Political correctness out of control

[Loren Pechtel]

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?

"Politically correct" is basically the assumption that the words make the problem rather than simply reflect the problem.

 

[Bomb#20]

View attachment 4958

These are really ISLAMIC feminists.

Loyal to a religion, not to the idea of expanding women's rights.

Not really feminists at all.

Kind of how the Nazi's were socialists.

You're seriously claiming these people are Islamic.



Have you any evidence for that claim?

 

[Bronzeage]

Political correctness is the story of the 5 blind men who went to see the elephant and were offended t have been identified by their visual impairment and the implication it rendered their observations invalid.

 

[zorq]

Show

View attachment 4958

That post by the Goldsmith feminist society says that they stand in solidarity with the Facebook post of the ISOC. I wanted to see what that facebook post was so here's the text of the post made on Dec.1st.

Goldsmiths Islamic Society (ISOC) would like to categorically condemn the vile harassment of our ISOC members (both male and female) by the Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society (ASH).
On Monday 30th November, students of Goldsmiths University, alongside members of the public attended an event organised by the ASH titled "Apostasy, Blasphemy & Free Expression, In the age of ISIS”. The ASH invited Maryam Namazie, who is known as a notorious islamophobe to speak at the event, despite our polite request for them to reconsider. The university should be a safe space for all our students. Islamophobic views like those propagated by Namazie create a climate of hatred and bigotry towards Muslim students.
Muslim students who attended the event were shocked and horrified by statements made by Namazie, and peacefully expressed their dissent to the disrespectful cartoons shown of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). These students were subsequently made subject to unnecessary bullying, abuse and violence by the ASH society and security staff. Some students were even forcibly removed from the event.
Following the event, members of the public who were present at the event have been tweeting unauthorised pictures of our University students with fabricated statements regarding false allegations of "death threats".
We would like to make it very clear that Muslim students did NOT make any alleged "death threats”. This is a fabrication made by supporters of the ASH and Namazie in an attempt to distort the truth and further marginalise Muslim students for expressing dissent at offensive statements and images.
A university should be a safe environment/space for all students including Muslims in this sensitive time. Hateful statements that encourage Islamophobia by Namazie and the ASH can lead to very serious & violent consequences towards the Muslim students at the university. A university institution needs to prioritise the safety of its students and take action to ensure students are not harrassed/intimidated online or on campus.

 

[untermensche]

These are really ISLAMIC feminists.

Loyal to a religion, not to the idea of expanding women's rights.

Not really feminists at all.

Kind of how the Nazi's were socialists.

You're seriously claiming these people are Islamic.



Have you any evidence for that claim?

Do you have any evidence they are feminists?

 

[Bomb#20]

You're seriously claiming these people are Islamic.



Have you any evidence for that claim?

Do you have any evidence they are feminists?

You claimed they're Islamic. I didn't claim they're feminists. I don't generally make claims about who is or isn't a feminist. When you claim they aren't really feminists, that's between you and your personal definition of "feminist". If what you mean is that they aren't really women's-libbers, I'd have to agree with you on that point. Doesn't change the fact that they're ideologues and they support silencing dissent from their orthodoxy by means of bullying. That's political correctness in a nutshell.

 

[fast]

If what you mean is that they aren't really women's-libbers, I'd have to agree with you on that point.

That's awfully gratuitous of you. If he said that dogs meow and what he means by "dogs" are cats, then I wouldn't agree with what he said even if I agreed with what he meant.

 

[untermensche]

Do you have any evidence they are feminists?

You claimed they're Islamic. I didn't claim they're feminists. I don't generally make claims about who is or isn't a feminist. When you claim they aren't really feminists, that's between you and your personal definition of "feminist". If what you mean is that they aren't really women's-libbers, I'd have to agree with you on that point. Doesn't change the fact that they're ideologues and they support silencing dissent from their orthodoxy by means of bullying. That's political correctness in a nutshell.

So no matter what the gripe or the tactic it is PC in a nutshell.

Got it.

 

[JonA]

But that can't be right because, "for those ideas we already have terminology and need no more."

How is it, in the world of political and social debate, we suddenly have enough ideas?

Did you read the part you quoted?

I didn't say we don't need more ideas; I said we don't need terms in addition to the ones we already have for describing the same idea.

 

[Bronzeage]

But that can't be right because, "for those ideas we already have terminology and need no more."

How is it, in the world of political and social debate, we suddenly have enough ideas?

Did you read the part you quoted?

I didn't say we don't need more ideas; I said we don't need terms in addition to the ones we already have for describing the same idea.

To say we don't need new terms is to say we don't need new ideas. Do you have some way of expressing a new idea, without new terms?

Political correctness remains what it has always been. It's a straw argument which is molded to meet the immediate needs of the discussion.

 

[zorq]

"Politically correct" is basically the assumption that the words make the problem rather than simply reflect the problem.

If PC only "reflects" problems, what are some examples of the problems that it is reflecting?

In my understanding/definition of "political correctness," (which I described in a post above) where it is an educational drive for more effective communication, words definitely do cause problems.

It is obvious that if we are accidentally communicating hatred or disenfranchisement with unintentionally emotive and distracting words, our intended message will not arrive intact and we will be less persuasive.

