Two questions about Political Correctness

[mudwhistle]

Control by whom of whom? How does this control manifest?

Exactly.

What are the actual mechanics of ‘control’?

If one is fearful of losing his job or being ridiculed in public by expressing his racist ignorance and hate, that’s a consequence of society’s consensus, not some mythical political apparition trying to ‘accomplishing’ anything.

Yet calling someone a "Creepy Assed Cracker" is praised by the left.

Makes sense, don't you think?

 

[mudwhistle]

Political Correctness is simply a way for haters on the left to turn the tables on those folks that pissed them off for one reason or another. Blanket media sponsored bigotry as punishment for being of the wrong political persuasion.

 

[daveman]

.

Since no one will answer, I'm more convinced than ever that this is about control and political advantage.

They can't tell me what they're trying to accomplish, they won't admit there's a downside to the approach.

So, I guess in a way they DID answer my questions, huh?

.

But there is nothing to ‘answer.’

You speak as if there is some sanctioned, authorized, official, coordinated unified, acknowledged, and actual organization in existence trying to ‘accomplish’ something.

There isn’t.

This is why there is no such thing as ‘political correctness,’ it’s a partisan contrivance of the right, a myth, a fantasy, a specter of our political times.

You sound as ridiculous as Hillary and her nonsense about a ‘vast rightwing conspiracy.’

You sure do like to pretend that real things simply don't exist -- PC, Obama's scandals.

How's that working out for you? Changed anybody's mind yet?

 

[daveman]

PC is not used to silence debate. Its used to let people know that the their words used in the debate should not be racists, sexist, etc. PC is for those that are too ignorant to be polite and actually start to sway opinion with their words. I can talk to someone about a totally opposite opinion without putting them down. That does more to sway opinion than any rant will ever do.

That is incorrect, and not in any experience I have ever witnessed or had. The PC notion is used as a cudgel to silence individuals who are winning a debate with logic.

PC is a scourge and should be eliminated from our lexicon. Let people argue and debate what they will without the fear that the language they use might offend someone. Adults should be able to get by that, and no one has the right to go through life un-offended.

I dont know what your definition of PC is but here is mine and Websters:

Definition of POLITICALLY CORRECT

: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated

To me that means make your argument without offending people with racist or sexist remarks. Now if a person is too slow or ignorant to do that then I could see why being PC would make that person angry.

What annoys me are the Professionally Perpetually Offended dictating that other people are offended by something.

If someone doesn't like what I say because it affects him personally, he can tell me. He doesn't need the help of white liberals.

 

[Asclepias]

That is incorrect, and not in any experience I have ever witnessed or had. The PC notion is used as a cudgel to silence individuals who are winning a debate with logic.

PC is a scourge and should be eliminated from our lexicon. Let people argue and debate what they will without the fear that the language they use might offend someone. Adults should be able to get by that, and no one has the right to go through life un-offended.

I dont know what your definition of PC is but here is mine and Websters:

Definition of POLITICALLY CORRECT

: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated

To me that means make your argument without offending people with racist or sexist remarks. Now if a person is too slow or ignorant to do that then I could see why being PC would make that person angry.

What annoys me are the Professionally Perpetually Offended dictating that other people are offended by something.

If someone doesn't like what I say because it affects him personally, he can tell me. He doesn't need the help of white liberals.

Does it not give you any pause that someone would even have to tell you that calling them a name is offensive? To me your assumption that a white liberal has to define what is offending to anyone is pretty silly.

 

[Asclepias]

Political Correctness is simply a way for haters on the left to turn the tables on those folks that pissed them off for one reason or another. Blanket media sponsored bigotry as punishment for being of the wrong political persuasion.

Actually its called social norms. Thankfully we have evolved past the point where its ok to demean someone because of their race or sex. Those that have not reached that stage of evolution are the ones lagging behind.

 

[Darkwind]

PC is not used to silence debate. Its used to let people know that the their words used in the debate should not be racists, sexist, etc. PC is for those that are too ignorant to be polite and actually start to sway opinion with their words. I can talk to someone about a totally opposite opinion without putting them down. That does more to sway opinion than any rant will ever do.

