A friend had shared a CBS News Minnesota article about the latest South Dakota policy, Pronouns, tribal affiliations now forbidden in South Dakota public university employee emails, asking me "What the heck?"
Read the Associated Press coverage at the WCCO link.
At Open Campus, Nick Fouriezos reports in The newest higher ed battleground: college email signatures:
Battles over diversity, equity, and inclusion are playing out on campuses across the country. Fourteen states, most of them with large rural populations, have outright banned DEI offices since 2023, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Here’s one under-the-radar consequence: Human Resources staff at the University of South Dakota told two administrators that they could be fired for language in their email signatures.
John Little and Megan Red Shirt-Shaw, who both work in student services roles, said in a statement last week that they were forced to remove their gender pronouns and tribal affiliation from their university email signatures.
The cause of the sudden threat to their livelihoods? A guidance the Board of Regents passed in December that restricts all employees in the state’s public higher education system in what they can include in their official communications. It outright bans inclusion of any information outside of the sender’s name, email/physical addresses, telephone number(s), and links to the institution’s website.
Students and faculty alike have protested the signature policy. The student government passed a resolution condemning it in February, noting that the policy came just months after previous calls for South Dakota universities to remove pronouns from communications and is “unnecessarily restricting the speech of University employees.”
“There is a general sentiment from people on campus that the policy is very heavy handed and creates more issues than benefits for the university,” says sophomore Sam Markley, the government affairs chair for the student government.
Nearly 1 in 10 people in South Dakota identify as American Indian or Alaskan Native, and the university boasts having “over 30 tribal nations represented on campus.”
Little and Red Shirt-Shaw had included tribal affiliations in their signatures before the guidance because it makes sense for their work. Little is the director of Native Recruitment and Shirt-Shaw is director of Native Student Services.
They raised the issue publicly for the first time last week, although the conversation with HR took place back in March. Both declined to speak with Open Campus more, saying they would need to consult with their legal counsel more before doing any interviews.
Since receiving a written warning, Little and Red Shirt-Shaw have decided to adjust their signatures. (They continue to include that information in the body text of their emails, and say they were told doing so wouldn’t be challenged by the university or regents as of now.)
Little said in a statement published on X.com (formerly Twitter) that he felt saddened that the Board of Regents “continues the erasure of Native people in the state of South Dakota.”
He made the decision to remove his signature in part because a suspension would have kept him from attending campus events, including the 12th Annual Native Alumni Dinner, which featured four Native women discussing their experiences at USD a half century ago.
“It was amazing to hear their power and strength in overcoming the racism and difficulties at USD during the 1970s, but also sad to realize that South Dakota continues to limit how we can identify ourselves,” Little said.
The net effect of the policy, critics say, is that South Dakota has managed to ban administrators putting gender pronouns and tribal affiliations in their signatures without having to, well, explicitly say that they are targeting LGBTQ and tribal identities.
Critics of the policy say it effectively targets administrators with LGBTW and tribal identities, creating an atmosphere where they may feel unwelcome. The University of South Dakota didn’t respond to our request for comment.
The USD Board of Regents did not respond to specific questions asked about the policy, but replied by saying that although employees may have “additional information they would like to share,” it was “critical” to identify consistent parameters for official communication as an employer.
“While supplemental contextual information can offer value in certain instances, consistent criteria for communications are necessary to safeguard our universities’ missions and interests,” Shuree Mortenson, director of communications, said.
The policy comes on the heels of other controversial actions, including a Board of Regents decision to replace its diversity offices with “opportunity centers” in 2022.
“There’s a part of me that feels like this is a way of getting back at tribal peoples,” says Cheryl Crazy Bull, a member of the Sicangu Lakota nation in South Dakota and current president and CEO of the American Indian College Fund.
“I feel like I am in the multiverse,” said Crazy Bull, who is also a USD graduate.
On one hand, she sees “a very robust national conversation” from many in higher education about “equity, inclusion, and finding pathways for Native people,” including some states agreeing to offer in-state tuition for Native students, among other perks meant to enhance Native enrollment.
Yet there has also been a simultaneous and noticeable shift in anti-diversity legislation and policies coming from what Crazy Bull calls “a minority with great influence,” who she describes as having a mindset of “let me erase you, let me pretend you don’t need support, let me forget the history, and the value of doing reparative and restorative work.”
There will likely be more of a response from Native organizations nationwide in the coming weeks, as more information comes out, Crazy Bull told me. In the meantime, she is calling for other groups to join Native communities in solidarity to advocate for a more inclusive signature policy.
“The part of me that wants to protest makes me think that everyone should put their ancestry and heritage and pronouns in their emails,” Crazy Bull says. “It shouldn’t just be Native people who feel like this targets them. Our allies should say: “I think I’ll put that I’m German, and I’d like to be known by they/them.”
Given how Governor Noem has lamented native children lacking hope, Bluestem's not surprised to see this attempt to erase staff's identity. Captain Richard Henry Pratt would be proud.
This Open Campus article is republished online under Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. I first read the piece at MinnPost.
Photo: The University of South Dakota in Vermillion (Courtesy Photo via Open Campus).
Related posts
- News digest: Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe to banish Noem; calls for Flute, State-Tribal Relations Committee chairs resignation
- Native American leaders in South Dakota forge ahead with educational reforms
- Noem Nincompoopery: ad scolds Jamie Smith for vote shared by state representative appointed to 2nd social studies standard work group
- Oceti Sakowin March for our Children: over 200 march, drum, and ride horses in pouring rain
- South Dakota News Watch: South Dakotans overwhelmingly support teaching of indigenous history and culture in public schools
- SD News Watch: SD teachers endure new stress as politics & culture war seep into classrooms
- Ihaƞktoƞwaƞ Dakota Oyate: Sixth tribe bans Governor Kristi Noem from reservation
- Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate bans Governor Kristi Noem from Lake Traverse Reservation
- Tensions continue between Noem, tribes
- News update on Noem's pairing reservations, tribal leaders with cartels; Rep. St. John's reply
- Noem calls for audit of tribes; ICT News/Rapid City Journal reporter finds the receipts
- Malice: she's on it. Tribal leaders insulted after Governor Noem claims they "are personally benefiting from the cartels being here
- In Winner, Noem links tribal leaders to cartels
- SWO Dakota to Governor Noem: don't single out reservations when drugs are a statewide problem
- Noem banned from Pine Ridge Reservation over remarks in border speech to state legislature
- Explaining and gaining? Noem concedes Texas costs were gift to Lone Star state; meets with two South Dakota House tribal members
- Drug cartels have infiltrated reservations, Noem says, but some tribal voices call speech ‘political’
- Noem to address Legislature on ‘potential South Dakota response’ to Mexico border situation
- No word on who paid or if she packed razor wire: Noem travels again to Texas-Mexico border
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6
"South Board of Regents bans tribal affiliations in employees' emails" - fixed the headline for you.
Posted by: Steve Chesney | May 31, 2024 at 08:57 AM