Search results

Transgender people have received substantial attention in recent years, with gender identity being a focal point of online debate. Transgender identities are central to discussions relating to sex-segregated spaces and activities, such as public toilets, prisons, and sports participation. The introduction of “gender-neutral” spaces has received criticism because some argue that there is an increased risk of sexual violence against women and children. However, little is known about the implications that these constructions have for whom is able to claim a “victim status.” In this chapter, I provide a critical analysis of the techniques used by individuals to align themselves with a “victim status.” These claims are presented and contextualized within varying notions of victimization, from being victims of political correctness to victims of a more aggressive minority community. This feeds into an inherently transphobic discourse that is difficult to challenge without facing accusations of perpetuating an individual's “victimhood.” Transphobic rhetoric is most commonly expressed through constructing transgender people as “unnatural,” “sinful,” or as experiencing a “mental health issue.” This chapter argues that the denial of transphobia and simultaneous claims of victimization made by the dominant, cisgender majority are intrinsically linked.

The slogan ‘not in my backyard’ became a symbol of a successful campaign in a psychological war waged by the Soviet Union against the United States and the NATO allies. Russians have already placed their cruise missiles in firing positions, but tried to prevent the US Army from doing the same on the other side of the Iron Curtain, namely in the NATO countries. Misguided citizens of the welfare states on the western side of the Iron Curtain demonstrated for disarmament in spite of Soviet secret build up of the missile stockpile. The EU citizens and their intellectual elites never dealt with the Russian communist genocide and underestimated hidden injuries of the Cold War. Today, when Soviet secret decisions leaked out due to a temporary access to the communist archives in Moscow, even carefully orchestrated campaigns in social media cannot change facts and wipe awareness out. This time it is the financial level of military expenditures, which is questioned by Russian trolls in the social media of the Dutch, German or French populations. Apart from military expenditures of NATO member states, Russian troll campaigns are also directed towards the support of multicultural ideologies and welcoming all immigrants. At first sight, they are as successful with the immigrants as they were with the cruise missiles. Most respondents in the Netherlands claim that immigrants are welcome – provided they settle down somewhere else – anywhere, but not in my backyard. Perhaps in my neighbour's backyard, behind national borders? In Turkey, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Italy, Spain – anywhere (but not here)? This is the message defining the subtle brand of a Dutch xenophobia, phrased in a politically correct way. Nobody, except extreme right (e.g., Wilders) or extreme libertarians (e.g., Baudet), dares to spell it out – and yet it haunts all political debates. A spectrum is truly haunting Europe – a spectrum of mass migrations. Are all forces uniting against it? No, but even the most ardent believers in welcoming Third World masses in the first world infrastructures conclude that good fences do good neighbours make or that a sound democracy requires solid territorial borders. Or does it? And what does this turn of political mind tell us about the values of Enlightenment?

Purpose – We investigate the antibias norm, “political correctness” (PC), and explore the consequences of the PC norm for group processes and group performance.

Methodology/approach – We define the term PC as it is used in public discourse and distinguish the PC norm from the related antibias norm of color blindness.

Findings – We suggest that the PC norm may play a unique role in reducing a critical type of uncertainty that would otherwise constrain performance, in particular, group creativity and decision making, in diverse work groups. We then explore the controversial argument that being politically incorrect can actually promote freedom of expression.

Originality/value of chapter – We conclude by reflecting on the costs of the PC norm and why the PC norm may remain prevalent in work groups for some time to come.