Political correctness run amok

Counter-productive accusations against exhibit illustrate broader problem

MELISSA HIEBERT STAFF

It’s almost impossible to breathe these days without offending someone. Being tolerant and prejudice-free is something that is of essential importance; however, the notion of political correctness has been contorted and extended to include everything that people can possibly — all rationality aside — find fault in. Everywhere you turn, there is sure to be someone complaining about something utterly inconsequential or irrelevant to any actual example of prejudice, discrimination or racism.

Case in point: some of the reaction to Gallery One One One’s current exhibit by artist KC Adams is a perfect example of political correctness run amok. The exhibit features a number of models of First Nations heritage, wearing shirts with phrases like “Sniffer,” “Gang Member,” and “FAS” (fetal alcohol syndrome) printed on them in tiny white beads. The models are also posed in stereotypical “traditional” aboriginal poses, in a fashion resembling the images of the early 19th century.

As an attack on the mildly controversial exhibit, printouts of a press release about the exhibit posted on the University of Manitoba’s website have been plastered around campus, with the word “racist” hastily scribbled on top of them.

The exhibit, clearly, was not meant to be racist. It was meant to challenge typical stereotypes, thereby bringing light to them, and to provoke discussion and critical thought. “I’m not defining stereotypes, I’m defying stereotypes,” Adams is quoted saying right on the press release. “Their defiant poses challenge the viewer to try and classify their identity,” she is cited as saying in an essay by the gallery’s curator, Cliff Eyland.

Unfortunately, some people who are all too eager to wag the finger of disapproval at anyone and everyone missed the message completely.

Being politically correct to extreme lengths, as exemplified by the backlash to the photographs, often does more to hurt the cause than to help it. Adams has tried to open up a meaningful dialogue that confronts the issue of racial stereotyping, and all that hecklers have accomplished is to shut the door on discussing important subjects like these. Moreover, tiptoeing around and being overtly vigilant in terms of language or conduct towards certain groups of people not only leaves them feeling alienated, but does just as much to call attention to this so-called dissimilarity as racism does.

Perhaps it all stems from the incessant tendency of humans to find as much fault in as many things possible so they can take a holier-than-thou stance and look down their noses at everyone who is not as infallibly politically correct as they are (or claim to be). Or, maybe the process of being overly diplomatic is just a method of covering up the fact that someone, in all honesty, can’t look past superficial differences in appearance or move past their own stereotypical tendencies, and overcompensate for this fact by making absolutely certain that their true feelings don’t show through.

Whatever the reason, political correctness is often taken completely out of context and to ludicrous extremes. Even the Manitoban, your own student newspaper, is at fault of practicing excessive political correctness. When doing “Toban Talkbacks,” it is encouraged that we systematically interview and photograph people from different visible minorities. Does this stem from the genuine desire to make sure that all opinions are fairly represented, or is it just another example of an excess of “cultural sensitivity?”

If the former is true, it seems that the belief that someone will hold a different opinion about student parking or some other burning question based on the fact that they have a different skin colour seems somewhat stereotypical in itself. If the latter is true, then we are just playing into the hands of those who believe that we must go out of our way just to prove that we are accepting, prejudice-free individuals who don’t single people out based on their ethnicity — when all the while we are doing just that.

I think this raises the question as to where the line should be drawn. Going out of one’s way to tread softly around social issues to the point of singling out visible minorities by being exasperatingly over-sensitive is counter-productive to everything that being “politically correct” stands for. Yes, there will always be people who are hypersensitive and frequently throw around terms like “racist!” just to hear the sound of their own voice, but these are the same people who will complain to the manager of a restaurant because their ice water is too cold.

People should be treated equally regardless, and cultural diversity is something that should be recognised and celebrated rather than being falsely ignored. Singling someone out because of their race works both ways, and just because it isn’t in an overtly stereotypical or racist way doesn’t mean that it isn’t still harmful or degrading. In order to foster a culture of acceptance, we must truly see people as people, rather than as merely another means to propagate a false image of diplomacy, tolerance and open-mindedness.