Almost a decade back, a group of buddies and I were watching a newish Robin Hood movie, and a young mentee asked why British authorities were hanging a Caucasian bandit: “He’s white — that ain’t realistic.”
The story is funny, but the sincere energy underlying the question is surprisingly common. To give an all-too-real example, academic leaders at USC recently declared a de facto ban on the use of the word “field” during discussions of scholarly work. Across at least the sizeable School of Social Work, the University of Southern California/Spoiled Children will “remove the word . . . from its curriculum and practice and replace it with the word ‘practicum’ instead.” The apparent reason for this is the perception that only blacks and Latinos have worked in the United States’ actual fields in the recent past: “The term may have . . . connotations for descendants of slaves and immigrant workers.” Per a rather lengthy official letter from the institution: “This change supports anti-racist social work practice by replacing language that could be considered anti-Black or immigrant in favor of inclusive language.”
Comments