First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply In Defense of Political Correctness
46429 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Sweden
Offline
Posted 2/24/16
political correctness is destroying everything
runec 
29178 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/24/16

HighProfile wrote:
quick answer; etiquette is etiquette, the word already exists. PC is wrong.


The modern usage of the term was originally just academic. Largely confined to universities and the like. It was pulled into the American culture wars by right wing conservatives throughout the 90s. Which makes this whole discussion somewhat ironic. As its conservatives who rail the most against the term, yet they're the ones that dragged it into the public sphere to begin with. They in essence created their own enemy.





runec 
29178 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/24/16 , edited 2/24/16

TheOmegaForce70941 wrote:

political correctness is destroying everything


252 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / In hiding? -NOVA
Offline
Posted 2/24/16

runec wrote:


TheOmegaForce70941 wrote:

political correctness is destroying everything




Charlton Heston maybe?
252 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / In hiding? -NOVA
Offline
Posted 2/24/16
Nope, he said it was "tyranny with manners"
44017 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
60 / M / Earth
Offline
Posted 2/24/16

theYchromosome wrote:
I'll define it as such: to act politically correct is to 'act in a way calculated to offend the least number of people.' This seems, to me, the best way to get at what most people are despairing at when they talk about PC.


My own definition of PC isn't the same. People who themselves (only) try to not offend aren't the issue; they have learned empathy. You wouldn't likely even notice someone like that. It is the ones who think that they are empowered as defenders and believe they have a right to (angrily) enforce conformity on what everyone else should think/do/say to match their own mindset; that action is what I would label as "being" PC, and that is what is causing the backlash. No one responds well to being told what they "should" do, especially if it comes from a complete stranger in a way that feels like they are being attacked.
runec 
29178 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/24/16

HighProfile wrote:
Charlton Heston maybe?


...Touche.



asharka wrote:
It is the ones who think that they are empowered as defenders and believe they have a right to (angrily) enforce conformity on what everyone else should think/do/say to match their own mindset; that action is what I would label as "being" PC, and that is what is causing the backlash. No one responds well to being told what they "should" do, especially if it comes from a complete stranger in a way that feels like they are being attacked.


That's not "being" PC though that's being a dick. By that definition the ones yelling at PC are also themselves being PC half the time. You can't yell at some for being PC then turn around and tell women what they can and can't do with their uterus for example. By your definition that is PC as well.

So lets just agree that these people are all dicks regardless of political orientation and agree to not be dicks to each other. -.-



626 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / The Fifth Dimention
Offline
Posted 2/24/16

pandrasb wrote:

I'm fine with self censorship, just not fine with censoring other people's ideas because either we don't agree with them or they offend us. I'm for freedom of ideas and speech.


^this
1552 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23
Offline
Posted 2/24/16 , edited 2/24/16
I don't want to get into this discussion, but rather just point out some of my own thoughts

Political correctness (it seems to me, but maybe i'm wrong) is an inherently cultural construct. What I mean is that there don't really seem to be any laws mandating against it, unless "politically incorrect" views are endorsed or enforced in a professional setting, but does anyone truly want them in such a setting? Perhaps so, though I personally would prefer it if they were kept private.

Basically, what I mean to say is that these "PC rules" seem to be self enforced by shaming and ostracizing people who publicly espouse them, but isn't that basically the concept of free speech at work? Isn't that the heart of trying to adjust behavior through culture rather than through legislation? I'm not saying the concept of politically correct culture is inherently good, but I think it really is just an extension of our culture, and I think something like this, perhaps ironically, arises naturally out of free speech.

HOWEVER, i fully admit that I may be misunderstanding some things. I don't follow politics or the media at all really, so everything I know is more or less from hearsay. I do think that I might hold some politically incorrect views though. However, i don't know for sure because i've never been in a position where I felt like I had to share them anyway.

1379 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 2/24/16
Disclaimer: i'm a troll right now so i cannot be blamed for my illogical disagreement of things that are largely accepted by others. especially when it comes to logic or things that might or might not make sense.


it is in-politically correct to be politically correct because you are not being politically correct to yourself. it's like that cat poster that ways something vile about your mom, it might be true but that doesn't make it nice to say. be nice to others unless you want to be mean.... then be mean.... if others are mean to you then go punch that cat that made fun of your mom cause it deserves to be hanging from that tree. it is a punishment from God to be born in that poster!
11752 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23
Offline
Posted 2/24/16 , edited 2/24/16
Free speech where you can say whatever you want as long it doesn't offend, isn't really free speech.. Why hasn't anybody noticed that?

Like buying a t-shirt in any color you want, as long as it's black.
80215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Seattle
Offline
Posted 2/24/16 , edited 2/24/16
This is new, but no more convincing than any other "defense" of PC. There is several problems with the current PC culture that make this defense a pointless one.

Let's start off with the most vile and notorious problem using PC as a weapon. Most PC worshipers will say that the constitution protects you from government repercussions but not social ones. As such, a great number of PC worshipers will use PC as a weapon to get people in trouble with work or their community. Living in the modern age it is really easy to ruin a business by spreading lies about its employees. Then a company must choose, do they take a risk on their employee or do they just get rid of him or her? Which brings us to the next point.

