It seems that we may be at the tipping point for use of the term “political correctness.” A Washington Post article from August 10 argued that both sides of the political aisle are attempting to censor speech by using political correctness to their advantage.   Prior to the 1990s, political correctness did not have the pejorative meaning it has now.  And it does seem that both sides have gone to an extreme – people in labeling others “politically correct” and in instances where groups protest people speaking based on their politically incorrect views.  New York Magazine gives some examples:

“You may remember when 6,000 people at the University of California–Berkeley signed a petition last year to stop a commencement address by Bill Maher, who has criticized Islam (along with nearly all the other major world religions). Or when protesters at Smith College demanded the cancellation of a commencement address by Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, blaming the organization for “imperialist and patriarchal systems that oppress and abuse women worldwide.” Also last year, Rutgers protesters scared away Condoleezza Rice; others at Brandeis blocked Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a women’s-rights champion who is also a staunch critic of Islam; and those at Haverford successfully protested ­former Berkeley chancellor Robert Birgeneau, who was disqualified by an episode in which the school’s police used force against Occupy protesters.”

The article continues to discuss how the term political correctness has evolved and how it “makes debate irrelevant and frequently impossible.”  I have always believed in the power of free speech and the importance of debate.  The freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democracy.  However, just like how people should not be able to stifle debate by saying, “That isn’t politically correct,” the opposition cannot use “I don’t have time to be politically correct” as an excuse for disrespectful and oppressive behavior.  Case in point: Donald Trump before, during, and after last week’s debate.  His comments were terribly offensive and downright sexist.  Shame on him.  Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.  Carly Fiorina had the perfect response on Twitter: “There.Is.No.Excuse.”

Instead of immediately shutting down a speaker because he/she may have made politically incorrect comments or has a questionable affiliation, we should listen to those speakers and then make an assessment.  Similarly, instead of using the scapegoat of “there isn’t enough time to be politically correct,” the speaker should listen to marginalized groups and complaints instead of immediately dismissing their concerns.  As a prominent businessman, Trump should know that women working full time in the United States make 77% compared to their male counterparts.  Megyn Kelly’s line of questioning was completely legitimate and the idea of asking a person who is running for president whether he could be fair to women if elected is reasonable and should not met with a dismissive response that blames political correctness.