> I once knew a Jamaican lady who found the term "African-American" extremely offensive and insisted on being called "black." I think she'd even fill out "other" as her race instead of "African-American." It's like calling all Asians "Chinese-Americans." Come to think of it, why don't we stick the "-American" suffix on "Asian"? Isn't it the only ethnicity we don't do that with?

No, we do that with that term as well. And even the term "Asian" by itself is rather hopelessly ambiguous except to describe geographical origin. The idea that a term to define a race is inherently politically incorrect and that race-defining terms should be abandoned in favor of geographic terms that make implications about race is a remarkably silly sabotaging of the precision of language.

But that's what political correctness is all about: making people more comfortable by removing specific terms that define things people don't want to have to face and replacing them with more ambiguous terms. We don't want to be confronted with what the word "cripple" really means, so we change it to "challenged" and cite demeaning usages of the term as cause to abandon it altogether. But use of the word "cripple" has never been inherently wrong, offensive, or insensitive; rather, what is wrong, offensive, and insensitive is usages of the term in demeaning contexts. To a point, I can understand how a term can be used in a demeaning manner so pervasively that it absorbs negative connotations. In such instances, I have very little problem with society shifting its preference for a sensible, specific alternative -- in this example, perhaps "disabled" and "handicapped." But to then assume anybody using the abandoned word AT ALL, in ANY context, is automatically expressing something demeaning or hateful is absurd. Not only absurd but counterproductive to progressive interests -- the louder people cry out over use of a conventionally negative term in a positive or neutral context, the less people are going to listen when protest is raised over a genuine instance of insensitivity or discrimination.

Using geographic or national terms to describe race is particularly problematic. It does, as I say, deal with the discomfort of some by replacing specific terms with ambiguous terms, thereby freeing people of the call to face those specifics. So a black man born and raised in England becomes an "African American," and while the term is inaccurate in every *practical* sense (and creates the need for excess verbiage to describe his actual national background), it reminds hearers of the term that the context of its use is grounded in respect and circumvents the weighty baggage that the term "black" comes with to anyone versed in social history of the last couple centuries.

Is this a good thing? Is it good to kowtow to the demand that neutral speech is offensive, that speech must be actively reverend to be inoffensive? Is it good to put away anything that might inspire in someone a psychological connection to past injustices, or is it better to face and deal with them? Too much of western society -- and this goes beyond political correctness -- is about avoiding hurt at any cost. If someone is hurt, in any way or for any reason, it's somebody's fault, and something has to be done about it. If a word hurts somebody, it must be changed. If somebody is hurt on someone else's property or on someone else's time, that person must be paid for it. If someone is hurt on someone's own property and his own time, freedom-infringing laws must be created and enforced in the name of safety. Millions of kids grow up spoiled brats, ill-prepared for dealing with the harsh realities of the real world, because so many consider it cruel to use negative reinforcement as a means of teaching children. (Not that I think a lack of positive reinforcement is any better, but that's another matter entirely.)

Lost in all of this is the idea that pain makes us grow. It's a natural and essential part of how we, as human beings, learn. If you never get hurt, you never learn anything. You never learn how to cope with pain. You never learn how to empathize with the pain of others and help them get through it.

But pain only works when people are allowed to learn from it. If parents shower a child with hugs and tears and cookies over something like a stubbed toe, how's he going to learn how to deal with any kind of discomfort at all, large OR small? If racial sensitivity means refraining from any and every term -- even if used in a positive and respectful context -- that reminds anybody of anything related to racial injustice, how can we, the human race, move beyond issues of race? If you are never able to face those elements of society and history that are cruel, painful, and unjust, good luck avoiding it in the future.

This concludes my rant on everything wrong with the world.