It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Give me some examples of Political Correctness that you disagree with

page: 6
16
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

That is the problem when a thread is created for the sole intent of stirring up arguments, instead of actually for the stated purpose...kinda like this one. Too many people afraid to stick their hand in the jar...afraid it might get bitten by something.




posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

I read somewhere today, I don't remember where, maybe here, lol, that many Europeans think we are all like the people on Jerry Springer.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

OK. So aren't you also anti-bullying?

Please explain to me the difference between aggressive shaming and bullying.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: highfromphoenix

originally posted by: kruphix

originally posted by: highfromphoenix
a reply to: DrumStickNinja

Cool.

I have a problem with people expecting others to be pc.

If a statement offends you then say something.

Just because you are anal you can't expect every person to agree with your nonsense.


And at the same time, you can't expect every person to be ok with you using terms that have been deemed by society as negative.

Go ahead, use your non-PC terms...call people retards...just don't complain when you either lose your job over it, lose friends over it, or are confronted about it.

Here is a little test to see if you are in the wrong...if you know you are going to get backlash for using a certain term and you place the blame on people being too sensitive....you are in the wrong.


Perhaps I would be "wrong".

Who are you to dictate what I am allowed to say?

When did this stop being a free country?


Being wrong and being free are not mutually exclusive.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
I have two that bug me, and I'm not even a Republican,

1. If you're white you're not allowed to say anything positive about your heritage or celebrate it in any way.

2. You're not allowed to dislike immigration for any reason, in spite of all the problems it causes.


What about St Patrick's Day? And Oktoberfest in America? Or the 2015 American Polish Festival? I even found a "European American Heritage Festival" in Pulaski, TN last year (so much I can say about Pulaski but I'll leave that alone). So where'd you get the idea that "If you're white you're not allowed to say anything positive about your heritage or celebrate it in any way"?

Also, I hear conservatives speak out against immigration all the time. Donald Trump & Ted Cruz have done so recently. So who's stopping you from doing these? Nobody's banning either of these things. It just sounds like you're complaining because everyone doesn't agree with you 100%. Because nobody's stopping you from doing either of these things.
edit on 10-7-2015 by enlightenedservant because: lol i had typed "thesez" instead of "these" lol what does that even mean? i blame romney



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

OH the press, the press, they pick up a story and beat it into the ground until they have the whole country at one anothers throats.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: ketsuko
Saying something like "I support traditional marriage" is now considered hateful.


That's because saying you support "traditional marriage" is just a politically correct way of saying that you don't think gays should have the right to marry.

After all, who DOESN'T support traditional marriage?


Likely anyone who thinks that something that has been traditionally understood to be between male/female for thousands of years across pretty much every society needs to suddenly be redefined. But I digress.

I think the term you are looking for is not politically correct. It is dog whistle. You are saying that saying traditional marriage is really a dog whistle for homophobic bigot.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   
I can't think of any of them that actually annoy me. I might mix them up when I want.

But frankly, I have always hated the terms "black" and "white".

Although considered white, I am not white. A sheet of paper is white. I'm kind of a pinkish beige. My friend Vanessa is considered black, but she's not black. The leather seats in her car are black. She is kind of a caramel, and sometimes in the light she has little flashes of a peachy color. It's a misnomer which I find annoying.

Otherwise the whole Christmas thing is ridiculous. It is in fact a religious holiday. If you are not religious please feel free to ignore it the way I ignore Ramadan, or whatever other holidays that do not apply to my personal life. And Halloween is now "fall festival". that's silly too.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Oh, of course, NO ONE BANS you from doing it, but ... nice little life you have there ... hurr, hurr, hurr ... sure would be a shame if you say something we don't like ...



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: ketsuko
Saying something like "I support traditional marriage" is now considered hateful.


That's because saying you support "traditional marriage" is just a politically correct way of saying that you don't think gays should have the right to marry.

After all, who DOESN'T support traditional marriage?


Likely anyone who thinks that something that has been traditionally understood to be between male/female for thousands of years across pretty much every society needs to suddenly be redefined. But I digress.


But what you just said isn't true. It HASN'T been that way across every society. There have been gay marriages in the past that were part of traditional marriage, and there have been polygamist marriages in the past that were part of traditional marriage. This is true across all societies, INCLUDING Christianity (yes gay marriage was a thing during early Christianity).


I think the term you are looking for is not politically correct. It is dog whistle. You are saying that saying traditional marriage is really a dog whistle for homophobic bigot.


