Political correctness

We had an interesting discussion yesterday and today about political correctness.  What is it?  Who sets it?

Wikipedia attribute the origins of political correctness (p.c. in short) with the feminist movement in the 70s.  We have all witness the changing of language such as chairman to chairwoman, to chairperson, and now to chair.

Language frames our thinking and terms carry other meanings besides the main intended one.  Sometimes, terms also carry negative baggage from old attitudes that needs to be changed and new terms facilitate that.

Shula said that changing terms is only superficial, it is the thinking that needs to change.

Mano said that the last 50 to 100 years have seen more social change than the centuries before it and p.c. represents the transitional stage before our attitudes and value systems settle into a new equilibrium.  As an example he cites how woman chose their married names from the husband's family name to keeping their own maiden name, to hyphenated name, to new word consisting part of each family name, and maybe to something else.  Like the change from chairman to chair, p.c. represents the state of social acceptance of each new step.

Eventually, society reaches a point where an acceptable term or attitude is reached and our attention is diverted to some other area that draws our attention.

P.c. is also used by the conservatives to complain about not being able to talk about some of the things permissible in the past for fear of offending sensibilities of parts of society. Using the term p.c. sarcastically is the conservatives way of attacking the change.

So p.c. is used by the weak in society to promote a new attitude and value system.  If this idea takes hold and there is enough support, the proponents can claim that it is the new main stream and label those not conforming as politically incorrect.

It takes courage to initially promote a new idea and convince others that they should adopt this.  At a certain point when there is enough support for this and the movement becomes mainstream, a bandwagon effect happens.

The people who join later are more like bandwagon followers than courageous early adopters. It is now the people who oppose this movement that needs courage to speak against it and risk being run over by the band wagon (and mob).

Dan mentioned that he behaves differently within the various social group that he participate in.  There are unspoken controversial topics for each group and for harmony, these topics are avoided.  This is not p.c., just the way we socialize and get along with the people around us.

However, as the group size grows to societies, the term p.c. seems to apply to these controversial issues.

How do we know when p.c. have gone too far?

Comedians and satirists are always ready to make fun of p.c.

Eventually, the rise of a new social concept relies on the sympathy and support of the masses.  The privileged have to be convinced that they should give up power to those who are underprivileged up till then.

Whether it is an appeal to their sense of justice, fairness, or that the society as a whole will be better off with the new attitude,  the privileged class complies and p.c. is now mainstream and no longer demand attention.

What about issues that was starting to be politically correct but did not manage to change social attitudes later on?  Somehow I cannot think of an example just this minute.

Let me know when you think of one!