Politically Incorrect Language Analysis
The Dissension in Politically Incorrect Language Imagine a young boy with autism who struggles to interact socially. Other children consider him unintelligent, and they have no trouble making him aware of their opinions. They call him names like retarded, dumb, and ignorant, but he cannot change the condition he has, so he withstands the insults. Even though the other children never strike him with their fists, the harsh words they use are just as intense. Politically incorrect terms, like “retarded,” that are used to hurt others are degrading, impudent, and should not be used. The adage “sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me” is erroneous. The use of politically incorrect language may not break bones but it does inflict pain. As specified by Peg Streep, there is a connection between emotional and physical pain, so when a person is emotionally distraught, it can be compared to the pain felt when being physically harmed (Streep). According to “A Word Gone Wrong” by Lawrence Downes, words hold insinuations (Downes). For example, the word “retard” denotes a mentally handicapped person, but it connotes a person that is considered an imbecile. The word “retard” was not established to inflict pain on the people in which it defines; however, it has
…show more content…
When the general public is asked to refrain from the use of a few words that may be offensive to others, the right to freedom of speech is not infringed upon. In most cases a group of concerned citizens vocalize the need to discontinue the use of a particular word that evokes discomfort in other citizens. For example, there is a campaign against the use of the word “retarded,” and it is called “Spread the Word to End the Word (Downes).” It is not required by law for every citizen of the United States to abstain from using the word “retarded,” so the right to freedom of speech has not been
When the general public is asked to refrain from the use of a few words that may be offensive to others, the right to freedom of speech is not infringed upon. In most cases a group of concerned citizens vocalize the need to discontinue the use of a particular word that evokes discomfort in other citizens. For example, there is a campaign against the use of the word “retarded,” and it is called “Spread the Word to End the Word (Downes).” It is not required by law for every citizen of the United States to abstain from using the word “retarded,” so the right to freedom of speech has not been