When Is Being Politically Correct Wrong?

I first encountered the concept of 'political correctness' in the 1980s. Back then, people would often use euphemisms to avoid direct language. For example, instead of saying 'lover,' they would say 'same-sex de facto spouse.' I quickly learned that this kind of sensitivity often led to the creation of new terms that were more cumbersome and obscure. 'Manhole cover' became 'access way' because it was considered that women were being hidden by language! While I can understand the intention behind these changes, I often find them to be a form of overkill.

Examples of Unnecessary Sensitivity

One such change that really offends me is the term 'ombudsperson.' The word 'ombudsman' has no English-derived counterpart, and the 'man' at the end is not a reference to a person who 'ombuds' something. The adoption of 'ombudsperson' instead mistakenly implies that 'man' was a codename for the word's actual definition.

On a more personal note, when I revealed that I have Australian Indigenous heritage, one person suggested I should be called a 'coon.' My response? What of it? Another individual got offended on my behalf, which is ridiculous. It's important to pick your battles wisely and understand when something is truly significant and when it's just semantics.

There are aspects of my life that I know will offend others. Eating meat, for instance, often attracts heavy criticism from vegans. However, the problem arises from their perspective, not mine. Similarly, I strongly dislike beanies and backward baseball caps, but does that mean I get offended when someone wears one? Not at all.

Being clinically overweight, do I get offended by fat jokes? Far from it! The issue here is the mindset that fat jokes are offensive. I've become one of those who use these ludicrous forms of ‘political correctness’ to highlight how absurd this mindset has become. An example is how a female in a hiking situation who got lost was told she was “geographically embarrassed.” Similarly, bald people are “follicly challenged,” and poor people are “fiscally challenged.” These terms are often used to soften the impact of more negative or stigmatizing language, but they can also come across as patronizing.

Caricatures and the Loss of Humor

Speaking of fat, the media reacted strongly to Joan Rivers making a joke about someone's weight. The incident involved a woman who appeared to be insecure about her appearance. Her face was taut, and her nose required more superglue than Michael Jackson's. However, in my Australian context, I was not familiar with her history or her comedy style, and from what I saw in her performance, it was subpar. Her jokes about sensitive topics, such as homophobia and antisemitism, were more about creating a spectacle rather than delivering a meaningful performance.

In the 1990s, there was a comedy trio called the Doug Anthony All Stars (DAAS). They lampooned various religions, covering everything from Christianity to Hinduism, Islam, and New Age beliefs. While most of their audience found their comedy humorous, one young woman was offended when they targeted her obscure sect. This highlights the delicate balance between humor and sensitivity.

The Church of Scientology was notorious for its aggressive stance againstDAAS, particularly when they made jokes about Scientology. This example demonstrates how political correctness can sometimes be used as a shield for individuals to avoid criticism. The Mindset of Political Correctness:

Proponents of political correctness argue that it is about equality. However, if this is true, then everyone should be prepared to receive their fair share of offense and get on with their lives. It's about time we stop being so sensitive and start focusing on what's truly important. The goal should not be to avoid offending anyone, but to foster an environment where everyone feels respected and valued.