USC Dubs the Term “Field Work” Racist. No, Really.

Sometimes it feels like we’re on a fast track to running out of allowable words in the wide English language. I’m not trying to be alarmist, but when “field work” is identified as an echo of white supremacy, it’s kind of hard to stay optimistic.

And that’s not a strawman, folks. That is a REAL DECISION made by the Susan Dworak-Peck School of Social Work at University of South Carolina. According to a memo released by the department, terms such as “field work,” “field study,” or “going into the field” will be replaced with “practicum.”

“Field work” has always made me picture, like, some nerd in khaki wandering around some savannah grasslands with a magnifying glass. Is that my white privilege showing? That I don’t imagine slaves picking cotton or migrant workers roving across the west during harvesttime? Not, of course, that the memo has the nuts to actually say what these “connotations” are. It’s my favorite game to play with virtue-signaling progressives: make them explain why the innocuous thing is “racist,” and you’ll suddenly get a great sense of who the actual racist is.

I mean, for f*ck’s actual sake. I expect this kind of empty virtue-signaling from social science departments (you know, the fields– I mean, practicums of study– that routinely have “armchair” put in front of them), but schools of social work are responsible for preparing students to roll up their sleeves and dig into societal issues at the ground level. The family fighting to regain custody of their children won’t give even half a damn whether you’re shadowing their caseworker for your fieldwork or practicum. You know what they do care about? Their family. The real life, tangible effects of a broken system which dictate so much of their lives. Families are suffering, and if future social workers’ education is more worried about using nice, inclusive language than actually helping people, it’s not about to get better.

This memo is meant to be a virtue signal, but there is no sign of virtue here. All it tells us is that their priorities lay with their own reputation and not the people their work claims to protect.

What a joke.