P.C. language is a very controversial topic; however it is one that in my opinion should not be. There is a need for more than only two sides to fully encompass the varying perspectives on P.C. language. But in an attempt to do so I will say that one side is for the complete use of P.C. language, while the other is strongly against it. Both sides have compelling arguments that all people should hear before they decide on a position to take; therefore, when someone blindly follows an argument without any reason or support, they end up looking weak and unarguable. This can be seen when talking to a person who is in support of one side and giving them a counter argument. They would not know what to say and how retaliate with their own thoughts, because they were not willing to make their own opinion in the first place. If a person were to truly advocate for a side then they would have their own reasons to do so, and would be able to come up with a counter argument against any other counter argument. So what I am trying to say is that, when someone like "The Word Police" try to earn "points for political correctness by saying 'ovarimony' instead of 'testimony',"(Michiko Kakutani) they can easily be subjected to "mockery." It is clear that the people who are actually trying to use P.C. language to change how the world looks at females, would not focus on using words like "ovarimony" but rather microaggressions that are actually hurting people. This is why people should not just come into an argument and blindly follow an opinion without actually seeing both sides and thinking of a logical one on their own.
No comments:
Post a Comment