ronp wrote:

....... and just the day before, BBC Radio 4 Today programme changed Fishermen to Fisher People.

So no doubt on the back of that we can expect that famous lozenge to be renamed ....

.... "Fisher People's Gender Neutral Friends".

That'll certainly be a hard one to swallow.

HWN wrote:

* Excluding students from accessing student activities due to high financial costs.

HWN wrote:

From "Microaggressions in Everyday Life: Race, Gender, and Sexual Orientation",
by Derald Wing Sue, Ph.D., these are just micro-aggressions in the classroom:

* Failing to learn to pronounce or continuing to mispronounce the names of students after they
have corrected you.
* Scheduling tests and project due dates on religious or cultural holidays.
* Disregarding religious traditions or their details. (Ex. Impacts of fasting)
* Setting low expectations for students from particular groups, neighborhoods, or feeder
patterns.
* Calling on, engaging and validating one gender, class, or race of students while ignoring other
students during class.
* Assigning student tasks or roles that reinforce particular gender roles or don’t allow all students
flexibility across roles and responses.
* Anticipating students’ emotional responses based on gender, sexual orientation, race or
ethnicity.
* Using inappropriate humor in class that degrades students from different groups.
* Expressing racially charged political opinions in class assuming that the targets of those opinions
do not exist in class.
* Hosting debates in class that place students from groups who may represent a minority opinion
in class in a difficult position.
* Singling students out in class because of their backgrounds.
* Expecting students of any particular group to ‘represent’ the perspectives of others of their race,
gender, etc. in class discussions or debates.
* Denying the experiences of students by questioning the credibility and validity of their stories.
* Assigning class projects or creating classroom or school procedures that are heterosexist, sexist,
racist, or promote other oppressions, even inadvertently.
* Using sexist language.
* Using heteronormative metaphors or examples in class.
* Assuming the gender of any student.
* Continuing to misuse pronouns even after a student, transgender or not, indicates their
preferred gender pronoun.
* Assigning projects that ignore differences in socioeconomic class status and inadvertently
penalize students with fewer financial resources.
* Excluding students from accessing student activities due to high financial costs.
* Assuming all students have access to and are proficient in the use of computers and applications
for communications about school activities and academic work.
* Assuming that students of particular ethnicities must speak another language or must not speak
English.
* Complimenting non-white students on their use of “good English.”
* Discouraging students from working on projects that explore their own social identities.
* Asking people with hidden disabilities to identify themselves in class.
* Forcing students with non‐obvious disabilities to “out” themselves or discuss them publically.
* Ignoring student‐to‐student microaggressions, even when the interaction is not course‐related.
* Making assumptions about students and their backgrounds.
* Featuring pictures of students of only one ethnicity or gender on the school website.
* Having students engage in required reading where the protagonists are always white.

Say nothing. Think nothing. Discuss nothing. Learn nothing.

astonbuilder wrote:

Ah yes, it’s all the governments fault

LT wrote:

The people of the UK are now made up of different cultures and races as opposed to predominately one culture and race. As such all the above points seem like common sense to me. Assuming you want a harmonious and inclusive place of learning, that respects the different backgrounds, faiths, abilities etc of the students.

Quote:

The term racial microaggressions was first coined by psychiatrist Chester Pierce, M.D., in the 1970s. But the concept is also rooted in the work of Jack Dovidio, Ph.D. (Yale University) and Samuel Gaertner, Ph.D. (University of Delaware) in their formulation of aversive racism—many well-intentioned whites consciously believe in and profess equality, but unconsciously act in a racist manner, particularly in ambiguous situations.

Racial microaggressions are the brief and everyday slights, insults, indignities and denigrating messages sent to people of color by well-intentioned white people who are unaware of the hidden messages being communicated. These messages may be sent verbally ("You speak good English."), nonverbally (clutching one's purse more tightly), or environmentally (symbols like the confederate flag or using American Indian mascots). Such communications are usually outside the level of conscious awareness of perpetrators.

Derald Wing Sue

Common courtesy.

HWN wrote:

- Hugh
(DNA-proven to be 0.00% English).

HWN wrote:

Another example of something that makes it appear that 'people of protected characteristics' (of which I am one)

Quote:

It is against the law to discriminate against someone because of:

age
disability
gender reassignment
marriage and civil partnership
pregnancy and maternity
race
religion or belief
sex
sexual orientation
These are called protected characteristics.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equ...cteristics

If I'm talking to a group of people all 20 years younger or older than me, I'm a "person of protected characteristic" in that context (age). Likewise if I'm talking to a group of women then, again, I'm a "person of protected characteristic" in that context (sex). We have gay friends and lesbian friends and when we meet up in the pub, the 6 of us (them plus SWMBO and me) are all "persons of protected characteristic" by virtue of our sexual orientation - it's a bit Noah's Ark, actually, going in to the pub based on sexual orientation two-by-two .