discriminatory | Campus Safe Words

TERM: discriminatory
RISK LEVEL: high

Definition

“Discriminatory” describes actions, policies, or practices that result in unfair or unequal treatment based on protected characteristics such as race, sex, religion, national origin, or disability. In higher education, it is commonly used in the context of legal compliance (e.g., Title IX investigations), institutional policy, and formal grievance procedures.

Why It’s Risky

While “discriminatory” is a valid legal term, it becomes politically charged when used to describe institutions, systems, or cultural norms without clear reference to specific violations of law or policy. In states with legislation limiting perceived ideological content—such as Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act or Texas Senate Bill 17—the term may be viewed as part of a progressive narrative framing American institutions as inherently unjust. When used broadly in DEI training, curriculum, or public messaging, “discriminatory” may be interpreted as accusing faculty, departments, or institutional policies of bias, even when unsubstantiated. This can trigger administrative scrutiny or legislative inquiry, particularly when the term appears alongside language about systemic injustice, privilege, or equity.

Common Critiques

Critics argue that “discriminatory” is sometimes applied subjectively or ideologically rather than in reference to specific, provable conduct. When the term is used to describe curricula, grading systems, hiring practices, or university history, it may be seen as advancing a worldview that presumes institutional guilt or moral failing. Some policymakers claim that such language contributes to a culture of accusation, where disagreement with certain policies or beliefs is labeled as bias. There is also concern that labeling traditional practices as “discriminatory” can create pressure to alter admissions criteria, faculty expectations, or student assessments in ways that conflict with academic standards or legal parity. In faculty hiring or training contexts, use of the term without precise legal justification may raise questions of viewpoint discrimination or compelled speech. The risk is amplified when “discriminatory” is used as a catch-all critique in campus activism, diversity programming, or generalized institutional self-assessments.

Suggested Substitutes

Unfair or unequal (in policy reviews or student affairs language)
Not aligned with institutional policy (in HR or faculty matters)
Noncompliant with access standards (in ADA or facilities planning)
Exclusionary effects (in program assessment or curriculum review)
Biased practices (in institutional research or survey reporting)

These alternatives help preserve clarity without implying legal or moral judgment.

When It May Still Be Appropriate

“Discriminatory” is appropriate in legal contexts involving Title VI, Title IX, or ADA compliance, and in findings or procedures where specific conduct has been reviewed under applicable law. It may also be used in academic writing where its meaning is clearly defined. Avoid use in general campus messaging, training materials, or program descriptions unless there is documented evidence and policy backing.

NOTES: Always anchor use of “discriminatory” in documented behavior, not assumed intent or ideological frameworks. Emphasize procedural fairness, individual accountability, and legal compliance to reduce exposure to political or legal challenges. When addressing perceived bias, use fact-based language that invites resolution, not accusation.