We live in a world today where our everyday lives are dictated by political correctness. People on the job, at school, on the streets, and sometimes even in their own home, have to be concerned with every word they say, it could be misconstrued by someone as being offensive or discriminatory. When typing an email at work, it is necessary to meticulously review it for its content. If this isn't done, one risks the chance of corrective action by their employers, termination or possibly a lawsuit for discrimination. Political correctness has gone way too far in the minds of some people. Almost any phrase or word can be taken the wrong way by people nowadays. Political correctness is almost going against the first amendment of freedom of speech. Why would someone look to someone else and ask if it’s OK to say what you want to say? We are a free people. Nobody decides what is proper to say. The European socialist may control language but here we have a Constitution with the Bill of Rights that protects our freedom of speech, but we have no right not to be offended. One should not be afraid to offend someone with their speech because of what others will say (Brady, National World). What may offend one may compliment another. Firstly, political correctness is founded upon the assumption that discrimination and prejudice exists within society. Of course the goal of being politically correct is so that it affects communication in a positive way. It’s to prevent arguments and people from getting offended. What we are not trying to achieve is some sort of polite utopia – it would be a dull and dreary place to live. I believe people should use more concrete words when we are communicating with one another. That way, others ... ... middle of paper ... ...it is being said to, and of course, it depends on the situation. I have determined it is nearly an impossible task to be completely politically correct. I imagine that with the rapid changes in acceptable terminology, before we know it schools will be required to hold classes on political correctness. People dislike social labels, but also want to be correctly labeled. People want to be distinct individuals and distinctly grouped with others. The boundaries of political correctness are hard to determine. It only takes one person's perception of an action or statement for it to be construed as offensive. I would hope that a person in this world could relax, have fun, don't worry and be happy. But one can't relax when having to be concerned with political correctness and its consequences every time they act, speak and with every word they write.
Hundreds of innocent people die each year due to a title that was created for them. Because of a stereotype that some other individual somewhere in our society created, and decided certain individuals belong, and should be hated for, innocent people in our society end up being killed. It is not fair for innocent people to die. Nor is it even fair for any individual to have to walk down the street, knowing that they are hated because of something that is beyond their control. Whether it be their skin color, hair color, appearance, or the way they walk, it can be a stereotypical characteristic that creates the risk of being judged by another individual, or perhaps even killed.
On the case of Bob Grisham, a teacher and head football coach at Lauderdale County High School in Alabama made some Anti-Gay, Racist Comments in the classroom. He also made some comments about the First lady. If we are going to be politically correct, then why is the media able to ridicule? They have pictures of the First lady behind on this site down below. The comments he made, yes were very wrong, but I do not think that anyone should be fired because of what they might say at work. It is just matter of discipline to that individual so it doesn’t happen again. They do need to keep all opi...
Charles R. Lawrence III adresses the matter in his essay “The Debate over Placing Limits on Racist Speech Must Not Ignore the Damage It Does to Its Victims,” by providing the perspective of those on the reciving end. He explains that “racial slurs are particularly undeserving of First Amendment protection because the perpetuator’s intention is not to discover truth or initiate dialoge, but to injure the victim” (628). This argument is justified because some people do take their freedom of speech as far as offending someone because of their race, cultural, and social beliefs. As Cinnamon Stillwell proved in her essay, “Mob Rule on College Campuses,” some students do become bullies when their beliefs are challenged. Stillwell illistrates a situation that occurred at Columbia University when conservative Jim Gilchrist was invited to speak but was unable to because rioting students did not allow him. Stillwell then goes on to say that “Apparently in their minds, niether Gilchrist nor anyone else with whom they disagree has the right to express their viewpoints” (623). This can be applied to both sides because both of them seem to believe that the opposing belief has no right to speak especially when it is controversial. Lawrence mentions that “whenever we decide that racist speech must be tolerated because of the
Rankin, Aidan. “The repressive openness of political correctness.” Contemporary Review 282.1644 (2003): 33+. Literature resource Center. Web. 15 Feb. 2011.
