Political Correctness

Every now and then I read members’ complaints about if Mensa has no opinions, then why does the Bulletin, Forums, local newsletter, etc. have the right to censor members’ contributions? Isn’t that censorship basically the editor’s or moderator’s expression of a personal value? Has Mensa become so concerned with being politically correct that it stifles intellectual debate from fear of offending someone?

“Politically correct” describes language, ideas, policies, or behavior which seeks to minimize offence to racial, cultural, or other identity groups. I can see how that would curtail free debate on many topics, and I agree with the editor of the SCAM that “political correctness has no place in Mensa.”

If controversy and edginess are good for our minds and conversations, why then does the magazine ever reject such content? Here’s my opinion: articles or ads are not rejected from publication because the content is considered by some to be offensive or politically incorrect—they’re rejected because the person with the authority to judge decided that the content is poorly written or not of significant interest to enough people to warrant the space.

There is a difference between censorship of potentially offensive ideas—and rejection of shameless self-promoting or mean-spirited crap. Good editors are expected to distinguish between the two.