PC is often times used as a method to prevent discussion. I cannot count the number of times people have called me a racist or msygonist online because they do not want to discuss an issue. Watch a social justice snowflake argue with someone. Once they have been completely defeated they will use PC as an excuse to raise their voice or get the other party to concede something. These are tactics aimed at silencing the discussion because they appear to be upset. It is a trick to give the losing party a way to remove the topic completely or change the topic to a more favorable one.

The last thing I will note is how it is used to shame people. If you are part of the majority you should feel ashamed is what most PC police get at. That is why we have all these annoying terms that get thrown out there. One example that I get a laugh out of all the time is when we talk about the amount of White actors, authors, directors, artists, in America. Yes that is going to happen when you live in a country that has 60% to 70% of one particular race. If I get one non-Caucasian for every 5 Caucasian that apply for something I am going to have a large Caucasian base. I mean you might as well go to Japan an demand that we boycott all anime or manga that is written by an Asian. I mean everyone over there would roll their eyes at the notion why do we not do the same. So I do enjoy whenever I am given a title as a means to offend me. Especially when we can use science to prove that there is nothing wrong with the norms in certain cases.

In all reality, it sounds like you are making some kind of argument to give respect regardless of whether or not it is earned. That is stupid, plenty of people do not deserve respect on all sides of the spectrum. Respect is earned, not given. PC people like to pretend that is not the case though.
47948 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 2/24/16

asharka wrote:


theYchromosome wrote:
I'll define it as such: to act politically correct is to 'act in a way calculated to offend the least number of people.' This seems, to me, the best way to get at what most people are despairing at when they talk about PC.


My own definition of PC isn't the same. People who themselves (only) try to not offend aren't the issue; they have learned empathy. You wouldn't likely even notice someone like that. It is the ones who think that they are empowered as defenders and believe they have a right to (angrily) enforce conformity on what everyone else should think/do/say to match their own mindset; that action is what I would label as "being" PC, and that is what is causing the backlash. No one responds well to being told what they "should" do, especially if it comes from a complete stranger in a way that feels like they are being attacked.


So, if I understand you correctly, a person is being Politically Correct if

1) They believe themselves to be (or are) in a position of power.
2) (possibly) Believe that power should be used to defend (presumably, something important to them).
3) Believe that they have a right to take steps to make the opinions/actions/words of others match their own.
4) (possibly) They must be angry about it.

If I have an argument with anyone, regarding just about anything, it's often the case that I'm doing so because I'd like them to take my view on things. Conformity is not a bad thing of itself. Much of the Republican party conforms on many issues, as is the case with Democrats. Americans, in general, conform on their ideas about child molestation. But more centrally, I do not think that wishing others to share your opinions, and using your powers (usually argument) to bring this about constitutes anything particularly negative. In fact, it might be illuminating to take a look at what the opposite of PC is on this definition -- an "anti-PC" is someone who:

1) Believes themselves powerless.
2) Believes power should not be used to defend (presumably something important to them).
3) Believe that no steps should be taken to make the opinions/actions/words of others match their own.
4) They mustn't be angry.

Frankly, I find it hard respecting such a person, but that's more or less just my intuition talking. It's also interesting to note that, when we're talking about the far right that throws such a fuss over the evils of PC, I'd say your they fit closer to your definition of 'PC behavior' than an 'anti-PC'.

I don't think (4) was meant to be a part of your definition, but in case it was, I think (4) to be a very strange thing to add. Like, If someone says "never use the word nigger" calmly, then he's not being PC, but if he yells it, he is PC. It's just so strange that I can't think it was meant to be part of your description (plus, it was in parentheses). Hopefully, you just meant that most people that fit the other criteria are usually angry about it -- which I find doesn't quite fit my impression, but isn't really relevant otherwise.
runec 
29178 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/24/16 , edited 2/24/16

MiharuTheMaid wrote:


pandrasb wrote:

I'm fine with self censorship, just not fine with censoring other people's ideas because either we don't agree with them or they offend us. I'm for freedom of ideas and speech.


^this



anti-freeze wrote:
Let's start off with the most vile and notorious problem using PC as a weapon. Most PC worshipers will say that the constitution protects you from government repercussions but not social ones. As such, a great number of PC worshipers will use PC as a weapon to get people in trouble with work or their community.


Right, lets all take a step back here for a moment.

Legally speaking:

Number One: Censorship is the government restricting what you can and cannot say typically by suppressing or redacting media.

Number Two: Free speech is not a defense against the consequences of speech.

So "PC worshipers" ( whatever that is ) are entirely correct. The Constitution protects your right to free speech but does NOT protect you from the consequences of said speech. Because while you have free speech, so does everyone else. You have the right to be an asshole but everyone else has the right to call you an asshole.

Free speech is not a defense against criticism though it is often invoked as such. Nor is censorship being told you shouldn't be saying or acting a certain way by a private entity. Though again, it is often invoked as such.



anti-freeze wrote:One example that I get a laugh out of all the time is when we talk about the amount of White actors, authors, directors, artists, in America. Yes that is going to happen when you live in a country that has 60% to 70% of one particular race.


If you are attempting to make the argument that Hollywood reflects population statistics and therefore no racism is involved, you may wish to recheck your numbers. As Hollywood does not reflect said numbers, let alone Los Angeles. By your logic, half of actors, authors, directors and artists coming out of Hollywood should actually be Hispanic. -.-



252 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / In hiding? -NOVA
Offline
Posted 2/24/16
Before pc...


It was Tyranny of the Majority!

by executive producer Alexis de Tocqueville
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.