Politically Correct Language

A Literature Review of Politically Correct Language

Emmanuel Araiza

The University of Texas at El Paso

Politically Correct Language

Abstract

Politically correct language has been an integral part of how many people live their lives.

Despite this, the use of politically correct language is still one of the most polarizing issues that

society faces today. On one hand many people believe that use of politically correct language is

the only way to improve society’s moral compass and that the United States should try to enforce

it to any degree they can. On the other, many believe that politically correct language is often

taken too far and as a result it does more harm than good. This paper will seek to explore both

sides of this argument in order provide to enough information for a person to make a well

informed decision over this polarizing issue. In order to further explore this issue an interview

was conducted with Norma Gradsky, a professor of linguistics and Communication at the

University of Texas at El Paso. In this interview Gradsky discusses the rise of politically correct

language and how it has shaped the social landscape in today’s society for better or for worse.
Politically Correct Language

A Literature Review of Politically Correct Language

Words were once seen as a combination of scribbles on a piece of paper or a combination

of sounds that come out of a person’s mouth. However words started to carry more weight with

the introduction of politically correct language. The recent movement towards the use of

politically correct language in today’s society has been seen as a polarizing to say the least. One

on hand, many people are fond of this movement because they find it to be liberating and

educational. On the other hand many people see it as way to censor the general populous and

destroy one’s freedom of speech and self-expression. This difference in opinion is what sparks

the debate over politically correct language and in order to understand this polarizing

phenomenon the following questions must be explored:

1. What is Politically Correct Language?

2. How did the use of Politically Correct Language create a social gap in today’s society?

3. Should people be held accountable for not using Politically Correct Language?

4. If laws that enforced Politically Correct Language were put into place, how would is

affect the relationship between minorities and the rest of the American populous?

These four questions are meant to explore how the use of politically correct language became a

major part of today’s society and what would be the consequences of trying to alter it.
Politically Correct Language

What is politically correct language?

Politically correct language can be defined as language that takes words with a

negative connotation and replaces them with words that are more inclusive and do not have the

negative connotation that the original word had. This ideology can be seen in an article Nicholas

Limerick wrote in 1999. In it he claims that the only reason politically correct language exists is

to soften the cultural impact behind of words which have the misfortune of carrying cultural

baggage. (1999) Limerick also mentions that the ideas of political correctness and cultural

sensitivity aren’t as recent as one might initially believe. In the same article, Limerick stated that

the idea of political correctness came from the English reformation era; however the term

“politically correct” didn’t become prevalent until the 1930s with the rise of Mao Tse-Tung and

Chinese communism. (1999) Despite this, Norma Gradsky, a language and communications

professor at the university of Texas at El Paso claims that politically correct language didn’t

surface in the United States until the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s.(personal

communication Mar. 27 2019)

How did the use of Politically Correct Language create a social gap in today’s society?

Despite originating in the middle of 20th century, politically correct language wasn’t seen

as a polarizing concept until the turn of the century. One of the reasons politically correct

language has created a social gap in today’s society is the politically correct language favors one

group of people over another. Libby Perves (1999) claims that society has a tendency to be

distorted to favor certain demographics of people in order to further an individual’s selfish

intentions. Perves also claims that this lack of morality can lead to things such as victim culture
Politically Correct Language

and politically correct contradictions which may lead to the impact of politically correct culture

being greatly diminished. (1999) As a result of this, many people have started to believe that

politically correct language is a tool that cynical people use to move up in society as opposed to a

way to create a more inclusive world.

Society’s resistance to change is another way the use of politically correct language has

created a social gap in today’s world. Norma Gradsky (2019) believes that one of the reasons

that politically correct language is such a divisive issue is people’s unwillingness to change their

diction. She also claims that the people who believe in things such as victim culture and

politically correct contradictions aren’t seeing the long term goal that politically correct language

is trying to achieve. And that the biggest divide over politically correct language comes stems

from people’s differing views on society’s intentions. Gradsky believes that an inclusive society

is more important thing to consider than the intent of individual people in today’s society. She

also believes that political correctness will be an issue that will continue to be debated until

people realize that the use of politically correct language is the only way to progress from a

social standpoint. (personal communication Mar. 27 2019)

Should people be held accountable for not using Politically Correct Language?

One of the biggest reasons the societal gap exists when it comes to being politically

correct is the debate of whether people should be held accountable for the things they say. On the

one hand, many people believe that it is morally correct to use politically correct language and

should thus it be legally enforced by the government while others believe that politically correct

language does more harm than good and should thus not be enforced in a legal manner.
Politically Correct Language

The primary reason people believe that people should be held responsible for the use of

politically correct language is the belief that it serves as a way to educate people and it would

help create a common culture that no one would feel left out. Larry Scanlon (1999) wrote that

politically correct language is one of the first steps to creating a culture that was inclusive of

everyone regardless of their background and that people who attack politically correct culture do

not believe in a world that is truly inclusive and equal to everyone. He also claims that politically

correct language is easiest way to achieve this goal since communication is a prominent part of

everyday life (1999)

