Jewish?! Gay?! These laundry lists of "dirty words" are ridiculous. Half of these words are perfectly acceptable depending on the context, but by producing a "list" like this, the Department is de-contextualizing the words and implicitly suggesting that they are never acceptable. It is typical small-minded bureaucratic political correctness, and just gives licence to the easily offended to cry "discrimination" whenever one of these words is used, regardless of how it is used. Forcing employees to come up with silly euphamisms for "gay" and "Jewish" doesn't address the root problem that the Department is persumably trying to address, that is, prejudice in the workplace.
Any guidelines on language in the workplace should take into account both:
(1) The subjective intent of the person using the language that could be considered offensive; and
(2) How a reasonable member of the identifiable group in question would interpret the use of the potentially offensive language, when considered in the context of how the language was used.
...or such is my humble opinion.
'manning the phones, manpower, policeman, chairman, spokesman, fireman, foreman'
are NOT gender specific. They are just descriptive of a job.
The world has gone nuts.
Hi Bystander. Just discovered your blog tonight. Good articles, short and to the point.
I agree with the the anomymous comments above.
NZ hasn't gone as silly as Britain or the USA....yet. Dave.
Bystander
Oh dear (sic)!
I'm a middle-aged (some say old) British part-tme chairman, and I'm having something of an identity crisis!
Perhaps you might like to consider another competition, the subject being a letter to Charlie Falconer
(a) seeking acceptable (to whom by the way?) alternatives for universally used and understood expressions such as "refugees", incorporating as many of the proscribed words as possible
(b) a translation of the same into the gobbledegook required by the thought police (officers of course, not men).
I strongly approve of this list, although I think they need to add a whole bunch of other words to it. I look forward to the day when they get the entire language in there then perhaps they'll disable themselves from writing complete bloody nonsense!
Meanwhile those of us with an ounce of common sense can carry on regardless.
Why are ----man job descriptions considered sexist? If a man works as a police officer, then surely he's apoliceman. If a woman works as a police officer, she's a policewoman. and why can't we cal la male chairman a chairman?
Clearly I'm missing something obvious here. But surely these terms are merely descriptive.
How about chronologically-impaired for old or middle aged? Or persons of a non-masculine gender for women? None of the black people I know object to being called black any more than I object to
being called white. They would probably object to being called a nigger which is offensive and isn't on this daft list.
This is so stupid as to defy belief, I have a black female colleague whom I routinely call pet. It makes her laugh, She is an intelligent, well-educated young woman (and at the risk of sounding like a sexist politically-incorrect middle aged man who's oppressing her rights she's extremely attractive too) and would be far more offended by me treating her like an idiot by following these rules than by me treating her as what she is which is just another member of my team.
The fools who drew up guidelines like these are so determined not to offend anyone that they end up offending everyone.
Surely "le male chairman"?
Interesting the term 'whites' is permissable. I'm sure it would raise some eyebrows if the same principle was used for those of a different skin colour (with due deference to the commenter above).
That said - speaking as one and on behalf of the whites - we don't mind.
Strange, my calendar doesn't say it's 1st April.
So what are we to do with the 1957 UN Convention on Refugees, under which many 'people seeking refuge' secure residence pending their application for, er, 'staying because they are under threat of persecution'.
Can one treat the list as definitive and exhaustive? Anything that isn't on it is open for use...
'Jewish' and 'gay' are not acceptable; I'd better start using 'kike' and 'poofter'.
Quite interesting - but mostly for its omissions. So what about paki, nigger, wog, pikey, gippo, poof, queer, and paddy, to mention but a few? Would I be OK to use those words - especially in letters??!!
The whole thing is quite preposterous.
(Political correctness run amok.)
The New Labour fascists are to blame.
The current Prime Minister must realise that his ability to control the sychophants lackeys and fools in parliament does not really make him any more special than anyone else.
Parliament is NOT supreme: people are.
Michael
Sorry, spelling problem:
should that have been
"sycophants"
or
"psychophants"
They missed 'mixed race'. We should say 'dual heritage' now apparently. Racist bastards.
