Political correctness has acted as a muzzle to those with an opinion and bubble wrap to those who are easily offended. Political correctness involves the prohibition of many common expressions and habits on the grounds that someone in our diverse society may take offence to them. It might have been born of a generous impulse - it’s good to avoid animosity when one can - but it has been taken to the extreme. It has become a nightmare for anyone with a different perspective on current affairs. We are encouraged to think about sexuality, gender identity, cultural imperialism, and race, but discouraged from talking freely about these very real issues. We have arrived at a point where we are constantly talking, but we are not actually saying anything. …show more content…
Unless you’re aware of all the latest banned phrases, conversation becomes as difficult as navigating a minefield. People around the world have, therefore, chosen to rather not voice their beliefs; it’s almost as if there has been an outbreak of selective mutism. With Donald Trump’s candidacy came the birth of a nation willing to embrace their voices once again. Donald Trump’s campaign was fuelled by ‘saying what everyone else was thinking’. He made use of aggressive, emotive, and powerful language that captivated Trumpsters around the world. “I think the only difference between me and the other candidates is that I’m more honest,” he argued. Trump’s use of language has changed how people speak to one another. The muzzles are coming off. What one thinks, what one feels, it’s all fair game now - tell it like it is. Political correctness is slowly being abolished, leaving a new challenge in its wake - the English language is being seen once again as the language of the oppressor. In June 2015, after Donald Trump announced his candidacy, most people would have laughed at the thought of him winning the election - it was seen as impossible for someone with almost no political experience to become President. How, then, did a real estate mogul manage to secure the most important seat in the White House and become the working-man’s president? Through his tell-it-like-it-is language, his conversational and unmanufactured tone, and his extreme ‘honesty’, Donald Trump managed to speak directly to his voters. To some, this style of speaking is the last thing they’d expect or want from a politician. To others, this made him more attractive than his competition. He found the issues that affected the lower and middle class - job security and their safety in a country plagued by shootings and terrorism - and targeted these throughout his campaign. His speeches are never the same; instead of speaking about the same thing in every state along his campaign trail as most nominees do, he tailors his speeches to his audience. For example, in a speech to Christian students at Liberty University in Virginia, he changed his usual stump speech to suit the evangelical crowd, arguing that Christianity is “under siege” and reciting verses from the Bible. It is this tailored-language that captured his audience and helped seal his November win. Furthermore, the businessman’s speeches have often been described as “word salad”, implying his use of language is anything but planned. However, when we look closer, it is clear that his words and use of grammar are carefully chosen to connect with his audience on a subliminal level. His constant use of repetition reinforces his main message to the audience. For example, Trump stated that “Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment.” He repeated the idea that Hillary wants to wave people’s right to bare arms, and, in order to prevent any backlash for lying, he hedges and adds in the word “essentially”. It could be argued that he was simply correcting a slip of the tongue, but this is actually a clever tactic. The desired message is now reinforced in his audience’s mind, even though it isn’t what he ‘technically’ said. People around the world look at Trump and his voters as irrational and uneducated, but one definitely cannot argue that Trump’s use of language is anything but clever and well thought out. Throughout his campaign, Donald Trump made use of derogatory and sexist language. From telling female reporters that they have the “face of a dog” to calling breastfeeding women disgusting, many females around the world have taken offence to his misogynistic views. Consequently, the Western man is now viewed as sexist too. Any progress made by feminist movements in the last two years has been abolished in one fell swoop. Whilst some of his policies aren’t as backwards as one might think, Trump has supported equal pay, arguing that “you’re going to make the same if you do as good a job”, it is difficult to see him as anything other than chauvinistic due to his use of language. After the shooting of 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando by an Islamic extremist, Donald Trump stated that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton “have put political correctness above common sense, above your safety, and above all else.” Most notably, he argued that “we could be very politically correct, but whether we like it or not, there is a problem”.
This sparked his ambition to ban all members of the Islamic faith from the United States, or insist on having all muslims carry a special pass. Moreover, the Mexicans that had immigrated to America were a focal point for the new president. “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems to us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” It’s obvious that Donald Trump has some extremely racist tendencies, made exceptionally clear by his desire to build a wall along the Mexican border. Trump voters now share a similar image. This resulted in the ‘I am Muslim’ campaign - an attempt to get through to the Americans with racist beliefs as well as to support those that bare the brunt of stereotypical
judgements. Ethnic minorities around the world view the West and Trump’s supporters, thanks to his campaign, as racists, sexists and homophobes. They’re the colour of the colonial powers. They speak the language of the oppressor. The abolition of political correctness has aided this view. Maybe it’s a warranted view, and maybe it’s a little too harsh. Trump has many unpopular views and his use of language is highly criticised, but maybe having an honest politician in power, one that is not politically correct and says exactly what he thinks, is a good change from those that simply say what they think we want to hear.
