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.

 

An Interesting point on Political Correctness

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




So you didn't actually read the thread then?





posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


It is childish and silly, but at least we have had a laugh.

And maybe my enemy is my friend.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   
PC can go too far. I agree we shouldn't do thinks like call a black person the N word. In that respect PC is fine. But it gets taken too far by the media who seek to impose someones agenda.

For example, Some black people now want to be called African American. Some black people don't even want that but want to be called an African who happened to have been born in the USA.

Not all black people feel this way. I personally know lots of them who think being called black is just fine.

One day we are going to wake up and hear the news telling us it's PI to call a black person a black person, and we Must call them an African American. The word black will become as bad as the N word.

Already I have heard conversations where someone says black person and they get yelled at for not saying African American. You get to the point you don't know what to say at the risk of offending someone.

( It's just fine with me if you call me white. Though my skin color is really tan, I won't insist on it that is silly, same thing IMO )

We don't have a clear cut manual on what is PC and what is not that is accepted by everyone. The first time some group or person gets offended at something they can claim Political Incorrectness. This is not fair to the rest of us.

[edit on 20-11-2009 by JohnPhoenix]



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   
all this PC garbage is mostly just about trying to find the least offensive way of calling a black person "the N word" and so on so that you can call them that and they won't be offended.

A large portion of the whole deal has to do with people who hate themselves so much that they have to go looking for a cause and try to politically change speech because they themselves are offended by something.

Look, I'm sorry , but over here, we celebrate Christmas, not the winter festival, not the holidays, and guess what, we wish each other a merry Christmas, not happy holidays and such.

Let's face it, if I wish a Jewish person a Merry Christmas, and in return he wishes me a Happy Hannaukah, I take it as the well wishing it is and continue on.

PC is the ritualized interface for the intolerant to badger and attempt to force the tolerant to kowtow to their own hatred.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoffinFeeder


Look, I'm sorry , but over here, we celebrate Christmas, not the winter festival, not the holidays, and guess what, we wish each other a merry Christmas, not happy holidays and such.



As do we in the uk?
Where is this place where you can't wish people merry christmas or happy easter and so on?



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by CoffinFeeder
 


I agree with you.

The whiteys are the whiteys, and get called so.

Who cares.

There are all colours of people in this world, and who cares what colour you are?

I, personally, would not care if I was called a whitey.

No-one should care what they are called.

And people should be free to refer to them in any way they want.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by spellbound
 




I agree with you.

The whiteys are the whiteys, and get called so.

Who cares.

There are all colours of people in this world, and who cares what colour you are?

I, personally, would not care if I was called a whitey.

No-one should care what they are called.

And people should be free to refer to them in any way they want.

Here is exactly why PC exists. You see, a whitey is not just a whitey. It might not be offensive to you, but another person might see it as offensive. Besides, not only the words you use, but also the tone you use them in are relevant.

In order to keep a productive dialogue going, there has to be a certain degree of understanding between all parties. If one side is offended for whatever reason, this means that the productive part is soon traded for a destructive part.

Especially in a situation where you aim to convince another of your point of view or gain some understanding for your cause, a certain amount of tact has to be applied. This is where PC comes in. Unwillingness to review one's wording is the cause of many of our conflicts. This is not only so in the political arena but perhaps even more so on an open forum like this.

You don't have to be afraid of hurting anyone's feelings, but keep in mind that the moment you do, the level of understanding will suffer greatly. Once someone is offended they can respond aggressively (as we've seen in this thread) often blaming the one who hurt them as having caused it (though this can be debated, it's sortof a logical respons) Neither side of the argument will gain much once the situation has escalated. Therefore it often pays off to use milder language which promotes peaceful argument. I would think that this very thread would have convinced you that PC conversation does have it's uses.

Being unable to 'level' with your conversational partner means no understanding for eachother's argument will be reached, rendering the whole conversation more or less pointless. It should be judged case by case. Some people prefer straight up unfiltered conversation where it doesn't matter how abusive the language gets, while others prefer to converse with the goal to reach an understanding (not an agreement per se)

Use tact when appropriate and leave it out when it's not needed. It's really not that complex.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   
political correctness is a cover of protection for a lot of people/religions/nations.

ethical correctness would be better.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 04:14 PM
link   
I don't really like the term "political correctness" because apparently its politically correct to terrorise citizens of the Middle East through warfare.

