Week 11_4/8/16_Charles Braun and His Ideas On Being PC

Political correctness is a growing practice that, when used correctly, can provide a safe space for people to converse about topics that can be emotionally difficult to handle based on individual experience. The most important thing here, is that political correctness should not be used as a tool to stifle opinions that one doesn’t agree with; political correctness is about using a language that isn’t purposefully or accidentally harmful to those it is referencing. Iowa State University (ISU) employee Charles Braun, however, thinks that on ISU campus, political correctness is stifling the opinions of those who do not agree with the call for political correctness, and submitted "Letter: Iowa State is too politically correct" to Iowa State Daily.

Right from the beginning, Braun appeals to pathos by making a reference to diversity, sustainability and discrimination, all three of which are words that evoke very particular definitions to different individuals. Once evoking those emotions, however, he dismantles any preconceptions of limited definitions by presenting situations that would not be considered “good” yet still fell under the umbrella meanings of the terms. Opening with this was an interesting method of attempting to undo what he refers to as indoctrination, saying, “Welcome to thought control, ISU style,” to anyone who thought all three words were universally “good” (Braun). Braun then goes on to point out that though some students might care for something that is popularly fought for – in this case sustaining the environment – they have little care for other, short-term problems – here the “unsustainable federal deficit that could collapse [the] economy in a few years” (Braun).

Braun then moves on to talk about what a thriving university needs: free, open dialogue. This is another use of pathos, where he is saying that a common value of campus needs to be freedom of speech and ideas, and runs parallel to the concept of freedom of speech as granted by the First Amendment, which he references earlier on. He argues that departments on campus are not free to express certain religions if they want, citing the fact Christmas trees are not used during the Christmas season, yet there is a zodiac image in one of the buildings has not been removed. This, too, appeals to pathos because religion plays such a large part in the ideals of many people. He then moves on to talk about the “free condom” buckets that annoy him on campus, which directly speak to the idea students are “trained monkeys unable to control their passions” (Braun). Here, he says that it is not considered politically correct to expect the students to practice abstinence before marriage, which is another appeal to pathos. Sex positivity – the idea that individuals should be free to practice their sex life or lack thereof however they choose – is a commonly held belief that comes into direct conflict with many religious, some of which are Christian, ideals. The author is trying to argue that those who believe in abstinence are expected to bend their views in order to appease those individuals who believe in sexual freedom.

Next, Braun attempts to use research to back up his stance on transgender individuals. This appeal to logos – if it can be called that – is something that I will address, yet discredit. He says, “consider a man who thinks he is a pirate and wants to cut off his hand, replacing it with a hook. This is not hypothetical; research ‘alien limb syndrome.’ We would try to help and cure that man for his own good. Now what about the man who wants to become a woman? Why do we try to cure one but celebrate the other?” (Braun). Now, I did as the author requested, and a quick Google search into the phenomena reveals that “alien limb syndrome” has absolutely nothing to do with the mistaken belief one is a pirate and wishes to remove his extremities. Instead, the syndrome is an actual neurological condition existing within the brain of those who have had strokes or surgeries and have lost control of one or more limbs’ conscious functioning and/or movement (Mark). So, despite the fact that Braun does attempt to use research, his research is either half-done or flawed, and also has nothing to do with what he seems to be arguing: that transgenderism is a flawed condition that should not be accepted.

Finally, Braun ends with speaking about the validity of love in heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and polygamous relationships, comparing them to pedophilia, bestiality, incest and necrophilia. Although I agree that there needs to be dialogue about the existence of the LGBTQQIP2SAA(+) spectrum, the comparison of any of the sexualities he mentioned to relationships where the sexual partner is a child, an animal or a dead body – none of which can give sexual consent, yet he used despite this disparity – is wildly problematic, and disregards any research into the validity of the partnerships. Here, I believe the author is appealing only to pathos, in that relationships outside of heterosexuality are largely villainized in society, and many religions oppose the lifestyles.

Before ending this analysis, however, I think that it should be brought to the readers’ attention that Charles Braun, the author, is not a student or professor on campus, but a Dining Systems Support Specialist, as is stated after his name. Considering ethos, Braun makes no reference to any authoritative figures or works known for their research or knowledge regarding religious freedom of speech on campus, does not cite any school rules regarding religious symbolism on ISU campus, any policies regarding sexuality, gender or romantic identity, and is not himself certified to be knowledgeable for any of those areas in which he speaks. While it may be true that dialogue needs to be opened on a number of these topics, should students feel oppressed in any way, the way he presents his arguments gives no indication that they are anything other than whining because the author is not getting their way. I would not consider this letter to be an appropriate representation of examples on why political correctness at its core needs to be reexamined on Iowa State University campus, or on any other campuses.

Braun, Charles. “Iowa State is too Politically Correct.” Iowa State Daily. N.p. 5 Apr. 2016. Web. 8 Apr. 2016.

Mark, Victor W. “Alien hand syndrome.” MedLink Neurology. San Diego: MedLink Corporation, 13 Apr. 2016. PDF. 8 Apr. 2016.