Political Correctness Issue
This is an excerpt from the paper...
One of the important issues today is described under the title "Political Correctness," or "PC." It is defined as efforts by certain political groups, primarily those on the left, to enforce a form of speech code so as to regulate speech to ban any term or phrase that might be considered demeaning to any group in society. One of the problems with these efforts is the vagueness of the terms used to define it--what is "demeaning," and how is it to be decided when a given phrase is demeaning or not? Richard Goldstein writes, "The perception of crisis is why hate speech has become a divisive issue among progressives. The distressing force of the current backlash against hard-won minority rights creates a fundamental conflict between our commitment to free expression and our desire to protect and preserve the victims of abuse. The result is an aching uncertainty about where to draw the line" (Goldstein 412). The issue is whether campus speech codes are the right way to address the problem of hate speech, or if such speech codes violate free speech. Americans have long prized the freedom of speech assured them in the U.S. Constitution, yet they also seem to accept that there are some boundaries to freedom of speech. Campus speech codes are the wrong way to address this problem, and they are especially wrong because they exist in a university setting where freedom of speech should be better understood. However, PC has invaded college campuses across the country, with s
. . .
the job, "letter carrier" is preferable to "mailman," and "mankind" is not to be used. Terms like "gringo," "savages" and "redskin" are among the words to be used only in quotes with the approval of the editor, managing editor, associate editor, or senior editor.
The release of these guidelines provoked a reaction, and the controversy became public. A memo signed by journalists at the Los Angeles Times Washington bureau states that it is a short step from "shunning offensive words to shying away from painful facts and subjects" (An all American industry 27).
Supporters of PC believe that it is a necessary way of avoiding hurt to a person who would be offended by certain types of speech, but more than this they believe it is an active way to make up for historical injustices. American history simply looks different to the descendants of slaves than it does to descendants of slave owners, and it also appears different to the descendants of conquered natives, exploited migrant workers, or Chinese railroad coolies. To them the vital history lesson is not the myth accepted by the majority but the reality of immigration laws that restricted the chances of Hispanic and Asians. They place less value on the engineering feat of th
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Richard Goldstein, Terms Dutch, Supporters PC, Nat Hentoff, Proponents Amendment, Hispanic Asians, Gerald Graff, Correctness PC, Racial Identification, PC Amendment, free speech, speech codes, freedom speech, dutch treat, all american industry, hate speech, campus speech codes, jack solomon, solomon eds, boston bedford, life sonia maasik, bedford books, st martin's press, maasik jack solomon, los angeles times,
Approximate Word count = 1231
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Political Correctness Issue
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
