The term politically correct in debates is about as useful as disgust is in morality. It’s a quick and dirty way to say “I don’t agree with this and I’m magically right.”
Someone named Britt McHenry, a sideline reporter for ESPN, was caught on tape insulting a two lot employee. The details of it aren’t really relevant except to say, she was pretty mean to this person. The important part is the comments.
One commenter said her punishment will be a slap on the wrist, but if it were a man, he’d be fired. In response to this, someone said,
“Too true. Our society is infested with political correctness. When you start to treat others in an unmerited or unwarranted way to make up for an inequality of years past you are no better than the “evil white straight males who seemed to have done great damage to the earth”, by “correcting” it. Everyone should be just as accountable.”
You could probably help me pick out some poor reasoning in the comment, but we’ll skip that. Somewhere else in the comments the exact opposite sentiment was shared,
“Who cares, like any of us at anytime hasn’t had it out with someone after a frustrating event. Even if she had pulled a Riley Cooper, nobody is required to be perfect 24/7. Internet PC Police are on the case I guess.”
This is why the phrase politically correct doesn’t actually mean anything. It’s an empty statement that can, and is, used in almost any situation by both sides. Sure, it can be shorthand but for what exactly? “She’s not being fired for this atrocious behavior because… PC.” “People only care about this minor infraction because… PC.”
If politically correct can be used to argue the opposite points, she should get a harsh punishment vs she shouldn’t get any punishment, how useful is it as a concept?
Being political correct usually just means being considerate. “I can’t call someone a stupid asshole on tv? Damn PC police.” It can go too far when we start censoring ideas, but that’s so rarely the case (I wonder if it ever is). Political correctness is hardly applied to anything all that relevant. Firing an ESPN reporter for being a jerk to someone isn’t some conspiracy to limit people’s autonomy (mainly just her vocabulary). And deciding not to fire her isn’t an imbalance between men and women in which women are granted more freedom after being held back for so long (cuz that’s totally over right bros?). It’s a decision based on how much damage a rant against the sort of people who watch tv (aka the people who tend to work at places like two truck offices) did and whether or not the tv station believes people will be able to look past it. If there is a gender difference it’s not because of political correctness, it would be because women are more sympathetic characters, or something along those lines. (I’m not suggesting they are more sympathetic, I’m saying if there is a difference in treatment it would be explained by something like that as opposed to women get more breaks because of political correctness.)