Discussion Of Whether Political Correctness Is Morally Correct
In the wake of Donald “I refuse to be politically correct.” Trump’s presidency, political correctness has become a pejorative in the media, under the belief that political correctness has ‘gone mad’ in instances where political correctness is exploited and no political change occurs, making it useless. Political correctness is the belief that language and actions which could offend disadvantaged groups (of race and sex) should be eliminated. The concept began to keep societies civil but is now seemingly tearing them apart. So where did it all go wrong? This essay will explore the use of political correctness in today's world and whether it is the way forward for our society.
Social media is where political correctness is at its strongest and people fear that public shaming is threatening their free speech. Freedom of speech is the ability to speak your mind and criticize your government without persecution or censorship. Whilst there are some real limits as we can be arrested for committing a hate crime, online you can never be free from the social consequences of having an unpopular opinion. Social media gives voiceless people a chance to ‘fight back’ against injustice, usually in the form of public shaming, but does publicly shaming individuals who are overtly offensive take away their free speech? A totem example is Justine Sacco’s case. She was a public relations executive who tweeted: 'Going to Africa. Hope I don't get AIDS. Just kidding. I'm white!'
In moments her tweet was trending worldwide, she was receiving thousands of death threats and her employer has been pressured to fire her. Sacco, who was a South African herself intended the tweet to mock ignorance of Africa, but due to her low status and mere 170 followers she was misconstrued, and her life was turned upside down; Whilst Sacco’s case was a misunderstanding, if she’d meant it, would her brutal shaming still be justified? Would the thousands of death threats sent have been reasonable? Whilst most people do not want those with offensive views to speak loud and proud, for us to have true freedom of speech we must allow others to say what they wish, what we do next, whether we educate and inform or belittle and shame, is up to us.
Political correctness is incredibly ingrained within our lives, as well as that of the corporate worlds’, where it is often exploited for profit. During June, LGBT Pride month, it’s hard to go long without spotting a rainbow pride flag. Shelves were stacked full of merchandise under the vague promise of a donation to charity and awareness, whatever that is, and some of the biggest brands advocating pride were Nike, H&M and Adidas. But is the support of minorities for profit just? Whilst it helps normalize homosexuality, and the money raised has the potential to benefit others, it’s clear these big brands have other priorities. But what seemed off about Adidas’ advocacy was their sponsorship of the world cup, as the last world cup took place in Russia, a country known for their strict laws on homosexuality such as the federal law 'For the Purpose of Protecting Children from Information Advocating for a Denial of Traditional Family Values' which ‘protects’ children from homonormativity. As well, the 2022 world cup is due to take place in Qatar, where it is illegal to be gay. The hypocrisy is hard to ignore. Brands such as Adidas love to wave their rainbow flags when it results in profit, but have yet to stand up for LGBT rights when it really matters and could result in change. The executive director of Breast Cancer Action, Karuna Jaggar asked: “What do we have to show for the billions spent on pink ribbon products?... A lot of us are done with awareness. We want action.”
It’s difficult to please everyone, and for these brands, it’s hard to know when to listen to the pressures of a politically correct society and when to stay silent. But we are all aware at this point, and want change.
When it comes to the debate of political correctness, there’s an obvious generational divide that needs to be addressed, but is it unrealistic to want older generations to have the same modernist views as most young people today? It seems like everyday a new article pops up about millennials ruining one thing or another by being too sensitive. Author Bret Easton Ellis, known for “American Psycho” has taken to saying millennials are defined by' “their over-sensitivity, their insistence that they are right despite the overwhelming proof that suggests they are not, their lack of placing things within context”.
Why the hostility? Older generations such as the baby boomers have grown up around very different standards for what is and isn’t offensive, consuming very different ideas about minorities through film and television which some would find hilarious and some disgusting today. Take the 1960s classic “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” in which the caucasian actor Mickey Rooney taped his eyes to play the role of Mr. Yunioshi- a very stereotyped Asian. Whilst this is looked down upon today, that doesn’t stop the film being considered a classic and a masterpiece by many. Whilst being a bit older doesn’t excuse avid intolerance, it isn’t incredibly realistic to want every gran to jump in on pride, but the generational gap isn’t as immense as you’d think, and can easily be crossed.
In conclusion, political correctness plays a very large role in our lives which we don’t always realize, and for us all to thrive in our modern world, we all need to be on the same page. Whilst political correctness can be exploited and overwhelming at times, when used with good intentions it guides our ignorance to understanding what is and isn’t appropriate, and often we are in desperate need of that guidance. Whether you like it or not, we’re all moving forward, some simply faster than others.