One of the reasons people do not believe that people should be accountable for their use

of politically correct language is the belief that using politically correct language will not do

anything to alter a person’s behavior. Ben O’Neill (2011), a lecturer at the University of New

South Wales, argues that politically correct language will not work as long as the stigma of a

particular word and intent to harm another person is still prevalent (2011). O’Neill claims that

people get stuck on what he likes to call a “euphemism treadmill” in which words keep get

watered down until they have no more weight behind it. (See Figure 1) The problem with this,

however is that people aren’t aware how harmful the euphemized word can be so they associate

the euphemized words with the harmful stigma of the original word. As a result the people who

adopt this new vocabulary still has the same harmful intent underneath and will still possess the

behaviors associated with non-politically correct language. (2011)

Politically Correct Language

Figure 1: this figure illustrates how the euphemism of words can quickly become an

endless cycle (O’Neil 2011)

If laws that enforced politically correct language were put into place, how would is affect

the relationship between minorities and the rest of the American populous?

When discussing the how the relationship between minorities and the rest of the

American populous would change if laws that enforced politically correct language, it is

important to realize that the content of this passage is based primarily on speculation and

subjectivity which stem from past events. With this being said in order to understand the events

that might happen if politically correct laws were put into place, it would be the most ideal to

look at how TV censorship laws where integrated and how it affected the medium as a whole.
Politically Correct Language

TV censorship was a movement that came about because of a lack of regulation of the

airwaves. This concept can be seen most prominently be seen in the censorship movement India

had in the early 20th century. In India, this movement was primarily comprised of multiple

Supreme Court cases which helped define what was acceptable to put on the airwaves and made

it a point to prioritize the freedom of speech and the freedom of expression. This was primarily

achieved by separating government beliefs from the beliefs of the people who made content to be

broadcasted on the public airwaves (Noorani 1990)

India is not the only government to put enact TV and movie censorship laws however

since many other countries have also put these types of laws into effect. One of the leading

countries in this respect is the United States with the creation and upholding of the Federal

Communications Commission (FCC), a subsection of the government which is tasked with

overseeing every part of the United States’ communications by radio, television, wire, satellite,

and cable. Even though they claim that they are not allowed to censor to anything that can be

deemed as an infringement to one’s first amendment rights (The FCC, 2017), it has not stopped

them from actively pursuing people who gotten out of line with their choice in words. The most

notable instance of this comes from the Supreme Court case FCC v. Pacifica Foundation where

the FCC sued a New York radio station for airing George Carlin's "Filthy Words", a monologue

that covered the seven words one cannot say while on public airwaves. Despite warning the

listeners of the explicit content prior to the broadcast and the large amount of citizens standing

with the Pacifica Foundation, the Supreme Court still ruled that the monologue should not have

been on the public airwaves and the Pacifica Foundation was reprimanded. (Hurwitz, 1990)

Although the movement for censorship in TV, movies and other forms of media was a

very unique and complicated movement, it is probably the best indicator as to how the
Politically Correct Language

implementation of politically correct laws would play out because both movements deal with

how the first amendment was being compromised in favor of a more politically correct

landscape. As a result this it is safe to speculate the relationship between minorities and the rest

of the American populous would be contingent upon how frequently people would be

reprimanded for their use of not politically correct language.

Conclusion

Over time the use of politically correct language went from being a political issue to

being an ethical one. Many people in today’s society still see the use of politically correct

language as a path to righteousness and a path to a brighter future in which everyone can coexist

in harmony and no one gets ostracized for the social background. Others believe that politically

correct language only exists to harm individual expression and to encourage things such as

victim culture and moral contradictions and that the enforcement of politically correct language

would do more harm than good. This paper showed many different opinions regarding this issue

however it is important to realize that public opinion will be what best indicates where this issue

will go in the future.

Politically Correct Language

Bibliography

Butterbaugh, L., Jackson, A., Branner, A. (1994) Political Correctness. Off Our Backs, 24(8), p.
20

Fox-Genovese, E., Scanlon, L. (1995) Two Views: Debating Political Correctness. Academe,
81(3), p. 8-15

Hurwitz, L. (1990) Review [Review of Mass Media and the Constitutions: An Encyclopedia of
Supreme Court decisions by Richard F. Hixson] The Journal of American History, 76 (4),
p. 1353

Limerick, N. (2011) Review. [Review of Political correctness: A history of semantics and culture
by Geoffrey Hughes]. Language in Society, 40 (5), p. 673-674

Morris, S. (2001) Political Correctness. Journal of Political Economy, 109 (2), p. 231-265

Noorani, A. G. (1990). TV Films and Censorship. Economic and Political Weekly, 25(6), p. 300.

O'Neill, Ben. (2011) A Critique of Politically Correct Language. The Independent Review,16 (2),
p. 279-291

Purves, L. (1999) Political correctness who benefits?. RSA Journal, 147(5489), p. 46-53

The FCC and Freedom of Speech. Federal Communications Commission. (2017) Retrieved at
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/fcc-and-freedom-speech.