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 ...
Gone are the days of legalized slavery, of Nazi Germany, of women being incapable of having a notable opinion. No longer is there a system of racial segregation adopted by an entire country, complete white supremacy or lynchings performed by the Ku Klux Klan. Yet, although we are no longer exposed to such past experiences and despite us living in a world where diversity is embraced more than ever, the existence of prejudice remains. Today we have universally come to accept multiculturalism, varied ethnic backgrounds and those populations who historically were forever stigmatized. But in spite of these developments prejudice has manifested itself in other, more subtle ways and no matter how modernized society become such unfavourable attitudes
Across the nation, millions of Americans of all races turn on the television or open a newspaper and are bombarded with images of well dressed, articulate, attractive black people advertising different products and representing respected companies. The population of black professionals in all arenas of work has risen to the point where seeing a black physician, attorney, or a college professor are becoming more a common sight. More and more black people are holding positions of respect and authority throughout America today, such as Barack Obama, Colin Powell, Condelezza Rice and many other prominent black executives. As a result of their apparent success, these black people are seen as role models for many Americans, despite their race. However, these groups of black people are exceptions to the rule and consist of only a tiny fraction of all black Americans. These black people in turn actually help to reinforce the inequality of black Americans by allowing Americans of other races to focus on their success. A common thought is, "They made it, why can't you do the same?" The direct and truthful answer to that question is Racism.
As in the Gilded Age, we still hear cautionary tales today to bring about immigration reform. Donald Trump, for instance, has used Muslim terrorism as a campaign topic to restrict immigration for those with an Islamic religious background.
Since this country was founded, we have had a set of unalienable rights that our constitution guarantees us to as Americans. One of the most important rights that is mentioned in our constitution is the right to free speech. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the
Trump has said and believes that all immigrants that enter the United States are bad and are set out to endanger the lives of all individuals
“…Everybody jumped on him, and beat him senseless… Everybody was hitting him or kicking him. One guy was kicking at his spine. Another guy was hitting him on the side of his face… he was unconscious. He was bleeding. Everybody had blood on their forearms. We ran back up the hill laughing… He should have died… He lost so much blood he turned white. He got what he deserved…” (Ridgeway 167). The skinheads who were beating this man up had no reason to do so except for the fact that he was Mexican. Racism in this day and age is still as big of a problem as it was in the past, and as long as hate groups are still around to promote violence, society is never going to grow to love one another.
While browsing through articles on the internet, I came across many related to the topic of racism. I am beginning to feel as if I am surrounded by stories of racism. From the KKK’s aggressive campaign against immigrants, to the police violence against black people in cites throughout our nation, racism and discrimination continue to be problems. One story stood out to me and continues to make me uncomfortable. Malachi Wilson, a five year-old boy, could not attend his first day of kindergarten in Seminole, Texas. What could he have done to warrant the principal’s rejection? His hair was simply too long.
Islam is the religion that provides a complete code of life including social as well as personal spheres. Islam has been targeted by many stereotypes including extremism since last few decades. The reason behind these stereotypes are on some facts and to some extent widely propagated through media. Many people involved in criminal activities, get highlighted easily by media and catch the attention of general public if they are Muslims. A major role behind these stereotypes is played by the outcomes of the 9/11 attacks. Muslims have been targeted with stigmatization and other forms of racial discrimination. They have to face tight security at international airports. Employers have also been showing concerns or hesitation while hiring Muslims especially the immigrants. Many reasons beside 9/11 attacks behind Muslim stigmatization in United States have been in existence since many decades.
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.
There are many different ways thoughts, ideas or views on certain subjects are squandered in order to attain political correctness. The constant bashing of other views by their peers makes them afraid to
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
The article "The Pros And Cons of Political Correctness" found in The Onion is found to be incredibly satirical. With its use of both trivializing and exaggerating the concept of being "politically correct". The term political correctness they use is usually defined by the layman of avoiding words that are deemed "offensive" and regressive. This obviously develops a strong sense of controversy between those with the progressive mindset and that of the conservative or liberal.
It so happens that a strong reactionary movement in response to something can also be misguided in their efforts, even if pursued in the name of the greater good. These strong reactionary movements lean heavily on one side, and their proponents reverberate like-minded ideas in an echo chamber, rather than being more balanced and nuanced, and not forming an ideology that is so uniformly “left.” Of course, they will say they have a right to be mad and I am not condemning their feelings of anger and indignation, but that a movement spurred out of these feelings is bound to be incorrect in at least some ways. Unless political correctness is the incontrovertible truth and requires no refinement, then chances are there is work to be done and there should be no shaming for suggesting