A person is a person no matter what their color, talents, or beliefs are. Every human being has dignity equal to that of every other, yet each of us is unique. We are different. We have different thoughts, feelings, opinions, and aspirations. We have all had different encounters with people, some good and some bad. These aspects (which make us who we are) are factors that will affect how we react to various circumstances.
Some people in the U.S. consider political correctness (PC) to be a sort of code of conduct. If someone tries to talk in a politically correct fashion, he or she is trying not to be offensive toward anyone through his or her dialogue. For instance, in the last sentence I made a point of stating “he or she” and “his or her.” One might deduce I was attempting to be PC by not excluding either gender. (There used to be a time where “he” was accepted as an all-inclusive pronoun.) But there is a notable problem with PC culture.
Since every person holds different views, every person might be offended by something different. Everyone might even have a different way in which to define PC itself. If one wishes to instill PC in the hopes of bringing about true equality and peace then there would be no withstanding PC at all, no boundaries at which to draw the line.
Practically anyone will be offended by something, and in order for their feelings not to be injured we will either stay quiet or remove whatever someone finds offensive. The major issue is this: not everyone is going to be made happy. What the majority finds offensive might not be so to the minority. And what might be taken as inappropriate to the minority might be entirely acceptable to the majority.
And no doubt even some forms of PC will be found insensitive to some people. The underlying trouble with PC that some have not seen through to yet is the fact that if we accommodate for everyone’s feelings and wishes we would be at the same time doing a disservice to so many others. Certain people allow their feelings, their emotions, to get the better of them too often. In taking PC to heart, we are putting only certain individuals’ concerns first; we are making only a chosen few our priority, thus destroying equality.
I will use the so-called “emotional support” animals as an example. David Whiting of Mercury News best sums up the purpose of such animals in stating that they, “needn’t be trained to do much more than make their owners feel good.” Other news outlets have engaged in lengthy discussions on the concerns regarding the allowance of these “therapy” pets. One prime element which has surfaced repeatedly is that emotional support animals threaten the use of genuine service animals for physically disabled individuals.
Thus, in our politically correct endeavors to appeal to everyone’s emotions we can begin to ruin the lives of the visually impaired as well as of our U.S. veterans. We do not need to be PC. It does not do anything for us except cause additional strife in a country already riddled with it. What we do need is more people who are willing to “take one for the team,” to make a few sacrifices, to be insulted and not be affected by it. We need more people who treat one another with common respect.