Political correctness out of control

[Angra Mainyu]

Would you consider the following examples cases of silencing, or are you talking about something worse, like beatings, imprisonment, etc.?

Example 1: http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid

This isn't an accident: I have intentionally adjusted my teaching materials as the political winds have shifted. (I also make sure all my remotely offensive or challenging opinions, such as this article, are expressed either anonymously or pseudonymously). Most of my colleagues who still have jobs have done the same. We've seen bad things happen to too many good teachers — adjuncts getting axed because their evaluations dipped below a 3.0, grad students being removed from classes after a single student complaint, and so on.

Example 2:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/20...est-germaine-greer-lecture-cardiff-university

Greer said five women had approached her as she travelled to Cardiff to back her stance on trans women. “They said: ‘I’m so glad that someone is saying what we think. We don’t think that post-operative male transexuals are women but we are not allowed to say so’. I will say so because I don’t believe they are women. That’s not tantamount to calling them names. I also happen to believe that the surgery is unethical.”

Was Greer lying about what those women said? If she wasn't, were they lying about not being allowed to say so?

It seems probable that some women just shut up because of fear of very serious social consequences that would probably result from making claims like that.

Of course, that does not silence activists from the other side, so it's not as if everyone is being silenced by that. But surely, there are people getting silenced. The threat of strong social condemnation sometimes does that. And sometimes the threat goes further, and it's a threat to their jobs as well.

 

[Bronzeage]

If political correctness is out of control, who had control, and how did they lose it?

Wouldn't be their responsibility to get it back?

It's social control. It's the shame of having said something stupid. Because there's feedback to whoever says it. But if somebody can just shut down anybody they find offensive and that's the end of it then society stagnates. We need to talk about stuff.

Shame is having said something stupid? When was that ever a thing?

 

[zorq]

When I first learned about "political correctness" I was in elementary school. I was taught that often the language we use inadvertently causes offence to people in ways that is not intended. While I learned on the playground that using words like "retard," and "gay" were adjectives that were colorful synonyms of "bad," I was surprised to discover that using these words inappropriately could actually greatly offend people. It also surprised me that other words like "midgit" which I thought was the neutral descriptive noun for an adult person who was smaller than about 3 feet tall could also cause unintended offence.

"Not Politically Correct," I was taught, is a label applied to words to bring awareness that these kinds of words may cause communication failures if used casually and incautiously. Of course they may also cause offence if used deliberately and for that purpose. "Political correctness" was a drive to popularize the "not politically correct" labeling of certain words to reduce the accidental communication failures and offence that had been commonplace for well... ever.

Adjusting my language to conform to "PC" struck me then as a noble goal. After all, isn't communicating everything you want and nothing you don't want a good thing?

Now, I'm using quotation marks around the term "Political correctness" because it is clear in this thread that the meaning of "PC" that I'm familiar with is not the same as the one used by the people most opposed to "Political Correctness."

I'm convinced that some of the reason "PC" has a disputed meaning is specifically because there has been a concerted effort by some people who are opposed to it (for various reasons) to co-opt and deliberately interpret differently so as to better serve their (various) purposes.

Or perhaps, my interpretation of "PC" is the one that was co-opted, and PC was more originally a movement designed to censor and shame the speech of others for no good reason beyond partisan revenge and dominance. But I doubt it.

But either way. Even though it has been mentioned in this thread already, I want to highlight the fact that "political correctness" doesn't mean the same thing to everyone.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

(Source: Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal)

fear of being thought racist is political correctness?

It's one of the effects of political correctness .

 

[untermensche]

There is no such thing as "political correctness".

It is a right wing creation that is used as magic words to lump all different kinds of protest as the same thing.

Students all over the country try for different reasons, some more reasonable than others, to not restrict speech but to point out where it is inappropriate and seek sanctions that exist on all inappropriate behavior.

But if one says the magic words "political correctness" one can use the most ridiculous examples to dismiss them all.

One can even use these magic words to dismiss things like long standing histories of racial tensions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Original discourse

fear of being thought racist is political correctness?

