Is Anti-PC Really Just A Way to Not Get Punished For What You Said (drugs, free speech)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just re-read everyone' s responses here and it seems that none of us really even knows the meaning of the term 'politically correct' - or if any one of us is right then many more of us are off base or it means 'all of the above .. depending on the situation and the people involved'.
We are certainly not all on the same page as to what it means. Some seem to be talking about whether one can/should say a swear word .. or words with fluid or many meanings .. in any sentence or as an attack. Others about whether one can use a 'vernacular' description for a member(s) of a particular group as defined by their sexual interests or their skin colour. Still others seem to think the term is really about 'political ideas or parties or candidates of the day'. And others seem to think it is about labelling someone based on (usually subjective) evidence that they 'hate' some other group. Or it could just be standing up and calling out the truth in a sea of lies.
We are certainly not all on the same page as to what it means. Some seem to be talking about whether one can/should say a swear word .. or words with fluid or many meanings .. in any sentence or as an attack. Others about whether one can use a 'vernacular' description for a member(s) of a particular group as defined by their sexual interests or their skin colour. Still others seem to think the term is really about 'political ideas or parties or candidates of the day'. And others seem to think it is about labelling someone based on (usually subjective) evidence that they 'hate' some other group. Or it could just be standing up and calling out the truth in a sea of lies.
And there are militant activists pushing each one of those variations, as well as those pushing against each one.
It's very very rare that anything, taken to the extreme, is ever any good. No, we don't want weapons in schools, and rape is bad; but suspending an elementary student for "sexual assault" because he kissed a classmate on the hand; or suspension on weapons charges because of the shape of his breakfast pastry are cases where the PC pendulum has swung WAAAAAAY too far the other way.
No, the "right" to go around insulting people and entire races at will is not good, but it is better than the other extreme where normal people are afraid to utter anything resembling a thought without being punished.
The interesting thing is that 40 years ago--when actual racism, sexism, et cetera, were much worse--even racists did not pretend not to know what terms were insulting--and when not to use them.
So today, which such issues really are much less prominent in everyday life, people are feigning ignorance: "Oh, is it insulting for me to parade in blackface on campus?" In the 70s, anyone knew that such a thing was going to start a fight.
How is it that racists knew this in the 70s and don't know it now? How is it that even people with despicable beliefs think they have more leeway to express them now than 40 years ago?
Is it just that people feel more free to be jerks today than 40 years ago?
^^ The only people complaining about being PC are the people who don't have the guts to say what they AND to deal with those that do not agree with them. Say what you want but it's stupid to expect to not get called out on it should people disagree. Grow up.
There are a lot of people here on CD that appear to be sexist and/or racist. I call them on it if I see it. We both get to have our say. That's how it's supposed to work.
It's okay if you are good enough to confront them, you can find out if they are sexist or racist, but many just go running off to tell teacher, and get the person labelled, whether guilty, or not.
How is being called a bigot and a hater stopping them from holding and expressing their opinions though?
To call someone a bigot or hater who isn't is bullying. It intimidates people. It has a chilling effect on free speech.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
Well the short answer is no. There is no right to prevent name calling. Yes, they are WELL within the right to say what they want but at the same time they are also subject to have whatever others want to say about them at the same time. Freedom of speech is a double-edged sword in that aspect.
No it isn't the same, it is the proportionality.
One person saying, "I think you are wrong" shouldn't generate a response of "well then you are evil." "We are going to just disagree then", would be the proportional response.
When the response in way out of proportion then it is bullying, but many forms of bullying are tolerated as long as the person being bullied is bullied by a "disadvantaged" group.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambler123
Based upon years of personal experiences, yes, it is. Nearly everyone I've run into who complains publicly about "political correctness" being one of the major flaws in our society harbors some form of bigotry or hatred within themselves. Usually, they hate the fact that they can't call "those people" appropriate bigoted terms anymore, or maybe they just hate the fact that people who are different (LGBT, people of other faiths, people of other skin colors, etc.) are now receiving comparable civil rights and they consider this wrong for some stupid reason (religion, upbringing, etc.)
Based upon years of personal experiences, no one I've run into who complains publicly about "political correctness" being one of the major flaws in our society harbors any form of bigotry or hatred within themselves.
What they are mad about is how the shame game has flipped. One example is 50 years ago when you said a woman had a baby "out of wedlock" it put a level of shame on the woman. While it might have hurt the feelings of the woman it served a societal goal of discouraging birth to unmarried women, which was recognized as bad for the woman, bad for the child and ultimately bad for society.
Now the shame is put on the person for using a phrase like "out of wedlock". Instead of discouraging single women from having children, now we practically deify the single mother despite the consequences to the mother, child or society.
That example is a case where "political correctness" is doing real damage to society.
I don't want to hear any anecdotal stories about how great your single mom was or what a great single mom you or how much better your life as a single mom than it would be if you were with the child's father. Every serious study on the subject show the ill-effects to everyone. Progressives have long understood this, which is why Margret Sanger found the American Birth Control League in 1921.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore
It's very very rare that anything, taken to the extreme, is ever any good. No, we don't want weapons in schools, and rape is bad; but suspending an elementary student for "sexual assault" because he kissed a classmate on the hand; or suspension on weapons charges because of the shape of his breakfast pastry are cases where the PC pendulum has swung WAAAAAAY too far the other way.
