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.

 

"Political Correctness" = Mind Control

page: 1
20
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Political Correctness" breeds a culture in which anyone can be "offended" by anything. The fact that so many are so easily offended nowdays is a sign that large parts of our society are mentally impaired. Since it is not "politically correct" to do so, I cant call them what they are: Sissies, Wimps, Wusses.

I once had a girlfriend who came home crying at the slightest "offense" from her boss. If her boss criticized her in any way, she would be "offended" and talking about filing a lawsuit on account of "workplace bullying" or "harrassment". I knew that if she would do that and win, she would feel that her cry-baby mentality is succesful and she'd use "being a victim" again somewhere in order to "get her way". So rather than confirming her stance, I confirmed her bosses opinion. And I did so several times. At first she got furious but eventually she toughened up and "owned" the trait her boss was criticizing her for. In other words, she no longer minded being criticized...and as a consequence, her bosses critical comments lessened over time and finally dissappeared entirely.

I was brought up to treat people with respect and kindness. This is not something that can be enforced under the banner of "political correctness". It happens as a natural consequence of ones upbringing or of ones maturity. Trying to "enforce" a certain style of speech most often leads to the exact opposite.

Also, its not the words themselves that are "offensive", but the intent behind the word.

Im not talking about degratory words such as "retard", the n-word or sexist terms, as this are mostly spoken with ill intent. Im talking about all the rest of the stuff we are no longer "allowed to say" because "someone could be offended". As an example, here's the "politically correct" version of Little Red Riding Hood
...



There once was a young person named Little Red Riding Hood who lived on the edge of a large forest full of endangered owls and rare plants that would probably provide a cure for cancer if only someone took the time to study them.
Red Riding Hood lived with a nurture giver whom she sometimes referred to as "mother", although she didn't mean to imply by this term that she would have thought less of the person if a close biological link did not in fact exist.

Nor did she intend to denigrate the equal value of nontraditional households, although she was sorry if this was the impression conveyed.

One day her mother asked her to take a basket of organically grown fruit and mineral water to her grandmother's house.

"But mother, won't this be stealing work from the unionized people who have struggled for years to earn the right to carry all packages between various people in the woods?"

Red Riding Hood's mother assured her that she had called the union boss and gotten a special compassionate mission exemption form.

"But mother, aren't you oppressing me by ordering me to do this?"

Red Riding Hood's mother pointed out that it was impossible for womyn to oppress each other, since all womyn were equally oppressed until all womyn were free.

"But mother, then shouldn't you have my brother carry the basket, since he's an oppressor, and should learn what it's like to be oppressed?"

And Red Riding Hood's mother explained that her brother was attending a special rally for animal rights, and besides, this wasn't stereotypical womyn's work, but an empowering deed that would help engender a feeling of community.

"But won't I be oppressing Grandma, by implying that she's sick and hence unable to independently further her own selfhood?"

But Red Riding Hood's mother explained that her grandmother wasn't actually sick or incapacitated or mentally handicapped in any way, although that was not to imply that any of these conditions were inferior to what some people called "health".

Thus Red Riding Hood felt that she could get behind the idea of delivering the basket to her grandmother, and so she set off.

Many people believed that the forest was a foreboding and dangerous place, but Red Riding Hood knew that this was an irrational fear based on cultural paradigms instilled by a patriarchal society that regarded the natural world as an exploitable resource, and hence believed that natural predators were in fact intolerable competitors.

Other people avoided the woods for fear of thieves and deviants, but Red Riding Hood felt that in a truly classless society all marginalized peoples would be able to "come out" of the woods and be accepted as valid lifestyle role models.

On her way to Grandma's house, Red Riding Hood passed a woodchopper, and wandered off the path, in order to examine some flowers.

She was startled to find herself standing before a Wolf, who asked her what was in her basket.

Red Riding Hood's teacher had warned her never to talk to strangers, but she was confident in taking control of her own budding sexuality, and chose to dialogue with the Wolf.

