It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

How to abolish political correctness?

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 05:49 PM

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

It refers to peoples as well, not just rugs and vases.


Referring to people as Oriental is not derogatory and is factually applicable.

Of course you would speak for all Asians. The term is imperialist and patronizing to them. Good on you for just being up front about your feelings.

No doubt you enjoy other 'factual' derogatory terms for human beings, too.

That's the only thing you've got right in this whole 2 day sequence, yes it is seen as derogatory.
Never knew that. So sue me.

Awesome. Because it was the one and only point I tried to make. It's not my fault it took two days.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 05:52 PM
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Say Happy Holidays, but don't penalize the person who says Merry Christmas. Often it is one or the other, not a choice.

Terrorist is fine in its context. I thought you were the one who explained that Wahhabi was a form of radical Islam? However, there are many different kinds of terrorists. The IRA were terrorists for example. ELF are terrorists. So sometimes, someone needs to be a little more precise in the language than simply terrorist.

I don't care if they say Black Lives Matter. Where I draw the line is when they force people to apologize for having said All Lives Matter rather than Black Lives Matter, and I do not care the tactics of their organization. But they can say Black Lives Matter all they want.

I am free to disagree with people who blame conservatives and Christians the same way you are disagreeing in your post I am responding to. This is not PC. It is, in fact, debate, something that society in general has lost track of how to carry on these days.

Also, gun control is not a PC issue as it is not dotted with euphemistic terms. The closest would be lumping suicides, accidents, and violent crimes under a catch all term created by the media called "gun violence" which somehow implies a gun got up under its own power and volition and fired of its own will.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 06:00 PM

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Gryphon66

The answer is: PC is merely a vapid generalist term used to refer to anything that a given speaker (often conservative) doesn't approve of ... i.e. referring to "PC" is actually very PC (Conservative version.)

No one has been punished by government for being "PC."

What other people do, how they react, is as much an expression of the general "freedom of speech" (not Constitutional) as when so many whine about PC-ness.

It's The Same Thing.

Yep. They complain about people being pressured with "PC" terms, then turn around and complain when people say:

1. "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"

2. "Terrorist" or "Wahabbi Extremist" instead of "Radical Islam"

3. "Black Lives Matter" instead of "All Lives Matter"

4. Anything that blames conservatives, Christian conservatives, or even mentions "gun control".

You are sooooo totally correct right here.
That's called "conservative correctness".

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 06:01 PM
a reply to: ketsuko

I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm just pointing out that many of the same people who complain about the constant "PC" have their own version of "PC". So they complain about the complainers, who turn around and complain about their complaining, which elicits more complaints.

Example: If someone says "Conservatives suck", that will provoke a bunch of complaints because it isn't PC to conservatives. Then those same conservatives will complain that others are too sensitive to the words used against them.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 06:12 PM
a reply to: MrsNonSpecific

I love your Bedlington profile. I own a two year old male Bedlington.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 06:21 PM
Some are ruled by emotions and there can be no critical thinking when the emotions are predominant. This is ego. The ego must be subdued. It is not in charge, being is.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 06:22 PM

I'll just drop this here.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 06:29 PM
a reply to: ketsuko

Good Post, there's a lot of truth to what's being said in it. Everything is screwed up nowadays, it's all going to crap.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 06:33 PM
The whole thing confuses me.

Guess it all just boils down to letting people be who they are.

If they're rude or silly, you have choices...ignore them or give it back to them or laugh and then just let it go.

If you're rude, they can do the same...they have choices...ignore them or give it back to them or laugh and (this is key) then just let it go.

Confrontations are going to happen, but people all just need to work on letting it go once it's done.

And overall, if you like people who are rude all the time or who , hang out with them.. If you don't, don't. Eventually it'll all sort itself out.
edit on 12/15/2015 by ~Lucidity because: phone typing sucks here

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 06:45 PM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Exactly. People are more aware of what constitutes intolerance and they are willing to speak up about it. That's really all there is to it.

