原創(chuàng)下拉有翻譯，轉(zhuǎn)載請聯(lián)系作者

Widely?misunderstood, the concept of political correctness is unwelcome for many because its violation bears the risk of “cancellation,” i.e. public condemnation and censorship. Cancellation may befall even well-intentioned speakers because what’s acceptable to express in public often isn’t clearly defined. The sudden and seemingly arbitrary nature of?censorship?causes many to oppose?political correctness.

Yet, it’s important to recognize that the value of restricting the most toxic forms of public expression is ultimately rooted in respect for marginalized peoples. Politically incorrect speech--such as racist, sexist, or homophobic remarks--is shunned because it diminishes or denies some fundamental aspect of the victimized group’s identity or humanity.

Consider the example of intellectually disabled people. Within many circles in the U.S. and China, people find no issue with referring to the mentally handicapped as “slow” or (much worse) “retarded”; even over drinks with some well-educated friends recently, I noticed they were casually using the term “autistic” to describe their?quirks. Calling people “slow” or “retarded” draws attention to their?handicap--something over which they have no control--in a way that negatively distinguishes them from the rest of us, rendering them “l(fā)ess than human.” Calling people or even ourselves “autistic” when they/we aren’t clinically diagnosed reduces the significance of a serious intellectual disability, devaluing actual autistic people’s lived experiences.

Ultimately, we should neither wield political correctness to silence those with whom we disagree?nor dismiss?it entirely as overzealous?self-righteousness. We must take the time and effort to learn about the underlying reasons why certain speech ought to be restricted in order to safeguard and affirm the identity and humanity of all members of society.

政治正確的概念被廣泛誤解，許多人不歡迎它，因?yàn)檫`反它有被“取消”的風(fēng)險，即公眾譴責(zé)和審查。即使是出于好意的演講者也可能被取消演講，因?yàn)樵诠矆龊媳磉_(dá)什么是可以被接受的通常沒有明確的定義。審查制度的突然和看似武斷的性質(zhì)導(dǎo)致許多人反對政治正確。

然而，重要的是要認(rèn)識到，限制最有害的公共表達(dá)形式的價值最終根植于對邊緣人群的尊重。政治上不正確的言論——如種族主義、性別歧視或恐同言論——會被避免，因?yàn)樗魅趸蚍穸耸芎θ后w身份或人性的某些基本方面。

以殘疾人士為例。在美國和中國的許多圈子里，人們把殘疾人士稱為“遲鈍的”或(更糟糕的是)“智障的”并覺得非常正常; 甚至最近和一些受過良好教育的朋友一起喝酒時，我也注意到他們不經(jīng)意地用“自閉癥”這個詞來形容自己的怪癖。稱某人“遲鈍”或“智障”會讓人們注意到他們的缺陷——他們無法控制的東西——以一種消極的方式將他們與我們其他人區(qū)分開來，使他們“不如人類”。當(dāng)人們甚至我們自己沒有被臨床診斷為“自閉癥”時，稱他們?yōu)椤白蚤]癥”會降低嚴(yán)重智力殘疾的重要性，貶低自閉癥患者的實(shí)際生活經(jīng)歷。

最終，我們既不應(yīng)利用政治正確來壓制那些與我們意見相左的人，也不應(yīng)將其完全視為過于熱心的自以為是。我們必須花時間和精力來了解為什么某些言論應(yīng)該受到限制，以維護(hù)和肯定所有社會成員的身份和人性。