In a controversial move, South Dakota has recently banned the use of pronouns and tribal affiliations in university email signatures. This decision has sparked debate and criticism from many who see it as an infringement on freedom of speech and an erasure of Indigenous identities.
The ban, which was issued by the South Dakota Board of Regents, prohibits university faculty and staff from including pronouns such as he, she, they, and tribal affiliations in their email signatures. The reasoning behind this decision is unclear, with some speculating that it may be an attempt to standardize communication across all state universities.
Critics of the ban argue that it is discriminatory and disrespectful to Indigenous people, who have a long and rich history in South Dakota. Tribal affiliations are an important part of many individuals’ identities, and by banning their inclusion in email signatures, the state is effectively silencing and erasing these cultural markers.
Furthermore, the ban on pronouns is seen as an attack on LGBTQ+ individuals, who rely on proper pronoun usage to affirm their gender identity. By prohibiting the use of pronouns in email signatures, the state is further marginalizing an already vulnerable community.
Many are calling for the ban to be overturned, with petitions and protests springing up across the state. Supporters of the ban argue that it is necessary for maintaining professionalism and consistency in communication, but opponents see it as a step backwards in terms of inclusivity and respect for diversity.
It remains to be seen how this decision will play out in the coming months, but one thing is clear: the issue of pronouns and tribal affiliations in university email signatures is far from resolved. South Dakota may have thought they were standardizing communication, but they may have stirred up a hornet’s nest instead.
0
0