That is incorrect, and not in any experience I have ever witnessed or had. The PC notion is used as a cudgel to silence individuals who are winning a debate with logic.

PC is a scourge and should be eliminated from our lexicon. Let people argue and debate what they will without the fear that the language they use might offend someone. Adults should be able to get by that, and no one has the right to go through life un-offended.

I dont know what your definition of PC is but here is mine and Websters:

Definition of POLITICALLY CORRECT

: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated

To me that means make your argument without offending people with racist or sexist remarks. Now if a person is too slow or ignorant to do that then I could see why being PC would make that person angry.

I guess you just simply fail to understand or grasp the issue that is being spoken of here.

You are advocating that people should be required to use polite speech or you will call them ignorant and stupid because they won't stop using words you find offensive.

You have not yet shown how you get to go through life without being offended by another persons language and you yourself just used language that is offensive and should not be used by adults in polite society or debate.

It never fails. You are like the guy that says, "I have never offended a redneck at all!"

 

[Asclepias]

That is incorrect, and not in any experience I have ever witnessed or had. The PC notion is used as a cudgel to silence individuals who are winning a debate with logic.

PC is a scourge and should be eliminated from our lexicon. Let people argue and debate what they will without the fear that the language they use might offend someone. Adults should be able to get by that, and no one has the right to go through life un-offended.

I dont know what your definition of PC is but here is mine and Websters:

Definition of POLITICALLY CORRECT

: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated

To me that means make your argument without offending people with racist or sexist remarks. Now if a person is too slow or ignorant to do that then I could see why being PC would make that person angry.

I guess you just simply fail to understand or grasp the issue that is being spoken of here.

You are advocating that people should be required to use polite speech or you will call them ignorant and stupid because they won't stop using words you find offensive.

You have not yet shown how you get to go through life without being offended by another persons language and you yourself just used language that is offensive and should not be used by adults in polite society or debate.

It never fails. You are like the guy that says, "I have never offended a redneck at all!"

I think I quite clearly have demonstrated I know what the OP is getting at if you read my posts. I dont recall saying that anyone has a right to go through life without being offended. What I said in summary was that if you decide you want to offend someone then prepared to suffer the consequences.

 

[Mac1958]

.

First of all, as a First Amendment purist, I realize I'm definitely in the minority on this topic here. I want to hear what people are thinking and who agrees with them. So if they say something "offensive", that's fine with me, it tells me a lot about them.

Also, I'd rather change hearts & minds rather than intimidate people into silence by threatening their jobs or calling them names like "racist" or "homophobe" when they say something less than complimentary about someone.

So, with that said, I have two questions:

1. What is your goal by intimidating people into not saying what they're thinking? What's the big picture here?

2. Do you see any kind of downside to this approach?

.

these are reactions to what happened and not bullying. A private business has an image to uphold, and if you or I go and say something racist. They have the right to fire you. You still have your frist amendment right to still say what you want. They also have the right to not have you as an employee.

As for labeling someone a homophobe etc. These again are reactions to the term being used. Public humiliation is not forcing someone to change. You dont have to change, but other people dont have to accept you either.

I think a better argument would be when people have to issue apologies after saying something. That is more wrong than being fired.

Finally someone with the intellectual integrity to actually take a stab at answering my questions.

Thank you.

So rather than trying to accomplish something it's a reaction. That would certainly make sense, more anger/frustration than anything else. Seems to me we're now at the "chicken or the egg" moment, where the righties can say they say shit because they're tired of being pushed around, and the lefties can say that what the righties are saying is racist.

Not so unlike Israel and Palestine, who did what first. Either way, it doesn't matter, since both ends of the argument have to be honest and stop pulling their shit before anything of substance can be accomplished.

The constant screaming of "racism" and the constant changing of words because they're not nice enough are certainly not healing anything. They're in fact exacerbating the problem. Someone has to be the adult in the room at some point and be the first to cut the crap.

Not holding my breath, of course.

