Oxfam Inclusivity Guide.

Oxfam's explanation -
Overview
Language has the power to reinforce or deconstruct systems of power that maintain poverty, inequality and suffering. As we are making commitments to decolonization in practice, it is important that we do not forget the role of language and communications in the context of inequality. The Inclusive Language Guide is a resource to support people in our sector who have to communicate in English to think about how the way they write can subvert or inadvertently reinforce intersecting forms of inequality that we work to end. The language recommended is drawn from specialist organizations which provide advice on language preferred by marginalized people, groups and communities, and by our own staff and networks, to support us to make choices that respectfully reflect the way they wish to be referred to. We want to support everyone to feel empowered to be inclusive in their work, because equality isn’t equality if it isn’t for everyone.

The link to the guide is here - oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/621487/tk-inclusive-language-guide-130323-en.pdf;jsessionid=C0A819D35295A3E663D7E4A3D2231FEA?sequence=4

Some of it makes absolute sense, some of it is absolutely over the top. The aim is to make everyone feel 'included' but seems to be about people not being offended.

Language is very powerful. For example the term 'woke' which was originally used as having awareness of the suffering of others through racism is now used as a term of abuse for people who try to defend minorities such as refugees, black people or asylum seekers, etc.
Just as the term 'Gashead' was originally used as an insult but is now taken on as a badge of pride.

Thanks Chesh. The bit in bold is a perfect example of finding some common ground and common sense.
Oxfam do fantastic work. No-one can dispute that.
But to me it looks like they have created a problem that didn't exist.
To answer my own question - this does not look like a good spend of their resources. And of course it would be tragic if people gave less to a worthy cause as a result.

Oldie

With regard to closing part of the forum down, we have had a very quiet period without complaints about language and trolling for a while. We have recently started to get complaints once again from various parties and to be honest we don't have the time or the inclination to act as a buffer between warring parties who will neither reconcile, agree to disagree, or stop arguing or should I say bickering and then complaining. A difference in views rapidly once again descends into attacking each other rather than arguing the posts.

With regard to the Oxfam language issue, I appreciate that each of us has to try to be sensitive to other people and I try very hard to empathise with those who have suffered because of their identity. Working for a suicide charity I became acutely aware of all types of abuse and the horrific damage humans can do to each other.

However I have also recently become concerned how, when so many people are trying their level best to cope with the ever changing rules around gender and identities and the language that pertains to it, that a minority of people are so easily offended when someone makes a simple mistake. Recently a newscaster was castigated and abused online for calling Sam Smith 'he' instead of his chosen pronoun 'they'. It was a simple error and yet there was an almighty furore around it.

There has to be give and take on both sides and simply correcting someone in a calm manner is far better than showing outrage that you have been deeply offended when the individual may be totally unaware of how you class yourself. 

Further one of my friends is deaf. Oxfam advises against using the term. Yet my friend uses the term all time. He talks about being deaf, the deaf community, support for the deaf at his work place. His friends use the term in conversation. Yet if I used the term at Oxfam I would be pulled up for it.

My father in his old age used terminology that you and I would fear to use. It was language he had used all of his life without ever being corrected. Just as gender has become fluid so has language and perhaps a bit of understanding, kindness and less offense wouldn't go amiss. When he was corrected my father tried his best to remember but at times would drop the odd word into conversation. Sadly I know a few people whose views are hardening against the use of 'appropriate language' because of the furore that kicks off every time some person in public life feels offended. That doesn't help anyone.

Regards Cheshire

I think it's clear Oxfam are political,they are a Lefty charity.Therefore liars.

I imagine an idiot worker of theirs shouting about "free speech " one week ,then a week later justifying this worrying guideline for 'inclusivity ' speak.

How much money was spent on the inclusivity bible?
This current effort is (according to Oxfams CEO) an update,so he 'did'nt know' the cost.So there was an original cost for the first edition and how many updates?Could be thousands £.

This spotlight on the patheticness at Oxfam comes at a time they are yet to shrug off the 'prostitute scandal' of Oxfam workers taking advantage of possibly desperate women,the kind of women they claim to help ( 2 non Oxfam language words in this paragraph I think).

Then since Oxfam became big business, it's paid big wages to the top people and those a little below.

Not sure but maybe £100,000 plus,with £60,000 to £70,000 not uncommon.

Perhaps someone could post the wages of these worldwide 'carers'.

Harassment of people on the internet is a crime,those that participate need to be stopped.Becoming obsessed,arrogantly seeing themselves as heroes and their victims as "thick racists" is no excuse.

Trying to discuss 'hot potato' topics is not a crime.Online stalking and harassment is.

This is precisely why the mods have considered getting rid of the political threads. You can't help yourself Bas. I am surprised you didn't call them all 'woke'.

Your post basically says Oxfam = political = Left = liars.

So as someone who has moved from centre right to centre left, I am now a liar in your eyes. Thanks Bas.
Not all left wing people are liars, just as not all right wing people are racist. 

I really take offence with people who cannot debate civilly and have to group anyone who has a different opinion as liars, woke etc.
Please, debate civilly and cut out the name calling!

Of course Oxfam are "political, but not in the simplistic "left Vs right" characterisation. Anyone, any organisation that states a position on any societal subject is, by definition, political.
The aim of inclusivity is honourable and should be applauded. The purpose of pointing to the barriers that (lazy) language used in everyday affairs is laudable.
The method by which this being communicated leaves a lot to be desired in my opinion (which is known within Oxfam).
This allows the issues I quote above to become lost in the screaming headlines put out by the refusniks who put their fingers in their ears whilst talking of our glorious (British) history.

This will happen, I am proud to see my two 4 year old granddaughters being raised in this way. We will not be the only one's and as the "Life on Mars" generation (mine) dies off, they will come to the fore.

The CEO of Oxfam earns £120,936.
Looking for a definition of hypocrisy?
People working for charitable organisations on excessive salaries.  
Parasites.

I suppose it was 'happy parent' or 'happy parenthood ' day today ,according to Oxfam speak.

Okay I suppose, but abit formal.

I've seen an Oxfam Mothers Day card for sale online.