Political Correctness/Derogatory Terms

It seems that when I open up WordPress with the intention of posting a new blog; it’s because my mind is flooded with passion and energy about a particular, negative subject that is potent to cause controversy. This is an abnormally long blog so if you are interested in the subject, however have a short attention span; may I suggest digesting it in chunks?

The Representation unit has only just begun in English Language, we cover topics such as: how language affects our opinions, and how opinions reflect our language; taboo words, and the environments in which they are and aren’t acceptable; stereotypes; and political correctness.

I presume that with ‘political correctness’ being in bold print, and it also being in the title of my blog; you’ve managed to salvage that this blog is about political correctness.

Well done, you guessed right, you little gold star.

Today’s lesson was most certainly enthralling, emotion provoking and a little eye-opening. It was today that people’s true colours revealed themselves; and while each has their own opinion, I could not help but judge these people on their opinions and their obstinacy. In English Language, all words are openly embraced and open for discussion; this is a discussion about said lesson and related subjects; ergo, I will be using taboo words.

The activity involved the teacher stating a ‘non-politically correct’ term and the context in which it’d be used, and it was our job as a class to place ourselves on an imaginary spectrum spanning the classroom, based on our disposition towards the word. The far left of the classroom was ‘completely unacceptable in day-to-day conversation’, and the far right being the opposite.

 

It was truly interesting, “Nigger” yielded a very negative outcome, most people on the far left with a sparse quantity of people in the middle. The consensus was that the association with slavery meant it was completely unacceptable to describe someone as “Nigger” or exclaim it carelessly.

The main debate however was that if “Nigger” can be so carelessly exchanged between two black people; there should be no outcry when a person of different ethnicity uses said word. Alex’s response, genius yet brilliantly simple; “two wrongs don’t make a right”. One can go into the debate that black people have earned their right to freely say the word, but does not make it justified for anyone of a differing ethnicity to use it.

The debate also branched off into “What CAN we call black people then?” The answer is ‘black’. ‘Coloured’ is outdated, and ‘African’ and any of it’s derivatives are too formal for casual conversation. Words come in and out of fashion, but to allow equality, we need to simply conform to the fashions.

 

Swiftly moving on, the use of “gay” to describe something negative. This provided mixed opinion as the majority of people were in the middle with a handful leaning towards ‘Acceptable’ and a handful leaning towards ‘Unacceptable’. I was completely against it. Being gay I am completely bias.

The person who found it most acceptable was picked upon and justified his disposition by saying “it’s a modern, slang term and while there are homosexual gays, the word is used with a different meaning in other contexts”. I offered my opinion that “Nigger”, and “Gypo” aren’t always used in the context in which they originate from, yet it still has that background and the use of the word is open for misinterpretation. If someone stubs their toe on a rock and quickly exclaims the rock is “gay”, they are describing the rock as something negative. Does that dictate that I am something negative and of little worth to society?

Someone tweeted me earlier saying, “This use of the word gay means weak and ineffectual. Words change with use. I am not offended by this use of the word.” To this I reply; not everyone in the same group is offended by the same words, people have different views, ethoi and moral standings; but is that not the purpose of political correctness? To provide guidelines on what is and isn’t acceptable to offend the least people? But to reiterate my point, I am gay, if something is being described as “gay” when it means “weak and ineffectual”, surely that makes me “weak and ineffectual”? I disagree.

 

“Paki” was one that was very mixed opinion. As it was short for “Pakistani”, one could argue it is socially acceptable. I was up the end saying it was completely unacceptable. One person was adamant that because it is socially acceptable to call the British “Brits”, the Scottish “Scots” and the Australian “Aussies”, it is acceptable to call Pakistanis “Pakis”. I didn’t express my view in class but I shan’t hold back here!

I completely disagree, I will make reference someone else’s opinion here; Australians weren’t, and aren’t, spat on, robbed, set on fire for their nationality. It is the horrific history that the word “Paki” holds that has given it such negative connotations, coupled with the ignorance to whom it’s aimed.

 

And the term “Gypo”, originally a derogatory term for Gypsies, is modernly used in the context “you thieving gypo”. Once again, I saw it as unacceptable. People were stereotyping and saying “but gypsies do thieve”, which I find awful. Where I live, we have gypsies in the area at least twice a year, and they are perfectly pleasant, free people with good family values; to use “gypo” with such negative connotations is an offence to the gypsy culture which a lot of people hold dear.

 

You may have noticed that throughout this exercise, I was obstinate that all these terms were socially unacceptable, and after hearing other opinions; I remain obstinate. All these terms are derogatory and the implications they can have are ostracisation and isolation of a minority; yet aren’t they still human? As one of the very few minorities in the group, I understood what it feels like to have people deliberately attempting to ostracise me, I appreciate the destructive use of language and have therefore limited/abolished my use of non-politically correct terms.

Everyone is still human, and deserved to be judged based on the individual’s actions; not who or what they are.

Of course, one must acknowledge and understand the environment they’re in; I freely used “Nigger” at a mate’s house, in the presence of a black friend because it was acceptable in said conditions. One must have the intelligence to appreciate where words are and aren’t acceptable, but I’ve spoken generally when discussing the above terms.

I also hear “but he/she refers to himself as ___(appropriate discriminatory slur)___!” Yes, but not everyone does it and you need to respect the average person. I am a dignified gay, I will not conform to the gay stereotype of sleeping round or anything else. It is my personality that is flamboyant and feminine, that isn’t conforming. You will never hear me use the terms “faggot”, “poof”, or “gay [when describing something negative]” because I do not like to hear them said to or near me, and I expect people to respect my moral standing.

So I repeat what I said at the beginning; Political Correctness aims to provide guidelines on what is and isn’t acceptable to offend the least people. Surely that’s a good thing? My personal view is to not speak, political correctness constantly in mind, but to have a basic level of awareness about what words are and aren’t acceptable. There is no point in a day-to-day conversation where “Nigger” or “Paki, “Gypo” or “Gay” (used negatively), is necessary.

 

BUT QUESTION:

What is YOUR personal view on the four words discussed?