.

 

[daveman]

I dont know what your definition of PC is but here is mine and Websters:

Definition of POLITICALLY CORRECT

: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated

To me that means make your argument without offending people with racist or sexist remarks. Now if a person is too slow or ignorant to do that then I could see why being PC would make that person angry.

What annoys me are the Professionally Perpetually Offended dictating that other people are offended by something.

If someone doesn't like what I say because it affects him personally, he can tell me. He doesn't need the help of white liberals.

Does it not give you any pause that someone would even have to tell you that calling them a name is offensive?

I didn't say anything about calling names, did I?

Hint: No.

To me your assumption that a white liberal has to define what is offending to anyone is pretty silly.

And yet all the time we have white liberals deciding that innocuous words like "brown bag" and "citizen" are offensive to others.

Here are some other "offensive" words:

His and Her
Peanut Butter Sandwich
Columbus
Normal
Pet Owner
Holding Down the Fort
Rule of Thumb
​

Do you find those offensive yourself? Or are you offended on someone else's part?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I dont know what your definition of PC is but here is mine and Websters:

Definition of POLITICALLY CORRECT

: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated

To me that means make your argument without offending people with racist or sexist remarks. Now if a person is too slow or ignorant to do that then I could see why being PC would make that person angry.

I guess you just simply fail to understand or grasp the issue that is being spoken of here.

You are advocating that people should be required to use polite speech or you will call them ignorant and stupid because they won't stop using words you find offensive.

You have not yet shown how you get to go through life without being offended by another persons language and you yourself just used language that is offensive and should not be used by adults in polite society or debate.

It never fails. You are like the guy that says, "I have never offended a redneck at all!"

I think I quite clearly have demonstrated I know what the OP is getting at if you read my posts. I dont recall saying that anyone has a right to go through life without being offended. What I said in summary was that if you decide you want to offend someone then prepared to suffer the consequences.

Correct.

No one has advocated any such thing.

No one has a ‘right’ to not be offended.

 

[Darkwind]

I dont know what your definition of PC is but here is mine and Websters:

Definition of POLITICALLY CORRECT

: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated

To me that means make your argument without offending people with racist or sexist remarks. Now if a person is too slow or ignorant to do that then I could see why being PC would make that person angry.

I guess you just simply fail to understand or grasp the issue that is being spoken of here.

You are advocating that people should be required to use polite speech or you will call them ignorant and stupid because they won't stop using words you find offensive.

You have not yet shown how you get to go through life without being offended by another persons language and you yourself just used language that is offensive and should not be used by adults in polite society or debate.

It never fails. You are like the guy that says, "I have never offended a redneck at all!"

I think I quite clearly have demonstrated I know what the OP is getting at if you read my posts. I dont recall saying that anyone has a right to go through life without being offended. What I said in summary was that if you decide you want to offend someone then prepared to suffer the consequences.

So, you have failed to grasp the issue.

The issue is NOT about having to take flack for saying something that may or may not offend someone, but the fact that people (mostly the left) will use this not because they are offended, but because they want to put fear into their opponent.


'I better not say that, or I'll get called a racist"

Or...

You get called a racist without merit, but now have to spend time proving you are not a racist, all the while, knowing that if they said it, then others will believe it, no matter the amount of proof provided.

A prime example. George Zimmerman. He tutored black children and not once has he ever exhibited a racist tendency. The media used race by careful editing of the 911 call to make it look as if he was racist.

This is the use of PC (meaning words that a political ideology fine offensive) in this case was artful and for the purpose of intentional harm to reputation. Not out of some misguided notion of keeping conversation civil.

 

[Darkwind]

I guess you just simply fail to understand or grasp the issue that is being spoken of here.

You are advocating that people should be required to use polite speech or you will call them ignorant and stupid because they won't stop using words you find offensive.

You have not yet shown how you get to go through life without being offended by another persons language and you yourself just used language that is offensive and should not be used by adults in polite society or debate.

It never fails. You are like the guy that says, "I have never offended a redneck at all!"

