Ever Thought About Respecting Others?

"Political correctness is as exploitable as any other progressive ideal, but its aim is to stifle the incessant noise of those who flap their careless lips without a thought about those they might offend and why that might be important."
~Marcus Brigstocke

The problem with discussing political corectness is that instead of engaging in a conversation where the sorting of words based on circumstance is the entire power which words hold in our society, "Political Corectness" often has a negative connotation that makes it almost impossible to have a well-informed discussion about it. The definition of political corectness is the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against. When people say they wish overt political corectness didn't exist they are basically stating that they wish that the social legislation that allows for people to be treated as equals should be removed from society. Overall, however, being politically correct is a personal choice. It is a personal choice that brings a great deal of power to the speaked who specifically chooses their words to make a point about their views about society. Rather than mask the issues that people who follow political correctness try to fight against, they are making a strong statement of inclusion. These people go out of their way to make certain that every person feels included when discussing topics. Since this IS a blog I am going to take a bit of a personal spin on this so please forgive me if my writing style less mirrors an essay and more mirrors and in-class discussion. Every time a politician is on stage discussing religion they all tie it back to the same basic string of words:

1. "I don't care if you're Muslim or Christian or Buddhist or whatever your religion is, when you listen to a spiritual song and you really open your heart, you can feel it. You can feel the message of it. Just a simple story." Valerie June
2. “It doesn’t matter whether you are Buddhists or Christians, Jews or Gentiles"
3. "All the religions of the world: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, even Buddhism" My Seventh Grade Global Studies teacher.

Do you understand what it feels like to have your religion completely bypassed in almost every religious discussion. People glaze by hinduism almost as if it doesn't exist. The issue isn't that I am some sort of devout hindu who is absolutely offended that these people would dare to not include my religion in their debates, the issue is that despite being the religion that the majority of people on the HUGE Indian subcontinent follow, no one knows anything about it. It is the fact that the moment someone mentions someone who is Indian I can immediately relate to the situation because who I am is never showcased in media or in schools or in my life. When you picture the perfect all american family you never picture an Indian girl with immigrant parents and a chip on her shoulder because of the way she had to push down her culture to have even a single hope of fitting in. So why am I telling you all of this? It is because this is the raw purpose at the heart of the politically correct agenda. Not at all is political correctness about "distract[ing] sttention from the real problems of prejudice and injustice that exist in society at large" (Kakutani) it, at its root, is about inclusion. The choice that an individual makes to include multiple bodies or types of people in their speech is a concious decision by that individual to hold the stake of what their opinions are in society. The argument that PC covers up the problems that we face as a nation rather than solves them is an important piece to the liberal's argument against political corectness. In Mike Lester's political cartoon he displays an NCAA meeting looking angrily at a man who owns a jeep Cherokee, stating that the name itself is an attack on the cherokee people (Lester). This is an important issue because the comic displays that there is a sick sentimentality that comes with holding on to possibly harmful past ways of thinking. The argument to keep the name of the Redskins the same derogatory name is that tradition ought to be upheld. Traditional values that beat down and trivialize entire cultures of people aren't traditions at all. There is a reason why Native American people are not called Red indians anymore, there is a reason why it is not okay to call them savages, or redskins, then why is it considered okay to "uphold the traditions" of the team name when it came from such a derogatory time?I was recently at a slam poetry competition and witnessed what I believed was one of the most creative poems I have ever experienced in regards to the considerations of the feelings of others. The four teenagers went onto the stage and stood in front of their microphones only for the one wearing a men's blazer to shout out, "And welcome to the game show: Your Opinion is Wrong!" The entire poem continued with the host rattling on several scenarios in which people had to decide whether different politically correct terms and arguements were simply ostentatious and over the top or justified. By the end of the poem the four students stood together for their mind-numbingly cool thesis, "you see, you can't defend your argument with that is just my opinion when your opinion is wrong. You can't have the opinion that it is okay to make others suffer

because you do not feel comfortable giving up the priveledge you were granted just by being born as who you are!" To be quite honest this poem rung within me the origin for the hate that the phrase "political correctness" faces. It shows that political corectness is just a term that priveledged people created in order to dismiss the people who have the nerve to ask for respect with a simple wave of the satirical wand. Demanding not to be stereotyped is not political corectness, it is a human right, and it is a sane or by any means morally-correct stance to believe that refusing to respect people's right to be treated like human beings is to time-consuming. When Steven Pinker directed conversation about the interesting phenomenon of the human ability to side-step around the issue when speaking, he was frustrated with our disability to be direct. This in no way has anything to do with selectively choosing our language in order to slowly form a more inclusive society. Even Pinker who so loathes the idea of not being direct recognizes that "words let us say the things that we want to say and also the things we would be better off not having said" (Pinker). He recognizes the difference between being direct and being directly offensive and mean for no other reason that the fact that it is hard to change the way one was brought up. It is important to recognize that you can say "merry christmas" and happy holidays and it doesn't have to create some sort of scandal like the infamous "war on Christmas". It tends to be those very people who are against political corectness that spout in great anger and dramatics that political corectness is a waste of time when it is known by the people who practice the politically correct way of thinking that it is synonymous with respect.