political correctness?


Gripped between the political battle between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the 2016 elections, my cousin dropped beside me and started asking me questions with innocent curiosity laden in his voice.

“Who is winning?”  he asked.

At that time all news channels were broadcasting the infamous election battle, hence the question.

“Donald Trump” I replied.

Surprised, he asked why trump was winning even after he said multiple controversies and spread fallacies without remorse or guilt. He was very well aware of both the candidates and all the things about them which were coming up in the news.

While Trump is an avid believer of the {free speech} amendment, which allows a person to say anything, political correctness is the complete opposite and restricts one from saying things that might harm or offend the beliefs, values and practices of  an individual or a community. 

Political correctness is a way of expressing ones ideologies and opinions without offending other people. It forces an individual to pick his word with utmost diligence to avoid the slightest chance or offending someone. Even though people support it, they do not agree with it as they like the idea of free speech better and it makes them believe that political correctness stops them from speaking their mind.

Is political correctness beneficial or does it compromise the very idea of free speech?

Political correctness can be seen in both ways. It stops a person from using word or phrases that offend someone. While on the other hand it also stops one from speaking their mind. Weighing both sides of the scale carefully we can judge political correctness as being beneficial because even though it stops one from speaking their free mind it stops people from using speech which is racial or marginalising. Though we can see that this is misused by the young white generation as they use it as a way to express their “superiority” while using political correctness as their shield to deflect criticism onto the accuser.

How is political correctness presented in America? A recent article written by The Atlanticshows that political correctness is widely unpopular among Americans of all ages. Almost 80% of the Americans think that political correctness is a problem. A strange but interesting observation in the data shows that the “white” population opposes political correctness the most posing a problem to the 82% American Asians, 87% Hispanics, and 88% American Indians who are opposed to the ideology political correctness. Fewer Americans are opposed because they use political correctness as it is a way of passing the power of their privilege while minorities say that it does not help them in any way. A major demographic of the people who support it is the young white population as they see political correctness as a way to make themselves feel better about the privilege they have.

On one hand, it can be said that politically correct language is vestigial as long as the stigma around those words is still prevalent. 

In a sense, new words continue to substitute the insensitive language but this just leads the individual to be trapped in a continues ‘euphemism treadmill’. The dispute arises that the new vocabulary is taken up by the same individuals with the same intent, defeating the purpose of the new vocabulary as the fundamental detrimental intent never changes. 

On a more extreme note, some individuals argue that one politically correct action permits them to further violations. This gives rise to ‘Moral Licencing’. Moral Licencing occurs when individuals commit moral behaviour in the past, and this makes them more likely to commit possibly immoral actions without worrying about feeling or seeming immoral. An example would be that or a Moral Bank. When people perform morally good behaviour they earn points and deposit them in the moral bank account and later, they use those points to balance their immoral or bad behaviour. 

On the contrary, advocates of Political Correctness suggest that it functions of the philosophy of language. Language structures our reality and it can be used to spread happiness or cause pain. Law Professor Mari Matsuda elaborated the impact of hate speech in her book ‘Words that Wound’ that the instance an individual utters hateful words, it immediately places them above the addressee, oppressing them. Researchers found psychological implications of hate speech stating it as self-fulfilling prophecy – what you hear more often about yourself, is what you start believing of yourself and then become it.

Stereotype threat, that is the awareness of a negative stereotype impacts the working memory capability. We are subconsciously aware of the stereotypes that society employs to define us and this emphasizes on the idea that words have the potential to considerably belittle an individual. 

Feminist or Feminazi


FEMINISM – A term used to define, establish, and achieve political, economic, personal, and social equality of sexes. Yet is this the true definition of feminism in the 21st century? Women have always been looked at and treated differently in all walks of life, be it work, education or even home life by society. Yet only saying that women are treated unequally is not the whole truth either. Some women misuse the power that comes with “feminism” by treating it as a blunt instrument to get what they want, false allegations of rape, extolling money or even getting a more preferable working condition. It isn’t seen commonly but it can be seen all around the world if you look closely enough. 

Many modern women have a completely misplaced notion about feminism. But I fail to understand how crossing the line of  accepted public decency and normality (Burning bras, Streaking in public places, Aggressive violent protests etc) achieves their ultimate goal of empowerment and equality. How does showing your nipples make you the stronger sex. Even though people say actions speak louder than words, the right words in the right context are more powerful than any other tool. The modern Femi-Nazi’s are not new to using language for their gain.