I think I quite clearly have demonstrated I know what the OP is getting at if you read my posts. I dont recall saying that anyone has a right to go through life without being offended. What I said in summary was that if you decide you want to offend someone then prepared to suffer the consequences.

Correct.

No one has advocated any such thing.

No one has a ‘right’ to not be offended.

The entire premise of PC is because a word of belief may offend someone and therefore should not be used, and if it is, then the threat of being labeled something bad is the result. Regardless of the truthfulness of the accusation.

 

[Mac1958]

So, you have failed to grasp the issue.

The issue is NOT about having to take flack for saying something that may or may not offend someone, but the fact that people (mostly the left) will use this not because they are offended, but because they want to put fear into their opponent.


'I better not say that, or I'll get called a racist"

Or...

You get called a racist without merit, but now have to spend time proving you are not a racist, all the while, knowing that if they said it, then others will believe it, no matter the amount of proof provided.

A prime example. George Zimmerman. He tutored black children and not once has he ever exhibited a racist tendency. The media used race by careful editing of the 911 call to make it look as if he was racist.

This is the use of PC (meaning words that a political ideology fine offensive) in this case was artful and for the purpose of intentional harm to reputation. Not out of some misguided notion of keeping conversation civil.

Bravo.

Actually, I'm sure the PC Police know this, but point it out and they immediately become obtuse and deny it all. That's because, of course, this type of intimidation has been so wildly successful for them. Why give it up?

.

 

[Plasmaball]

.

First of all, as a First Amendment purist, I realize I'm definitely in the minority on this topic here. I want to hear what people are thinking and who agrees with them. So if they say something "offensive", that's fine with me, it tells me a lot about them.

Also, I'd rather change hearts & minds rather than intimidate people into silence by threatening their jobs or calling them names like "racist" or "homophobe" when they say something less than complimentary about someone.

So, with that said, I have two questions:

1. What is your goal by intimidating people into not saying what they're thinking? What's the big picture here?

2. Do you see any kind of downside to this approach?

.

these are reactions to what happened and not bullying. A private business has an image to uphold, and if you or I go and say something racist. They have the right to fire you. You still have your frist amendment right to still say what you want. They also have the right to not have you as an employee.

As for labeling someone a homophobe etc. These again are reactions to the term being used. Public humiliation is not forcing someone to change. You dont have to change, but other people dont have to accept you either.

I think a better argument would be when people have to issue apologies after saying something. That is more wrong than being fired.

Finally someone with the intellectual integrity to actually take a stab at answering my questions.

Thank you.

So rather than trying to accomplish something it's a reaction. That would certainly make sense, more anger/frustration than anything else. Seems to me we're now at the "chicken or the egg" moment, where the righties can say they say shit because they're tired of being pushed around, and the lefties can say that what the righties are saying is racist.

Not so unlike Israel and Palestine, who did what first. Either way, it doesn't matter, since both ends of the argument have to be honest and stop pulling their shit before anything of substance can be accomplished.

The constant screaming of "racism" and the constant changing of words because they're not nice enough are certainly not healing anything. They're in fact exacerbating the problem. Someone has to be the adult in the room at some point and be the first to cut the crap.

Not holding my breath, of course.

.

Think of it this way from a business stand point. You make more money by pleasing everyone. So You take out offensive trigger words in order for people to like your product.

Dont get me wrong i think their are some out there that would like to force people into not using those words, but the idea that it would become illegal is absurd to me.

Take Tracy Morgan and how he made a gay joke. The gays shamed him into saying he was sorry and basically made him his *****. Why? Money and shame really. Tracy could have said **** you and nothing would of happened.

Or take Dean as another example. Nobody is stopping her from saying or thinking what she said. The network dropped her as a reaction because its a bad image. People shunned her because as a society we are trying to grow beyond that type of thinking. She could go on tv tomorrow and still say what she wants, but that doesnt mean people have to higher her or like it.

Words change all the time and the constant change to more "nice" terms can become a tad absurd. Take the seattle case. Yeah they are trying to be soft with the people, but they didnt ban anyword. They are trying to promote an image that everyone will enjoy.

