I don’t know where to start. The number of things that are not being understood here is staggering.
> Blogs. They’re places to post ideas and get feedback. They don’t establish policy.
>An office of diversity and inclusion at a university. Advocates for the rights and roles for non-majority populations, fosters dialog about ways the divides hat exist between groups can be narrowed/closed. Does not make policy.
>Non-binary-gender-inclusive language. An emerging area of language where people who do not self-identify with either of the two traditionally known genders (male and female) are working to come up with language that includes them. Like any new, difficult idea, messy and confusing for those of us who do fall within the established binary. Not law. Not policy.
> The situation at hand. The vice chancellor for diversity and inclusion, working appropriately to advance its University-assigned mission, writes a “how to” to try and explain to those unfamiliar with this still very-new area of thought and identify steps they can take – they’re interested – in helping create a more gender-inclusive classroom environment. Attempt to explain the pronouns thing. In a a blog post. NOT. MAKING. POLICY.
But RageKulture combines with total lack of understanding of the basic concepts of what a blog is, and with uninformed politicians eager to score cheap points with an equally uninformed electorate, and turns this into another irrelevant slapfight.
And now, the number of state lawmakers and politicians running toward this nontroversy with their torches blazing…
And UT isn’t unique. There’s town vs. gown idiocy like this at every turn. The Reading Fun Home at Duke Controversy comes to mind.
The net-net is this. If you disagree with something, at least do the thing a favor and attempt to understand all of the elements involved so you can disagree based on facts rather than being disagreeing out of ignorance.
You do your side of an argument a disservice when you can’t be bothered to care enough to know specifics.