Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on political correctness
Political correctness essay
Essays on political correctness
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on political correctness
The issue of political correctness has always been a source of controversy, but it has came to the forefront in the past few years because of the increase of liberalism, people wanting ultimate equality especially in the words we speak. Political correctness is a highly debated argument because the two sides arguing have such different views. The ones against political correctness say it is a violation of their right to free speech, while the ones for it say it is absolutely necessary to regulate some of your language in order to not offend someone. Both sides of the argument do make very valid points and that is why this topic is so heavily argued. It is a grey area the matter is not black and white neither side is really right or wrong. But …show more content…
There is multiple different ideas of what exactly political correctness is and what it does from people all over and that wave of confusion can sometimes cause people to misunderstand the exact point of political correctness. It is to make someone feel better walking around their town, to know that they are gong to get treated no matter what their physical features of spiritual beliefs are. The ones that oppose political correctness are known to basically have their own version of political correctness called ‘patriotic correctness’. Unlike with political correctness people do not flaunt around the idea of patriotic correctness by name and some might not even know this is what they are expressing by way of their words and actions. Patriotic correctness is seen as an excuse for people to say whatever they want to or about whoever because it is in the defense of American nationalism. We see this a lot now a days in the issue of old relics from America’s history wanting to continue being used even if said relic is offense to a people group in today’s society. That debate has been one of the most controversial this year and the root of it stems from the question of ‘how politically correct should we be?’ is it a big enough deal to ban certain items or is that taking away you ‘American …show more content…
Trump has been widely known for his serious lack of political correctness, he was not afraid to speak his mind no matter what it was he was or who he was hurting by saying this. Some speculate that this could be a reason Trump had victory in the election, people saw his avid lack of political correctness refreshing and thought it was what America needed. This fact alone is kind of frighting because America voted for a man partially because of him not caring about the hurtful things he says about people he is going to be the president of. It makes you seriously wonder if this was just people being ignorant and wanting to rebel or if they actually thought this was some type of advantage in the presidential race. This along with the previous mentioned debate over the use of old artifacts show the way that political correctness is affecting America and it’s not a very subtle effect. As for the people worried about getting the right to free speech taken away, everyone should absolutely have that right but there is a line crossed when that right is used to hurt people because of parts of their life. When the use of free speech is to be completely ignorant to people who do not deserve it thats when things need to be regulated and looked at. When looking at reasons as to why people have a dislike for political correctness it usually come back to
Don’t Just Stand There is an essay written by Diane Cole. It was first published in 1989 in a New York Times publication. She advises her audience about how to react to prejudice comments and jokes. However, her argument is not credible because she fails to mention vital information that would help to support her argument, and there are too many logical fallacies.
Words are capable, and now and then the words we utilize affront individuals. The right to speak freely is very esteemed yet what happens when your opportunity gets to be destructive or rude to another person? There are such a large number of various types of individuals and diverse things that insult every individual. In this day where we are more disposed to say whatever we need, we see more offense being taken to the words that get said. It's difficult to comprehend why certain words can affront to somebody when it may not appear that approach to you. We need to ask ourselves, why do we mind what other individuals say and would it be advisable for us to censer everything that goes into general society just so individuals don't get annoyed?
Political correctness may be a coined term that the general population does not necessarily know the definition of, but is relevant in every single person’s life. In today’s society one must be very careful when verbalizing opinions in order to prevent offending others around, or from disturbing the Politically Correct Puritans: those who strongly support censorship of politically incorrect labels (Suedfeld et al 1994). There are many different theories as to what makes political correctness important and why college campuses seem to be so heavily surrounded by political correcting activists, but oddly enough there has not been an extensive amount of research done on the topic.
How much we valuse the right of free speech is out to its severest test when the speaker is someone we disagree with most. Speech that deeply offends our morality or is hostile to our way of life promises the same constitutional protection as other speech because the right of free speech is indivisible: When one of us is denied this right, all of us are denied. Where racist, sexist and homphobic speech is concerned, I believe that more speech - not less - is the best revenge. This is particualrly true at universities, whose mission is to facilitate learning through open debate and study, and to enlighten. Speech codes are not the way to go on campuses, where all views are entitled to be heard, explored, supported or refuted. Besides, when hate is out in the open, people can see the problem. They can organize effectively to encounter bad attitudes, possibly to change them, and imitate togetherness against the forces of intolerance.
Rankin, Aidan. “The repressive openness of political correctness.” Contemporary Review 282.1644 (2003): 33+. Literature resource Center. Web. 15 Feb. 2011.
Unlike many other countries America has freedom of speech. Even in other countries in Europe people are not allowed to use “hate speech” and they can be sent to prison for it. Fortunately, the American constitution defends people’s freedom of speech, no matter how controversial it is. Political correctness diminishes people’s free speech. It may not be direct but even indirectly the knowledge that someone might have adverse consequences; such as losing a job as a result of their speech is unacceptable. People have the right to state their opinions without others infringing on them, it was the principle in which America was founded. The first amendment of the constitution of the United States declares that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” (US Const. amend. I, sec. i). While the first amendment only affects congress’s control over free speech, it indicates that free speech is a right that people must have. Some people are of the opinion that if something can be found offensive
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
The Complexity of John Proctor John Proctor, in Arthur Miller's "The Crucible," embodies a multi-faceted character whose actions are not solely defined by morality, but rather by the interplay of personal integrity, societal pressure, and individual agency. Some may argue that John Proctor's actions are primarily driven by selfish desires rather than principles of integrity. Proctor's affair with Abigail Williams is seen as a selfish act, driven by lust and desire for personal gratification. His initial reluctance to expose the truth about the witch trials can be interpreted as self-preservation, rather than a commitment to justice. Proctor's guilt and remorse over his affair with Abigail are evident in his confession to Elizabeth, showcasing an internal struggle with his actions.
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.
People can stop talking to someone who they consider offensive, they can walk away. Words don’t hurt people, despite the current popular opinion. Free speech should not be limited by anything it should just be free. Some people will say horrible things, but when they say such things to other people, people will think that they are horrible, and not listen to them anymore. Laws against saying certain thing don’t protect anyone, all they do is hide the true nature of people, until it is too late to do
In the 21st century being “political correct” has not only become a conversation between amongst peers but it is now swaying our political processes and presidential race. Often times people are more concerned about being political correct rather then being truthful. What is and is not appropriate to say to fellow American’s. What may or may not be offensive to those around us. Now while we should take precaution to those around us some things are inevitable to stay the same. In today’s society one of the most talked about subjects is, is it appropriate to call people in our country illegally “aliens”. The illegal alien term should not be changed in order to conserve the feelings of those that
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.
It is not about being PC, it is called not sounding racist. And if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck…. Well. SOME of you have been told that you sound racist. If a person is not racist they certainly do not want to sound racist.
Hence, censorship is essential in society to eliminate discrimination on basis of race and gender, protect children, maintain stability and restore what censor sees as lost moral values. Censorship occurs when expressive materials like books, magazines, movies, videos, music or works of art are restricted to particular audiences based on their age or other characteristics. http://www.ala.org/oif/intellectualfreedeomandcensorship.html) Censorship is not a recent development. It wasn’t imposed properly or there weren’t strict regulations before.
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