Its like going into a temple and saying merry xmas. Not really the best thing to do, so you say happy holidays. Does it hurt anyone? No, are you still free to wish people a merry xmas outside of that temple if you wanted too? Sure.

Another way is this. Your mother always told you it was rude to wear a hat inside. Sure you can still wear the hat, but its not respectful to others.
Unless you are a woman in church, then you can wear a hat....Blows your mind lol...

As for racism? that has become such a political football that the term really has lost most of its meaning.
Real racism gets drowned out now by these fact outraged racism pimps. When you see the left and right running towards that label 2 minutes into the topic, you know we are in trouble.

 

[Asclepias]

What annoys me are the Professionally Perpetually Offended dictating that other people are offended by something.

If someone doesn't like what I say because it affects him personally, he can tell me. He doesn't need the help of white liberals.

Does it not give you any pause that someone would even have to tell you that calling them a name is offensive?

I didn't say anything about calling names, did I?

Hint: No.

To me your assumption that a white liberal has to define what is offending to anyone is pretty silly.

And yet all the time we have white liberals deciding that innocuous words like "brown bag" and "citizen" are offensive to others.

Here are some other "offensive" words:

His and Her
Peanut Butter Sandwich
Columbus
Normal
Pet Owner
Holding Down the Fort
Rule of Thumb
​

Do you find those offensive yourself? Or are you offended on someone else's part?

I said the name calling part. Goes along to me with racist or sexist remarks. Those words dont offend me and anyone that lets someone else define whats offensive to them is lacking.

 

[The T]

I guess you just simply fail to understand or grasp the issue that is being spoken of here.

You are advocating that people should be required to use polite speech or you will call them ignorant and stupid because they won't stop using words you find offensive.

You have not yet shown how you get to go through life without being offended by another persons language and you yourself just used language that is offensive and should not be used by adults in polite society or debate.

It never fails. You are like the guy that says, "I have never offended a redneck at all!"

I think I quite clearly have demonstrated I know what the OP is getting at if you read my posts. I dont recall saying that anyone has a right to go through life without being offended. What I said in summary was that if you decide you want to offend someone then prepared to suffer the consequences.

So, you have failed to grasp the issue.

The issue is NOT about having to take flack for saying something that may or may not offend someone, but the fact that people (mostly the left) will use this not because they are offended, but because they want to put fear into their opponent.


'I better not say that, or I'll get called a racist"

Or...

You get called a racist without merit, but now have to spend time proving you are not a racist, all the while, knowing that if they said it, then others will believe it, no matter the amount of proof provided.

A prime example. George Zimmerman. He tutored black children and not once has he ever exhibited a racist tendency. The media used race by careful editing of the 911 call to make it look as if he was racist.

This is the use of PC (meaning words that a political ideology fine offensive) in this case was artful and for the purpose of intentional harm to reputation. Not out of some misguided notion of keeping conversation civil.

Indeed. BULLY tactics. I don't fall for it, rather confront it, and send them home with their tails between their legs to lick their wounds.

 

[Asclepias]

I guess you just simply fail to understand or grasp the issue that is being spoken of here.

You are advocating that people should be required to use polite speech or you will call them ignorant and stupid because they won't stop using words you find offensive.

You have not yet shown how you get to go through life without being offended by another persons language and you yourself just used language that is offensive and should not be used by adults in polite society or debate.

It never fails. You are like the guy that says, "I have never offended a redneck at all!"

I think I quite clearly have demonstrated I know what the OP is getting at if you read my posts. I dont recall saying that anyone has a right to go through life without being offended. What I said in summary was that if you decide you want to offend someone then prepared to suffer the consequences.

So, you have failed to grasp the issue.

The issue is NOT about having to take flack for saying something that may or may not offend someone, but the fact that people (mostly the left) will use this not because they are offended, but because they want to put fear into their opponent.


'I better not say that, or I'll get called a racist"

Or...

You get called a racist without merit, but now have to spend time proving you are not a racist, all the while, knowing that if they said it, then others will believe it, no matter the amount of proof provided.