No, the "right" to go around insulting people and entire races at will is not good, but it is better than the other extreme where normal people are afraid to utter anything resembling a thought without being punished.
Exactly right.
Banning a kid from certain Halloween costumes because someone might be offended is the silly end of political correctness, but there are many very serious uses of political correctness that have bad consequences for individuals and society.
Why should private citizens and entities be disallowed from calling out others for what they say? That is the other side of free speech, you can say what you want other people can criticize and dispute what you say.
If someone has the stones to say something unpopular then they should have the stones to take the criticism.
It's amazing how many don't get this. Yes, you have your free speech. I also have my free speech to criticize whatever it is you're saying.
To me there's almost a false dichotomy about PC today. I think a lot of PC takes things too far but that doesn't mean that people should just be able to spout whatever hateful rhetoric they want with no repercussions. That puts us back in the 1800s. There's a middle ground and it's hard to say where it is but just ceding to the extremes on each side isn't going to get us anywhere.
It's amazing how many don't get this. Yes, you have your free speech. I also have my free speech to criticize whatever it is you're saying.
To me there's almost a false dichotomy about PC today. I think a lot of PC takes things too far but that doesn't mean that people should just be able to spout whatever hateful rhetoric they want with no repercussions. That puts us back in the 1800s. There's a middle ground and it's hard to say where it is but just ceding to the extremes on each side isn't going to get us anywhere.
As with most issues nowadays too many people are entirely incapable of seeing or unwilling to see any middle ground. It is either the pseudo fascism of the most extreme forms of political correctness or it is the complete lack of restraint that may have defined a bygone era. If we look back in history to other times that were also dominated by the extremities of opposing ideologies what we see is death, horror and barbarity. We don't want to go back to times like those, even if we can trot down that road on a pleasingly smug high horse. Now that the people who may have lived through such times have almost died off on us, we may have no choice but to live through such things again in the near future, if only so future generations will have their own concrete examples in living memory to draw from.
It's gotten to the point where I don't really know where political correctness ends and censorship begins, or where being boorish, offensive, rude, or just "Being a Jerk" begins, and political correctness begins. There seem to be no clear demarcation points in that continuum.
As another poster noted, the popular understanding of "political correctness" means different things to different people. It also means different things across time.
To try and put this graphically, the progression seems to go:
Angry boor (jerk or bully)----->unapologetically old-fashioned------> Clueless about current social norms-------> Simply rude--------> A little insensitive ---------> Polite but not informed -------> politically correct ---------> Uptight ---------> Word Nazi --------> Full-on censorship
The Merriam-Webster definition is wholly inadequate to describe a very complex issue.
Actually, no, it is not.
Quote:
conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated
This pretty much sums everything up nicely. A certain subset of people fully believe that is it possible to completely eliminate any form of harm from the world. It starts as a legitimate desire to reduce harmful effects. People die from falls, so everything must have a guardrail and/or people must wear fall protection harnesses. The initial results are generally good; guardrails, anti-slip surfaces, and grab-handles have saved countless lives. But people still die, so more and more regulations and rules are put into place. Eventually you wind up with the classic "OSHA Cowboy":
This leads to the concept that anything bad that happens can always be blamed on something.
It's the exact same thing with PC speech.
The more often bad ideas are discussed, the more they become mainstream. There is talk that white supremacy has more of a "mainstream" following thanks to news shows constantly interviewing extreme racist Trump supporters. The anti-vax nutters were tinfoil-hat wearing basement dwellers until Oprah and McCarthy brought them into the sunlight. The more people hear an idea, no matter how horrid it may be, the more likely people will eventually think the idea is valid.
So the noble goal of the PC crowd is to eliminate the propagation of hate speech. If such speech is never uttered in "legitimate" conversations, then no one will think it is normal or mainstream. If no one thinks it is normal, then maybe eventually it will go away.
Unfortunately, the real world doesn't work that way. As speech become less and less free, the bar is lowered such that what was once normal speech is now "hate speech". You go from university "public places" back in the day where people could stand and say literally anything without repercussion (Don't like it? Walk a different path to class) to university "safe places" where it is all but impossible to say anything without being accused of hate.
No speech should be "engineered" from above. It is the first sign of the worst regimes in history. They dictated a PC speech that matched their idology and propaganda. But it always failed as it sounded fake and fabricated.
However, you are wrong about something else. It's not so much what I (as individual) can say or not, as what official and public organizations say. The media is heavily censored (at the time when any other censorship is rejected). Colleges, working places, businesses, municipalities, corporations, as well as all government branches. The health care industry. These are the places where PC talk is most evident.
^^^Which is pretty much all formal adult endeavor. You can be non-PC in your personal relationships. If you called your mother-in-law a fat pig, you'd probably be right but it won't be good for your marriage.
Adolescents are about the only one's who can get away with non-PC talk, and often they are bullies.
It's a ridiculous topic that won't die. Look at the bolded orgs, are they really part of some communist regime? No, they are America, pretty much the way they have always been. And if they weren't, it was in the days when workers had no rights.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
