By JAMES K. FITZPATRICK
I haven’t come across many defenders of the University of New Hampshire’s “Bias-Free Language Guide,” a 4,500-word document posted on the university’s website in early August by Sylvia Foster, the school’s coordinator of equity and diversity.
Even the usual suspects on the politically correct left are keeping their distance, sensing that Foster went too far, making a mockery of the university community. UNH President Mark Huddleston moved quickly to give assurances that “the views expressed in this guide are not the policy of the University of New Hampshire,” and that “no one on campus is required to obey these suggestions,” where speech is “free and unfettered.”
But Huddleston’s protestation does not close the discussion. Obviously, Sylvia Foster thought she would be applauded in the academic world for her attempt to make the University of New Hampshire, in her words, “an inclusive learning community” by informing incoming students of words they may use that “for some, feel like a form of violence.” She knows the views of her colleagues.
What words does Foster have in mind? The “Guide” suggests that students use the expression “person with a mental health condition,” rather than “crazy”; “people of advanced age,” in place of “senior citizen”; “person living at or below the poverty line,” instead of “poor person”; “persons seeking asylum,” instead of “illegal immigrants.”
Foster even wants UNH students to refrain from using the word “American” for U.S. citizens, because she believes doing that makes South Americans feel excluded. This only scratches the surface. Do an Internet search of “University of New Hampshire’s Bias-Free Language Guide” and you will see what I mean.
Reading through Foster’s list of objectionable words piqued my curiosity. It led me to ask myself why don’t we hear complaints about the words “paddy wagon,” “paddy hustle,” “donnybrook,” “malarkey,” “lynch law,” and “hooligan.” Or objections about the famous ventriloquist dummies “Charley McCarthy” and “Jerry Mahoney.” Why aren’t these things politically incorrect?
I would wager that a sizable number of readers of this column are scratching their heads, not getting my point; that they don’t see the common denominator between paddy wagon and Charley McCarthy. I can see why. These figures of speech are now so much a part of the American vernacular that it is not obvious that they all refer to the Irish. But they do.
The term paddy wagon refers to the police vehicle used in American cities to round up brawling Irishmen — “paddies.” Paddy hustle refers to scams used to trick gullible Irish immigrants. Donnybrook is a suburb of Dublin, known for brawling during its annual summer fair; in modern America we use the word to describe a crowd engaged in a noisy fight. We don’t have to go through the whole list. You get the point.
My question: Why don’t Irish groups protest these caricatures? It is not that there is something morally superior about the Irish that makes them more tolerant than most Americans. I have known too many Irish-Americans who resemble Whitey Bulger and “Mad Dog” Coll more than they do Archbishop Sheen to advance that proposition. It would make me a laughingstock if I did. What, then, is the answer?
I see a few possibilities. Pondering them can teach us something about the state of politically correct language these days, perhaps even lead some of the groups that take offense over politically correct language to reconsider whether they are overreacting.
I would contend that in some cases the answer is that assimilated Irish-Americans are like most other Americans: They are oblivious to the origins of the expressions. They don’t take offense because they are unaware of the Irish dimension to the terms.
(Although you would think that “Charley McCarthy” and “Jerry Mahoney” would have raised a few hackles back in the day. Maybe even “Fibber McGee.” But, from my boyhood recollections, Irish-Americans enjoyed these characters as much as people whose families arrived on the Mayflower.)
There is also the possibility that Irish-Americans are secure enough in the United States to find no reason to take offense over something like “paddy wagon”; that they see it as nothing threatening. It could also be that Irish-Americans view some of the terms as a form of good-natured self-mockery. The pugnacious Notre Dame leprechaun mascot is in that category.
Is my point that African-Americans, Hispanics, and Jews should learn to see the slang expressions used for them in the same category as “leprechaun” and “paddy wagon”? No. There is a difference between the “n-word” and “paddy.” The different manner in which the words were used throughout our history cannot be mistaken.
That said, a case can be made that the characters on the Amos and Andy show are no more offensive and stereotypical than Fibber McGee. As a boy, I was a big fan of the Amos and Andy television program. It struck me even at that age that some of the characters represented buffoons and simpletons, but not all. And certainly no more than those on, for example, the Red Skelton program. There were solid, middle-class black families represented on Amos and Andy, as well as the Kingfish.
But there may be no reason to dwell on this point. That American blacks were able to enjoy the characters on The Jeffersons and Good Times illustrates that they are able to draw the necessary lines in this matter. Blacks reacted to these shows, as well as the many modern situation comedies on television that focus on the black family, in the same manner that American Jews once reacted to the popular old radio show The Goldbergs.
The bottom line? When this issue arises in a classroom, common sense should prevail. There is a middle ground between the extremes of the University of New Hampshire’s “Bias-Free Language Guide” and the ignorant and hateful things said about blacks and Jews at an Aryan supremacist rally; between a student using the “n-word” and one who describes illegal aliens as what they are — illegal aliens.
Making a fuss over the use of the term “illegal alien” has much more to do with advancing a political agenda than it does with protecting students from hateful language.
+ + +
Readers are invited to submit comments and questions about this and other educational issues. The e-mail address for First Teachers is fitzpatrijames@sbcglobal.net, and the mailing address is P.O. Box 15, Wallingford, CT 06492.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress