South Dakota Policy Bans Gender Pronouns in Official University Emails

South Dakota’s new policy banning gender pronouns in university correspondence is stirring controversy. Faculty members who proudly listed their tribal affiliations are facing unexpected repercussions. The move has ignited a debate over diversity, inclusion, and free speech in higher education.

South Dakota’s New Policy Sparks Controversy

A new policy in South Dakota prohibits public university faculty and staff from using gender pronouns in official correspondence. This also prevents Native American employees from listing their tribal affiliations, highlighting the state’s fraught history with tribes.

Faculty Members Receive Warnings

Two faculty members at the University of South Dakota, Megan Red Shirt-Shaw and John Little, have traditionally included their gender pronouns and tribal affiliations in their email signatures. However, both received warnings in March, indicating they were in violation of a new policy set by the South Dakota Board of Regents in December.

Threat of Suspension Over Pronouns

John Little stated that he was given five days to remove his tribal affiliation and pronouns. Failure to comply could result in suspension or termination, illustrating the stringent enforcement of the new rule.

Branding Policy with Broader Implications

The Board of Regents describes the policy as a branding and communications measure. This follows Republican Gov. Kristi Noem’s push against “liberal ideologies” on campuses, which included banning drag shows and removing pronoun references.

Political Influence and Tribal Tensions

All nine board members were appointed by Gov. Noem, who has been criticized by tribal leaders for her comments on drug cartels and child care. This has led to her being banned from most South Dakota tribal lands.

National Trend in Conservative States

South Dakota’s policy aligns with a broader conservative movement to curb diversity and inclusion initiatives across the country. Approximately one-third of states are enacting similar measures, impacting education policies nationwide.

Extending Beyond K-12 Education

While policies targeting pronoun use have primarily affected K-12 students, some religious colleges have also adopted such measures. Houghton University in New York dismissed two dorm directors last year for refusing to remove pronouns from their email signatures.

Concerns Over Broader Impact

There are growing concerns that South Dakota’s policy could signal a trend extending into public universities. The president of the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education noted the unprecedented nature of such a policy at a state university.

Conservative Push Against Diversity Initiatives

This policy is seen as part of a conservative effort to limit transgender rights and diversity initiatives. The current political climate is being viewed as a testing ground for such restrictive measures.

Faculty Advocacy Groups Respond

The American Association of University Professors is not aware of other public universities enforcing similar pronoun policies. However, they acknowledge a broader agenda targeting educational practices under the guise of branding standards.

University Declines to Comment on Consultation

A spokeswoman for the University of South Dakota did not answer questions about whether administrators or the Faculty Senate were consulted before the regents adopted the policy. She directed all inquiries to the Board of Regents, avoiding direct responses.

Regents Defend the New Policy

Shuree Mortenson, spokeswoman for the regents, stated that all six universities had the chance to review the policy. However, she clarified that the Board of Regents made the final decision, emphasizing consistency to safeguard the brand.

Lack of Consideration for Tribal Affiliations

Mortenson did not address whether the inclusion of tribal affiliations was considered before adopting the policy. She also did not confirm if faculty at other universities received similar warnings, focusing instead on the policy’s branding objectives.

Faculty Concerns Over Tribal Representation

When the policy was announced, Little and Red Shirt-Shaw sought clarification on its impact on tribal affiliations. Their inquiries revealed that the potential effects on Native employees had not been considered.

Historical Context of Native Erasure

The U.S. has a history of attempting to eradicate Native American cultures through various means, including forced assimilation. This policy’s impact is seen as a continuation of those erasure tactics, particularly in South Dakota.

Feeling of Erasure Among Native Faculty

Red Shirt-Shaw expressed on social media that being barred from listing her tribal affiliation felt like further erasure. She emphasized that including tribal affiliations and pronouns signals respect for diverse lived experiences.

Workaround for Tribal Affiliation and Pronouns

Red Shirt-Shaw and Little have started listing their tribal affiliations and pronouns in the body of their emails. The university has not objected to this practice, allowing them a temporary workaround.

ACLU Raises Concerns

The ACLU of South Dakota has received complaints from faculty and students at the University of South Dakota. Advocacy manager Samantha Chapman highlighted the unintended consequences of the policy, noting its impact on free speech and double erasure of queer Indigenous individuals.