Thursday, January 9, 2014

"Political Correctness and Wreckness" by Bee Elae

I was having a conversation with a three year old in the summer of 2013 (after our superhero fight), and the child proceeded to tell me how much they loved firefighters...except the child referred to them as "firemen". Our next mission was to put out a fire caused by a "bad guy" and I slid my arms into the way, way too small firefighter jacket, and buttoned up my little friend's fire fighter apparel in which the sleeves covered their little fingers. It was so adorable. I asked if I could be a firefighter, and the child replied "NO! Girls can't be firemen!!" Burrrnnnn.

This will be short and sweet but think about these: policeman/policewoman, fireman/fire woman, garbageman/garbage woman, and superman/superwoman. The bright side: how pleasant it is that specificity and individualism is expressed by adding "man" or "woman" to the end of a career title. The foggy, dark side: the lack of acknowledgement for other persons outside of the "man" or "woman" categories, and the complete misunderstanding and absence of legitimate reasoning as to why sex is that relevant in reference to a career name. Gender is relevant for equal rights within an occupation; not for unnecessary distinguishing. Throughout my upbringing, there were no differences in reference to career names (unless it were the type of occupations in which there were differences in status or education like "doctor" and "nurse"). There was a firefighter, a police officer, a garbage collector, and a super hero. Historically, inequality was all but non-existent, and women were limited in the work field while men were almost limitless. I also recall my Women's and Gender professor correcting someone who addressed her as an "actress" after a class project. "Actor", she responded. Have you actually thought about it? WHY is "man" or "woman" placed behind a career title? What about people that don't identify with being "male" or "female"? Is adding the gender of a person onto their occupation that important for identification? Saying "fireman" excludes everyone else but the male, and saying "fire woman" excludes everyone else outside of the female...so...it makes sense to address them as a "firefighter", right? Are these titles being made into a bigger issue than necessary?

"Politically correct: agreeing with the idea that people should be careful not to use language or behave in a way that could offend a particular group of people" ("Politically Correct." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 9 Jan. 2014. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/politically correct>).

 Gendered words and titles may not receive the 1st place ribbon on the relevancy list because there are more in-depth issues in our societies in desperate need of being addressed, but the ideas for and against "political correctness" are quite large after engaging in debate or thought. After having read other opinions and responses towards political correctness, I argue that the reactions are astounding and capable of making one think about gendered words, who the words include and exclude, and who it does and does not offend. It's understood  that some individuals feel as if distinguishing the gender of a person following their career title is of minuscule importance, and for those that are offended by it possess insecurities and are seeking negativity, but it's also understood the impact the words have on individuals that consider the titles to be of importance and affect the path to equality among persons. After reading an article I found on Huffington post by BJ Gallagher (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bj-gallagher/the-problem-political-correctness_b_2746663.html), I thought more about political correctness. In agreeing to part of what BJ stated, I inquired if the "effects" of the extent of political correctness caused more issues despite the "original intent" which was positive. Has political correctness limited one's freedom of speech?

 I reconsidered one of the statements made by someone suggesting that those that approve of political correctness are insecure. I disagree. It seems as if individuals have taken political correctness to an extreme which has caused more problems than addressing the initial issue. An issue which should not have been an issue, but more of an understanding in reference to respecting all people, but political correctness seems to have the ability of being applied excessively and unnecessarily in certain instances. Political correctness is not completely outright and the definition is believed to be poorly structured. Still, why is it such a challenge to exclude the gender of a person from a career title? For what reason were the differences created? Another question, is the term "political correctness" appropriate? That is my problem. I appreciate (and accept) the idea of gender-neutral career titles, but the the term name ("political correctness"), the extent of practicing the term, the path change, and effect of political correctness leads to issues. That's the problem. It's been used inappropriately. Is being more mindful of the terms we use towards others more relevant than the terms we are given to use?
                                                   ^ Definitely a Google Image ^
With Realness, 
Bee Elae
1/10/2014

No comments:

Post a Comment