# What's so bad about political correctness? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 30, 2006, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603 "2006-07-30T21:18:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/41 "2006-07-31T14:21:32Z")
> [@you with the face](#): > > Well, who said A-A is supposed to replace black anyway? A-A is no more a euphemism for black than Irish-American is a euphemism for white. The problem is that people read way too much into the term and automatically assume that it exists out of PCness. I guess the idea that A-A was coined as a way of distinguishing a population of people based on their _ethnicity_ as opposed to race is just a concept that is too large for the masses to swallow. I wish folks would unhinge their jaws just a little bit. Juuuust a little bit. It may not have been coined as a euphemism for ‘black’, but it was certainly coined as a replacement for ‘black’ in the context of people of African origin (but not other people of African origin). As such, it’s easy to see how it became commonplace as a generic replacement term; trouble is that it simply isn’t really a very useful one, except when used self-referentially. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/42 "2006-07-31T14:25:08Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > It may not have been coined as a euphemism for ‘black’, but it was certainly coined as a replacement for ‘black’ in the context of people of African origin (but not other people of African origin). Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/43 "2006-07-31T14:29:35Z")
> [@you with the face](#): > > Well, who said A-A is supposed to replace black anyway? A-A is no more a euphemism for black than Irish-American is a euphemism for white. The problem is that people read way too much into the term and automatically assume that it exists out of PCness. I guess the idea that A-A was coined as a way of distinguishing a population of people based on their _ethnicity_ as opposed to race is just a concept that is too large for the masses to swallow. I wish folks would unhinge their jaws just a little bit. Juuuust a little bit. > > If my tone comes across as caustic, forgive me. Sounds like that thinly veiled arrogance that was referred to earlier. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/44 "2006-07-31T14:42:00Z")
> [@you with the face](#): > > Cite? If you will accept citations from Wikipedia… > **[African Americans](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American)** > > African Americans, also known as Afro-Americans or Black Americans, are an ethnic group consisting of Americans with partial or total ancestry from any of the black racial groups of Africa. The term "African American" generally denotes descendants of Africans enslaved in the United States. While some Black immigrants or their children may also come to identify as African American, the majority of first-generation immigrants do not, preferring to identify with their nation of origin African Am... > [@](#): > > The term “African American” has been in common usage in the United States since the late 1980s, when greater numbers of African Americans began to adopt the term self-referentially. Black nationalist Malcolm X favored the descriptive term “African American” as more historically and culturally defining over “Negro” and “black” and used the term at an OAAU (Organization of Afro American Unity) meeting in the early 1960s, saying, “Twenty-two million African Americans - that’s what we are - Africans who are in America.” Former NBA player/coach Lenny Wilkens is another who used the term as a teenager in the 1950’s when filling out a job application. ---
**Author:** ![Nature\_s\_Call](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nature_s_call/32/19006_2.png) [@Nature\_s\_Call](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nature_s_Call)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/45 "2006-07-31T14:42:02Z")
George Carlin, in defending his preference for “Indian”, says that Columbus did NOT think he had reached India and therefore called the people he met “Indians.” He says that country was known then as Hindustan, not India. The word “Indian” derives from (I’ll get this wrong) “people who walk in God’s grace” or something, “In Dios” Is there any truth to this? I am a white man. I am (well not really) offended at “Caucasian.” I am Canadian. I don’t even know where Caucasia is! Actually… what the hell DOES “Caucasian” refer to? On the bastardization of words to sanitize gender, I propose the following: The word “human” is not offensive, neither is the word “woman.” Both of these words end in “-man” Why then is policeman, fireman, chairman, alderman, businessman offensive? Is it because “man”, referring to male, is unadorned? If we must alter the language to correct this, instead of replacing the suffix “-man” with “-person” let’s add a prefix to “man.” I like “he-” but that probably wouldn’t fly. Some may suggest “de-” How about “jo-”? e.g. “At the party there were 20 women and 22 jomen.” For what it’s worth: my chief complaint against PC is it presumes my use of an “incorrect” term means I intend harm. I insist on saying blind, cripple, retarded, and