Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Negative effects of political correctness
Political correctness influences society
Political correctness influences society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Negative effects of political correctness
The institute of Marxism or in other words political correctness, it started in Germany 1923 the main purpose at that time was to find way to implement communism in Russia. As we all know that communism believes in social group not individual. Political correctness deals with social communication it is concerned with replacing offensive words that are considered as discriminating against certain section of society. Robert Allen also defined political correctness by saying “the political correctness movement is also devoted to promoting an alternative terminology that seeks to assert a move positive aspect to negative qualities”. from the begging of the term political correctness it went through three stages the first used favorable to those whose views remained in sync with every shifting Bolshevik party live, the second stage was in 1960s and again it was used favorably by the new left radicals. The last stage was when it was used negatively by the conservatives in America. Political correctness has three categories the first is offensive like gay or retarded these words refer to people as insults for undesirable concept. The second one is subtle like policeman and mailman, this words effect our way of thinking because they implies that those roles are for men only, the last one is blatant like n-word to refer to black these words are very offensive. In summary politicl correctness is term used to describe language to minimize offence(I love English language). The paper discusses political correctness with articles that are with and another that are against it.
Like everything in the world political correctness have its supporters and . Mr. Younkins is one of the people that are against po...
... middle of paper ...
...2009) political correctness build an inclusive society in which people from diverse backgrounds are offered equal opportunities. Another article that defend political correctness talk about the people who are against this movement don’t want to be polite or civil to the people different from them, the important thing to this people is to do what they want when they want even though they used hurtful word they don’t care(angry black woman 2007). This article end by saying political correctness is very important to the language and we need to fight for it so let’s make sure people use it. Allan Goldstein has the same opinion as the two authors before he said that ” political correctness is a small price to pay for keeping the peace between large groups of outraged people” he means people don’t like political correctness but we need it so the people can live peacely.
The oppositions of Lawrence’s paper argue stating that in the position of the minorities being silenced is not necessarily true because the person being insulted could say something back that is just as offensive. The person could also be choosing to be the bigger person.
In the modern society, millions of people realize that several offensive words with insulting taboo meanings heavily disturb their daily lives and break some special groups of people’s respect to push them to feel like outsiders of the whole society. As a result, more and more people join some underway movements to eliminate the use of these offensive words in people’s everyday speech and writing. However, these offensive words themselves are not the culprit, the bad meanings people attach are the problems and some other functions of the words are useful in the society. Christopher M. Fairman the author of “ Saying It Is Hurtful, Banning It Is Worse” also argues that although
Michiko Kakutani's essay “The Word Police” is a refreshing look at a literary world policed by the Politically Correct (P.C.). She pokes fun at the efforts of P.C. policepersons such as Rosalie Maggio, author of The Bias-Free Word Finder, a Dictionary of Nondiscriminatory Language . But in mocking authors like Maggio, Kakutani emphasizes that efforts of the P.C. police are often exaggerated to the point of silliness and can even become a linguistic distraction from the real issues. In fact, such filtering or censorship of words can lead to larger problems within the English language: “getting upset by phrases like ‘bullish on America' or ‘the City of Brotherly Love' tends to distract attention from the real problems of prejudice and injustice that exist in society at large” (686). According to Kakutani, over-exaggerated political correctness just serves in complicating our words and diluting the messages. But really, the problem in P.C. advice on word-choice is the exaggeration of inclusive ness. Kakutani addresses the P.C. police's righteous motive: “a vision of a more just, inclusive society in which racism, sexism, and prejudice of all sorts have been erased” (684). But where does one draw the line between writing inclusively and walking on eggshells? What is politically correct? Must writers assume the worst of their audiences when debating whether to mutate the spelling of “women” to “womyn” in order to avoid sexist language? The truth is, writing purely inclusively is an arduous task; it requires consistent and careful consideration of many exterior elements such as audience, literary content, and societal context. An examination of these elements reveals just how difficult ...
Charles R. Lawrence intended audience in his article “On Racist Speech” is college students and universities. His sense of tone is forthcoming. Lawerence word choice sets the tone by using the words conspicuous,dissenter, and bigot. The article gives examples of how universities do not protect minority college students. Lawrence states that universities should protect their students He also gives an example of how universities have tried to have rules to ban racist speech yet they have proven ineffective in stopping racial slurs. The regulations have not stopped the verbal brutality yet it has stopped the occurrences of physical fights. He mentions how students do not have any need to be hurt verbally.
All in all, the article, "Can My Children Be Friends With White People" was published in the New York Times opinion section, this means that the opinion of professor Yankah despite not being correct is one that should not be censored or abominated. Instead pieces like this should allow for people to come together and understand
Rankin, Aidan. “The repressive openness of political correctness.” Contemporary Review 282.1644 (2003): 33+. Literature resource Center. Web. 15 Feb. 2011.
