[LinearPhilosopher]

So, i get the feeling some of this may have been covered in other threads. In that case I apologise for the spam or redundancy.

I do believe this topic deserves discussion in specific.

The term is thrown out a lot. A while back i was watching the Munk Debate on the subject where debating against the proposition was well known troglodyte and internet troll Jordan Peterson, with Stephen Fry, a man of many fields and much renown and very much a classic liberal in the Lockian sense of the word. The debate was amusing, but devoid of any serious content and found myself disappointed that aside from a few sound bites, it was a rather shallow affair.

Fast forward to today, I am still confused as to what PC means. Growing up, I'd always thought the term referred to how politicians will often avoid saying certain things for fear of being controversial, or using words to mollify certain events and downplay them so as to avoid escalation. something like, Russia's saying we don't have troops in the area, it's just a bunch of grass roots volunteers.

Now, i've seen PC used to refer to everything from assaults on free speech, an inability to utter tastless jokes (which i enjoy thoroughly might i add) to "can't go around and say that Obama's a Muslim" to a grand conspiracy to censor the right wing. I've seen it used to refer to transgenderism as well.

Based off this wide variety of instances, the only thing i can conclude PC means, "is anything the speaker sees as a unified movement whose purpose is to restrict speech that runs counter to the speakers fundamental beliefs".

At which point, it's a term devoid of meaning as it refers to pretty much anything you want and has little coherence speaker to speaker.

But enough rambling, what are the forum's thoughts on the topic.

[Grief]

Nowadays I mostly view the concept of "political correctness" as a rhetorical strategy that looks to do two things.

1. Suggest that the "politically correct" attitude isn't genuine. When someone is accused of being "politically correct" the implication is that they might not truly hold those views - they're just saying the socially accepted thing. This (along with related concepts like "virtue signalling") looks to dismiss a position or argument without needing to engage with it. This is naturally pretty convenient, especially on topics where making the argument explicit can be off-putting (i.e, it can be more effective to mock anti-racists than to try to justify racism).

2. It looks to shift the onus from the person being offensive to the person being offended. It isn't my fault for having poor manners or horrible views - it's your fault for having "thin skin". I might say that I am just "telling it like it is" or "saying what everyone is thinking" in a further attempt to claim that my views are the true social norms while yours are not.

[Mentalist]

My background is Eastern European (not a people's known for their sensitivity when it comes to social issues). My parents are pretty racist, and I had to grow up around them.

In my (obviously biased by my upbringing) understanding "political correctness" refers to using neutral terms to replace historical group descriptions that are now widely considered insensitive. Anyone who doesn't want to have to change their vocabulary will complain that "they are being forced to be politically correct".

This post has been edited by Mentalist: 15 September 2019 - 06:10 AM

[Cause]

Political correctness though is more than what you describe Ment. I has good sides to it and bad sides to it.

A person might call it Political correctness that in America they went from calling black people N***** to African Americans. In my country being called black in and of itself is not considered a bad thing and the idea of African Americans is often made fun off as being too overly sensitive. I have to admit I find it strange but I have no problem treating people with respect and consider this to be harmless (even though I am sure in the past I have made fun of the African American thing myself). This is good political correctness.

However political correctness can also be the negative that some topics are now almost taboo to even discuss in public because everyone will be uncomfortable. Not because they are made uncomfortable by the topic but because they are uncomfortable that someone in the group will be offended, report them to HR etc. The other day on a forum I was told not to discuss whether god (Yaweh) is male, female or non-gendered (The view point of Catholicism and Judaism so I argued it wasn't a debate, it was a fact) because the topic was too serious and they were worried about its relationship to trans-gendered people. Political correctness can be the cowardliness that to prevent offending anyone you basically say nothing and do nothing.

[Nicodimas]

Modern political correctness is left calling everyone that disagrees with them racist.

If you don’t agree your racist..someone that wears a MAGA hate is automatically racist. They aren’t politically correct for whatever reason.

Political correctness is made up thing.. that is to manipulate the political tone of a conversation to dissuade the counter-party to try to impart a feeling of guilt for thinking a certain way.

It’s just made up and I agree with cause in the above statement. It helps foster a type of weakness.. so people don’t actually communicate.

To just like assume there is some sort of political rightness is totally nuts. We are all different, we communicate differently and have different established endpoints in our line of thought.This is a good thing.

Political correctness is argument of assuming...

[Vengeance]

If the person that you support is a racist who advacates racist policies. When you support a racist you are responsible for their ability to enact their racism. Therefore you are guilty of their rasicm. There is no political correctness implied.

[Maark Abbott]

 Nicodimas, on 16 September 2019 - 01:16 AM, said:

Modern political correctness is Obammer tryna tik ma guns

ftfy

[Tiste Simeon]

Yeah I think anyone wearing a MAGA hat is a racist. It's like the modern Klan hood.