Not "is". "Is caused by".

is that the only cause?

No.

So if there are multiple causes available, possibly all acting at once, is political correctness the primary cause, a secondary cause, a Tertiary cause?

Exact;y how does political correctness cause this fear, and how does it work with other causes?

Being called on one's bullshit, ... not political correctness
Having people disagree with another person, ... not political correctness
Having people bully someone, ... not political correctness
Expecting people to not be assholes, ... not political correctness

Political correctness started out as an inside joke and devolved into a bullshit term like reverse discrimination to be used by angry white males as a way to wear the mantle of victimhood and not face the fact that many of them had indeed been conned into supporting a system designed exalt their membership in a race while exploiting their labor, dimming their intellect, and stealing theirs and their children's futures.

You obviously do not understand the race card.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Political correctness started out as an inside joke and devolved into a bullshit term like reverse discrimination to be used by angry white males as a way to wear the mantle of victimhood and not face the fact that many of them had indeed been conned into supporting a system designed exalt their membership in a race while exploiting their labor, dimming their intellect, and stealing theirs and their children's futures.

Calling ideas you don't like bullshit doesn't make them false.

 

[Bomb#20]

There is no such thing as "political correctness".

It is a right wing creation that is used as magic words to lump all different kinds of protest as the same thing.

You keep saying this, even though the actual origin of the term has already been pointed out upthread. The noun form, "political correctness", is a backformation from the adjective form, "politically correct". "Politically correct" used to be a term of art in Marxist circles. The hard left said it unselfconsciously, referring to views they saw as being the correct views to hold for political reasons. The ideologically impure left got fed up with the orthodox left trying to stifle debate among the left and bully them into conformity, and they took up using "politically correct" sarcastically, as a put-down of Marxist narrow-mindedness and an expression of their own commitment to accepting diversity of opinion. The concept spread by osmosis from the non-doctrinaire leftists to centrists, and eventually to rightists. Of course centrists and rightists use it to refer to a considerably less specialized orthodoxy than the one the Marxists were pushing. From a point of view outside the left, an awful lot of the non-Marxist left come off about as dogmatic as orthodox Marxists come off from the point of view of a typical leftist.

 

[Bomb#20]

So if there are multiple causes available, possibly all acting at once, is political correctness the primary cause, a secondary cause, a Tertiary cause?

That of course varies from case to case. It appears to have been the primary cause in Rotherham.

Having people bully someone, ... not political correctness

Where are you getting that? Bullying is the central feature of political correctness.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Having people bully someone, ... not political correctness

Where are you getting that? Bullying is the central feature of political correctness.

Sensitivity and respect is the central feature of political correctness. OVERDOING that is "political correctness out of control." That is, people being TOO sensitive, treating things with respect even when they are obviously frivolous and not worthy of it.

Using political correctness to bully people is actually a form of censorship.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Political correctness started out as an inside joke and devolved into a bullshit term like reverse discrimination to be used by angry white males as a way to wear the mantle of victimhood and not face the fact that many of them had indeed been conned into supporting a system designed exalt their membership in a race while exploiting their labor, dimming their intellect, and stealing theirs and their children's futures.

Calling ideas you don't like bullshit doesn't make them false.

Explain PC in your own words and then show how it has, as a culture-wide trend, society-wide trend, harmed white men. How has it changed the course of history and the life chances of white men as a whole? How is it different from anything from simply being called out for being an asshole to being bullied? And why if it is a thing, which you have to prove it is first, why are its victims too damn scared to fight it?

When my grandmother was 71 and I was 4, she held my hand as we marched in protest of segregation along streets with klansmen in full regalia threatening every step we took. surely the angry white men of america are as brave as a grandmother and a preschooler. Or are they?

 

[DrZoidberg]

When I first learned about "political correctness" I was in elementary school. I was taught that often the language we use inadvertently causes offence to people in ways that is not intended. While I learned on the playground that using words like "retard," and "gay" were adjectives that were colorful synonyms of "bad," I was surprised to discover that using these words inappropriately could actually greatly offend people. It also surprised me that other words like "midgit" which I thought was the neutral descriptive noun for an adult person who was smaller than about 3 feet tall could also cause unintended offence.

