“The Princeton University HR department has largely wiped the word ‘man’ from its vocabulary.” Arnold Cusmarfu
“Instead of using ‘man,’ employees are told to use words such as human beings, individuals or people.” Ibid
PRINCEton itself has male overtones; Princesston sound better?
Thank you, Princeton, for this progress!
We’re so grateful, blessed and proud!
Thank you for such ‘forward thinking’
You have heard us clear and loud!
We’re so glad we have a ‘safe place’
To pretend we’ve been set free!
It was high time for these changes…
Dudes, you’re AWESOME…(Honestly)
We are wymyn on a mission!
Angry dudettes makin’ waves!
Breaking chains of our oppression…
Proving nonsense REALLY saves!
We’ve escaped ‘the Patriarchists’!
Gender-neutral, We’ve been fixed!
We’ve been played, and spayed and neutered
Common sense?..At last we’ve nixed!
– Tom Graffagnino
Anticipating the election of Hillary Clinton and the establishment of a federal Department of Permissible Expression (DoPE), one of our nation’s most prestigious universities has decided to get ready. The College Fix reports:
The Princeton University HR department has largely wiped the word “man” from its vocabulary.
The relatively new policy in effect at the Ivy League institution spells out the directive in a four-page memo that aims to make the department more gender inclusive.
Instead of using “man,” employees are told to use words such as human beings, individuals or people.
Other guidelines? Instead of “man and wife” use spouses or partners. Switch out “man made” with artificial, handmade or manufactured. Don’t use the verb “to man,” as in to work something, instead use to operate or to staff. Throw out workmanlike and replace it with skillful.
The memo goes on to list a variety of occupations that typically include the word “man” in them and offers replacements: business person instead of businessman, firefighter instead of fireman, ancestors instead of forefathers, and so on.
“Consistent with style guidelines issued by Princeton’s Office of Human Resources and Office of Communications, and as endorsed by the Institutional Equity Planning Group as a preferred University practice, HR has developed these gender inclusive style guidelines, to be utilized by all HR staff members in HR communications, policies, job descriptions, and job postings,” the memo states.
In a statement to The College Fix, John Cramer, Princeton’s director of media relations, said the guidelines “reflect the university’s initiative of fostering an inclusive environment.”
While Princeton’s language policy [is] for its Offices of Communications and Human Resources, Princeton’s LGBT Center also offers a guide on various gender pronouns for those who identify as “transgender, genderqueer, and other gender-variant,” suggesting “ze, zie and hir,” “they and theirs,” and “Ey, em, eir and emself.”
Cramer clarified Princeton’s policy [however], saying “these are guidelines issued by HR, developed in cooperation with Institutional Equity Planning Group for communication and job postings. Students are not mandated to follow this policy.”
In their eagerness to come up with gender-neutral terminology, the dim bulbs who concocted this foolishness overlooked the obvious. To carry out a scrub that would be acceptable to eagle-eyed Clintonian overseers of political correctness, the word “man” would have to be replaced with something more suitable also in words where it occurs such as “manager,” “maneuver,” “mangrove,” “manifold,” “manipulate,” “manor,” “mantra,” “manure,” and so on. Have at it, Princeton/H.R.!
Why stop there? Presumably proper names containing “man” might also be potentially offensive to the tender ears of some Princeton students. What should we do about Manassas, site of two Civil War battles? How about foreign names like Manila Bay, Mannheim, Manchuria, and Manitoba? Should art history books edit the names of painters Andrea Mantegna and Edouard Manet? Women named Amanda will probably have to use the initial if they want to be hired by a future Clinton administration – unless they’re applying to work for Bill at the “Foundation.”
If you think this is all too silly for words, think again. Unless Americans elect Donald Trump in November, we will witness divisiveness in this country to a degree that will make Barack Obama seem positively amateurish. The damage that two or three radical feminists on the Supreme Court would do to our Constitution should convince NeverTrumpers that the time for foolish games must – absolutely, positively – come to an end.
Working to keep control of Congress will not be enough. After all, Lindsey Graham voted for the “wise Latina.”