A prime example. George Zimmerman. He tutored black children and not once has he ever exhibited a racist tendency. The media used race by careful editing of the 911 call to make it look as if he was racist.

This is the use of PC (meaning words that a political ideology fine offensive) in this case was artful and for the purpose of intentional harm to reputation. Not out of some misguided notion of keeping conversation civil.

How can you say that the issue is not taking flack for what you say and then turn around and say "I better not say that or I am going to be called a racist"? Are you confused or did you not read over what you wrote?

Just because someone calls you a racist that doesnt mean you have to spend time proving youre not. Who told you that? if you get busted expressing a racist sentiment of even calling someone a racist name you have a right to do that.

 

[Darkwind]

I think I quite clearly have demonstrated I know what the OP is getting at if you read my posts. I dont recall saying that anyone has a right to go through life without being offended. What I said in summary was that if you decide you want to offend someone then prepared to suffer the consequences.

So, you have failed to grasp the issue.

The issue is NOT about having to take flack for saying something that may or may not offend someone, but the fact that people (mostly the left) will use this not because they are offended, but because they want to put fear into their opponent.


'I better not say that, or I'll get called a racist"

Or...

You get called a racist without merit, but now have to spend time proving you are not a racist, all the while, knowing that if they said it, then others will believe it, no matter the amount of proof provided.

A prime example. George Zimmerman. He tutored black children and not once has he ever exhibited a racist tendency. The media used race by careful editing of the 911 call to make it look as if he was racist.

This is the use of PC (meaning words that a political ideology fine offensive) in this case was artful and for the purpose of intentional harm to reputation. Not out of some misguided notion of keeping conversation civil.

Indeed. BULLY tactics. I don't fall for it, rather confront it, and send them home with their tails between their legs to lick their wounds.

I use a very similar argument for why I think that the term 'racist' and 'homophobe' are meaningless in today's world. For those who have caught on to the tactic of using slurs as a means of scaring the other side no longer care, because the power of the word no longer stings.

I personally applaud individuals who can maintain a civil discourse, and get get into a intense debate without resorting to using emotionally charged words as a means of ruining another persons reputation.

But that is a self imposed restraint, not one that should be forced upon others.

 

[Darkwind]

I think I quite clearly have demonstrated I know what the OP is getting at if you read my posts. I dont recall saying that anyone has a right to go through life without being offended. What I said in summary was that if you decide you want to offend someone then prepared to suffer the consequences.

So, you have failed to grasp the issue.

The issue is NOT about having to take flack for saying something that may or may not offend someone, but the fact that people (mostly the left) will use this not because they are offended, but because they want to put fear into their opponent.


'I better not say that, or I'll get called a racist"

Or...

You get called a racist without merit, but now have to spend time proving you are not a racist, all the while, knowing that if they said it, then others will believe it, no matter the amount of proof provided.

A prime example. George Zimmerman. He tutored black children and not once has he ever exhibited a racist tendency. The media used race by careful editing of the 911 call to make it look as if he was racist.

This is the use of PC (meaning words that a political ideology fine offensive) in this case was artful and for the purpose of intentional harm to reputation. Not out of some misguided notion of keeping conversation civil.

How can you say that the issue is not taking flack for what you say and then turn around and say "I better not say that or I am going to be called a racist"? Are you confused or did you not read over what you wrote?

Just because someone calls you a racist that doesnt mean you have to spend time proving youre not. Who told you that? if you get busted expressing a racist sentiment of even calling someone a racist name you have a right to do that.

How hard is it to understand what I said?

If I am debating you on the merits of an economic policy, I never mention the President's race, and I am winning the debate. You then just flat out say My position is racist because the President is black and that is why I am opposed to his policy. That is not Me taking flack for using uncivil language, nor is it all that uncommon.

That is you using an emotionally charged, Politically Correctness tactic, to silence Me.

This is what we are debating. The use of these kinds of tactics as they are related to PC terms like racist, bigot, homophobe. Or terms like, "The war on women".