Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nathan Hamblen (talk | contribs) at 16:13, 12 May 2004 (=History= communist claim is still disputed on talk page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Political correctness, politically correct, and P.C. are terms that commonly refer, sometimes mockingly, to a social movement which was characterized by its supporters' efforts to redress, primarily by the use of language, real or alleged discrimination on the basis of race, gender, or other criteria. The purpose behind this is to prevent the exclusion of people from greater society based merely upon perceived differences or a handicap that can be overcome. Through repeated use of politically correct terms, its advocates hope to change people's thought processes from containing biases to being more accepting of differences. The new terms are often clumsy substitutes for the original stark language concerning race or ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and disability status (physical or mental). It is also used by some to refer to those who support for such political policies as affirmative action and multi-lingual education; extremist support of environmentalism and opposition to capitalism are often regarded as politically correct as well.

An example of substituting politically correct terminology for terminology considered offensive by many would be substituting the phrase disabled person for cripple when describing a person with a physical or mental disability. Use of terms like “gimpy” or “nutter” to refer to the aforementioned groups would be decidedly non-p.c.

Usage

The intended purpose of political correctness is twofold: to remove language offensive to many, and to include all members of society by treating them equally. The first meaning is exemplified by usage of P.C. terms such as “African-American” in the place of “Negro” or “black,” or the older term “nigger.” However, the choice of specific racial or ethnic nomenclature depends on both location and time period. For example, in the United States people of both Caucasian and African descent use the term “black,” and while the term “nigger” is generally considered racist and offensive, some younger African-Americans use the term among themselves, but view it as derogatory if it is used by people of other races.

Older terms for groups said to be underrepresented are sometimes viewed by members of the group as perpetuating stereotypes, which exclude individuals from high status activities. For example, using linguistically marked word variants such as the term “poetess” could be said to denote that male practitioners are the norm, and some would say perpetuates what they see as male dominance in society. Some have suggested that the adherents of these linguistic changes are concerned with, in many cases, their acceptance of some form of linguistic relativism (e.g., the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis), the idea that language influences thought and culture, or even—in some sense—that it constitutes reality itself. Nevertheless, advocates of these language changes state that the proposed changes are designed mainly to treat others with respect. Some counter that enforcing the use of specialized, politically correct jargon in regards to some creates a separate status for these groups, and thus prevents integration and acceptance.

A rule of thumb for determining whether a term may be considered politically incorrect is to question whether one is identifying the individual by an uncontrollable attribute, rather than on his or her unique accomplishments. For example, calling Stevie Wonder a blind black man could be said to imply that his handicap and race are more important than his significant musical influence on Motown and Soul.

Political correctness may also be exhibited by refusing to discuss some particular traits of some ethnic or religious minority. For instance, it may not be politically correct to point out that some immigrant community has crime rates above those of the general population, or to discuss cultural traits that may have led to such a situation.

History

Both the movement and the term describing political correctness, rose to broad usage in the early 1980s. Many leftists allege that the term “political correctness” started as a label jokingly used to describe one's over-commitment to various political causes. In the view of one conservative commentator, Bill Lind, however, the intellectual roots and attitudes associated with P.C. are many decades old and rooted in radical leftist movements. Also, in a linguistics mailing list , there was discussion of the term used -- sometimes quite straight-facedly -- in the early and middle 1970s. Use of the terms “P.C.” and “politically correct” declined in the late 1990s, and the allegedly repressive political attitudes associated with these beliefs have started to fall out of favor somewhat, but it is asserted that the above-described attitudes associated with political correctness are still very strong in many universities and other institutions.

The purchasing of school textbooks in United States public schools is subject to bias and sensitivity guidelines which, while used particularly in the school textbook area are also used in the construction of testing. This is a subject of considerable debate at the present time in this industry, with most sides agreeing that the quality of American public school textbooks is much lower than that of other industrialized nations, and that the method of determining content is severely hindered by either the politically correct, politically conservative, or more often, both.