"Not Politically Correct," I was taught, is a label applied to words to bring awareness that these kinds of words may cause communication failures if used casually and incautiously. Of course they may also cause offence if used deliberately and for that purpose. "Political correctness" was a drive to popularize the "not politically correct" labeling of certain words to reduce the accidental communication failures and offence that had been commonplace for well... ever.

Adjusting my language to conform to "PC" struck me then as a noble goal. After all, isn't communicating everything you want and nothing you don't want a good thing?

Now, I'm using quotation marks around the term "Political correctness" because it is clear in this thread that the meaning of "PC" that I'm familiar with is not the same as the one used by the people most opposed to "Political Correctness."

I'm convinced that some of the reason "PC" has a disputed meaning is specifically because there has been a concerted effort by some people who are opposed to it (for various reasons) to co-opt and deliberately interpret differently so as to better serve their (various) purposes.

Or perhaps, my interpretation of "PC" is the one that was co-opted, and PC was more originally a movement designed to censor and shame the speech of others for no good reason beyond partisan revenge and dominance. But I doubt it.

But either way. Even though it has been mentioned in this thread already, I want to highlight the fact that "political correctness" doesn't mean the same thing to everyone.

I think it's two different things. Choosing to use political correct language, not to offend, is of course nice. I don't know about noble. But it does speak of a thoughtful attitude and is commendable. That's a world apart from being in someone's face for not being politically correct. The topic of this South Park episode:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZDK_LG9DuU

 

[SimpleDon]

I'm a liberal. Yes, one of those, a bleeding heart liberal. Tolerance is sacred to me. Just to let people get the fuck on with whatever without judging. To me political correctness is the antithesis of liberalism. It's everything liberalism isn't. IT'S IN THE FUCKING NAME! I personally make an effort not to offend people. Because I'm polite and well behaved. But I'm not going to police others on their use of words. Nor unfriend people who I think uses offensive words. To me that's also to be polite and well behaved. It's the opinion that matters. Not which words are used.

My impression is that political correctness is often white people competing about who is the most tolerant and end up becoming the one thing they're trying not to be... namely fascists. Here's Louis CK explaining what the problem is and how political correctness works:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF1NUposXVQ

In Sweden right now there's controversy about the artist Makode Linde who is setting up a show in Stockholm's flashiest and most central art venue. He's calling the show "Negerkungens återkomst" which is Swedish for "Return of the Nigger King". What makes this special is that this is a government owned building. Politics matter. The will of the people and such.

This has led to a debate in various media channels where the director of Kulturhuset (the venue) is telling Makode that it's not acceptable and that he has to change the name. Makode's response was "So a white guy (the director) is telling a black guy (the artist) to stop being racist against blacks. He just doesn't get it. This is just political correctness out of control. He seems to be under the impression that art is a democratic process. It isn't. I'm going to call it whatever I like".

So this is a question to liberals. Do you think political correctness is out of control? I don't really care what conservatives or racists think because it's not news. This is a question for the liberal club.

Yes, PC goes much too far. Most of what PC tries to accomplish should be done by simple, good manners. But as my sainted Nana always said, bad manners is its own punishment. It is bad manners to correct others who are not responsible to us, that is our children and grandchildren. You must allow others to stain themselves without comment.

 

[ronburgundy]

Where are you getting that? Bullying is the central feature of political correctness.

Sensitivity and respect is the central feature of political correctness. OVERDOING that is "political correctness out of control."

Wrong. As already explained, the the origin and continued primary use of the term is to refer to blindly dogmatic application of a political agenda without regard for scientific or ethical "correctness". Thus, making it something that is only "correct" according to extremist dogmatic ideology, and thus by definition "out of control" in the sense of being unreasonable, unjustified, and harmful.

