Stanford's “Elimination of Harmful Language” Initiative (itcommunity.stanford.edu)

Article summary

The article discusses Stanford's "Elimination of Harmful Language" Initiative, which aims to remove certain words and phrases from usage. The initiative categorizes language into various types, including ableist, ageist, and culturally appropriative. The comments reveal that the initiative has sparked debate and criticism. The initiative's list of harmful language includes phrases such as "blind review" and "committed suicide".

Main themes

• language and power
• ableism and disability
• free speech and intellectual freedom
• euphemisms and newspeak
• slacktivism and social justice

What commenters say

• The initiative's list of harmful language is overly broad and perpetuates ableism by implying that disability is abnormal or negative.
• The use of certain words and phrases, such as "committed suicide", can be seen as moralizing and blaming the individual.
• The initiative's focus on language is seen as a form of 'slacktivism' that does not address the underlying issues.
• The redefinition of words and phrases can be seen as a form of newspeak that undermines meaningful communication.
• The initiative's approach to language can be alienating for individuals with language processing conditions, such as autism spectrum disorder.
• The use of euphemisms, such as 'died by suicide' instead of 'committed suicide', can imply passivity and undermine personal responsibility.
• The initiative's goals are seen as a power grab that undermines free speech and intellectual freedom.