In its purest form, political correctness is the effort to use language that is inclusive, non-discriminatory, and non-offensive. This is especially important concerning issues and topics about race, gender, sexual orientation, and culture. Using politically correct language attempts to rectify the prejudiced and eurocentric viewpoints that were supported in the centuries before.

Today, political correctness can be a very polarizing and political term. Its portrayal in media and society is not always flattering. This makes the decision of writers to include this type of language extremely difficult and controversial.

Let’s take a look at some opinions of every day and acclaimed writers:

Lilly Dancyger is an editor at Narratively, Catapult, and Barrelhouse. Her writing has been featured in Rolling Stone, Psychology Today, the Washington Post, and many more. In this article, Dancyger describes a choice many writers must make today, to use politically correct language or not. Many writers see politically correct language as an act of censorship. They believe that writing should be personal, authentic, and reflect their own experiences including their language. For many, it would be a personal affront to actively exchange terms that come naturally to them. While Dancyger agrees that “nothing should be off-limits to the creative mind,” not using more sensitive language is doing more harm than good. Using words and phrases that are offensive only further stigmatize and marginalize those same groups of people who are fighting for equality and undermine their efforts to reclaim their identity. Dancyger believes utilizing more inclusive language can be an opportunity for writers to show growth and mastery of their language. Writers who are unable or unwillingly to keep up with the changing lexicon will not be able to keep up with future shifts in society. Writing and language are always evolving as society guides it, writers must not “hold back progress” by refusing to evolve as well. 

Lionel Shriver is an acclaimed writer, most notably known for her 2003 novel We Need to Talk About Kevin. Shriver’s position on political correctness in literature and language is unlike the opinions of Dancyger. Shriver instead warns that the “censorship” created by political correctness would make the literature a “ timid, homogenous, and dreary” place. She also has a negative view of sensitivity readers, regarding their use as unwarranted scrutiny of “perceived slights.” Many of Shriver’s novels include non-white characters but many of these characters have been criticized widely for their inaccuracies and inauthenticity. She was even told by her agent to replace a non-white character with a white one. Regardless, Shriver believes that she has a duty to continue to push back against the criticism. Writers should not fear the “blowback” of using nonwhite characters in the fictional world. She asks writers to have “a little more courage.” 

Pam Withers is an award-winning young adult author who also runs a blog about her experiences as a writer. In a recent blog post, Withers chronicles her experience with politically correct language in her fiction writing. Withers believes that politically correct language and usage of sensitivity readers can be a tool to provide readers with a full cast of authentic characters that will resonate on the page. Her recent revelation comes after she hired a sensitivity reader to review her Canadian-Korean character Mr.Kim. The sensitivity reader gave Withers suggestions to adjust the broken English Mr. Kim spoke to sound more Korean than how she wrote it. Withers had been using grammar and words that sounded more like a Chinese version of English than the Korean one she intended. Withers had previously believed and still partly believes that the demand for sensitivity readers can be “over the top” and that their vetting can’t begin to represent an entire community. It’s a writer’s job to create a fully diverse cast of characters, even if they don’t necessarily reflect the world or appearance of the writer.