She replied, "I am taking my Grandmother some healthful snacks in a gesture of solidarity."

The Wolf said, "You know, my dear, it isn't safe for a little girl to walk through these woods alone."

Red Riding Hood said, "I find your sexist remark offensive in the extreme, but I will ignore it because of your traditional status as an outcast from society, the stress of which has caused you to develop an alternative and yet entirely valid worldview. Now, if you'll excuse me, I would prefer to be on my way."

Red Riding Hood returned to the main path, and proceeded towards her Grandmother's house.

But because his status outside society had freed him from slavish adherence to linear, Western-style thought, the Wolf knew of a quicker route to Grandma's house.

He burst into the house and ate Grandma, a course of action affirmative of his nature as a predator.

Then, unhampered by rigid, traditionalist gender role notions, he put on Grandma's nightclothes, crawled under the bedclothes, and awaited developments.

Red Riding Hood entered the cottage and said,

"Grandma, I have brought you some cruelty free snacks to salute you in your role of wise and nurturing matriarch."

The Wolf said softly "Come closer, child, so that I might see you."

Red Riding Hood said, "Goddess! Grandma, what big eyes you have!"

"You forget that I am optically challenged."

"And Grandma, what an enormous, what a fine nose you have."

"Naturally, I could have had it fixed to help my acting career, but I didn't give in to such societal pressures, my child."

"And Grandma, what very big, sharp teeth you have!"

The Wolf could not take any more of these specist slurs, and, in a reaction appropriate for his accustomed milieu, he leaped out of bed, grabbed Little Red Riding Hood, and opened his jaws so wide that she could see her poor Grandmother cowering in his belly.

"Aren't you forgetting something?" Red Riding Hood bravely shouted. "You must request my permission before proceeding to a new level of intimacy!"

The Wolf was so startled by this statement that he loosened his grasp on her.

At the same time, the woodchopper burst into the cottage, brandishing an ax.

"Hands off!" cried the woodchopper.

"And what do you think you're doing?" cried Little Red Riding Hood. "If I let you help me now, I would be expressing a lack of confidence in my own abilities, which would lead to poor self esteem and lower achievement scores on college entrance exams."

"Last chance, sister! Get your hands off that endangered species! This is an FBI sting!" screamed the woodchopper, and when Little Red Riding Hood nonetheless made a sudden motion, he sliced off her head.

"Thank goodness you got here in time," said the Wolf. "The brat and her grandmother lured me in here. I thought I was a goner."

"No, I think I'm the real victim, here," said the woodchopper. "I've been dealing with my anger ever since I saw her picking those protected flowers earlier. And now I'm going to have such a trauma. Do you have any aspirin?"

"Sure," said the Wolf.

"Thanks."

"I feel your pain," said the Wolf, and he patted the woodchopper on his firm, well padded back, gave a little belch, and said "Do you have any Maalox?"


Source

Thoughts?


[edit on 18-8-2009 by Skyfloating]




posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Thoughts? Other than hilarious, it is sickening.

You were 100% correct in your statement about upbringing with respect for other creatures and common courtesy. There is no need for political correctness other than to segregate and divide society.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
S & F for you OP...I've been saying this for years and it falls on deaf ears even on ATS. I believe the mark of the beast is the PC and Status Quo. Once you accept it you will lose your soul.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:48 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Because they are getting slick with bigotry these days. Your girlfriend may not have been able to correctly articulate why she was upset. Only that her boss is picking on her. She knew something was wrong, but couldn't describe how. And was left with a feeling of unease.

a company may not be able to openly discriminate against say, women or latins. But they will put restrictions on that keep people of smaller stature out. Say, you have to be able to lift a 100 pounds, over your head. So unless you are a pretty tough guy, that is really hard to do. Technically, a company has to accomodate people, and there is technology these days that help people lift heavy stuff, so they use it as a way to keep certain groups out.