Besides, I don't know how many times I've told someone that they like men. PC stuff can get the hell out.

[edit on 20-11-2009 by Whine Flu]



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
personally i think freedom of speech is much more important than not offending anybody. PC is a borderline fascism



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
I think that PC goes much further than just defining the words that are appropriate to use when describing race or gender. It''s a whole mind set about what you can or can not talk about.

If you suggest that underrepresented minorities are underrepresented because they don't place the same value on education or that it has something to do with the number of single family households... You are not being politically correct.

You are supposed to tow the PC line that everyone and everything is equal so it must be that somehow underrepresented minorities are being held back by an external force. (Think white privilege or overt and/or covert racism).

The first thing that happened after the shootings down in Texas was a lot of PC hoopla from the media assuring the population that this was a lone gunman. Why? PC.... The media talks about an anti Muslim backlash and all you get is someone pulling a scarf. That's political correctness.

Hollywood tries to be PC. Ever notice how many doctors lawyers FBI agents are portrayed by underrepresented minorities. Now go into a court room or hospital and see how many underrepresented minorities are the chief of surgery or judges. Once again PC in action.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   
The way I get around Political Correctness is to explain that I'm Politically Challenged, and they need to make an accommodation for my disability.

Political correctness has its costs and benefits. It is no longer acceptable to use derogatory language about someone based on their race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc. This is overall a good thing. Yes, it limits" freedom of speech", but only in contexts where your speech was subject to limitation anyway - mostly work and school. For example, most of these places have rules against vulgar language.

The benefits of this restriction outweigh the costs. Yes, we are prevented from saying certain things and yes, PC can be taken to ridiculous extremes. One person was fired for using the word, "niggardly", which is actually perfectly acceptable and has nothing to do with minorities.

But despite some problems, PC has made life much easier for many people who would otherwise face repeated insults and hurtful behavior. It is no longer permitted to make insulting references to race or ethnicity; it is no longer acceptable to grope women or comment about them in a sexual context. This is a good thing, and worth the price we all pay.

As for Hasan's massacre, the real issue is whether he was espousing violence. Reporting threats or musings about violence is not a violation of PC. PC does not require anyone to ovrlook violence or other illegal acts. It may be that the people who knew Hasan weren't clear aboout the limits of PC, or just figured to keep quiet and let someone else risk getting in trouble for mentioning the odd or suspicious behavior. But I don't think that's necessarily a failing of PC, so much as it is people not really understanding the intent of PC.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
This is the most ridiculous call-and-response thread I've ever read here at ATS. Are you REALLY that upset that you can't call someone you think looks middle eastern "Paki"? A black guy a "n****r?" A white guy a "cracker"? A woman "T*ts McGee"? A gay man "f*g"?

Political correctness is often just correctness, but it makes conversations that would otherwise be outrageous by most people's standards impossible without repercussions. It muzzles ignorant loudmouths who would call people by ethnic and racial slurs, trivializing them on merits outside of their control.

Seriously, can anybody provide a legitimate example of an instance in which political correctness has stifled your ability to say anything other than hateful ridiculousness???

Also, for the knee-jerk, here's a definition-
Political correctness (adjectivally, politically correct; both forms commonly abbreviated to PC) is a term denoting language, ideas, policies, and behavior seen as seeking to minimize social offense in gender, racial, cultural, sexual orientation, handicap, and age-related contexts.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Okay so, let me start this by saying I am a disabled American woman, I am twenty-one-years-old, and am in my fourth year of college.

As far as using certain words in order to not come across as offensive, I agree with the thread starter to a point. See, I don't like being called a cripple because I wear a leg brace, but over the years I have come to learn that people are sometimes ignorant, and the odds of them coming out of that ignorance are often rare unless something detrimental happens to them. In regards to what they call me, well...