Words cause communication problems. Communication problems often cause real world problems that can sometimes escalate to violence. That's a big problem. Effective communication that chooses better words can help prevent problems.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Is the word "nigger" as big a deal in Sewden as it is in the US?

I don't think anybody can answer that. Anybody on this forum who has lived both in Sweden and USA?

I do remember how it was a completely neutral term in the 70'ies and early 80'ies. It became associated with "nigger" through cable TV and American shows becoming available, late 80'ies.

I remember as a twelve year old in '88 how there was some debate in our school about changing the name of a common ball game. The game was called "Nigger". Old game. I had three black kids in my class. Which was rare BTW. Blacks were uncommon in Sweden back then. Anyway the name of the game was changed and the debate ended when the black kids threatened to beat anybody up who used the new name. And that was the end of it. They had rightly identified the problem. In Sweden we had no derogatory words exclusive for blacks. This was trying to create one else artificially. If our school hadn't agreed to change the name the word would have been robbed of some of its power. Which is good. In Sweden political correctness made "neger" a derogatory word. Racists never managed to.

Fun thing. At the homeless shelter I volunteer there's a old guy who works. He refuses to call the black guys as a group anything but "neger". He just does this out of habit. Not racism.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Well, then your prior comments show ignorance and/or inability to logically apply these facts.

No, they show that I disagree with you about the interpretation of historical events and the nature of the rhetoric being used in the past compared to now.

Imagine that! Somebody can know the same facts you do and still disagree with you! That's fucking MIND BOGGLING isn't it?

If by "abuse" you mean a valid criticism of destructive left-wing authoritarianism

No, I mean "term of abuse" in the sense that it was originally used as a pejorative in an attempt to deride concepts that conservatives disagreed with.

There's that dreadful D-word again: people disagreeing with each other, and coming up with all kinds of abusive and derogatory language to describe people who disagree with them. Who ARE all of these complete assholes who have the audacity to continually disagree with the almighty ronburgundy?

Just like right-wing authoritarian bullies cry about "abuse" against Christians, it is common for bullies on the left to cry about "abuse" when they are accurately called out as well.

That's "common?" This is literally the first time I have ever seen the word "abuse" used in that context.

To be clear: YOU are the only person who I have ever seen using it that way, which is probably because you are (rather hilariously) using it incorrectly.

 

[whichphilosophy]

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.

Was the intent to be racist or to marginalize anyone in a derogatory manner.?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

You're talking about overdoing (1). I'm pretty sure DrZoidberg and Linde were talking about (2).

In that particular case, I don't really disagree. I do think it is, as you put it, an unusual effort to show racial sensitivity above and beyond what is actually called for (or, really, makes any rational sense in context), and I think they're a similar phenomenon: people taking a common-sense thing (don't be an asshole) and running with it to ridiculous extremes ("You're not allowed to use that offensive terminology!")

ronburgundy is no more a dogmatic rightwinger than you are a dogmatic leftist.

I know that, I was being sarcastic

 

[AthenaAwakened]

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?

"Politically correct" is basically the assumption that the words make the problem rather than simply reflect the problem.

And again you can't answer the questions before you. the one sentence you provide, there is no exposition, no examples given. FAIL

 

[DrZoidberg]

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.

Was the intent to be racist or to marginalize anyone in a derogatory manner.?

The guy is black himself, and an outspoken and active campaigner against racism. What do you think? His use of the word is precisely because he has been the target of racism. He's owning the slur and using it as a symbol of pride. If I'm to speculate, the point is to take power away from the slur. Just like the gays did with words like "gay".

 

[JonA]

Did you read the part you quoted?

I didn't say we don't need more ideas; I said we don't need terms in addition to the ones we already have for describing the same idea.

To say we don't need new terms is to say we don't need new ideas. Do you have some way of expressing a new idea, without new terms?

Apparently being stupid is your specialty

To say we don't need new terms for ideas already properly described is to say we don't need new terms for ideas already properly described.

I'm not saying whatever it is you think I'm saying and I can't even understand how you could so horribly misread what I've so simply written now about thrice.

Political correctness is (or at least was) a novel term to express a novel idea. It is not and was not a term merely synonymous with "nice" or "respect", especially since for those ideas we need no more terminology than we already have.

Political correctness remains what it has always been. It's a straw argument which is molded to meet the immediate needs of the discussion.

I've spotted two groups of people in
this thread: those that have done the research, understand the history of the term and the relevance of that history to the term's modern usage; and those that are just making shit up as it suits them.

This statement makes clear to which group you belong. That said, I've little time for unenlightened discussions with intellectually lazy nincompoops who can't even be bothered to read Wikipedia much less anything more substantive.

G' day!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"Politically correct" is basically the assumption that the words make the problem rather than simply reflect the problem.

If PC only "reflects" problems, what are some examples of the problems that it is reflecting?

In my understanding/definition of "political correctness," (which I described in a post above) where it is an educational drive for more effective communication, words definitely do cause problems.

Except in the case of ethnic slurs, no. Consider, for example, "retarded". Giving them another name will simply cause that other name to acquire the same connotations, their brains won't work any better. The word isn't the problem.

 

[JonA]

... words definitely do cause problems.

Except in the case of ethnic slurs, no.

What do you mean by "ethnic slurs" and what's so exceptional about them?