No I think she pretty much nailed it. "Traditional marriage" is just a cover phrase to disguise someone saying they don't want gays to get married. The last time it was used, it was a cover to disguise someone from saying they didn't want black people from marrying white people.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko


There's a difference between PC and just wanting to be hateful and bigoted.
Wanting to be homophobic and fearmonger about certain things is not anything to do with PC.... it's about being civil and having some respect.

Also... who isn't Anti-Bullying??

You talk like a child.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Oh, of course, NO ONE BANS you from doing it, but ... nice little life you have there ... hurr, hurr, hurr ... sure would be a shame if you say something we don't like ...



But that is the rhetoric constantly used, "WAAAAH! The PC crowd are trying to ban such and such word! WAAAAH!" That rhetoric is literally in every thread that is posted on PC. Police your own rhetoric before applying the sarcasm to the other side of the debate.
edit on 10-7-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: kruphix

So anytime one uses a term somebody else doesn't like, you're automatically wrong and they're right?

Huh.


Nope...not "somebody"...but society.

Now, being against society is not always a bad thing...but in the cases we have been discussing...like wanting to call someone a retard...I think I can safely say that person is wrong.


Weird. I haven't seen any discussion of the multiple examples I cited.

So I guess we're only looking to discuss the blatantly ignorant names.

Got it. I have no interest in discussing somebody whining about not being able to use the n word because of PC so I guess I no longer have anything to discuss on the subject.

Yay me!



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
darn good question

undocumented workers instead of illegal immigrants, comes to mind

I'll try to think of another


Or or the federal term "Illegal Aliens". The state of California is trying to get rid of the term "alien". Gov. Brown actually has a bill to sign on his desk, specifically for that word.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

I like cookies. Sign me up



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen
Heh, yep, a swirling whirlpool of butthurts.


What offends me today?
edit on 10-7-2015 by Lysergic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
a reply to: tigertatzen

I read somewhere today, I don't remember where, maybe here, lol, that many Europeans think we are all like the people on Jerry Springer.



Europeans have their own issues. It's not all Kumbayaa over there.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko



1. Eich and Mozilla (not Chik-fil-a)

A company acted in it what it determined to be its best business interests? Yeah, sometimes those Boards can be absolute jerks.

Here's what a prominent gay blogger had to say about it:



On the other side, the sharpest critic of Eich’s ouster is Andrew Sullivan, the popular writer of the Daily Dish blog who is openly gay and an early supporter of gay marriage. “The whole episode disgusts me – as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society,” he wrote. “If this is the gay rights movement today – hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else – then count me out.”


But perhaps there was an actually business decision on the part of the Board made here?



A piece in today’s Wall Street Journal points out another practical reason that Eich’s private views could have presented a problem for Mozilla: the company is hoping to renew a major contract with Google GOOG +2.29%, a company that strongly supports gay rights. The Journal talked to a Mozilla insider who said the deal might have been put in jeopardy by Eich’s leadership.


Yeah, I know. Businesses have to make some tough decisions sometimes. I don't agree with this one, but then I don't own any stock in Mozilla

Forbes Magazine


2. Rahm did say that. He's an explosive guy. Did he actually keep Chik-fil-a out of Chicago then?

3. Barilla "came under fire" ... you mean the public exercised their rights of speech and spoke their minds?

That's three occasions. So what your'e saying is that your complaint is an extremely limited phenomenon, nationwide?

Good!




posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Oh, of course, NO ONE BANS you from doing it, but ... nice little life you have there ... hurr, hurr, hurr ... sure would be a shame if you say something we don't like ...


And then what happens? hurr hurr hurr. Absolutely nothing. hurr hurr hurr... And that's the point. Complaining because you don't get 100% agreement isn't the same as someone stopping you from doing something.

He/she was saying white people supposedly can't be proud of their heritage even though there are festivals all over America that celebrate different heritages of white cultures. So who's stopping those? And he/she said white people couldn't talk about immigration anymore even though that's a flat out lie too. The only thing that's changed is other demographics are finally being treated equally.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




He isn't dictating anything to you. He is just giving you a statement of reality. You can't change popular opinion. If popular opinion disagrees with your using a word, then that is something YOU alone have to deal with when you use it. You can either not use it or use it defiantly. But at no point are you not ALLOWED to use that word. No one will arrest you for it or fine you for it.


Actually, that is not quite accurate...people can be arrested for using defamatory words. It is a form of harassment, under the law. If calling someone a "retard" can be proven to have caused quantifiable harm to the person it was directed at, it can be prosecuted as a criminal act. If it is a racial slur, it can technically be prosecuted as a hate crime.




top topics



 
16
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join