The Outdoors People try to use language that is as inclusive as possible in all of our writing, whether that’s our free educational resources, our communications with our schools, or our internal documents. Other people and organisations have written far more persuasively on this topic than we can, but we want to add our voice in saying "this is our official policy and it is not going to change."
Why do it?
It's well-understood that there are many factors which can lead to people and groups being marginalised. These can include physical barriers, economic limitations, lack of opportunity, lack of representation, and many more. Our small company tries to help fix these, wherever we can, for as many groups as we can. Trying to use language which doesn't discriminate or exclude people is one of the simplest changes a society can make. We think it’s the least we can do, which is why we are always looking for other ways we can make a difference.
Which groups do we consider to be “marginalised”?
The law here in the UK creates a list of “protected characteristics” which are age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation, marriage and civil partnership, and pregnancy and maternity. In our inclusion policy, we add developmental disability, gender identity, health and mental health, and living situation to the list. We also try to support any other personal or group identity that may be a cause of discrimination.
What if we make a mistake?
That's certainly possible; none of us are above making mistakes and nobody can know everything. Language is an imperfect medium for communicating complex concepts and we all approach any conversation with biases and preconceived ideas. We're one small educational company in a very large world, but we're going to keep doing our best.
Can inclusive language be discriminatory?
This is an argument that gets made a lot. On the whole, we disagree with it. If we write a blog post about “people”, that includes all people, and we do not discriminate.
You can view our inclusion policy here.
Might inclusive language alienate people who disagree with us?
We’d like to live in a world where everyone agrees that it’s a good thing to try and include marginalised groups and individuals, but we’re aware that’s unfortunately not always the case.
It isn’t a choice to be LGBT+, or a person of colour, or a woman, or any of the many other groups who are often marginalised by our society. It is a choice to get angry about a blog post using the word “people” or any other inclusive language. Ultimately, there has to come a point where we opt to including people from marginalised groups over trying to reach out to those who are being choosing being hostile.
Social Media and Blog Comments
We simply don’t have a huge amount of resources to devote to moderating comments on our blog posts, or to interacting with people who disagree with us on social media. We are a small company that is focused on delivering amazing educational experiences for primary school children. As a result, we operate a strong policy of blocking the tiny minority of people who are hostile to our inclusivity programmes and language so that we can avoid being overwhelmed. More importantly, we would like marginalised people to feel safe when interacting with us online.
Isn't that shutting down debate?
There are lots of spaces that people can go to where they can expose themselves to different viewpoints and experiences. Unfortunately, we don't have the resources to become one of them.
Thanks,
The Outdoors People