handicapped when I need such descriptors. I love the scene in “Clerks II” where Randall said “porch monkey” in front of a black couple. He was honestly unaware the term was racially charged (as was I - I’d not heard the term before). The shocked look on everyone’s face was predictable - but that’s what I mean! They all assumed the mere mention of that phrase had dealt harm… but no hate was intended, no disrespect was felt, no damage was (or should have been) done. Nonetheless, the manager felt it necessary to apologize and refund the black couple’s money. Randall, after realizing how others took it, launched a campaign to “take back” the phrase. Why should we allow hate-mongers to claim certain words for their exclusive use, leaving us to fabricate new words? We should wrest those words out of their hands! Come on fellow honkies! Join me in taking all racially/sexually/handicappedly charged words back! All of them! Can I get some niggers to join the cause? ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/46 "2006-07-31T14:44:20Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > Sounds like that thinly veiled arrogance that was referred to earlier. I find it arrogant to insist that something is “PC” just because a particular term falls outside of a person’s comfort zone, for reasons that are without factual merit. But that’s me. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/47 "2006-07-31T14:50:43Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > If you will accept citations from Wikipedia… > [African Americans - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American) I don’t think your cite supports what you think it does. I counter your Wikipeidia article with this [About.com](http://experts.about.com/e/a/af/African_American.htm#hd6) article: > [@](#): > > **The term as originally applied refers to only those descended from a small number of colonial indentured servants and the estimated 500,000 Africans taken to British North America or the U.S. as slaves (of about 11 million Africans taken to the Western hemisphere in general).** In slightly broader usage, the term can include West Indian and Afro-Latino immigrants whose African ancestors also survived the Middle Passage or recent African immigrants/children of immigrants with American citizenship, but these groups tend to use the ethnic terms Latino or Hispanic, or identify themselves by their countries of origin (i.e., as Nigerian, Dominican or Jamaican instead of African American). The term does not include white, Indian or Arab immigrants from the African continent, and they are not generally considered Africans on the continent. ---
**Author:** ![yBeayf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e274bd/32.png) [@yBeayf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yBeayf)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/48 "2006-07-31T14:55:04Z")
> [@](#): > > But even if it’s confusing, isn’t it a bit arogant for non-Indians to decide that “Indian” is no longer an acceptble term? Indians call themselves Indian, regardless of the smug thrusting PC upon them. OTOH, if we have two distinct groups claiming the same term for themselves, there needs to be a useful way to distinguish them. And I think that Indians-from-India have a bit older claim to the term. ---
**Author:** ![yBeayf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e274bd/32.png) [@yBeayf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yBeayf)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/49 "2006-07-31T14:57:39Z")
> [@](#): > > ``` > George Carlin, in defending his preference for "Indian", says that Columbus did NOT think he had reached India and therefore called the people he met "Indians." He says that country was known then as Hindustan, not India. The word "Indian" derives from (I'll get this wrong) "people who walk in God's grace" or something, "In Dios" Is there any truth to this? > > ``` Nope, not at all. The indigenous inhabitants of North America were misnamed by the Spaniards, pure and simple. And the name “India” for the area where the Indians-from-India live goes back to ancient Greek – it was what they called the area around the Indus river. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/50 "2006-07-31T14:57:47Z")
> [@you with the face](#): > > Well, who said A-A is supposed to replace black anyway? A-A is no more a euphemism for black than Irish-American is a euphemism for white. Really? Because in my experience African American as used in the United States is specifically used as a descriptor for people we would typically call black. > [@](#): > > I guess the idea that A-A was coined as a way of distinguishing a population of people based on their _ethnicity_ as opposed to race is just a concept that is too large for the masses to swallow. The United States 2000 Census form considers “Black, African Am., or Negro” to be one and the same. Maybe it was originally coined to be an ethnic descriptor but that’s not how it’s being used by most people. > [@](#): > > In the US, “black” does not have anything to do with skin color. Perhaps at one time it did, but not anymore. Baloney. It might not be the only factor but to say skin color has nothing to do with whether we call someone white or black it is just plain silly. > [@](#): > > Perhaps the reason why you find A-A confusing is the same reason you have mistaken Indians for black people. You are being too literal. It makes me wonder if you find Native American to be confusing in the same kind of way. Or it could be that racial classifications of any kind are arbitrary and will vary depending on cultural context. I can find all sorts of pictures of people from Papua New Guinea that most Americans would call black. Marc ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/51 "2006-07-31T15:06:22Z")
