Politician political correctness

Maybe the reason nothing ever gets accomplished in politics these days is partly because politicians must act like perfectly polished puppets. Prime Minister Gordon Brown was overheard calling a woman he has just been filmed having a discussion with “bigoted” (read the story at the NYT). Maybe the woman was bigoted. Maybe too many people are bigoted and that’s a major problem we should discuss. Does the woman need an apology? Of course, she was insulted publicly by the Prime Minister of Britain. But does there need to be a blow out of news coverage because it was so inappropriate to call anyone bigoted?

And be honest, how many people walk away from someone and complain, “Man, that guy was such an asshole.” It’s not shocking or surprising. We seem to forget politicians are real people. Real people who have to pretend to be these shining examples of moralism and good ethics, no wonder so many people consider politicians to be lying scumbags…in some ways we force them to be.

Political correctness is a term treated with a mix of frustration and relief. Many think people are being too sensitive and others believe changing our rhetoric is important to stopping prejudice. Perhaps we need to think about it with both these view points in mind and one more. What do these terms really mean and what are they doing?

In the case of Arizona’s new immigration law they’ve replaced some terms for others. Alternet has an article about this very idea

This explains how last Friday Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed a bill into law that basically says, “Cops can use the color of your skin as one factor for demanding proof of citizenship,” and then went on to tell reporters that “racial profiling is illegal.”

This is the age of political spinning, of wide spread propaganda feeding the media.

Being political correct can be important and recognize negative rhetoric while making a conscious effort to be more aware of the implications of certain terminology (think stereotypes). However the real issue perhaps is what people individually mean by what they’re saying. When Brown called that voter bigoted he may have been addressing a bigger problem (that he perceived) about people being closeminded (the voter complained about Eastern European immigrants). And instead of focusing on prejudice and what we can do about it, the media has turned to the fact that he used the word “bigoted.”

Political correctness is lacking one key feature. We don’t address the why and search for the source of the problem. We have to dig deeper and think about the wider implications of what and why we say what we do. Calling someone a faggot, for example, is not only offensive because we think of it as an insult but it’s offensive because of the history of the term. During the Spanish Inquisition (beginning in the late 1400s) heretics were burned at the stake. These people ranged from accused witches to followers of Judaism. Bundles of sticks (also known as faggots) were carried to the stake and the people designated to carry these sticks were more often than not homosexuals. When there wasn’t enough sticks (or so the story goes) the homosexuals were then used to fuel the fire. This is perhaps where the crossover came from faggot meaning a bundle of sticks to being a derogatory term for gays. So this term carries a lot more weight than most middle schoolers are aware when they jokingly call a friend a “fag.” We should be aware of what we’re saying and where it came from, particularly when it’s an insult or a stereotype. I remember first learning that tidbit on gurl.com when I was in middle school, it completely changed the way I thought about words and dialogue.

So, being politically correct is important but we must know why. And being politically correct shouldn’t mean we can’t say what we feel and freely discuss bigotry and prejudice.

Now go read Inga Muscio’s book Cunt: A Declaration of Independence to learn about a term that is now derogatory but did not start out that way.