An Interesting point on Political Correctness, page 4
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times


reply posted on 20-11-2009 @ 08:48 AM by spellbound
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.


reply posted on 20-11-2009 @ 09:13 AM by spellbound
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.


reply posted on 20-11-2009 @ 10:33 AM by Mokoman
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.


reply posted on 20-11-2009 @ 05:33 PM by chiron613
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.



reply posted on 20-11-2009 @ 09:06 PM by Stellar Divinity
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]


reply posted on 22-11-2009 @ 08:36 AM by kcire
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]


reply posted on 30-11-2009 @ 03:13 AM by thricearound
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!"
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Do you feel this way too?
  Posted 6 days ago with 64 member flags
Fibonacci Numbers, Phi, and the Venus/Earth Relation
  Posted 3 days ago with 57 member flags
The Truth about "New Agers"
  Posted 14 days ago with 36 member flags
Evolution happens. That\'s a fact.
  Posted 5 days ago with 28 member flags
I have superpowers. Read this thread if you don\'t believe me.
  Posted 19 days ago with 19 member flags
If you could be anything what would you be?
  Posted 4 days ago with 17 member flags