Don't think everyone who has different opinions to me is a racist, definitely not, but yeah those hats are a sure sign.

[Gorefest]

If you wear a MAGA hat you support an openly racist, mysogynist and discriminatory government. I cannot see how it can be interpreted in any other way.

[Morgoth]

Political correctness boils down to the simple "don't be an asshole".

[Maark Abbott]

 Morgoth, on 16 September 2019 - 11:15 AM, said:

Political correctness boils down to the simple "don't be an asshole".

I think maybe this is a slight oversimplification. A lot of it does come down to this exact point, but it has usage in terms of obfuscating a speaker's actual position when that position is at odds with public onion on a matter.

But mostly it's about not being an asshole.

[Tattersail_]

I honestly read this thread and thought what is wrong with Magaluf? I put it in to search engines and everything. I haven't been there myself but then I realised you are using it as "Make America Great Again" rather than going on a stag do.

I'm still laughing now.

[Maark Abbott]

 Tattersail_, on 16 September 2019 - 11:50 AM, said:

what is wrong with Magaluf?

Some mysteries are not for mankind to know

[Macros]

Also, what's right with the vomit filled magaluf?

[Tsundoku]

Naughty naughty Justin ...

https://www.news.com...696412ea71f785c

[Cause]

Full Disclosure I am white but I seriously cant understand the problem here. Its over fifteen years old, he was at a fancy dress party, he is an extreme liberal (I believe). Doesnt make him a hyprcrite if he is more woke now than he was fifteen years ago.

[Tsundoku]

Stop using logic. Haven't you seen the recent trend of mining people's pasts looking for ANY sort of infraction - however minor?
I've heard some funny names given to it, but I can't recall them at the moment.

It's just the natural extension of the revision of history by judging historical figures according to today's elastic standards.

[Blend]

 Cause, on 19 September 2019 - 11:41 AM, said:

Full Disclosure I am white but I seriously cant understand the problem here. Its over fifteen years old, he was at a fancy dress party, he is an extreme liberal (I believe). Doesnt make him a hyprcrite if he is more woke now than he was fifteen years ago.

Gods I'm happy to see someone else say this. I think Ed the Sock said it best: "Trudeau wears dark makeup in 2001. Intervening years welcomes in immigrants of colour & Syrian refugees. Scheer in 2006 video compares gay people to dogs. Intervening time never apologized, never been to Pride event. Actions speak louder than old snapshots."

I am also white, and I certainly know better now, but I can honestly say that I had no idea that wearing blackface or brownface was considered racist back in 2001. I learned that was the case in around 2003 when we did it to a friend of mine in the privacy of our own home when we were playing with some theatre makeup I had bought for a Halloween costume. I took a picture and he made me immediately delete it and explained why it was considered racist to do blackface and/or brownface. I now know better. I have learned from that experience and would now never do such a thing.

So yeah, it was in bad taste. But it was fucking 2001 and he has done plenty to show that mistakes made when he was younger don't define the kind of person he is today.

I don't vote Liberal but it's certainly not because of something as ridiculous as this. Scheer's Conservatives are just trying to find any shit that will stick to Trudeau after something like 5 or 6 of his candidates have been called out for racist and/or homophobic things they've done in the last 5-10 years as opposed to nearly 20 years ago.

[Tsundoku]

So does this change anything? I never knew Jordan Peterson suffered from depression, nor his wife's issues.
Then again I didn't go searching very hard, nor did I follow him as a subject much besides occasional articles or news stories on TV.

https://www.news.com...525cab3d04c6c78

I know it's sort of tangential but I thought it may be a bit relevant to the topic, being as he has been a prominent figure in this area recently.

This post has been edited by Tsundoku: 21 September 2019 - 12:37 PM

[LinearPhilosopher]

 Tsundoku, on 21 September 2019 - 12:36 PM, said:

So does this change anything? I never knew Jordan Peterson suffered from depression, nor his wife's issues.
Then again I didn't go searching very hard, nor did I follow him as a subject much besides occasional articles or news stories on TV.

https://www.news.com...525cab3d04c6c78

I know it's sort of tangential but I thought it may be a bit relevant to the topic, being as he has been a prominent figure in this area recently.

As an individual, i sympathise. Addiction is not an easy thing to manage. Nor dealing with the potential impending death of your SO.

But let's be real, this guy is a grade A asshat. A good friend of mine did a whole video about debunking his thought on the road to wiggin pier. (spoiler he didnt even read the book he said he did.) This guy's claim to fame was refusing to address someone in the way they wanted him to. Im not so callous as to say he had it coming or you reap what you sow, but hes done quite a few bad things and hasn't exactly left things better off then before he came to popularity.

video for those curious:

Attached File(s)

•  70120370_2461878690768256_2920502994489311232_o.jpg (53.58K)
  Number of downloads: 0

This post has been edited by LinearPhilosopher: 21 September 2019 - 10:12 PM