The march of the politically correct – reshaping our language

In 1887, Oscar Wilde wrote of England's relationship with the USA, "We have everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language."

But the language gap is narrowing at an accelerating rate as the strictures of political correctness demand that any word or phrase which has been perfectly good and understandable for generations must be changed and changed now if it has even the remotest possible cause for offence. And the warriors for this reshaping of our language insist that even if there is no immediate offence to anybody there could be some offence imagined somehow, somewhere and at some time so it is best to be careful and nip it in the bud.

American universities, always in the forefront of so-called progressive causes, are leading the charge although British, Australian, Canadian and other English language universities are not far behind. The truism that what happens in the USA will eventually happen elsehere has never been more starkly or immediately illustrated.

Almost any American university could be chosen at random to prove the point.

The University of New Hampshire is typical. It has on its website what it is pleased to call a "Bias-Free Language Guide" and it is so extraordinarily Orwellian that even its own President Mark Huddleston has admitted that he is "troubled by many things" that it contains. But, of course, he hasn't demonstrated any leadership by throwing it - or even bits of it – into the bin. That, as I am sure he knows, would be a career destroying move. It would be almost as dangerous as saying something nice about President Trump.

According to the University's website, the guide "is meant to invite inclusive excellence in (the) campus community". An utterly bewildering list of words is condemned as being "problematic". Of course, nowadays we must take it as settled fact that any word containing "man" is primitive, sexist and reactionary so "chairman", "mailman", "manpower" and many other "man" words have long been consigned to the dustbin of history.

But the language Nazis had only just begun with those early victories.

Apparently, there is a gravely serious fear of "ciscentrism" which the university defines as a "pervasive and institutionalised system that places transgender people in the 'other' category and treats their needs and identities as less important than those of cisgender people". "Cisgender people are men who identify as men and women who identify as women – at least 99% of the community and including straight and gay men and women.

"Ciscentrism includes the lack of gender-neutral restrooms, locker rooms and residences," the university thoughtfully explains.

The word "homosexual" is out and should be replaced with "Same gender loving" (why use only one word when three will do?) because that is more "inclusive" and even describing a US citizen as "American" is wrong because it "assumes the US is the only country inside the continents of North and South America". "Illegal alien" should be "undocumented immigrant" or "person seeking asylum" and "Caucasian" is definitely bad because, we learn from the university website, the notion of race is "a social construct ... that was designed to maintain slavery". It should be "European-American".

The words "mother" and "father" and any words derived from them are simply too awful because they "gender a non-gendered activity", "healthy" is out in favour of "non-disabled" while "handicapped" or "physically challenged" should be dumped for a "person who is wheelchair mobile". "Rich" should be "person with material wealth" while "poor" should be a "person who lacks advantages that others have."

"Overweight" is rejected because it is "arbitrary" as is "senior citizen" or "elder". The list goes on and on.

And the ever-helpful University of New Hampshire website has a further very helpful guide about the correct way to use pronouns. This is, they say. Is "a starting point for using pronouns respectfully".

For example – "his" and "her" are out and should be replaced by "hir" which is "non-binary". We learn that "non-binary" pronouns "are often used by trans, genderqueer and other gender non-conforming people". And, wonder of wonders, if everybody spoke and wrote using this reengineered language it would mean that we would move "closer to a full democracy".

Purdue University has its own more or less similar list of naughty words – "Stereotypes and Biased Language" – and informs its students and faculty that "biased language" frequently occurs based on gender "but can also offend groups of people based on sexual orientation, ethnicity, political interest, or race". The university advises the terrible downside of not using "non-sexist" writing – "If you write in a sexist manner and alienate much of your audience from your discussion, your writing will be much less effective."

A unique service is provided for its students by the University of Nebraska and all they need is a set of coloured crayons to discover just where they are on the "gender-identity spectrum" and to provide a handy guide to "queer and trans community language". It is a drawing of a unicorn which is coloured in.

An example is given which shows how a student would fill out this page if he was a man who identified as a woman, was sexually attracted mainly to women but sometimes to men and other genders and who experienced little emotional attraction to any gender. Having discovered just how bloody mixed up he or she was, they could then learn what the correct language is to use to describe themselves and about how they want to be referred to.

The acronym LGBTQIAPP+ is offered as a comprehensive reference to "lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, aromantic, pansexual, (and) polysexual individuals" and how to address them and talk and write about them. Everybody is warned, "Trans people can be straight, bisexual, lesbian, gay, asexual, queer etc just like everybody else."

Already, the serious consequences of not abiding by these new rules are emerging. One recent case was of a student at Northern Arizona University having her English paper marked down because she used the word "mankind" instead of "humanity".

The student received an email from the staff member marking the paper stating, "I would be negligent, as a professor who is running a class about the human condition and the assumptions we make about being 'human', if I did not also raise this issue of gendered language and ask my students to respect the need for gender-neutral language."

However, the professor was careful not to display any "oppressive" superiority in the teacher/student relationship – that would be woefully politically incorrect - by adding unctuously, "I will respect your choice to leave your diction choices 'as is' and to make whatever political and linguistic statement you want to make by doing so." In other words if you are determined to be a sexist reactionary pig and refuse to enter the 21^st century then you can but you will suffer for it.

Not content with being absolutely politically correct, Bethel University – a self-described "Christ-centred university" – has a killer argument: God wants us to be inclusive and non-sexist with our language.

It preaches to staff and students via its "Language is a Powerful Tool" lesson: "The Bible teaches us to value all people because they are created in God's image. Some traditional uses of language have been received as excluding a substantial group of people. To be clear in our Christian witness, the Bethel faculty encourages the use of inclusive language."

It provides a predictable list of words and terms which good Christians should not use. The university supports "traditional marriage" but cautions against using the phrases like "man and wife" because they put women in a "dependent" position.

Yet they sometimes appear not to live up to their own standards. One of its student clubs is called "City Front Ministries" which has its own website headed by a quotation from the King James Bible (Matthew 4:19", "And he said unto them, follow me and I will make you fishers of men". Only of men? Are women and everybody else who doesn't identify as a man excluded?

The university uses the King James Bible for its many Bible-based courses – "all truth ... has its source in God" – blithely ignoring the dreadful sexist, "non-inclusive" language that this Bible – translated between 1604 and 1611 – flagrantly and defiantly uses.

Presumably, according to this "Christ-centred university", this quote and millions of others in the King James Bible are simply inexcusable rubbish, "So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them." (Genesis 1:27)

I've got a quote for the brains trust at Bethel University and I'm sure they will recognise it – Luke 23:24 – "Father forgive them for they know not what they do."