> [@Nature's Call](#): > > George Carlin, in defending his preference for “Indian”, says that Columbus did NOT think he had reached India and therefore called the people he met “Indians.” He says that country was known then as Hindustan, not India. The word “Indian” derives from (I’ll get this wrong) “people who walk in God’s grace” or something, “In Dios” Is there any truth to this? [None whatsoever.](http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mgenteindios.html) ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/52 "2006-07-31T15:19:24Z")
> [@MGibson](#): > > Really? Because in my experience African American as used in the United States is specifically used as a descriptor for people we would typically call black. Which doesn’t change the fact that one term references ethnicity and one references race. Nelson Mandela is not an A-A. Cuba Gooding, Jr. is a A-A. But both are black. See how this works? One term communicates something that the other does not. > [@](#): > > Baloney. It might not be the only factor but to say skin color has nothing to do with whether we call someone white or black it is just plain silly. What race is [Colin Powell](http://pristina.usmission.gov/images6/sec2.jpg)? [Queen Latifah](http://pristina.usmission.gov/images6/sec2.jpg)? [Kid](http://www.pappasblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/kidnplay.jpg) from Kid 'n Play? [Tisha Cambell](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tisha_Campbell-Martin)? Their skin is far from black, but I assure you that they are black people. Any insistence to the contrary is baloney. > [@](#): > > I can find all sorts of pictures of people from Papua New Guinea that most Americans would call black. And I could probably find equal amounts of people who think the sun is a planet. The question is, so what? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/53 "2006-07-31T15:34:04Z")
> [@you with the face](#): > > I don’t think your cite supports what you think it does. > > I counter your Wikipeidia article with this [About.com](http://experts.about.com/e/a/af/African_American.htm#hd6) article: Remembering that the assertion you called me to cite support for was this: > [@Mangetout](#): > > It may not have been coined as a euphemism for ‘black’, but it was certainly coined as a replacement for ‘black’ in the context of people of African origin (but not other people of African origin). …let’s take a look at your [About.com](http://About.com) cite: > [@](#): > > The term African American carries important political overtones. Previous terms used to identify American blacks were conferred upon the group by whites and were included in the wording of various laws and legal decisions which became tools of white supremacy and oppression. There developed among blacks in America a growing desire for a term of their own choosing. > > With the political consciousness that emerged from the political and social ferment of the late 1960s and early 1970s, Negro fell into disfavor among many American blacks. It had taken on a moderate, accommodationist, even Uncle Tomish, connotation. The period was a time when growing numbers of blacks in the U.S., particularly black youth, celebrated their blackness and their historical and cultural ties with the African continent. They defiantly embraced black as a group identifier—a term they themselves had repudiated only two decades earlier—a term often associated in English with things negative and undesirable, proclaiming, “Black is beautiful.” > > By the 1990s, the terms Afro-American and African American began to reemerge, this time for many as self-referential terms of choice. Just as other ethnic groups in American society historically had adopted names descriptive of their families’ geographical points of origin (such as Italian American, Irish American, Polish American), many blacks in America expressed a preference for a similar term. Because of the historical circumstances surrounding the capture, enslavement and systematic attempts to de-Africanize blacks in the U.S. under chattel slavery, most American blacks are unable to trace their ancestry to a specific African nation; hence, the entire continent serves as a geographic marker. So I think your citation actually supports my position better than the one I picked; namely, that ‘African-American’ is indeed a term chosen specifically to replace ‘black’, for those black people of African heritage. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/54 "2006-07-31T15:35:32Z")