Controversy

The term “political correctness” is itself fraught with controversy. Self-described political progressives never used the expression widely and have now stopped using it almost entirely as it has become a popular jeer against them. Critics often point out the similarity to newspeak and thoughtcrime and the fascist propaganda that is conjured by the subject. Advocates argue that defending those who they see as victims of repression or discrimination does not itself constitute intolerance. Critics also argue that advocacy of “P.C.” amounts to censorship, and that it makes open discussion more difficult. Proponents have also been accused of hypocrisy for denouncing mainstream religions as judgmental while themselves engaging in perceived “bashing” of groups such as whites, males, corporations, and others. The critics of P.C. have themselves been accused of using the word as a kind of smear term which itself acts as a form of propaganda, much in the way that red-baiting was used in the 1950s.

Satirical use

In recent years, political correctness has come to be used seriously by some and jokingly by others, in protest against policies seeking conformance with a set of beliefs, primarily of leftists, which encourage cultural change. The term is also frequently used by conservatives in a broader sense to characterize any of a numerous set of beliefs they disagree with. Liberals counter that though conservatives claim that liberals use political correctness to suppress speech, conservatives could be said to be using the label “political correctness” to suppress speech.

A recent situation at the L.A. Times is very illustrative of the conflicts regarding the issue. A review of an opera included the term “pro-life”, as in, “life-affirming.” As it is the Times's policy to use the term “anti-abortion,” the term got changed, even though the meaning was entirely different. They then changed it back and gave the name of the editor who had changed it. They then had to retract the name of the person who had edited it because it is Times policy not to name people who make changes to articles.

Another well-known satirical take on this movement can be found in the book Politically Correct Bedtime Stories, in which traditional fairy tales are rewritten from a so-called politically correct viewpoint and often reverse the roles of good and evil from those of the original version. For example, Hansel, Gretel and their father are evil and the witch is good in the politically correct version of Hansel and Gretel.

The practice of satirizing so-called P.C. speech indeed took on a life of its own in the 1990s, though it is no longer so popular. Part of what it is to understand the meaning of “P.C.” is to be familiar with satirical portrayals of political correctness, and to understand them as such. Such portrayals are often exaggerations of what actual politically correct speech looks like. For example, in a satirical example of so-called P.C. speech, the sentence “The fireman put a ladder up against the tree, climbed it, and rescued the cat” might look like this:

The firefighter (who happened to be male, but could just as easily have been female) abridged the rights of the cat to determine for itself where it wanted to walk, climb, or rest, and inflicted his own value judgments in determining that it needed to be “rescued” from its chosen perch. In callous disregard for the well-being of the environment, and this one tree in particular, he thrust the mobility disadvantaged-unfriendly means of ascent known as a “ladder” carelessly up against the tree, marring its bark, and unfeelingly climbed it, unconcerned how his display of physical prowess might injure the self-esteem of those differently-abled. He kidnapped and unjustly restrained the innocent animal with the intention of returning it to the person who claimed to “own” the naturally free animal, but it immediately fled his grasp, having withstood more insult and injury than it could bear.

The above text admixes the most radical versions of several movements or theories, including non-sexist language, animal rights, cultural relativism, accessibility, emotional development, and environmentalism. In fact, almost any so-called P.C. speaker would most likely be perfectly satisfied with “The firefighter put a ladder up against the tree, climbed it, and rescued the cat.” Furthermore, the fire protection services have always preferred “firefighter” to “fireman,” dating from many years before P.C. and discrimination against male firefighters.

The satire is not necessarily an anti-P.C. or pro-P.C. statement. Both liberal and conservative readers, for example, often enjoy this particular text.

See also

• Doublespeak
• gender-inclusive language
• propaganda
• Hate speech
• non-sexist language
• Politically Incorrect
• Newspeak
• disability

Further reading

• Diane Ravitch, The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn, Knopf, 2003, hardcover, 255 pages, ISBN 0-375-41482-71

• Henry Beard and Christopher Cerf, The Official Politically Correct Dictionary and Handbook, Harper Collins, 1992, paperback 176 pages, ISBN 0-586-21726-6

External links

• Tongue Tied — documents alleged ongoing censorship of politically incorrect speech or expression in the United States.
• Possible origins of the term at www.linguist.org