Racist right-wingers wrongly refer to actual moral and scientifically correct ideas as "politically incorrect", but the whole point of the term is that the idea is not correct in any sense outside of a dogmatic application of a narrow political agenda. Thus, something can only be politically correct if is lacks both scientific and moral correctness (acknowledging that the latter is not an objective property but a relation to subjective ethical principles). You are just accepting and reacting to their perverted use of the term rather than its historical and legit and meaningful modern use which distinguishes between liberal positions that are reasonable or ethical from those that are blindly dogmatic and fail to acknowledge conflict with other core liberal values.

 

[fast]

Sensitivity and respect is the central feature of political correctness. OVERDOING that is "political correctness out of control."

Wrong. As already explained, the the origin and continued primary use of the term is to refer to blindly dogmatic application of a political agenda without regard for scientific or ethical "correctness". Thus, making it something that is only "correct" according to extremist dogmatic ideology, and thus by definition "out of control" in the sense of being unreasonable, unjustified, and harmful.

Racist right-wingers wrongly refer to actual moral and scientifically correct ideas as "politically incorrect", but the whole point of the term is that the idea is not correct in any sense outside of a dogmatic application of a narrow political agenda. Thus, something can only be politically correct if is lacks both scientific and moral correctness (acknowledging that the latter is not an objective property but a relation to subjective ethical principles). You are just accepting and reacting to their perverted use of the term rather than its historical and legit and meaningful modern use which distinguishes between liberal positions that are reasonable or ethical from those that are blindly dogmatic and fail to acknowledge conflict with other core liberal values.

A continued, widespread, and perverted overuse (such that it's current misuse is essentially perverted beyond repair) tells me that any attempt to use the term as it's continued primary use (as if it's in accord with historical use) is foolhardy. It's a hopeless cause, as the precursor that allowed for it's distorted use is the same barrier to recontinued correct (or should I say historical?) use. But good luck.

 

[ronburgundy]

Wrong. As already explained, the the origin and continued primary use of the term is to refer to blindly dogmatic application of a political agenda without regard for scientific or ethical "correctness". Thus, making it something that is only "correct" according to extremist dogmatic ideology, and thus by definition "out of control" in the sense of being unreasonable, unjustified, and harmful.

Racist right-wingers wrongly refer to actual moral and scientifically correct ideas as "politically incorrect", but the whole point of the term is that the idea is not correct in any sense outside of a dogmatic application of a narrow political agenda. Thus, something can only be politically correct if is lacks both scientific and moral correctness (acknowledging that the latter is not an objective property but a relation to subjective ethical principles). You are just accepting and reacting to their perverted use of the term rather than its historical and legit and meaningful modern use which distinguishes between liberal positions that are reasonable or ethical from those that are blindly dogmatic and fail to acknowledge conflict with other core liberal values.

A continued, widespread, and perverted overuse (such that it's current misuse is essentially perverted beyond repair) tells me that any attempt to use the term as it's continued primary use (as if it's in accord with historical use) is foolhardy. It's a hopeless cause, as the precursor that allowed for it's distorted use is the same barrier to recontinued correct (or should I say historical?) use. But good luck.

Should science discard "theory" and "evolution" and countless other meaningful and useful terms because they are pervasively misused by people? There is nothing about the term that is flawed that made it get co-opted. That happened due to the dishonest ideologues on both the right and the left (the right applying it to all liberal values, and the left inventing complete nonsense like "it means being polite and considerate"). The concept to which it was created to refer is as or more meaningful and important to identify (and criticize) now as it was originally. Thus, we need to refer to it with some term, and any new term created will just get co-opted again by the same ideologues motivated to ignore the difference between reasonable and unreasonable ideas related to tolerance and decency.

 

[fast]

A continued, widespread, and perverted overuse (such that it's current misuse is essentially perverted beyond repair) tells me that any attempt to use the term as it's continued primary use (as if it's in accord with historical use) is foolhardy. It's a hopeless cause, as the precursor that allowed for it's distorted use is the same barrier to recontinued correct (or should I say historical?) use. But good luck.