As Americans we need to be compassionate and understanding towards them. Political correctness is necessary in this changing and progressive world that we live in. We do have the first amendment; however, that only really affects the government’s interactions with people in regards to free speech. People’s interactions with one another are not affected by the First Amendment. Furthermore, it is better in Europe because people cannot get offended by what others say about them. America needs to be more progressive and censor ourselves so that no one is offended by our
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 “Politically Correct” movement’s purpose is to bring historically condescending terms, offensive music and art, and controversial educational content to an end and replace them with more positive and less-offending references. Offensive and demoralizing efforts are wrong, but the censorship and deletion of words and phrases that do not contain the intention to demoralize are taking political correctness too far. Politically correct (or “PC”) antics have created a social decline that is growing worse with each generation, specifically regarding areas of art, education, language, and our right to freedom of speech; the degradation they have brought to the American psyche has even led to name-changing.
A story commonly spread through word of mouth, Charles Perrault wrote an early rendition of Little Red Riding Hood in 1697. Between the late 17th century and today, there have been a few changes in societal norms, customs, and understandings of social values. To summarize, laws based on religion have given way to laws based on science…in turn, scientists have taken their newfound social power and discovered ways to destroy all life on Earth…following that, humans have practiced leaving the planet, preparing for the inevitable day when our self-created nuclear holocaust gives us no other choice…and lastly, various oppressed social groups, recognizing that they would also like a seat on their starship to salvation, have fought for their civil rights and equality through various social reform movements. A side effect, political correctness, is the attempt to rid the English language of any terms, phrases, or expressions that would encourage our society to remain rooted in its biased theories of the past. Thus, we are now at an age where a maxim is placed upon the empowerment of the individual, no matter who you are or what formerly oppressed group you may represent, with an equally strong maxim placed upon breaking any barriers that block the empowerment of the individual.
This is true in the sense that with gaining knowledge of social standards and developing ways of better defining social groups, we are going to have to say “We’re sorry for the spoken mistakes that have kept English and mankind from evolving and this is the new term that does not primitively stampede over your history.” I will try to show my interpretation of what politically correct language is and why it should be used, only to how it relates to the United States of America but possibly to a broader geographical range. The use of politically correct language creates less social conflicts, develops more equality, and needs to be constantly updated in order to define the group or person correctly. In fact, humans prefer, sometimes without being consciously aware, to group things together in an effort to better explain the world around them. I emphasize “things” because in order to derive order from apparent chaos we must categorize, referencing everything.
for it to be construed as offensive. I would hope that a person in this
Prejudice and discrimination have both been prevalent throughout human history. Prejudice deals with the inflexible and irrational attitudes and opinions that are held by others of one group against those of another. Discrimination on the other hand refers to the behaviors directed against another group. Prejudiced individuals have preconceived beliefs about groups of people or cultural practices. There are both positive and negative forms of prejudice, however, the negative form of prejudice leads to discrimination. Individuals that practice discrimination do so to protect opportunities for themselves, by denying access to those whom they believe do not deserve the same treatment as everyone else. An example of discrimination based on prejudice involves the Jews. “Biased sentiments and negative stereotypes of Jews have been a part of Western tradition for centuries and, in fact, have been stronger and more vicious in Europe than in the United States. For nearly two millennia, European Jews have been chastised and persecuted as the “killers of Christ” and stereotyped as materialistic moneylenders and crafty business owners (Healey, p.65). The prejudice against these groups led to the discrimination against them.
Theirs is an obvious divide between everyone on earth. Whether it be race, ethnicity, sexuality, politics, or anything else, everyone has their unique perspective on life. With all these differing viewpoints, there’s bound to be conflict of thought. There are many who try hard to get everyone on the same pattern when it comes to thought. These “politically correct” try hard to make no be righteous and to make every demographic not feel out of place. Writer Jonathan Chait in “Not a Very P.C. Thing to Say” challenges the politically correct culture and asks questions about the way they go through with things. In “Unmasking 'racial micro aggressions '”, another writer, Tori DeAngelis wrote an article describes racial microaggressions”,
Although freedom of speech is regarded by many as an essential part of a democratic society, there is ongoing debate as to how far this right should extend, and whether it is acceptable to place limitations upon the right on the grounds that the speech could be classified as “hate speech”. Hate speech is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as “speech expressing hatred or intolerance of other social groups”. This covers a wide array of language, from racist or homophobic language, through to the publication of unsavoury views such as holocaust denialism. Despite the importance of free speech being widely accepted within both political commentary and legislation such as the European Convention on Human Rights, some commentators argue that