Politically Correct or Politically Direct? by Carolyn Parks, M.B.A.

We have become sensitive as a world community. And this sensitivity shows a positive movement toward tolerance and understanding. And I think most of us can buy into the logic that increased tolerance and increased understanding most certainly leads to lesser conflict.

But is there a point in time in which political correctness in our words and/or life actions can be taken to another type of extreme? Where we are afraid to talk directly about certain issues or live directly for fear of being ostracized?

Perhaps sometimes, there is context for political directness. And perhaps directness is sometimes confused with correctness. When this happens, we may run into some dangerous traps. I am only scratching the surface and touching upon two:

1. We may focus so much on semantics of 'correctness' that we don't actually deal with the issue at hand and recognize it for what it is.

Consider the terminology surrounding individuals who are mentally 'slow'. Two-three decades ago, the word 'retarded' was used. Then, the word retarded was considered ignorant, and was replaced with 'disabled'. And then, as far as I am aware, 'disabled' became inappropriate and was replaced with 'challenged' and then, 'gifted" (or specially abled?) to eliminate any negative connotations. Please forgive me, as I'm sure I've missed some words inbetween or mixed these up. If I am called on this, my point may just be confirmed (issue getting lost in the words).

The word 'retarded', when looked up in a dictionary, means "slowed down in mental achievement'. Now. I ask you to please put aside years of political conditioning aside. If such negativity had not been associated with this word, would it really be far from accurate when describing an individual who is not able to achieve the pace of learning that you and I achieve? If your car reaches the finish line before my car, my car is slower.

I am going to head out on a limb and suggest that in this case, the word retarded was originally NOT meant as a bad word. And now, we use the word 'gifted'. Ask yourself if that word is more compassionate than it is accurate? If you think I am not caring, then you are not correct. I am MORE than aware of the power of semantics and their potential to harm. I believe that titles and adjectives used to describe people should be equally accurate and compassionate. I understand why the word 'retarded' was changed. It became insensitive as it was used in a negative tone. But my worry is this...when the words change frequently, I become so phobic that I am not using the RIGHT word that I stop talking about it (IT being the topic). We need to be DIRECT as well as compassionate so people can openly talk about issues without fear of banishment.

2. We may avoid differences of opinion.

Differences in opinion are what make this world grow and develop. Differences don't always point to conflict. And the other thing to note is that differences DON'T disappear. They will just become more potent, as the nature of mankind is to argue and to think for himself. If we quash opinions too much, we may create a bigger problem in the end when there is the inevitable explosion of will. Political correctness, while absolutely noble in its intentions, has the danger of quieting important conversations if taken to extremes.

Consider the women's movement. In the 1950's and 1960's, women considered motherhood, wifehood and managing a household to be 'their role' and it was NOT politically incorrect at the time to say the word 'housewife'. And then, in the 1970's, the pendulum started to swing the other way, encouraging women to recognize their choices. This was a great thing. But then it became more politically incorrect for women who wished to remain in the home when they 'should have' been out blazing the career trail in the 80's. Those women must have felt very alienated, because they could have been seen as assailants to the women's rights movement. And now, in the new millennium, motherhood is coming 'back into style' and the pendulum seems to be reaching its rightful place in the 'middle' (where choice of career and motherhood are personal).

However, during each of these phases, it took crusaders to stand up and be politically INCORRECT on the matters of motherhood, being a wife, etc. It was precisely very strong differences in opinion that led to a new generation of thinking. Being direct and often vehemently opposed was necessary in order to create change. Imagine exactly how wrong or radical some of these women would have sounded during the time at which they spoke out or stood up!

I think that the most important gift we can give ourselves is the understanding of when political correctness may overshadow political directness and therefore stymie open discussion and action.

So, the benchmark? For myself, I ask a simple question. Am I hurting the person I am talking to or about? Am I limiting their potential? Am I presuming things I know nothing about? If not, then let me speak. After all, it's a free world (or shall I say, 'global community')?.