Or, you may not be able to say, I can't hire minorities, but that doesnt' stop them from hiring them, and then three months later firing or laying them off.

Is her boss particulary tough with only females? Young women? Older women?

For example, in my job my boss only took suggestions seriously from guys. So If I wanted to get an idea across, I had to get a male coworker to pitch it. And hence that person would get credit.

There is a phenomenon where people are too senstive. But it is a grey area to define overly sensitive and someone actually giving you a hard time.

People who say that people are being oversensitive with the PC stuff usualy has never been in a position where you have been discriminated against.

[edit on 18-8-2009 by nixie_nox]



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
S & F for you OP...I've been saying this for years and it falls on deaf ears even on ATS. I believe the mark of the beast is the PC and Status Quo. Once you accept it you will lose your soul.


I disagree. With you and the OP. Where the hell did this term "political correctness" come from? Another deception from the PTB to divide us using the Constitution to do so? 1st Amendment. Hell, that gives us the freedom to be assholes? Something wrong there.

What's wrong with civility? NOTHING!!!! "Oh, but that infringes on my constitutional rights". Big whoop. There's bigger fish out there to fry than what one can say. What about what the MIC is doing to the country? That's not talked about because we are talking about issues that don't matter to them and they are actually using it to cloud our eyes.

Your soul is only lost if you concentrate on non-issues, works for THEM. WAKE UP!!!



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 08:36 PM
link   
This thread reminded me of a job i had a few years ago.
My manager was a women whos duties included packing things away into the store room whenever a new truckload would come in, she was of a small stature and could not physically lift most of the boxes.
As i was the only person on with her when the load would come in,(early in the morning) i would pack it all away, and by doing so i would be behind my own duties by an hour or two, which would make the rest of the day a mad rush.

Realy if you cant physically do whats expected in your role you should not be in that role.

Also reminds me of everytime i order a pizza they have an asian with a very thick accent answering the phones, surely logic dictates that in an english speaking country it might be a good idea to have an english speaking person answer the phone.

To finish my little on topic/off topic rant i think political correctness is borne out of the desire for everyone to be equal to everyone else.
A nice thought but unfortunately everyone is not equal to everyone else, some people can do what others cant, its just a fact of life.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Many of us agree that the PC thing has gone to far. It has it's place, of course, as you mentioned above, some words are just too offensive for anyone to hear. (By-the-by I'm glad to see you included the word "retard" in your list of offensive words. I see it all over ATS, and I cringe everytime I do).

But in the bigger picture, we are doing ourselves in by honoring persons who are dangerous, or disrespectful to our country, and tolerating their disrespect because we are too PC to speak up, just because they are immigants from the middle east, or whereever. It's a dangerous little game we are playing. Same thing in the UK and Australia. They are headed for what looks like almost certain disaster because of politeness.

For my personal little story: I once worked in very large office in a state where there is a HUGE football rival between two universities. On casual day, many people wore tee's with the logo of the larger university on the front. The Director apparently recieved many complaints that these tee shirts had "offended" many in the office who supported the other team.

Later that week, there was a memo. Tee shirts worn on casual day must not contain "a message". Good lord. World gone mad.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 08:59 PM
link   
The last time I had a real job it was at a medium sized company that was owned by a black man who employed about 100 people including a staff of 18 different managers which I was one of.

On the side he championed civil rights and was friends with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton as in I can't talk now Jesse or Al is on the phone friends.

He was also an ordained Minister, had a regular Radio Show where he gave inspirational sermons, and was a Rhodes Scholar.

He was twice named Miami's Black Business Man of the Year during the period I worked for him.

I would sometimes tease him though that out of his 18 managers not one of them was black.

He would respond I hire people on merrit and not color, and it was very true he hired people on merrit and not color, but if you were a corporation that was owned by a white man and you didn't have any black managers he would be one of the people leading the pickets!

What a crazy world! Thank heavens I took to the Outback Steak House moto from a tender age "No rules, just right".



