The Dangers of Biased Language

Page 86

Some labels are easily identifiable as derogatory. Others, however, are infused with more subtle meanings that influence our perceptions about the subject. This is known as biased language. For example, referring to an older person as “sweetie” or “dear” (even if kindly intended) can belittle him or her (Leland, 2008). In particular, older individuals struggling with dementia are sensitive to language that implies that they are childlike (“Did you eat your dinner like a good girl?”) because they are struggling to maintain their dignity (Williams, Herman, Gajewski, & Wilson, 2009).

When language openly excludes certain groups or implies something negative about them, we often attempt to replace the biased language with more neutral terms, employing what is known as politically correct language. For example, the terms firefighter, police officer, and chairperson replaced the sexist terms fireman, policeman, and chairman, reflecting and perhaps influencing the fact that these once male-dominated positions are now open to women as well. In other cases, politically correct terms evolve around group preferences, with groups redefining the ways they want to be described or labeled: terms such as physically challenged or differently abled have largely replaced the term handicapped.

Critics of political correctness, however, argue that attempts at sensitivity and neutrality can undermine communication. They note that political correctness focuses attention on rhetorical arguments rather than real issues underlying language. They also maintain that it substitutes euphemisms for clarity when dealing with difficult subjects and that it makes communication more difficult by placing certain words and phrases off-limits. But others note that there is value in always trying to be sensitive—and accurate—when we make choices regarding language.