Quote:To kind of get back on topic, there seems to be more to this lunacy.
Here is an excerpt of the course syllabus from one class.
First I'll address the part that I highlighted in red. Since when is referring women/men as females or males considered "oppressive and hateful"? Is it a "gross generalization? Is it derogatory/oppressive language?
Next, let's look at the part in bold and see how it relates to the examples given.
"The Man" - This is a term used to refer to someone in a position of authority, in most cases a police officer, prison guard, etc. Does it fit any of the description in bold?
"Colored People" - This is how black people were generally referred to prior to the civil right's movement. It might have actually been the "PC" term during that time as use of the "n word" was also very common. Is the term "racist" or "generally offensive"? I would say so in today's society depending on the context. Should the term be banned from a learning environment? I would say no, again depending on the context.
'Illegals/Illegal Aliens" - This is an appropriate term to refer to people in this country illegally. I would say that it borderline could be considered racist since it commonly refers to those of a Hispanic race.
"Tranny" - This is a derogatory term used to describe a transvestite. This would be the only phrase or term that I would say should not be used.
As has been pointed out already, the right to free speech ends when educational institutions are involved. The faculty has near-total jurisdiction over what can and cannot be said. Frankly, in this example, a professor has every right in the world to control the language used in his or her classroom. This isn't strictly about moral judgments over what's right and wrong; it's every bit as much about controlling the dialogue and keeping things focused. I don't know about you, but if I were the professor, I'd rather spend time on coursework than on debating whether or not "wetback" was a slur against illegal immigrants or not. As to the examples you cited:
"The Man" - I don't personally see how this could be considered offensive, nor have I ever even stopped to think that it might be. Calling this sexist goes beyond the realm of PC and into the realm of "seriously?!".
"Colored people" - This term certainly wasn't always offensive, but it was subverted into an extremely offensive term in the era between Jim Crow Laws passing and the end of the Civil Rights movement. Today, though, it is a racially-charged term, and one best left to history classrooms. History classrooms, imo, are where many of the things we consider taboo today should be freely and openly taught. I'm not saying history professors should go around dropping N-bombs left and right, but I do think that it's important that kids, particularly at the high school and college levels, hear that word and know just how much hate and evil existed to form it. Roughly the same rationale applies to the term "colored people", although calling someone colored is not nearly on the same level as dropping an N-bomb on them.
"Illegals/illegal aliens" - This one's tricky. I do have issues with calling illegal immigrants "aliens", because it dehumanizes them, and I have issues with calling them "illegals" for much the same reason. That said, referring to them as "illegal immigrants" is, to me at least, a very common sense description of what they are. It's not a derogatory or racial slur at all. They are immigrants to this country, and they immigrated here by illegally walking across an imaginary line, overstaying their visa, etc.
No disagreement at all on "tranny". It's a highly-offensive term.
I don't think we disagree on the nature of the words, JIB, but I do think we disagree on the application of free speech in classrooms. To me, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a teacher or professor controlling the language of their classroom, no more so than I'd have a problem with an employer saying that their staff couldn't walk around the hallways of the building dropping F-bombs and slinging racial slurs, no matter how playful or harmless the intent. The First Amendment does not exist within a classroom environment.
Consider this: a student who is otherwise performing well repeatedly uses racial slurs and homophobic language in a class, which frequently derails discussion. The professor expels that student from the course and fails them, and as a result, that student does not graduate on time and loses out on a tremendous job offer that was contingent upon their graduation after that semester. The student then sues the college for violating their First Amendment rights, resulting in lost wages and damage to their reputation.
How far do you think that lawsuit would go? Not being sarcastic here. I have a general feeling of how far it would make it, but I'm not entirely certain on that.