[edit on 18/8/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Political correctness influences people weak minded to adhere to the self-censorship thing. It is more or less a psychological tool for diminishing dissent.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


Hm. You know, I am not sure that is how it started out? But it is damn sure what it has become.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 




The fact that so many are so easily offended nowdays is a sign that large parts of our society are mentally impaired.


Mentally impaired? No. Some people are just born with or develop higher moral preference to Harm/Care and Fairness/Reciprocity (liberals, typically, going by psychologist Johnathan Haydth's scale). After more or less winning some vital and needed moral battles in American culture (Civil Rights, Women's Rights, etc), a radically liberal counter-culture revolution swept across America taking these ideals to the extreme and have been an active component in society ever since.

Unfortunately, some people use injustice or offense as a social leverage to gain personal validation and power - effectively cheapening the inherent danger of remission into racist and sexist based attitudes as a counter to the "PR BS". Certainly, I think, we've done our children no real favor by telling them that each and everybody is a winner in their own special way, that there are no losers and pleading with parents to be friends who delegate and ask for equal "responsibility" to their kids to do the right thing.

No.

Society hasn't, and won't collapse when the new batch of "ignorant worthless punks" get released into the real world. You're just doing them no favors by throwing them from the baby pen at into the lions den when they turn 18. Like all generations, they'll sink or swim on their own.

... or they'll be like the fat kid in the shallow end of the pool with waterwings on. Only the pool is your basement, and the waterwings is World of Warcraft. And the water is slowly turnin yellow. Though to be fair, there's also a reason why Japan has issues with introverts who won't leave home, with a higher than average teen/tween suicide rate.

Real life has winners and losers, and your kid probably isn't the former. Deal with it. Teach them how to deal with it.

Just my views though. The PR melee mouthed star child special children chiders, literally, make me ill at times. Listening to them talk is like watching a solo act of two-girls-1-cup. Worst thing to come out of the hippy movement since brown acid.

Post Note: Your child rearing books based on uncritical examinations of philosophies we know are not true to reality. They are woefully incomplete in their analysis of development and behavioral psychologies because they'd rather sell you a feel good fortune cookie advice than give you the truth, either in whole or in part. You've been suckered.

Post Note 2: Don't just educate your kids. Instill in them a love of learning if you can. They will educate themselves. And teach them how to throw a punch and stand up for themselves. I've seen many a friendship, or at least respect, forged after a good fight than I can reasonably ignore, provided the victimization cycle doesn't establish itself prior.




As an example, here's the "politically correct" version of Little Red Riding Hood


Ah, interesting. Personally, though, I prefer the older pre-Perrault versions in which the Wolf tricked red into unknowingly cannibalizing her grandmother's butchered corpse, molested her, and then ate her. I don't exactly profess to know what the moral of the originals was, exactly, but it's definitely a more attention grabbing spectacle with shades of Oedipus Rex.

It's also a great point of interest to raise to those who claim that our society is perpetually getting more vulgar and obscene. We were always this vulgar and sick minded, though perhaps more cultured back then.

[edit on 18-8-2009 by Lasheic]



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
My thoughts ?

Starred and Flagged. By far one of the best post I've read on ATS, which is saying a lot, really.

The Red Riding Hood Story is a classic. When I find the printer cable I'm going to print it off and pass it around

Really can't say much more than your OP has said so much better ...

There's no doubt in my mind that PC speech was intended from the outset as a control mechanism, as mind and speech control

Idiotic substitutions are used and deemed to be 'politically correct', although they're subject to change, at which point they become even more idiotic, imo.

For example (this appeared when I entered a Search for 'Politically Correct Terminology just now )


BEST TERMS:

Individual with (a) Brain Injury.
Individuals with (a) Brain Injury.
Person with (a) Brain Injury.
People with (a) Brain Injury.
Survivor with or of (a) Brain Injury.
Survivors with or of (a) Brain Injury.