> [@yBeayf](#): > > OTOH, if we have two distinct groups claiming the same term for themselves, there needs to be a useful way to distinguish them. And I think that Indians-from-India have a bit older claim to the term. So, in the name of PC, should we thrust a name upon people who don’t even want it? If we just stepped back, and took everything in a case by case basis, and actually looked at whether a term is intended to be offensive vs. descriptive I think we’d be a lot better off. ---
**Author:** ![yBeayf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e274bd/32.png) [@yBeayf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yBeayf)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/55 "2006-07-31T16:08:20Z")
> [@](#): > > So, in the name of PC, should we thrust a name upon people who don’t even want it? No. I in fact call Indians-from-NA “Indians”, since every Indian person I have met uses that term to describe himself. I’m just lamenting the ambiguity here, and wishing there were a terminology that would satisfy everybody while not introducing confusion. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/56 "2006-07-31T16:13:33Z")
Asking why political correctness is bad is not really a well-formed question. Political correctness is bad in the same way that the Grinch Who Stole Christmas is bad - it’s a fantasy monster invented for the particular purpose of representing evil. “Political correctness” is a term with approximately the same amount of meaning as “Volvo-driving, ivory tower elitists” - it’s a concept deliberately invented for a political purpose. That’s why, in every discussion of this type, you see people seriously discussing the merits of _imaginary terms_ and self-righteously defending their rights to use the term “blind” instead of “visually-impaired”. Why shouldn’t you use the term “blind”? No one has asked you not to. But talk radio hosts and political pundits are having great success at convincing people that some group of academic types (probably drinking lattes while driving their Volvos and listening to NPR) has set themselves as a mysterious language authority and demanded that every reference to another human being be some twelve-syllable compound word. You don’t have to believe the propaganda, folks. No one is going around scolding people for using the words “blind” or “black” or “Indian” (in fact, in academic literature, as far as I can tell, the normal term for American Indians is, in fact, “American Indians”.) “Political correctness” is a phantasm. It’s not something real. Of course there are some examples of people accidentally being overzealous in trying to be inoffensive. But the idea that this represents some larger phenomenon that we somehow need to fight against is pure fiction. Even more bizarre is this: > [@psychloan](#): > > It’s also about intimidating and silencing those who dare to question the tenets of PC. It’s hard to imagine a belief less rooted in reality than this one; the term “political correctness” was popularized specifically in mocking jokes and right-wing screeds. _No one_ is going around defending it; the ludicrous idea that people are being “intimidated” or “silenced” for being “un-PC” would be absolutely laughable if it weren’t such a perfect example of political propaganda having overcome reality. The only real examples I can see of people trying to actually shape discourse are those who smugly explain how they don’t see people in terms of race or ethnicity or height but rather as “humans”. Now those people don’t represent any sort of organized force to be wary of, but if they did, they would be the real problem, as the expressive power of language _would_ be seriously hampered if we had to stop making any sort of reference to those things. The mind reels at the thought. “Could you take this document to Sheila, please?” “Who’s she?” “She’s the dark-haired _human_ at the front desk.” :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/57 "2006-07-31T16:24:03Z")
> [@you with the face](#): > > Nelson Mandela is not an A-A. Cuba Gooding, Jr. is a A-A. But both are black. See how this works? One term communicates something that the other does not. And yet people, including the United States census, continues to use AA to describe race. > [@](#): > > Their skin is far from black, but I assure you that they are black people. Any insistence to the contrary is baloney. Now who’s being literal to the point of ridiculousness? People might describe me as white but it isn’t like my skin is literally snow white. Likewise you don’t have to be coal black for someone to identify you as black. Obviously there’s some variety to human skin tone but most people in the United States identify race by physical characteristics such as skin color. > [@](#): > > And I could probably find equal amounts of people who think the sun is a planet. The question is, so what? Great. It’s obvious to me that you’re being completely irrational and have little of value to add to the conversation. Thanks anyway. Marc ---
