Last quarter I was assisting the Cross-Cultural Center’s (CCC) Search Committee with the hiring effort for a new assistant director. In the final stage, we interviewed five candidates who were outstanding individuals and proved to possess necessary skills for the position. A lady with a law degree from Boalt School of Law and years of experience in community work was our favorite in the bunch. So close to receiving an offer, she made a comment during an informal lunch conversation that flipped our positive impression with her 180 degrees. “It is just lame that education is not the State’s first priority,” she said. She was eventually voted not suitable for the position by the committee.
Many may question the rationale of our decision, but I still consider we made the right choice. For those who are not familiar with the CCC, it is a university unit and a safe space for students of all identities to learn and experience diversity and student leadership. Political correctness (PC) is one of the many virtues valued and embraced by the CCC staff. Regarding the scenario above, I believe most of us would agree this lady didn’t mean harm in her comment. However in my opinion, expressing one’s disappointment with a reference to people with disabilities was very disrespectful. In fact it appeared to be even more dreadful when such comment was made in a casual setting, which could be deemed as an accurate reflection of one’s mindset and values. At UC Davis where we practice the Principles of Community, we should not allow room for exclusive and discriminatory language.
Language political correctness nowadays is a popular movement especially in politics and academia. I understand how this phenomenon could be vexing for it forces people to be prudent and neutral in verbal communication, which is not necessarily a speaking habit that everybody is accustomed to. In yesterday’s class, some classmates even questioned if significant difference existed between PC and non-PC language. I would argue there is.
I don’t know exactly when “power words” based on socially disadvantaged people’s accounts started to be adopted for and introduced to our communication, all of which is just to add dramatic effects to conversations. To examine these “power words”, such as “something is so gay/lame/retarded,” with our critical thinking skills, we can easily see that the users position themselves as verbal oppressors and are perpetuating ideas/values that have been long abandoned in the stream of history. One beautiful aspect of the United States is its emphasis on equality across people and respect for individuals, and the use of “power words” undoubtedly undermines this fundamental value of our country.
Political correctness may cause temporary inconvenience in our verbal communication because we now need to choose our vocabulary more carefully. Nonetheless I personally think it is well worth the “trouble” for it is one of the few places in society we can literally practice equality, at no cost. Say what we mean and mean what we say. That’s the whole point about communication after all, isn’t it?
4 comments:
I know that "retarded" or "gay" are bad words to say, but I thought "lame" was a common word till now. I guess there's just too many people saying it so it made the word common. Anyway, thank you for educating me again that the power of words.
It's a pity how a qualified individual for the position immediately got turned down because she expressed her opinions through the use of a power word. Had she said something like "I find it unfortunate how education is not the State's top priority" and perhaps adding her vision as to how the state can improve fix that problem can improve her chances of the position. I don't quite understand what 'Political Correctness' means from your post. I have my own idea but I feel you can elaborate on it a bit more. I agree with you that "political correctness may cause temporary inconvenience in our verbal communication" as people may have to censor themselves. When they do so, it seems to me that what they really mean may not accurately reflect what they say. They are no longer freely expressing themselves. They have to alter their words, as which are a clear reflection on their true thoughts and feelings. This brings to mind issues about politics and censorship. Take for instance, Howard Dean's 'byah' that potentially ruined his candidacy. Had he shown his enthusiasm differently, would he have had a better chance? In the run for presidency, if using certain language is politically incorrect, is verbally and ruthlessly attacking your opponents considered politically correct? If it's not OK to call someone 'gay', is it OK to spread false rumors about them having an affair? This whole notion of free speech and political correctness intrigues me. It seems like you can say whatever you want, while watching your mouth. I enjoyed your post and found it very informative and insightful.
PS: Thank you for your comment on my post last week. I plan on writing another 'follow-up' post while addressing your comment if the flexibility of our topics for posting permits.
This is a clear, cogent, and incredibly educational post—it sheds light on our discussions of last week. My frustration with 'political correctness' is mainly that (for some people who do not choose to ‘use’ it) it has somehow comes to mean an 'unnatural' way of speaking—as if, when speaking politically correctly, we are being unnatural and not saying what we 'really' think. Of course this is absurd, as *all* language is learned and put to use in contexts that exceed any one individual. Language is neither natural nor unnatural, neither 'one's own' nor purely something 'out there' that can be forced on an individual. And you are exactly right to point out that, really, being politically correct is simply explaining what we 'mean' more precisely; as Peter points out, the job candidate could have used the word "unfortunate" rather than "lame" to a more effective end. I suppose one of my goals, in this class, is to increase sensitivity to language so that we do not use words uncritically or *as if* any words are 'natural' and others are not. The more we look at words, meanings, and contexts, the more sensitive we are to the implications of speaking. This public writing experiment (the blog as essay space) is challenging how I think about all this, too. Thank you for your post, Rick!
Your post addresses not only an important issue but also reveals the meaning of what political correctness is. You choose your words carefully in this post, perhaps more so than in some of your other posts emphasizing the being politically correct is an important part of today’s “society.” However, some of today’s social jargon has been developed out of these non-PC words, like lame and changed meaning into something else. Is it possible that with time these words lose their sensitive meaning and become just words within our diction? Is it possible that the idea of political correctness comes out of people reacting too much too a word? By this, I simply mean, do we place too much value on words in general? By slowly censoring what words are politically correct and which words are not, aren’t we just censoring how people express themselves? And I feel that it is not just “normal (those in the majority)” that use these politically correct words, in fact I find that most people using them are those who are supposed to be offended by them. I do think that it is great that we, as a community and university, are taking into consideration how our words can affect others but I feel there is a serious flaw in the idea of political correctness. Eventually as we, as a “society,” get closer and closer to being politically correct we lower the amount of words we can use. And then the question becomes are these words ever politically correct or will they perpetually be banned as everyday jargon, positive or negative. The main flaw that unfortunately comes with being politically correct is also accepting censorship of the ways in which we can express ourselves, so where do we draw the line between what is politically correct and what is overt censorship?
Post a Comment