As Americans we need to be compassionate and understanding towards them. Political correctness is necessary in this changing and progressive world that we live in. We do have the first amendment; however, that only really affects the government’s interactions with people in regards to free speech. People’s interactions with one another are not affected by the First Amendment. Furthermore, it is better in Europe because people cannot get offended by what others say about them. America needs to be more progressive and censor ourselves so that no one is offended by our
There was no political correctness in this movie, creating an environment that has great impact. The ugliest character, Officer Ryan, is abusive on the beat and is hard to work with, but still his coworkers have his back. At home he cares for his aging father, and in an attempt to secure better healthcare benefits, he verbally abuses an African American social worker, who has him escorted out. At movie’s end it is the social worker we see in a fender bender spouting racial slurs at the Middle Eastern person who hit
with their religion or ethnic group exposed in a light that may be very negative and insulting to
The institute of Marxism or in other words political correctness, it started in Germany 1923 the main purpose at that time was to find way to implement communism in Russia. As we all know that communism believes in social group not individual. Political correctness deals with social communication it is concerned with replacing offensive words that are considered as discriminating against certain section of society. Robert Allen also defined political correctness by saying “the political correctness movement is also devoted to promoting an alternative terminology that seeks to assert a move positive aspect to negative qualities”. from the begging of the term political correctness it went through three stages the first used favorable to those whose views remained in sync with every shifting Bolshevik party live, the second stage was in 1960s and again it was used favorably by the new left radicals. The last stage was when it was used negatively by the conservatives in America. Political correctness has three categories the first is offensive like gay or retarded these words refer to people as insults for undesirable concept. The second one is subtle like policeman and mailman, this words effect our way of thinking because they implies that those roles are for men only, the last one is blatant like n-word to refer to black these words are very offensive. In summary politicl correctness is term used to describe language to minimize offence(I love English language). The paper discusses political correctness with articles that are with and another that are against it.
In American politics today, issues such racism, misogyny, homophobia, and xenophobia are a few of the many topics some of the main talking points that for left wing political activists discuss. It seems as if racially motivated protests have been becoming increasingly prevalent. The creation of safe spaces has become quite a common practice , especially in intellectual environments, to prevent people from being offended or “triggered” by others opposing ideologies arguments, ideas, or statements. During the recent presidential election, cycle mainstream media appeared to be more concerned about Donald Trump not being completely politically correct rather than Hillary Clinton’s extreme carelessness in regards to properly handling classified
PC policies have also compromised the accuracy of educational content in textbooks. Material close to being offensive is removed or adjusted to satisfy the super-sensitive or to avoid any unforeseen complaints. For example, American Indians can't be depicted with long braids, in rural settings, or on reservations, even though many American Indians do have long braids and live in rural settings or on reservations. If the depictions of our historical figures are incorrect, then the new PC textbooks should ensure their historical accuracy and footnote each change appropriately. In addition, if the information is correct but is being altered to satisfy sensitive groups, it should be changed back, regardless of the offending potential. How far could this evolve? Will we continue to erase provocative and controversial details of our history? It “dumbs down” our textbooks, leaving them bland and far less interesting. This effort to cleanse our history is wrong and it is killing our education efforts/system today.
...he discrimination and violence that is in the world. Language is not always verbal; it can also be picked up by actions.
However humans naturally put emotions into what they say if they did not put emotion into their word then that would just make people robots. Which is a lot of the reason why political correctness matter to an extent. “What’s mad here is the willingness of people to spout such ideologically vacant and socially dangerous statements without pausing to consider a) the meaning, b) the rationale or c) the consequences of their words. In short, people are being idiots about political correctness(It’s Time to Get Real About).” Political correctness is just a way of providing labels to other people. If somebody were to call somebody from Ireland a Scotsman they would be offended because that is not politically correct. The exact same principle applies to every other label. From calling somebody a racist to calling somebody homophobic it is just a label made due to political
This morning while looking at Yahoo news I came across an article that relates to discriminatory language. Six Arizona student that where taking part in a school picture wearing shirts that spell out “You’ve Ever Seen Class Of 2016” (YahooNews). They decided to rearrange the letters to spell out the “N” word and posted a picture on Instagram. I think this is a perfect example of discriminatory language being used. Their decision is going to potentially hurt them in the long run after they graduate. In my opion I feel that they thought it was ok to take the picture and post it because of their upbringing. Everything starts at home and how you raise your children. Children are not born to hate or discriminate they are made that way.
By removing any words that might offend anyone are we subconsciously trying to make everyone the same? Ravitch writes, "The great irony of sensitivity reviewing: it has evolved into a bureaucratic system that removes all evidence of diversity." Sensitivity
Censorship is not a recent development. It wasn’t imposed properly or there weren’t strict regulations before. In the article “Hate Radio” by Patricia J. Williams, the writer says that radio was a powerful source of media. It had influenced a lot of people. The power of media can change the course of history. The host on the radio such as Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern were also influencing a lot of people. The theme was not merely the specific intolerance on hot topics as race and gender, but a much more general contempt for the world, a verbal stoning of anything different. Most of the audience on this radio shows were white and male. Most of the callers have spent their lives walling themselves off from any real experience with blacks, feminists, lesbians or gays. Rush Limbaugh tell his audience “what you believe inside, you can talk about it in the marketplace.” Unfortunately what’s inside is then mistaken for what’s outside, treated empirical and political reality. Most of the talks on the radio were being racist against the blacks. This had influenced so much that a statistics showed that 53 percent of people in America agree that blacks and Latinos are less intelligent than whites, and a majority believed that blacks are lazy, violent, welfare-dependent and unpatriotic. Hence this stereotype among the people was due to the lack of censorship.(Williams,502)