The path to hell is paved with good intentions.
Sometimes language travels down that same path. Other times people take a well meaning term and wrongly demonize it. If I were to advocate a way through text of redressing social injustice while attempting to avoid offensive language, there would not be much backlash. It would be a whole different story if I were to label this as political correctness.
A popular criticism is that these terms highlight our differences and therefore our society can never act as a whole. Terms for certain groups seem to always be changing. In America, the term "people of color" is used to identify people who do not consider themselves Caucasian. It replaced "colored" because it places the emphasis on the human aspect of the group first and on the distinguishing factor last. "People of color" is preferred over "non-white" as to not further exclude racial minorities from their majority counterparts. These changing terms do not seek further separation between groups. They are actually less divisive while simultaneously stressing our humanity: something all people share.
Similarly, some opponents will argue that politically correct terms do little more than shelter people from the real world. To them, creating euphemisms that cover up insensitive terms is a pointless exercise. A simple rebuttal lies with the example of women. It is apparent that using offensive, demeaning and submissive terms in place of politically correct terms "females" or "women" would be unrepresentative of the real world and unfair to women. Thus, using the politically correct term would not be sheltering women from the real world. Likewise, people are not being coddled if they feel offended by politically incorrect racial slurs. Yes, racists and drunken University students loitering on the Corner at night will continue to exist, but simply excusing these recent behaviors by telling the victims of racial epithets to just get over it does nothing to alleviate these problems. In these cases, not doing anything would build up a tolerance of not only political incorrectness, but also a tolerance of racism.
There is this notion that the more politically correct society is getting, the closer we are to Newspeak: the official language in George Orwell's novel, 1984. In this novel's totalitarian regime, Newspeak gets smaller and simpler by the year because words that interfere with the Party's agenda are removed. In doing so, the government in 1984 is controlling written text, oral speech, as well as mental thoughts. Politically correct terms accomplish quite the opposite effect. They give us new perspectives that have not been represented historically.
For instance, in a Cavalier Daily opinion article earlier this semester, a writer used "the LGBT" (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) which prompted several people to point out that LGBTQ is an adjective and not a noun. Just a couple of decades ago, all of these groups would have been regarded as one and would have been called "the gays" similar in fashion to "the sick." This distinction may just be syntax to some, but for others it represents the commonalities in the LGBTQ community while acknowledging that the community itself is actually very diverse. Thus, being politically correct encourages thought that goes beyond lumping people into large groups without considering its actual constituency. Thankfully there has been no conception of the PC police, comparable to the thought police instituted in 1984. If someone chooses an outdated or inaccurate term to identify a group, then his diction is simply a reflection of his ignorance, but he will not be arrested or prosecuted for it.
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis theorizes that thought and behavior are somewhat shaped by language and has been used many times in defense of political correctness. But another famous psychology experiment should also be noted. The Stanford prison experiment concluded that simply being assigned a role will shape a person's behavior. The two main features making up that role were the prisoner and guard costumes and the prisoner and guard titles.
In life, our costume is our race, gender, religion, sexual orientation and so on. Our costume is picked out for us and for the most part, we cannot change out of them. Right or wrong, this is a major factor for how we and others "determine" our role in society. Some are already at a disadvantage based on their costume. The other major factor determining our role, the title, should not be another reason for putting someone at a further disadvantage.
Political correctness may go overboard at times (follicularly challenged comes to mind), but for the most part it does wonders by discouraging the use of derogatory terms, empowering the historically oppressed and uniting us in the fact that everybody has a common trait - we are all people. Political correctness should not be overlooked, or chastised for that matter, when trying to include all people into mainstream culture. Being politically correct takes little effort but can surely go a long way.
Hung Vu's column appears on Tuesdays. He can be reached at h.vu@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 13 hours agoUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | YesterdayUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | 2 days agoInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
