The use of politically incorrect language should be avoided.

Not so long ago, my teenage cousins, Cody and Jake, and I were walking through the park when Cody spotted a disabled man sitting unattended in a wheelchair, and he turned to his brother and said: "Jake, I dare you to go and tip that spastic out of his chair." Needless to say, I was horrified and appalled and I turned to him reprovingly and said: "Cody, we don't say ‘spastic', we say ‘disabled person'. Calling someone with disabilities a ‘spastic' can be very hurtful." Mind you, the disabled man was using some pretty colourful language himself, but when his carer returned and helped him back into his wheelchair, we could see that Jake had tipped him into a steaming pile of canine faeces, so we forgave him his indiscretions. Interestingly, not so long ago, the term "spastic" was a perfectly respectable one. Not until 1994 did the charity "The Spastics Society" change its name to "Scope". (1) Although a medically correct term, by that time the word had become politically incorrect in everyday usage. Similarly, only a few generations ago, the word "moron" was a perfectly acceptable term to describe someone with mild mental health issues. (2) However, over time, was more commonly used as a term of abuse and so it was eventually considered vulgar and offensive to use the word in polite society. A comparable history is attached to other terms used to describe people with physical or mental disabilities such as: cretin (3); lunatic (4); retard (5) and cripple (6). Etymologically speaking, someone might be perfectly correct in referring to a person with learning difficulties who had just been glassed in a pub fight as "a bloody retard", but they would not be politically correct. That's because the term is liable to cause offence. Similarly, you could go up to someone who was born out of wedlock with a severe congenital disorder and perfectly accurately call them "a cretinous bastard", but that would usually be deemed insensitive. The same principle can apply to race. For example, people of South Asian ethnic origins are sometimes called "Pakis", which is merely short for "Pakistanis". However, this is considered to be a highly offensive term of racial abuse (although, unaccountably the word "Brits" as a short form of "British people" isn't.) Some people think that using the rhyming slang term "Hami-Ackies" (from the Scottish football club Hamilton Academicals) is somehow less offensive, but it isn't. The only acceptable way to refer to people from that part of the world is "Pakistanis" or "Asians". Likewise, we should avoid using gender-specific words that may belittle the place of women in society. Often they can be easily replaced with non-offensive alternatives. Here are some examples: Replace "mankind" with "humanity"; "man-made" with "synthetic"; "man-hours" with "employee hours"; "stewardess" with "flight attendant"; "housewife" with "homemaker"; "wench" with "server"; "skivvy" with "cleaner"; "whore" with "sex worker"; and "hag" with "aesthetically-challenged female of a certain age". Equally, it is important not to offend homosexual men by using offensive language. For example, while it is acceptable to say: "I see George Michael has been arrested for having gay sex in public toilets again" it is not acceptable to say "That Manchester United midfielder, Christiano Ronaldo, looks like one of those gays to me." (even though he might do). Also euphemisms such as "queer"; "bender"; "shirt-lifter" or "uphill-gardener" are likely to cause offence, just as to describe an effeminate man as "good with colours" is unacceptable. Of course, freedom of speech is important, but in polite society, it is very important to moderate one's language so as not to offend other people's sensibilities. (1) http://www.scope.org.uk... (2) http://www.merriam-webster.com... (3) http://www.merriam-webster.com... (4) http://www.merriam-webster.com... (5) http://www.merriam-webster.com... (6) http://www.merriam-webster.com...