Conservatives now play the PC card the way they often accuse others of playing the race card.
Never was such a term more misunderstood and more misused. As I remember it, political correctness was originally about language: saying ‘domestic engineer’ instead of housewife, “waste management specialist” instead of garbage man, “administrative assistant” instead of secretary, etc. Now, it is used as a political ploy for people who don’t want to conform to current social mores.
It used to be called being polite and decent to people.
It is not ‘political correctness’ that most people are talking about when they use the term. What they are actually referring to are current social mores, current social values. The majority of our society now accepts gays and their right to have a respected place in our society. The majority of people in our society now believe that we should not use pejorative terms to refer to one or another gender, race, ethnic group, etc. What is being called ‘political correctness’ is something that has always existed in human civilization; it is the use of appropriate respect for others based on the values of your society. What the people who object to political correctness are objecting to is behaving, and speaking, in a way that is valued by our modern day society. If you are in the minority, you may not hold the same values as the majority, and, therefore, your desire to behave a certain way is condemned by the larger society. For example, as has been noted in this thread many times, it was once unacceptable for gays to acknowledge their sexuality, and so, to adhere to the norms and values of the society, they suppressed their true sexual identity and/or hid it from the larger society. Nowadays, we have, as a society (the majority of our society) come to accept gays, so now the tables have turned and those who continue to cling to an archaic social norm are unhappy and angry about having to suppress their personal outlook in public.
Times change. Societies change. Values change. It is not ‘political correctness’ that is the issue; it is acceptance of current social mores and norms, modern day social values. It isn’t an issue of free speech. Can your employer fire you for calling someone at work a 'bull dyke'? Perhaps not, legally, because free speech is a legal issue, not a social one. But your employer can fire you for creating a hostile environment in the work place, a social issue, because you are not conforming to current social values and thus making other employees uncomfortable, and in the end, it is an isssue of productiveness, of causing a problem with the productive atmosphere throughout the work place.
When you're living your life according to a book that was written hundreds or thousands of years ago, and that book's instructions reflect the mores of the times in which it was written, to justify adhering to that book assumes that the book got nothing wrong.
That adherence assumes that all social progress ended at the moment that book was finished.
This is absolutely correct: using a viewpoint that was written 2000 years ago as a benchmark for how we should live today is ridiculous. Picking and choosing certain values expressed in that document and then insisting everyone must conform to them is also ridiculous. The ideas in the Bible “reflect the mores of the times in which it was written.” Times change. If we stuck by all the values expressed in the Bible, we would be halting all social progress at 2000 years ago. That is ludicrous.
So a person should be fired or castigated for their personal views? ANY personal views that go against the grain of a protected class? And we are not talking about name calling here. A person cannot hold a view opposed to those held by the "right" people without fearing for their economic and social well being? They have to hide what they think just to preserve their own way of life?
I guess some animals are more equal than others.
It is not a matter of having personal views; it is a matter of feeling you can express them anywhere at any time in any way you want even though they are unacceptable in today’s current social environment. In past times, people who held socially unacceptable ideas, acted in socially unacceptable ways, or used socially unacceptable language were suppressed and/or ostracized for doing so—this is true throughout human history: it has nothing whatsoever to do with anything we would like to label as political correctness. It has nothing to do with politics-it has to do with acceptable public, social behavior. With
civilized behavior. When you behave in ways that you are labeling as politically incorrect, you are actually behaving in ways that are
uncivil: not conforming to current social expectations and values. Perhaps this is why the Republican party is sinking like a stone. "....you better start swimmin'/Or you'll sink like a stone/For the times they are a-changin'."
Times change, values change: what people who have a problem with what they consider ‘political correctness’ actually have a problem with is accepting the values of the majority, of the current social climate within which they live.
Chris Rock explained it best....
Two fat girls can joke about how fat they are, but if a skinny girl does it, it is just plain mean
Two poor people can joke about how poor they are, but if a rich person does it, it is just plain mean
Get it?
And this is very, very true and always has been. Cloistered nuns can make jokes about themselves and their lifestyle, but if an outsider does it, it’s not okay. Any group, anywhere, any time, can make inside jokes about themselves, but when an outsider does it, it is not okay. It has nothing to do with political correctness; it has to do with being polite and diplomatic and using plain old common sense. This has been true throughout human history. It is a matter of getting along with each other, showing respect for each other.
Just so fucking stupid to make this a left vs right.