The root of the problem isn't what people say but the fact that anyone feels they must take some form of retaliation against the person for what is said.

It's been said a thousand times but freedom of speech comes with the freedom to be offended.
It ends there unless you have a retort.
But you don't run to the School Principal or the media and demand so-and-so is fired for calling someone "X"
That's more akin to living in East Germany under communism when they encouraged you turn in your neighbor.
If they had thoughts critical of the regime of course.

I for one will not alter my language one iota to suit anyone.
I cling to my first amendment even harder than my 2nd.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 07:02 PM

I think George Carlin describes the absurdity of political correctness superbly in this video. A favourite part is talking about "slow people" as minimally exceptional. You could't make it up, oh they do hahaha. It's only 8 minutes long give it a watch well a listen.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 07:43 PM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm talking about PC. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

In my first post, I used the term "retardo" in the second post, I used the term "illegal alien".

Both terms have been made taboo by the PC brigade for obvious reasons.

Controlling the way people use their free expression.

And? I wrote this thread to ask a specific question. You haven't answered it yet, instead choosing to try to offend me by saying politically incorrect things. That is called trolling hun.

See, this is exactly why its pointless to discuss ANYTHING with you.

This whole OP is just a loaded question.

See ya round Tex.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 07:44 PM
A Canadian blogger I follow talks about the paradox of free speech.

"There is no underlying logic to be found if we dig deeper and deeper into the notion of free speech that will bound our reasoning and discourse to ethical norms. Free speech doesn’t demand rationality and reasonableness. It allows cheap rhetoric and sophistry."

In relation to the paradox.

"Ethics is the source of the dilemma, not the way out."

"The challenge of free speech is not to make discourse answerable to ethics, but to be able to live with a radical relativism of ideas."

"Not all beliefs can happily coexist. There is no harmony to be found. The blessing and curse of the notion of free speech is that the conflict between competing ideas and ethics is inevitable.

There is simply no inner peace, no resolution, to be found in trying to concretize the norms of free speech. The human desire to have well defined ethical principles to guide our lives is common enough, ubiquitous even. But if it is inner peace that you seek, you need to accept the imminent conflict. Embrace the paradox."/

The blogger is a PHD Science candidate and I think he talks from an academic perspective. I am not sure where hate speech would fit into all this or even if it fits in at all.


posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 07:48 PM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: ketsuko
In order to stop it, we need to stop mass shaming everyone refuses to use the media approved terminology.

How do we do that then? Wishful thinking?

PS: I snipped the parts of your post I didn't care about and found irrelevant to what I'm asking. I mean #, do you guys HONESTLY think I don't know what political correctness is? Why the need to try to educate me on what you think it is?.

Well, probably because you're dismissive when it doesn't fit your narrative, and you seem to cherry pick data points more often than not.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 07:55 PM

originally posted by: DAZ21
Krazyshot, you are the epitome of what's wrong with PC culture.

You are shouting people down telling them that the message they have isn't right while your definition of PC is the one and only...


Oh my bad, that might be offensive. I mean preach! err wait...

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 08:09 PM
Having been at war with P.C. in it's expressions that lack knowledge and history, I can be brutal as it amuses me to hit back at the fact they are faux offended in the first place.
I couldn't care less why, unless they are trully individually injured psychologically ,which isn't what I want for the debate.
Parrotting slogans repetitively used by left manipulations,without any form of vetting or intellectual confirmation,usually attacking a given website as a bias source or generalizing one's background so it can be pidgeon holed into some demographic that is easily stereotypically defined is a necessity.
We state facts based our expertise which are in fields NOT appreciated by the mass fans of Saul Alinsky ,one can see them exhalting Che Guevarra on T '#s and other rampant ostridge like behavior.
Their seems to be some kind of NEED to project their ideas about yours even about the ones YOU express even though they have NO idea professionally on the subject one has worked at for years.
can't WAIT until the main nut is booted out,unfortunately the rest aren't much better.
edit on 15-12-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 08:37 PM
a reply to: cavtrooper7

I agree. I don't care much about the actual slogan, its the obvious need some people have to assert their opinion of it. It's almost as if they feel obligated to do it. I call it the Spot the Bigot game. For some inadequately explained reason some people find it necessary to wave an accusing finger in someone's face shouting, "I found one! I found one!" In reality, all they need to do is find a reflective surface and the game is over.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 08:50 PM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

We just need to teach children words do not hurt, that no one has ever been injured by a word in the history of the universe, that violence involves actual violence and not talking, and that political correctness is a superstition insofar as it conflates speaking and writing with physical violence.

