Political correctness is a rather controversial topic. Whereas some speakers believe it to limit their ideas and thoughts, some others consider it to be necessary to establish social relationships. It is the arguments for and against political correctness that are worth analysing in this essay.
It is believed that language expresses people's ideas. Consequently, whenever speakers utter a word, they should be responsible for it since people are thought to be aware of the choice they are making. When speaking, people decide how to get across a message. It is this selection that should be made consciously so that speakers are able to take responsibility for their own speech.
Saying the first thing that enters a speaker's mind seems not to be the most accurate way of communicating. As members of a community, speakers are expected to respect others. Not taking into consideration other members' feelings may cause speakers many problems, mainly social ones.
As regards the arguments against political correctness, it may be stated that it is said to limit speakers' freedom of speech. Some speakers do not agree with the idea of having their speech restricted since they seem to prefer to go straight to the point than to beat about the bush.
It is claimed that uttering nice words to express ideas or opinions will not change the way speakers are. According to some people, political correctness tends to be used as a tool to hide speakers' real feelings and thoughts, thus it seems to be a great strategy so as not to let the listener know who the speaker really is.
As a conclusion, it can be stated that the arguments for political correctness are that speech expresses ideas and opinions and thus, it may hurt other members of the community's feelings. On the contrary, the arguments against political correctness are related to the fact that it limits speakers' freedom of espression and , as Nash argued in his article, it does not change the way speakers are.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario