freshman”? Called a wealthy person rich?  Called an octogenarian elderly? Well, you’re a bigot! According to the University of New Hampshire’s new “Bias-Free Language Guide”  terms as innocent as “healthy” or “foreigners” are “problematic”.  According to Campus Reform:

“American,” “illegal alien,” “foreigners,” “mothering,” and “fathering” are just a handful of words deemed “problematic” by the University of New Hampshire’s Bias-Free Language Guide.

According to the university’s website, the guide “is meant to invite inclusive excellence in [the] campus community.”

[…]

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.”

Using the word “Caucasian” is considered problematic as well, and should be discontinued in favor of “European-American individuals.” The guide also states that the notion of race is “a social construct…that was designed to maintain slavery.”

The guide also discourages the use of “mothering” or “fathering,” so as to “avoid gendering a non-gendered activity.”

Even saying the word “healthy” is problematic, the university says. The “preferred term for people without disabilities,” the university says, is “non-disabled.” Similarly, saying “handicapped” or “physically-challenged” is also problematic. Instead, the university wants people to use the more inclusive “wheelchair user,” or “person who is wheelchair mobile.”

Using the words “rich” or “poor” is also frowned upon. Instead of saying “rich,” the university encourages people to say “person of material wealth.” Rather than saying a person is “poor,” the university encourages its members to substitute “person who lacks advantages that others have” or “low economic status related to a person’s education, occupation and income.”

This constant limitation of speech in the name of “sensitivity” is just one way to censor speech without actually enacting any authoritarian legislation. It’s indoctrination and it is putting us on a dangerous path to the day where we might not be able to legally speak our mind.

What do you think? Is the guide a necessary step to ensure that students feel safe on campus? Or is it just completely absurd?

Source: Campus Reform