POLITICAL correctness is a social construction. Created in the mind of the collective, PC culture is used to chastise individuals who are considered to be acting offensively toward a protected group.\nThere is a place for social protocol in influencing how individuals refer to one another in polite society. Political correctness taken to the extreme, however, is censorship. It is curious what speech society chooses to chastise, and that which our culture lets slide.
Just last week, a report surfaced on the radio broadcast of the Dori Monson Show that a high school student volunteering at an elementary school in Seattle was allowed to hand out Easter eggs to third graders only after agreeing to call the eggs "spring spheres." Several news outlets across the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada have since picked up the story. Although the third graders quickly began calling the treats Easter eggs, the story serves as an amusing illustration of PC policing gone too far.
What I do not understand is the sensitivity double standard that PC culture encourages. One is required to walk on eggshells to avoid ticking-off only certain groups. Thus, even though it is preferred that Christian religious holidays are not referenced in public schools, the term "bitch" is accepted widely within youth culture.
The Merriam-Webster online dictionary lists its first definition of the term as "the female of the dog or some other carnivorous mammals" and its second definition, in part, as "a malicious, spiteful, or overbearing woman - sometimes used as a generalized term of abuse." Now, I would think that the use of a word with this dictionary definition would set most women howling. I have yet to see, however, a show of solidarity against such disrespectful terms. In fact, women commonly throw the term around to refer to one another and allow men to use it without incurring any social penalty.\nThere are other examples. For the week of March 12-18, The Economist's headline read, "Bamboo capitalism: The rise of entrepreneurial China." The cover featured tiny people riding, and some falling off of, red butterflies in the midst of what looked like a smog enveloped bamboo forest.
Am I the only one who finds it potentially offensive that The Economist took a snapshot of the modern Chinese economy and characterized its entrepreneurs as butterflies struggling through a smog-filled bamboo forest? And what exactly is "Bamboo" capitalism meant to imply? The Economist clearly is asserting that entrepreneurship in China is somehow different from traditional entrepreneurship, but is that cultural stereotyping justified? More importantly, is it politically correct?
While I do not care for PC culture, I would at least like to see PC protection granted equally to all races, genders, ages, religions and sexual orientations. If a word is offensive, it should not be acceptable for a rapper or a woman to say it but inappropriate for the vocabulary of other individuals from different groups. If we are going to have solidarity vigils at the University for a group that has been offended, we should have them for every group. There should be no PC special treatment - everyone should get treated with the same kid gloves.
The arbitrary assignment of protection from offense within PC culture amuses me. Even as a columnist, I still am learning what is socially acceptable to write. Every action has a consequence, and when you choose to voice an opinion you must be prepared to deal with the repercussions. When commenting on issues related to a PC protected group, one really should weigh whether making his point is worth incurring the wrath, justified or not, of those he offends.
Would the world be a happier place if everyone were hypersensitive to the feelings of other groups? Society might become a safer place for some, but could embracing PC culture stifle the truth? If PC culture is used to make an idea or a group untouchable, then the beneficiary can use political correctness as a weapon to kill debate that threatens its goals.
For better or worse, society clearly encourages individuals to self-censor their speech, but let us hope that PC culture never discourages the free exchange of ideas.
Ginny Robinson's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at g.robinson@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 3 days 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 | 3 days agoUniversity 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 | 5 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.
