Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014
Political correctness
Section E. Social, moral and religious
Political correctness is a movement that originated in the USA in the 1980s. Its aim is to promote liberal and egalitarian attitudes especially through modifications to language and behaviour. In Britain, the main initial reaction to political correctness was one of derision, especially based on extreme examples of ’PC’ talk. However, some examples of political correctness, such as the use of ’she’ and ’her’ rather than ’he’ and ’his’ as the default personal pronoun (e.g.’the reader is asked to use her imagination’) have become widespread and accepted. The central question in this debate is whether modifying language and behaviour at the everyday level can really have a large-scale impact on equality and social justice. As always, address the principles and beware of playing ’example tennis’.
Pros
[1] Political correctness is concerned with social justice. It is paying attention in detail to language and behaviour in order to rid it of ingrained prejudice, discrimination or oppression. It aims in particular to combat racism, sexism, homophobia and discrimination on the grounds of physical appearance or handicap. The great value of political correctness is that it recognises the need to challenge attitudes and behaviours from the bottom up — starting with the very language that has embodied prejudice and discrimination over the years. Political correctness has successfully argued for using something other than just ’he’ as the default personal pronoun, for the use of ’chair’ or ’chairperson’ instead of ’chairman’, and for ’Ms’ instead of ’Miss’ and ’Mrs’ (to abolish the discrimination between men and women, with the latter, unlike the former, being defined by their marital status).
[2] Political correctness recognises the important role of language in shaping attitudes and behaviours. If it is socially acceptable to call people ’fat’, ’ugly’, ’stupid’, ’short’, ’spastic’, ’bent’, ’bitch’, ’Paki’ and so on in derogatory ways, then attitudes will not change. It is right to challenge such name-calling and discrimination wherever it is found. We have political correctness to thank for alerting us to this hurtful behaviour and making us watch the way we think, speak and act.
[3] It is easy for opponents to pick out silly examples where political correctness has been taken to extremes. The existence of such examples does not mean that the whole movement should be abolished.
[4] It is up to the groups in question to find their own names. However, it is still right to challenge the use of names that have been part, in the past, of discriminatory ways of thinking and talking — that was the original reason for challenging the uses of ’black’ and ’white’. It may be that terms such as ’black’,’queer’ or even ’bitch’ can be ’reclaimed’ by a group and used positively. But there will always be a difference between someone choosing to use the word ’queer’ to describe themselves, and being labelled with these terms by others. Political correctness is not committed to any particular new names, but seeks to challenge the unthinking use of old discriminatory ones.
[5] People need to keep up with changing language in order to avoid causing offence. However, if somebody uses insensitive language but is otherwise tolerant, they should be corrected rather than judged.
Cons
[1] Political correctness may be well inten- tioned, but it has no important consequences. The real battle ground for social justice should not be incidental uses of language, but real attitudes in the workplace and in society at large. It is implausible and patronising to suggest that people cannot understand that ’man’ just means ’all people’ or that they really use it in a way that implies men are superior to women. Political correctness is a distraction from real issues of discrimination.
[2] It is absurd to believe that political correctness is to be thanked for drawing our attention to discrimination and abuse. The movements campaigning for women’s rights, black rights and gay rights all predate political correctness. Political correctness reveals an unhealthy and patronising obsession with so-called ’rights’ and discrimination. Adults can cope with being teased about their height, weight, age or IQ without the need for the verbal witchhunt of political correctness. More serious issues of discrimination are dealt with by the law.
[3] Political correctness is too often taken to extremes. A London teacher forbade her class to see the film of Romeo and Juliet because it did not provide gay role models. A teacher in America suspended a six-year-old boy from school for kissing a girl — this, it was claimed, was sexual harassment.
[4] Political correctness is often selfdefeating in that it creates exclusive, patronising or just silly names for groups that it believes are being discriminated against. Using the term ’African American’, it could be argued, implies that black Africans in America are not ’real’ Americans. Calling someone ’differently abled’ rather than ’disabled’ is patronising. Calling a bald person ’follically challenged’ is just silly.
[5] The existence of politically correct language leads to people who are not in the know with the latest ever-changing vocabulary being wrongly labelled as racist or sexist. People who had been told to say ’black’ rather than ’coloured’ are then attacked for doing so. People should be judged for their actions and attitudes rather than having linguistic traps set for them.
Possible motions
This House would be politically correct.
This House believes political correctness has reduced discrimination.
This House believes that political correctness will bring social justice.
Related topics
Censorship by the state
Pornography
Extremist political parties, banning of