Words are just that, words. They only have power insofar as the power and therefore ability we give them to harm us. For example, do I get my feelings hurt because the United States Government has deemed me disabled? No. Big deal, I can't join the Army, would I have if I wasn't disabled? Perhaps. Granted, I don't really know since my life didn't pan out that way; however, these terms of which you speak are in a sense archaic, and thusly make them even more offensive from a sociological standpoint which is one of the things that makes them so offensive now.

Now, is this taking away the thread starter's freedom of speech? No, not exactly. You could call me a crippled cracker bitch all you want, but are you going to have many friends if you talk like that regularly, or even once? Probably not.

There's a point in your life where you learn to break away from these stereotypes, these meaningless things that society has placed on certain individuals, and until those of us, disabled, a minority or otherwise, can see that, we are bound to have a problem. Because it's when you begin to accept these titles that you truly become the thing you seek to eradicate.



[edit on 20-11-2009 by Stellar Divinity]



posted on Nov, 22 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   

As much as we like to deride the PC brigade. In many ways Political Correctness has been a good thing for our society.


I disagree with this.

I think political correctness is overrated and should not be used in 'any' situation just to be 'correct'.

Also a lot of nationalities/religions are so blinded by proud, that my guess is that 'political correctness' only ads a layer of misery on top of this.

Because now I can insult someone by:
A)- Saying something offending/discriminating.
B)- Saying something that is 'not political correct'.

Rather strange isn't it? One person can now be insulted twice on the same subject?! In the end...for whose benefit?

At the moment the most right-winged politician sounds rather oke, just because he is being 'political correct' when speaking in public. But his mindset is still the one of a racist....I do not see how anything good can come from this.

It is just another bomb that is about to burst.

If, for example, a Jewish person is proud to be a Jew...this in my eyes is the same as thinking he's better than me, a non-Jew.

So I could walk around offended all day?

Mostly I get mad when people 'expect' to be handled correctly...Who the hell are they?! What right gives them this way of thinking? I myself will decide how I call them, name them and approach them. And I never am being 'political correct'.

In the eyes of most muslims I am a 'Kafir' or an 'Infidel'...why would I answer this with 'political correctness'? To show them...?

'Political correctness' are just other words for 'discrimination'.

*note: I always use Jews and Muslims as examples because with these 2 'groups' I have experience. Or is what I am saying now not political correct?

[edit on 22-11-2009 by kcire]



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 03:13 AM
link   
If you disagree with PC it doesn't necessitate your endorsement of any views censored by PC...You just have the honesty to avoid the illusion that you can change somebody's mind (no jurisdiction can change mine at least haha!) and people will only not speak out their seniments anymore...Also, PC is discriminalization as it doesn't equal out peoples' reception by society but simply adds motive to only a fragment of perceived offenses...Suddenly the motive merits punishment in a sense and further, people can make claims of discriminalization in varrying degrees, so everybody is affected by hate-speech laws in a different way--This is something my father jokingly speaks of as "victimhood poker", perpetuating one's own victimhood (think of Keenan's idea behind 'Prison Sex') for personal gain-The idea is kinda scary anyway, that opinions can be criminalized. If somebody offends you, you sue the F*cker, and as long as the court that rules on it isn't subject to any presuppositions, you should be fine, comparing to how courts have decided in past cases concerning blacks or evolutionists, simply because they felt their cultural rigor violated. However with PC, people are actually less equal because dislike directed in one direction is handled differently than the other way around.Alas Victimhood Poker, you only benefit in varrying degrees. The question simply is, if you have a running justice system, why make these adjustments? Throwing over board the convention always sounds suspicious, as if things aren't taking a sound course and need to be bypassed. I think this goes hand in hand with "free speech zones", in the eyes of tptb people don't merit free expression of their opinion, alas the war on the internet and so on, all serves the same end. I surely don't think judging someone solely because of his looks is a smart thing to do, however you can't lump everything onto the "hate-crime" card. Guy shoots up the holocaust museum? Hate-crime. A muslim threatening the head of the BNP? Same thing I'd do! Muslim shoots up army base? He probably hated your freedom and stuff. Yeah right, you don't properly examine anyone's motive anymore because you can defend principles in court..."This man needs to be punished because...HE HATED FREEDOM!"



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join