Further examples in this "best" category include but are not limited to:

Survivors of Acquired Brain Injury.
Person with an Acquired Brain Injury.
People with Anoxic Brain Injuries.
Survivors of Stroke.
Survivor of TBI.
People with Brain Tumors.
Person with Brain Injury due to Encephalitis.
Survivor of Acquired Brain Injury.


OK TERMS: (as these are being used in various survivor groups):

Brain Injury Survivor.
Brain Injury Survivors.
Brain Injury Winner.
Brain Injury Thriver.
Person or People with Cognitive Challenges. (Although, please note, not all persons with a brain injury are ultimately cognitively challenged, although many are. Some do recover their cognitive functions. Also, some have other sorts of physical, perceptual, or sensory challenges, but may ultimately restore to a cognitively normal level.)

Additional examples in this OK category include but are not limited to:

TBI Survivor.
Stroke Survivor.
Anoxic Injury Survivor.
Brain Tumor Survivor.
Meningitis Survivor.
Coma Survivor.
Brain Injury Survivors.
Aneurysm Survivors.


POOR TERMS:

Brain Injured Victim.
Brain Injured Victims.
Brain Damaged Person.
Brain Damaged People.



So, the conversation goes something like this: ' Hi, I haven't seen Mr. Thomas around lately. Heard he's been in hospital. How's he going .. hope he's ok ? '

Politically correct reply: ' Oh, I heard he's a Brain Injury Winner'

First person: ' What ? '

Politically correct person: ' You know, he's a Brain Injury Thriver .. a Survivor of Acquired Brain Injury ... '

First person: ' What ? '

Politically correct person: ' Sigh ... he had a head injury, but he's on the mend now'

First person: ' Oh, I see. What happened to him ? '

Politically correct person: ' He was hit by a golf ball '

First person: ' Riiiight. I see. Why didn't you say so in the first place '


A while ago, I thought I was doing well (in politically correct terms) by describing someone as 'wheel-chair bound'. Until I was corrected and informed the term now is 'differently abled'.

My sincere apologies to anyone who may have been offended through a reading of this post.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 



Great, great post


Nodded as I was reading it, particularly the 'You are a Winner' segment.

Not sure about the US, but in Australia now, child-care workers are not allowed to utter the word 'no', apparently. They're instructed to 'divert the attention' of the child/children in question, with carefully phrased gems such as ' Let's not do that. Let's look at the pretty bunny. See his big eyes looking at you. What can we do with the pretty bunny. Carrie .. what do YOU think we should do with the pretty bunny ? Who knows .. who knows what we should do with the pretty bunny ? '

You can imagine it, can't you. Harried, overworked child-care worker with 20 or so three year olds outside in the sandpit. Little Jimmy has sand in his eyes, so the teacher is attending to that AND to little Tamara who wants to go to the toilet AND to little Jaydyn who has sand in his mouth as he screams his lungs out AND to twins Kara and Kylie who're tossing spades-full of sand at half a dozen kids to prevent them from gaining access to the plastic castle.

Then the teacher sees little Caryn with a 'C' about to stab little Ronlydd in the eye with a piece of wood. Teacher has point 5 of a second in which to prevent Ronlydd's possibly permanent blinding. Does teacher cry, Let's not do that Caryn with a 'C'. Let's look at the pretty birdie

Or does teacher scream, ' NO ! Caryn .. NO ! '

If you chose the latter, you are definitely NOT keeping up with the programme, are you ? And you would get a bad-mark on your child-care teacher record.


Oh .. forgot to say, in Australia, one of the substitutes for the banned 'No' word in the child-care environment is ... ' Let's keep with the programme'.

So next time your toddler makes a dash into the centre of the highway, be PC and 'suggest' ... 'Come here sweetie. We need to keep up with the programme now, don't we ? '. Unfortunately the truck driver unable to apply his brakes in time won't hear you either.



[edit on 18-8-2009 by St Vaast]



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
I disagree. With you and the OP.

What's wrong with civility? NOTHING!!!!


