March 10, 2002 |
It is one of those phrases we throw around reflexively, convinced that we share with our fellow citizens a collective notion of what it means. But every now and then a debate emerges on radio talk shows, in the workplace, in news stories or magazines. What does "politically correct" mean to us these days? Is political correctness an outlook, a set of values, a political ideology?
December 8, 1994
Louise Yarnell's depiction of the world of the '64 Free Speech Movement (UC Berkeley Activists of '64 Return to Takeover Site," Dec. 4) as one where even the slightest hint of nonconformity could bring taunts of "Commie" or "Red" is unmitigated hogwash. Certainly those nonconformists who actually endorsed Communism and socialism as the wave of the future earned those comments. But there were many different forms of nonconformity in those days and the catcalls Yarnell describes were generally reserved for those who deserved them.
January 11, 2003
Thomas Bonk closed his Jan. 9 article on the PGA Tour by noting, "It won't go away, mainly because the two people at opposite ends of the issue won't let it. Martha Burk ... has called for protests ... and Hootie Johnson ... isn't budging on inviting a woman to be a member." On the same day in a second golf-related article, Bonk devotes, by my count, six out of 16 paragraphs to comments relating to the very same "issue." It is painfully apparent that, in reality, this issue continues to persist ad nauseam, not because of Ms. Burk and Mr. Johnson, but because there are so many champions of misguided political correctness within the media, such as Mr. Bonk.