Many terms that have been widely used in the past have recently been subject to a wave of politically correct adjustments, with campaigners and the government attempting to revolutionise our vocabulary. Terminology such as “retarded”, “negro” and “dustbin man” have been classified as politically incorrect, and have been replaced with “mentally handicapped”, “black” and “waste disposal coordinator”.
The motives of those who support political correctness are clear: they believe that the words we use to describe, for example, ethnic groups, affect our opinions on them. The reasoning behind this is apparent: describing a black person as a “nigger” is blatantly derogatory, and if children are brought up to use such terminology then their views of black people will most likely be in accordance with this. Instead, campaigners believe that children should be educated with inoffensive phrases, to theoretically remove racial disharmony, as well as other problems such as sexism, ageism and homophobia.
However, such alterations to the English language have not been wholly welcomed, and the concept of political correctness is often ridiculed through the medium of humour. The process of creating new terminology to describe something the English language already has a word for is seen by some as unnecessary; many critics have argued that the problem lies in our attitudes, rather than the words we use to convey our opinions. This has led to ‘political correctness’ itself acquiring negative connotations, and it is often associated with extremism and over-zealous attitudes.
Examples of how political correctness has been derided include “aquatically challenged” to replace “drowning”, “spatially perplexed” to replace “drunk”, and even “provider of distributive, monetarily valued fornication” to replace “prostitute”. Evidently, these ridicule the politically correct method of seemingly elongating clear and concise terms into complex, vague phrases. This derogatory viewpoint on the concept has led those who support it to avoiding the phrase ‘political correctness’ itself, and it has been said that it is only those who oppose it who actually use the term.
Opponents of political correctness argue that this method of attempting to control the way we communicate and express our ideas is actually a form of dictatorial censorship, and consequently prevents individuals from conveying their own personal views on a subject. Another strong argument against political correctness is that language is simply a reflection of social attitudes, and if this stance does not change then the new, ‘positive’ lexis will soon acquire the same negative connotations the previous words implied. The outcome is that instead of using taboo words such as “slut” or “spastic”, the new lexis to describe such people will have pragmatic meanings that continue to imply a derogatory view. As Ann Robinson, Chief Executive of SCOPE (formerly The Spastics Society, but renamed to become more politically correct) stated,
“Words make a difference but what is more important is the work ahead to end discrimination.”