**Author:** ![Nature\_s\_Call](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nature_s_call/32/19006_2.png) [@Nature\_s\_Call](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nature_s_Call)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/58 "2006-07-31T16:25:48Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > No one is going around scolding people for using the words “blind” or “black” or “Indian” This just isn’t so. I’m sure you’re correct that the “PC movement” did not start from latte-sipping do-gooders. It more likely started from some indignant asshole saying (for example), “What do fat people _want_ me to call them, _horizontally enhanced_?” However the phantasmic “movement” started, it’s become such that people **do** scold you for using the “incorrect” term. It’s become mandatory at a former workplace of mine to have “sensitivity training” that ensures no one will commit sexual harassement or racism. Noble motives, but within the “training” is a rundown of PC terms. There it is grounds for disciplinary action to use “blind” or “cripple” - let alone “coloured” or “wop” ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/59 "2006-07-31T16:40:24Z")
Just in the interest of The Straight Dope[sup]®[/sup], and not joining this mêlée of a thread: > [@](#): > > I don’t even know where Caucasia is! Actually… what the hell DOES “Caucasian” refer to? Not Caucasia, but the Caucasus–a region of Eurasia where we arbitrarily set the “border” between Europe and Asia along a line demarked (in the South) by the Caucasus Mountains that extend northward from the land between the Black and Caspian seas. It was in this region that Johann Friedrich Blumenbach believed that the European peoples had originated as he attempted to describe the various human races, as he perceived them, in the late 18th and early 19th century. His work carried over into all the subsequent people who divided humanity along “racial” lines. (The word “Caucasia” does exist, but it is more commonly presented as “the Caucasus.”) > [@](#): > > On the bastardization of words to sanitize gender, I propose the following: The word “human” is not offensive, neither is the word “woman.” Both of these words end in “-man” Why then is policeman, fireman, chairman, alderman, businessman offensive? Is it because “man”, referring to male, is unadorned? If we must alter the language to correct this, instead of replacing the suffix “-man” with “-person” let’s add a prefix to “man.” Interestingly, that was the method used in the earlier forms of the language where variants of “wer-” indicated the masculine and variants of “wif-” indicated the feminine and the word “man” meant persons without identifying sex. “wif-” went on to become “wife” and “wifman” became (for reasons of orthography) woman while “wer” dropped out of the language (except in combined forms such as werewolf) leaving “man” as both the masculine and gender neutral. So your proposal has a certain historical merit. Getting anyone to go along with your proposal may take sime effort. * * * To dip my toe into the discussion, barring the change of language regarding man, werman, and woman/wifman, there is a current use for the elimination of the -man suffix (although I agree that it is overdone in some cases). There have been any number of women who have related stories of growing up confused that they could not fight fires, police streets, or carry out trash because the words, themselves, indicated that the job was a “man’s” job. This may not be as true in 2006 as it was in 1970–but then, we have changed the language so that fewer young girls encounter the problem. And for every case of some poor sap being simply _overwhelmed_ by the need to use extra letters in fire fighter or police officer, we have the opposite cases where flagman and workman were shortened (by one consonantal sound) to flagger and worker. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2006, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603/60 "2006-07-31T16:50:45Z")
> [@Nature's Call](#): > > This just isn’t so. I’m sure you’re correct that the “PC movement” did not start from latte-sipping do-gooders. It more likely started from some indignant asshole saying (for example), “What do fat people _want_ me to call them, _horizontally enhanced_?” However the phantasmic “movement” started, it’s become such that people **do** scold you for using the “incorrect” term. Yeah, if you’re using an actual offensive term. If you’re using a term that’s genuinely offensive to most of the people in the community, you don’t have much business complaining when others tell you to stop it. But like I said, no one’s going around scolding people for using “blind” or “black” or “Indian”. Those are all perfectly normal, acceptable terms for blind, black, or Indian people respectively; it is either fantasy or mendacity that leads people to claim that the word “blind” is now verboten. > [@](#): > > It’s become mandatory at a former workplace of mine to have “sensitivity training” that ensures no one will commit sexual harassement or racism. Noble motives, but within the “training” is a rundown of PC terms. There it is grounds for disciplinary action to use “blind” or “cripple” - let alone “coloured” or “wop” You really expect me to believe you could get in trouble at work for using the term “blind”? Yeah, right. Whereas if you’re going around at work calling people “cripples” or “wops”, your ass oughta get fired. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-bad-about-political-correctness/366603.md?page=4)