I definitely can understand removing the words “master” and “slave”, especially in situations where they’re really unnecessary, such as “house master” instead of head, president, leader, etc at boarding schools. But field, such a general term? Yes, there were field hands in slavery times, just as there are migrant field workers today. But there are so many contexts for the word field. This seems absurd.
1 Like
To be fair, the headline is clickbait. The word “field” isn’t banned. What they actually wrote was, “Language can be powerful, and phrases such as ‘going into the field’ or ‘field work’ may have connotations for descendants of slavery and immigrant workers that are not benign.”
Whether USC should devote more resources to increasing diversity in its undergrad population is a different question that they should address.
8 Likes
“An office within the University of Southern California’s School of Social Work says it is removing the term “field” from its curriculum because it may have racist connotations related to slavery.” and “This change supports anti-racist social work practice by replacing language that could be considered anti-Black or anti-immigrant in favor of inclusive language,” the memo reads. “Language can be powerful, and phrases such as ‘going into the field’ or ‘field work’ may have connotations for descendants of slavery and immigrant workers that are not benign.”
The title seems exactly representative of what the office is doing, that an office within the USC school of Social Work is removing the word “field” from its curriculum.
As for the racial composition of USC (a completely different and “What about this?” separate topic), apparently the student body is at least 28% non-White, non-Asian, possibly more, depending upon whether the over 25% of students described as “international” are also non-White, non-Asian. But yes, 5.3% Black or African American is a lower percentage than that at some other highly selective schools.
I would imagine that many US African American students who are admitted with the same financial package to equally selective and desirable schools would wind up choosing to attend a school with a higher percentage of AA students.
I’m imagining a sports article. The USC Trojans will take the practicum this Saturday against the Stanford Cardinal. Mmm. Not the same. 
2 Likes
Apparently administrators have been “fielding” calls ever since the announcement.
I’m imagining interesting substitutions for the word “Trojans.”
1 Like
You mean they have been practicuming calls.
My junior high team changed its name from the Railsplitters to the Trojans in the late 60’s. I think that Railsplitters would have been preferable to being called all the words related to Trojan that junior high kids could think up! And if you’d said the word practicum to them …
4 Likes
How about “meadow” instead? Has a nice bucolic ring to it. I’m off to do some meadow-work.
3 Likes
The USC Prophylactics doesn’t quite roll off the tongue, now does it?
They’re free to do what they want. I don’t plan to stop using the word. H often goes out and does field work with his job - in real fields. Our ponies have access to real fields too.
Such is life.
4 Likes
On a more serious note, are there organizations or people other than the USC School of Social Work and Michigan Department of Health & Human Services (state government, not university) who see “field” as racially problematic?
When I was a teenager my father was studying for his Masters degree from USC. I was really into sports at the time and one day asked him what USC’s school colors were. Without missing a beat he replied “milky white”. Mom wasn’t amused but my brother and I were.
I just re-read this old post of mine and realized that it doesn’t make a lot of sense without further clarification. My father’s “milky white” comment was a reference to the USC “Trojans”.
Yeah, I think we all got it the first time. 