"doesn't address the root problem that the Department is persumably trying to address"
Well, no. Someone would have to leave their office for that.
On the plus side, they didn't. Because the kind of people who worked many, many days with tax-payer supplied doughnuts and coffee to produce that list would otherwise have been trying to actually affect the root problem.
And you can imagine how bad that would have been....
Don't forget that the term "Chairman" is actually a contraction of the phrase "Chair Manager" and has no connotations to the the gender of the person holding said position.
These idiots would make offense out of nothing at every opportunity. Still keeps 'em in employment I suppose. . .
What bog trotting fugly lesbo wrote that then?
I say, isn't Tony Blair looking... experienced these days?
Can someone tell me what the DCA is for? No really, it is a serious question.
When I read DCA, I cannot help but think of the yes minister book. And you have to admit that this guide could have been in the book.
Reality is stranger than fiction!
Name and Shame the idiot who writes these types of nonsensical leaflets. Let's have em' outed. If they believe this, they won't mind their names being published, then we can have a sensible debate with these people and get rid of all this nonsense.
To be fair, I know several ladies of all ages who despise being referred to as 'dear' or 'love', regarding it as patronising. And I know plenty of people who use 'middle-aged' (and 'middle-class' for that matter) as a term of abuse!
Rogerborg: I really, really wish I could be absolutely certain you were being flippant, but even if you are it's in very poor taste.
Some years ago my force handed out a booklet which amongst other things said we should not use the term Oriental, it then went on to say it was acceptable to use the term black in describing Chinese people. It goes without saying this tosh was ignored by all and sundry.
I did spend some time trying to find the provenance of this odious piece of arsewipe. There was nothing in it to say who or what organisation was responsible for its publication or who was responsible for the authorisation of it's contents.
These are sugestions made by people in the equql opps industry. Their choice of carreer tells us all we need to know about them.
It is from their ranks that Stalin recruited the staff of his re-education camps, Gulags he called them.
Carry on using any term that is not offensive or rude. You can't lose your job over it and it always makes things interesting if you can annoy these people without dropping yourself in the poop.
Every time we avoid using words like manhole cover, the English language and the sole of this country dies a little more.
"Can someone tell me what the DCA is for? No really, it is a serious question."
It is there to provide jobs for those who "work" there, thus reducing the unemployment figures. It is a warmer, dryer alternative to digging holes in the road and then filling them up again.
I guess at least a million people in Britain are employed in similar office-based, memo-writing, meeting-holding jobs. It would actually save money to send them all home indefinitely on full pay - we would save on the heating, lighting, stationery and biscuits.
So "Pikey" is ok then?!
I used to be the "token tart" too on a Board I sat on - loved it. I should be ashamed of myself - I am letting womanhood down and mocking all those ernest boiler suit wearing sisters ...
To be scrupulously fair, I must say that the lists are neither exhaustive nor definitive, and I have of necessity left out the copious explanatory notes. Thus, Pikey, Nigger and the rest were, I imagine, anathematised a few Sir Humphreys ago.
This is exactly the sort of nonsense that is prevelant in the police service nowadays.
With loads of officers working on policies and proceedures whilst the few left at the front line continue to battle on with no help.
Police Service!
Its obviously too late for you now mate, they've got you.
Propper coppers who arent tainted by pc call it the Police Force.
and PC Midlands - if you tick the wrong box - if your carbon copy dares to fail to come through - well the entire case comes apart - no excuses for human error so PC are we
Does this mean everytime I have to complete a questionnaire, I am not allowed to describe myself as English, without ensuring that there is also a section, which asks me to confirm that I am also white, which I must answer (even though I would not be so obliged if I were from the Asian or African continents and the hue of my skin reflected this). Presumable failure to answer this discretionary? question would label me as racially intolerant should the fact that I am "pigment challenged" also arise.
Ours is a lost generation. Let us, then, teach our children to speak English, in hopes that they can revive it someday.
Let us also teach them to think; and the first lesson should be that language is for expressing truth, not suppressing it. To forbid words is to forbid the thoughts they stand for.