It's a simple matter of early childhood education, but unfortunately many adults are already a lost cause.
edit on 15-12-2015 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 09:40 PM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: DAZ21
a reply to: Krazysh0t

That's fine as long as they can back up their PC accusation with proof that such freedom of speech was in fact racist.

Wait so someone spouting likely bigoted rhetoric doesn't have to back themselves up with evidence, but someone calling him a bigot needs to prove the person is a bigot? How does that work?

Which by the way is the problem with PC culture. Because they shout racist because it's something that they don't want to hear not necessarily because it was a racist statement that was made.


The thing is, I agree with them here.

As someone who has worked in social justice, and works to this day with NGOs and political campaigns around disadvantaged communities, and who works around and is friends with countless social justice people, I've seen first hand how some people can and will abuse the concepts of social justice to manipulate others, or simply project on to others.

There most definitely ARE situations where people call racism, when in fact the situation or original action is not racist. I disagree with you that someone can claim "racism" or bigotry without demonstrable evidence. The accusation of racism can destroy careers and reputations. Without real evidence, that is in fact slander or libel, or defamation of character. All of which can be prosecuted either in a court of law or civil court.

A great example is recently a women in my office begin to see me as a threat as I was doing quite well. She began lashing out at me and harassing me. This was witnessed by others. I finally called her out on it. Given we work in a very liberal, social justicey group within NYC, she claimed that I was being "patriarchal" and that I was calling her out because she is a woman, so on and so forth.

Because her bad behavior was witnessed by others (thankfully), most of us knew that she was just behaving poorly, that in fact it wasn't due my "sexism" or "bigotry."

However, one of my uber social justice friends tried to lend it credence, because in our current "pc" or social justice climate, the moment someone offers some trigger word such as racism or sexism, all of a sudden that can be a valid superimposition or explanation, even if it is completely false.

It is these kinds of excesses that are making people disenchanted with the PC or social justice world, NOT the original or ostensible goals of social justice.

posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 10:02 PM

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm talking about PC. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

In my first post, I used the term "retardo" in the second post, I used the term "illegal alien".

Both terms have been made taboo by the PC brigade for obvious reasons.

Controlling the way people use their free expression.

Ugh, I was going to tailor my response directly to the OP, but you're making the point too easy! Nobody is controlling your free expression, or anybody else's!

If a CNN anchor says, "undocumented workers", does that somehow physically prevent you from saying "illegal immigrants?" Are you fined? Jailed? Executed? No. Not once has anything of the sort happened.

If you're the only guy around who uses racial slurs and one day find the entire town pointing and laughing at you for being the only dip# still doing so, has your freedom of speech been abridged? Absolutely not. You are still free to make a mockery of yourself if you so desire.

I think the issue these butthurt crybabies have with "PC" is that they're being exposed and facing ridicule now that their way of thinking has been relegated to the extreme minority. They whine, whimper and complain as if their right to their own way of thinking/talking has been taken away.

It has not. The only thing which has changed its that most people no longer think or speak like they do, and so their mechanism of validation no longer exists. Without it, they live in their fantasy victim-mindset world where they're not allowed to say what they want. They're simply just not getting the support they once had and so they wish to take away others' right to free speech - something which has NEVER been done to them.

The "PC Crowd" is a term that simply means this: "The majority of people don't feel the way I do, and it makes me feel uncomfortable." As a defense, they pretend they're no longer allowed to say things which they ARE allowed to say.

new topics

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in