The most basic idea of “feminism” is equality of the sexes but with the help of few cases, I will 

Illustrate the fallacies of  modern age feminism. 

In August 2016, A 28 year old, male teacher Christopher McKenna was sentenced to ten years in prison for sexual misconduct with a student who was a minor. A crime that was bought to justice and the perpetrator was punished. Every coin has 2 sides, and unfortunately one side got preferential treatment and bias in the court of law. Stephanie Peterson a female guilty was found guilty of having sexual intercourse with a minor (one of her students) twice in her car.

The question I choose to ask all feminists is “Where is feminism now”? Women are equal to men, it is a known fact. Feminism strives for equality in all aspects, yet why doesn’t feminism come into the picture here? No feminist voice speaks against women getting lighter sentences than men for the same crimes. Have we conceded that women have a weaker mental and physical strength? After all, it is about equality between the genders and so should be the punishment.

Feminism unfortunately has selected deafness and it compromises the real feminists who are trying to bring real change and strive for equality and not publicity.

Let me shed some light on the puzzling and controversial case of the “Rohtak sisters”. On November 14th, a video went viral on youtube where the “Rohtak sisters” were beating up three men in a passenger bus claiming they have been harassed by them.

Two days after, the three accused (men) were arrested by the police without any prior background check, their only means of evidence were the words of the sisters.The girls were lovingly christened the name “brave hearts”. Then they were also appreciated by the chief minister of Haryana for their act of “bravery and strength”. 

By achieving mainstream publicity, rewards and recognition, they decided to rinse and repeat their previous act and misused their power by posting another video soon after the first one.The girls claimed that the video was, in fact, a month older, and reported that a boy had teased them in the park, and had eventually fled, as the girls started to beat him. 

Fortunately few people who had witnessed the events came forward and stood up for the men who were falsely accused and with the help of further investigation, the Rohtak sisters were finally charged against falsely blaming men of harassment. 

The main topic of concern here is how the people and government reacted to the videos. Instantly taking the side of the sisters without a proper investigation or inquiry. Acts like this should be illegal and feminists aren’t highlighting this event like it needs to be. Women can freely slap and beat up men. Yet, if we flipped the coin, it is utterly contemptuous for a man to hit a woman? Since when did respect become gender specific?

 I cannot stress enough that without any evidence, it was presumed that the men were guilty just because the victims were females which is quite ironical as the real victims in this case were men. No feminists talked against the Rohtak sisters who misused their power for their gain.

As mentioned earlier, The modern Femi-Nazi’s are not new to using language for their gain.

Let me use some examples to show how the language is also treated unfair between the genders.

The “vogue empower video” by Deepika Padukone spreads the message of women empowerment, in which Deepika talks about “My body, My choice” then why do we go back to forcing our boyfriends and husbands to have a particular physique? When a woman says, she wants a tall, handsome guy with good physique, they consider it as a requirement but when a man says he does not want a fat woman, it is considered as objectifying a woman which is disrespectful.

A man is called a rapist or a pedophile at the slightest hint, but we come out on the roads with placards when a woman is called a slut.

It is also found that both the genders speak in a different way. Men’s speech is usually straightforward and is aimed to achieve and maintain independence while women’s speech typically includes expressiveness which is sometimes very manipulative and can surely be used as a tool for personal gain.

I don’t say feminism is bad but  Isn’t feminism about breaking even with both the genders rather than pulling one down? 

Isn’t it about meting out equal treatments to both the sexes than being anti-men. Yes, a certain section of men needs to be shamed, but does feminism endorse inflicting pain on men in general to derive pseudo pleasure? 

In my opinion, the term feminism is as much for men as it is for women because men too struggle with gender stereotypes.

Developing India?


India goes to own the most costly election this year, political parties pay ton of funds on campaigns and “vote buying”. this is often all public’s cash and it’s for his or her welfare, not the politician’s personal interest.

I believe india’s democracy is at risk due to older generation ruling over it. However they may have additional experience but the educated younger generation has new and modern thoughts which can get rid of the corruption which is what’s most vital for our economy right now.

Until most politicians gets the hunger for power out of their minds, the economy can suffer. In spite they ban the notes. Until their minds are black, black money will exist. With the population of 1.3 billion, we should be the top economy of the globe and this in fact is feasible with the required government support.

I feel that the money that is spent on the elections and “world tour” that the current prime minister is on, if used for general public welfare like providing education and healthcare, the development rate can increase in rapidly.