Because she used “mankind” instead of “humanity,” her liberal professor subtracted 2 points.
A student used biblical diction, and her professor punished her…
In this modern age of being able to choose from over 50 gender types on Facebook, it’s no surprise that gender-sensitivity in language is such a hot topic in the liberal university system. Use the wrong term, and you might offend a reader. What used to simply communicate ideas clearly to people, these days results in emotional meltdowns and convalescent trips to the local safe space.
Professors love it. They are insulated from the real world as it is. They are funded by taxpayer money and incapable of being fired for even the dumbest policies they force on their students. It’s the closest thing to living in fantasy land as you can get in this life. A Northern Arizona University student recently discovered this the hard way:
A Northern Arizona University student lost credit on an English paper for using the word “mankind” instead of a gender-neutral alternative.
Cailin Jeffers, an English major at NAU, told Campus Reform that she received an email from one of her professors, Dr. Anne Scott, informing her that she had been docked one point out of a possible 50 on a recent paper for “problems with diction (word choice)” related to her use of the word “mankind” as a synonym for “humanity.”
“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,” Scott explained. “The words we use matter very much, or else teachers would not be making an issue of this at all, and the MLA would not be making recommendations for gender-neutral language at the national level.”
Do you remember having to follow the rules of the MLA Handbook when writing term papers in high school? You might have even been required to buy a copy of the handbook. I was.
WORLDVIEW COLLISION
College professors get to ram their worldview down the throats of the students who take their classes. When their students disagree with them, they can punish them with bad grades. This is just one more reason Conservative parents shouldn’t send their children to get overpriced degrees in any university. The liberals will hijack their children’s worldview and drive a permanent wedge between parent and child.
Liberals believe their worldview is supported by the facts. But the problem is that facts are not neutral. Facts are colored by your worldview. Which “facts” you decide to include, and which ones you decide to exclude, are determined by your worldview.
Liberals think their facts are legitimate. They think the facts that Conservatives focus on are illegitimate. They are basically like children in that way.
This teacher is enforcing a worldview, a certain network of presuppositions which cannot be proven by science. She wrote an email to her class:
You are welcome to make a statement about your politics, or conscience, or beliefs by using gender-specific language in your papers, and in many cases gender-specific language is called for, when you can discern with certainty the gender of the characters and author you’re discussing. However, I’ll still have to subtract a point or two for any kind of language that refers to all people as ‘mankind’ or readers as ‘him/he’, for the reasons I’ve outlined carefully above.”
CHRISTIANS FUNDING THEIR ENEMIES
She grades students based on how well they conform their thoughts to her worldview. She has zero tolerance for the Christian worldview, or any worldview in which the only two kinds of gender are male and female.
At bottom, her attack is on the Christian worldview. Her beef is with the God of the Bible, because it was in the Bible where “humanity” was defined as “mankind”: “He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them ‘Mankind’ when they were created” (Gen. 5:2).
Taxpayers fund professors like this. Recent polls show that 75% of Americans identify as Christians. This means that liberals like Dr. Scott are using money from Christian parents to indoctrinate their Christian children into an anti-Christian worldview. A rival worldview which can’t even make sense out of basic language, by the way.
What better reason is there for Christian families to refuse to send their children into a university system that is hostile to their worldview?
