This article perfectly demonstrates how talking about "PC" prevents good discussion about inclusion.
As it turns out, "PC" is a term developed to dismiss appeals to sensitivity and inclusion. And it's quite good at doing so!
So, if you care about sensitivity and inclusion, but focus on "PC", you're forced, like this author, to throw your hands up in defeat.
It's actually quite simple: if you realize that policing other's language is more often itself a form of exclusion/aggression, then you can clearly describe the scenarios the author relates as part of the problem, not as some failure of the only proposed solution to an unfathomable problem.
The point the author is attempting to make is that a culture has been created where it is unacceptable to fail to be arbitrarily sensitive and inclusive. That this is used to bully and control people and does not allow for a diversity of opinions.
As it turns out, "PC" is a term developed to dismiss appeals to sensitivity and inclusion. And it's quite good at doing so!
So, if you care about sensitivity and inclusion, but focus on "PC", you're forced, like this author, to throw your hands up in defeat.
It's actually quite simple: if you realize that policing other's language is more often itself a form of exclusion/aggression, then you can clearly describe the scenarios the author relates as part of the problem, not as some failure of the only proposed solution to an unfathomable problem.