New day, new excitement around a gender issue. On Monday, the Technical University of Applied Sciences Georg Simon Ohm in Nuremberg announced that the gender asterisk will be used in future in its official communication in addition to gender-neutral formulations. The university has developed guidelines for this. “Employees are recommended to use the spelling in everyday life, but it remains voluntary,” it says.
So far, so neutral. Nevertheless, the announcement caused outrage. Several employees and students express their indignation. Because many, probably also consciously, reply directly to the announcement email from the university management, the criticism goes to the entire university mailing list. This allows 15,000 people to read along. Corresponding emails are available to FOCUS Online.
A research assistant writes: “Dear university management, I hereby submit the application that the TH Nuremberg awards the titles “Mistress” or “Bachelorette” to female students in the future for reasons of respect and to ensure equal treatment.”
A guest lecturer writes: “Thank you very much for the “LEID thread”. […] For me, making every lecture gender-neutral doesn’t exactly have the smack of progressiveness, but rather it seems a bit intentional and not able and also has a pathetic and really embarrassing component.”
A civil engineering professor: “I would like to say a big thank you to everyone who spoke out against this guide. What does colleagues mean? Looks like source code in a programming language. As an advocate of the Latin language, I get medium to great pain there.”
And a research assistant at the chemistry chair thinks the discussion about the entire mailing list is correct: “The majority rejects these grotesque language rules, but doesn’t dare to say anything against them for fear of social sanctions.” And further: “The missing visible contradiction is namely exactly the reason why this nonsense could spread so much in the first place. […] The ‘Woken’ want people to believe that their opinions are in the minority and that [sic] dissent is morally reprehensible.”
Student representatives, on the other hand, are positive. “As students of the Technical University of Nuremberg, we are pleased that it contributes more to diversity and equal rights.” We are “sometimes very disappointed” with the reactions and hope “for these people that they will become more far-sighted and thus create a positive and future-oriented environment can be created at the TH,” says the student self-government faculty of architecture.
A professor of social sciences is also positive: “Just dealing with gender-sensitive language gives me food for thought. It stimulates the linguistic imagination to look for pleasing and sensitive spellings. Thanks for the suggestions in the guide.”
The university management is trying to mediate. “A number of responses have been received, both positive and negative,” writes TH President Niels Oberbeck to all distributors. FOCUS Online also has this mail. “I answered this feedback personally, not through a larger mailing list,” he continues.
“In an academic institution, objective discussion must be possible, based on arguments and mutual respect. Unfortunately, some of the feedback from the company lacks this.” That is “not appropriate for the discourse at a university”.
The university-wide e-mail distribution list is also not the appropriate means of communication. I therefore urge you to move the discussion on the topic of dealing with gender-sensitive language away from university-wide e-mail traffic. In the personal area, in your university environment, also by involving the university management directly,” says the university president.