Civility, Respect, Tolernace is fine.

The problem is victim-mentality. Here`s someone who feels offended that McDonalds makes her wash her hands, files a lawsuit and wins.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 02:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Because they are getting slick with bigotry these days. Your girlfriend may not have been able to correctly articulate why she was upset. Only that her boss is picking on her. She knew something was wrong, but couldn't describe how. And was left with a feeling of unease.


Thats sometimes true and it should be considered first. But upon closer examination of the case it turned out that what her boss was trying to convey was correct.



A company may not be able to openly discriminate against say, women or latins. But they will put restrictions on that keep people of smaller stature out. Say, you have to be able to lift a 100 pounds, over your head. So unless you are a pretty tough guy, that is really hard to do. Technically, a company has to accomodate people, and there is technology these days that help people lift heavy stuff, so they use it as a way to keep certain groups out.


Imagine you were the member of a minority-group. And rather than getting a job because your attitude in the job-interview caused respect in the employer, you get the job because someone pressured that employer to give it to you. How would you feel?




Or, you may not be able to say, I can't hire minorities, but that doesnt' stop them from hiring them, and then three months later firing or laying them off


A company should have freedom of choice who to employ. Pressuring a company to employ someone will result in evasion-tactics such as the ones you describe.



People who say that people are being oversensitive with the PC stuff usualy has never been in a position where you have been discriminated against.


When I was younger there were jobs I did not get. Rather than try to pressure the employer into giving me the job or blaming it on discrimination, I accepted it and took it as inspiration to do better next time.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
For my personal little story: I once worked in very large office in a state where there is a HUGE football rival between two universities. On casual day, many people wore tee's with the logo of the larger university on the front. The Director apparently recieved many complaints that these tee shirts had "offended" many in the office who supported the other team.

Later that week, there was a memo. Tee shirts worn on casual day must not contain "a message". Good lord. World gone mad.


Sense of humour replaced by cry-baby-ism.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by St Vaast
Not sure about the US, but in Australia now, child-care workers are not allowed to utter the word 'no', apparently. They're instructed to 'divert the attention' of the child/children in question, with carefully phrased gems such as ' Let's not do that. Let's look at the pretty bunny. See his big eyes looking at you. What can we do with the pretty bunny. Carrie .. what do YOU think we should do with the pretty bunny ? Who knows .. who knows what we should do with the pretty bunny ? '


Extremely Dangerous. Not because it diverts attention to the positive but because this shift is manipulated from the outside rather than as a matter chosen by the child. This inadvertendly leads to sub-conscious rebellion within the child you will later finally want to focus on all the bad and ugly.

Incredible. Just Incredible.

In the end it all boils down to people trying to control other peoples behavior.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 03:35 AM
link   
I know many "members of minority groups" who are not as sensitive as portrayed by the media. In fact, implying that they are "sensitive" and cannot take a few hits is an insult to them. Im thinking in particular of a homosexual acquaintance of mine who does not want to be babied, because it is degrading.

If I were a black I would not want special protection, I would want to learn to stand up for myself. And I know blacks who feel the same way.

So implying that they are all weak and disadvantaged is not exactly strengthening them. Its even subtly racist.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lasheic
Mentally impaired? No. Some people are just born with or develop higher moral preference to Harm/Care and Fairness/Reciprocity (liberals, typically, going by psychologist Johnathan Haydth's scale). After more or less winning some vital and needed moral battles in American culture (Civil Rights, Women's Rights, etc), a radically liberal counter-culture revolution swept across America taking these ideals to the extreme and have been an active component in society ever since.


The richest entertainer (Oprah Winfrey), the biggest sportspeople, the most succesful musicians and the President of the United States are black.

That is not indicative of them having no civil rights.

It is correct that the civil rights movement helped overcome inequality. But once an inequality has been overcome, one could move on to other things. The "civil rights movement" is now exaggerating their agenda and acting as if things are still the way they were 100 years ago.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join