If you've ever tried not to think of white bears, you know that a thought forbidden is a thought imperative. If the bureaucrats wanted us not to think evil thoughts about those who are different from us, they could not have adopted a more foolish policy.
Besides, to compel us to deny that a girl is a girl not only breeds cynicism and despair, it threatens the future of the species.
I also note that it is suggested that the only prophet whose name I can take in vain is Christian. I can; however, wish a infinite number of misfortunes upon someone under/in the name of any other Prophet (Christian or otherwise).
Again political correctness has taken led us to the brink of stupidity, then made us take a great leap forward.
If I were given the option of chosing between some thug physically assaulting me, but doing so without referring to my creed, colour, religious principles or sexual orientation, and someone not assualting me, but making an assumption that I was homosexual, I for one would prefer the latter.
If these "though police" have nothing better to do, perhaps they could be locked in the British Library and advise to "cleanse" all the literature therein, making sure that it is transcribed into all the necessary languages (e.g. the Gospels must be in Greek, Latin, Hebrew and in both the traditional Hebrew and variations thereof). These cleansed books to be made available on request in electronic form only. This will hopefully keep them "gainfully employed" and allowing those people who actually need to deal with the real world to do their jobs and call a spade a spade, rather than a "digging instrument, not to be confused with a person who has a higher than average dark pigmentation in the epidermal layer on view to the general public..... as long as that is quite clear"
I noticed that there were 31 comments and hurriedly scrolled through them to look for Rogerborg's contribution. I just knew it would be a gem.
You never fail to please, R.
If there's one thing that annoys me more than the existence of lists like this, it's the self-righteous indignation of reactionary 'little Englanders' the lists create in their wake.
I have a theory that it's not lefties like me writing these fucking stupid lists, it's BNP members who want to discredit the whole concept of anti-racism by making it out to be this kind of dumbass censorship.
'Refugee' is a legal term denoting someone's status, as is 'asylum seeker'. What are the DCA going to use instead, or is that merely an IND problem?
And what _do_ you call deaf people, then? Not that it matters - they can't hear you. baDing-tish!
Bystander, do you have a source for this? I couldn't find it online and want to be sure it's for real.
NB I assume "used negatively" is meant to apply to all of "immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers, gypsies", not just "gypsies". I.e. according to the DCA, it's OK to say someone is an immigrant or an asylum seeker, but it's not OK to say "the immigrants have caused problems" or something.
Similarly "blind", "disabled", "deaf" are OK; it's just the use of these adjectives with the definite article which they are trying to outlaw (as in "guide dogs for the blind"). I know this is something of a shibboleth; I've never understood why.
Jenny,
I have the booklet on my desk. It is aimed at staff and is not on any public site that I know of. I had to obtain my copy by nefarious means. A couple of media organisations have asked to borrow it, but I can't do that. They will have to go the FOI route if they want it badly enough.
Anon
And which is the Government department with the highest refusal rate to provide information under the FOIA?
I wonder who is more stupid?
Those who drafted it?
Or those who will comply with it with bovine docility?
If you are in the latter category - you deserve everything you get.
'Innapropriate' does not mean 'illegal'. It simply means whatever some behaviouraly disturbed idiot subjectively dislikes and before the Department of Consitutional Affairs gets on it's High Horse, then tell me what article of the Euopean Convention or the Human Rights Act which, as a public body they are bound by in relation to the freedom of expression qualifes the freedom of expression by the use of the term: 'inappropriate', or a term which used will cause 'offence' I think the qualifying term is the use of the word 'Law'
In other words, as a public body DCA, enact it into law, if you dare or shut up!
As for the rest of you, stop 'whimping' and ignore it!
I don't think anybody else has asked this, so obviously I am just being stupid... but, what is wrong with the word Jewish? Are we to assume that the DCA is planning a Nazi style genocide of anyone caught involved with the scullcap wearing religion?
My god. We had a brief the other day along these lines and I confess...I sat at the back and doodled on my notepad whilst a colleague sat and crossed his eyes at me. Immature I know. My daughter tells everyone that Mummy is a policeman and you know what?? I don't care.
Commenting by HaloScan