Should science discard "theory" and "evolution" and countless other meaningful and useful terms because they are pervasively misused by people? There is nothing about the term that is flawed that made it get co-opted. That happened due to the dishonest ideologues on both the right and the left (the right applying it to all liberal values, and the left inventing complete nonsense like "it means being polite and considerate"). The concept to which it was created to refer is as or more meaningful and important to identify (and criticize) now as it was originally. Thus, we need to refer to it with some term, and any new term created will just get co-opted again by the same ideologues motivated to ignore the difference between reasonable and unreasonable ideas related to tolerance and decency.

Sorry. I was being perhaps unreasonably pessimistic.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Calling ideas you don't like bullshit doesn't make them false.

Explain PC in your own words and then show how it has, as a culture-wide trend, society-wide trend, harmed white men. How has it changed the course of history and the life chances of white men as a whole? How is it different from anything from simply being called out for being an asshole to being bullied? And why if it is a thing, which you have to prove it is first, why are its victims too damn scared to fight it?

When my grandmother was 71 and I was 4, she held my hand as we marched in protest of segregation along streets with klansmen in full regalia threatening every step we took. surely the angry white men of america are as brave as a grandmother and a preschooler. Or are they?

Wow, that was pretty brave of your grandmother (and you as well!). Not sure if I'd expose a 4-year old to bigoted assholes. But I certainly understand.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Sensitivity and respect is the central feature of political correctness. OVERDOING that is "political correctness out of control."

Wrong. As already explained, the the origin and continued primary use of the term is to refer to blindly dogmatic application of a political agenda without regard for scientific or ethical "correctness". Thus, making it something that is only "correct" according to extremist dogmatic ideology, and thus by definition "out of control" in the sense of being unreasonable, unjustified, and harmful.

Half right. The TERM originally referred to the application of a political agenda (namely, that minorities should be spoken to and treated with respect and sensitivity) which from the very beginning was rejected by conservatives as too stifling of their expressive creativity. It is indeed "correct" only in the terms of that political agenda, and would be "incorrect" only if one assumes that treating people with respect and sensitivity is not something you should have to do (hence the reason Rush Limbaugh was one of the first to rail against the concept of "political correctness").

There's nothing extremist about that ideology. When and where it becomes dogmatic, however, is when it gets out of control.

You are just accepting and reacting to their perverted use of the term rather than its historical and legit and meaningful modern use

Now that wouldn't be the blindly dogmatic application of a rightwing political agenda demanding that I accept YOUR definition of a political term as if it is the only possible correct interpretation of it... right?

 

[ronburgundy]

Wrong. As already explained, the the origin and continued primary use of the term is to refer to blindly dogmatic application of a political agenda without regard for scientific or ethical "correctness". Thus, making it something that is only "correct" according to extremist dogmatic ideology, and thus by definition "out of control" in the sense of being unreasonable, unjustified, and harmful.

Half right. The TERM originally referred to the application of a political agenda (namely, that minorities should be spoken to and treated with respect and sensitivity) which from the very beginning was rejected by conservatives as too stifling of their expressive creativity. It is indeed "correct" only in the terms of that political agenda, and would be "incorrect" only if one assumes that treating people with respect and sensitivity is not something you should have to do (hence the reason Rush Limbaugh was one of the first to rail against the concept of "political correctness").

There's nothing extremist about that ideology. When and where it becomes dogmatic, however, is when it gets out of control.

You are just accepting and reacting to their perverted use of the term rather than its historical and legit and meaningful modern use

Now that wouldn't be the blindly dogmatic application of a rightwing political agenda demanding that I accept YOUR definition of a political term as if it is the only possible correct interpretation of it... right?

Wrong again. You keep repeating made up nonsense refuted by all historical facts already presented to you in this thread. It has always been a derogatory term used against dogmatic leftists since at least the 1940's (about a half century prior to Limbaugh). It was not used by rightists, but rather more reasonable leftists.

The abuse of the term by conservatives to refer to any an all liberal values is a more recent phenomena, as is the abuse by dogmatic leftist like yourself who make up nonsense like that PC originally meant "polite and considerate".