美国的政治正确的来由是什么？

原创下拉有翻译，转载请联系作者

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 “less 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.

政治正确的概念被广泛误解，许多人不欢迎它，因为违反它有被“取消”的风险，即公众谴责和审查。即使是出于好意的演讲者也可能被取消演讲，因为在公共场合表达什么是可以被接受的通常没有明确的定义。审查制度的突然和看似武断的性质导致许多人反对政治正确。

然而，重要的是要认识到，限制最有害的公共表达形式的价值最终根植于对边缘人群的尊重。政治上不正确的言论——如种族主义、性别歧视或恐同言论——会被避免，因为它削弱或否定了受害群体身份或人性的某些基本方面。

以残疾人士为例。在美国和中国的许多圈子里，人们把残疾人士称为“迟钝的”或(更糟糕的是)“智障的”并觉得非常正常; 甚至最近和一些受过良好教育的朋友一起喝酒时，我也注意到他们不经意地用“自闭症”这个词来形容自己的怪癖。称某人“迟钝”或“智障”会让人们注意到他们的缺陷——他们无法控制的东西——以一种消极的方式将他们与我们其他人区分开来，使他们“不如人类”。当人们甚至我们自己没有被临床诊断为“自闭症”时，称他们为“自闭症”会降低严重智力残疾的重要性，贬低自闭症患者的实际生活经历。

最终，我们既不应利用政治正确来压制那些与我们意见相左的人，也不应将其完全视为过于热心的自以为是。我们必须花时间和精力来了解为什么某些言论应该受到限制，以维护和肯定所有社会成员的身份和人性。