PC is stupid eh?

[Kevin Trotter]

I agree PC is wrong.We should be able to think or say anything we want no matter how crude and insensitive it is to whatever group of people we want to. And if I want to ride thru black neihborhoods and beat someone with a ballbat , why should I get more time than a garden variety criminal who robs or kills soley on the basis of economic gain? Who cares that the same individuals

harboring these ideas may be a personnel director

who can act onthose thoughts and changes hundreds of lives , why it's his Godgiven right by God!

Who cares that for years women and minorities were routinely paid less and shut out of jobs ,that black slaves were hung for learning how to read or write and that legacy of distrust of authority lives on today? I mean this past twenty odd years of affirmative action has been hell on the MAJORITY. I mean now that most of the CEO's are now women and minorities er..that's not right it still the same old white guys running things my mistake. Well the point is why can't it be like it used to be when we could be honest and call a spade a spade (no pun intended) Whats wrong with me telling off color jokes , or making fun of gays and there stupid parade? Just cause I talk like that doesn't mean I act upon it.I mean the CONSTITUTION gives me the right to free speech,and I'll say what I want when I want. Only lets stop using the code words please. When you say MINORITIES use the word you really would like to use. Don't say MAJORITY say what you really mean.See the real problem with PC is that even the people against it still adhere to it. Perhaps for lack of balls or maybe out of politeness. So lets not fool ourselves. If you are so offended by the Gay rights parade and of their lifestyle,

call em what you call em around your MAJORITY friends in the privacy of your own home.

By the way I'M a minority

[ 07-07-2002, 03:00 PM: Message edited by: Steve Schacher ]

[Guest Grayfox]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Race Bannon IV:

Perhaps for lack of balls or maybe out of politeness.

---

my reason is out of respect. i respect everyone until they give me reason not to. or until i feel i should speak my mind about something, then i let loose, and i dont give a shit on who i offend.

if it offends you then cover yer ears till im done. its my right, and ive fought to defend that right. just cause im a whitey, and i have a shaved head does not make me a nazi, or a "nigger" hater, or a facist... far from it.

i respect everyone, until they give me reason to not respect them anymore. criminals i have no respect for. men who beat on their women i have no respect for. hypocrites i have no respect for... and i dont care if theyre white, black, hispanic, chinese, japanese, jewish etc... you see where im going. and im sure the majority of people that post here agree.

nuff said

[ 07-07-2002, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: Grayfox ]

[Menchise]

quote:

---

Part of what is at the root of Political Correctness is this country's obsession with what divides us instead of what unites us.

---

I think that is exactly what PC is working against: the false perception that cultural differences contribute to national division.

quote:

---

People should equally focus on the things that we have in common. It is what we have in common that unites us in Humankind.

---

That is not the only thing that unites us, and humankind would suck big time if that was the case, because then it would just be a celebration of sameness.

quote:

---

Political Correctness, to me, is an attempt to force commonality where none exists by altering the meaning of words to make people fit into groups to serve an agenda.

---

I don't know of any case, apart from legal battles (hence my dislike of PC law enforcement), where Political Correctness changes the meaning of words. As far as I know, the social movement merely suggests alternative phrases, many of which are just common sense.

You mentioned that its agenda is to force commonality where none exists. I disagree. I think PC supporters recognize that people are different, and they're not trying to make everyone the same; in fact they're against making everyone the same. All they're doing is suggesting alternative phrases and mannerisms that avoid unintentional offense. None of the suggestions that I know of would make any fundamental or even major changes to language or mannerisms, and it certainly doesn't suggest any thought control as some people claim. It's just about being more culturally aware in social relations.

By the way, I think you should examine the agendas of some of the more vocal opponents of PC in the political arena, because I think they're trying to maintain and/or expand division where none is intrinsic.

[ 07-08-2002, 01:51 AM: Message edited by: Menchise ]

[CommanderJohnson]

Ok, since I was one of the people who said PC was stupid on the other thread, I better post here.

PC *is definitely* stupid.

I should be able to say anything I want, and if it offends someone who hears it, they should be able to express their discontent with it, and if I decide to apologize or change the way I talk based on their objection, so be it, but I should be able to have that choice without all of society being immersed in this idea that certain words and phrases are off limit even if it doesn't offend them. What annoys me the most is when people advocate PC *not* because they or any of their friends advocate it, but because it is percieved by the media as the "right" thing to do.

The most obvious example of PC gone bad:

Black/White

10 years ago, if describing someone, it could be said "that person is black" or "that person is white". It makes sense. If you see someone, the first thing that pops into your head isn't their nationality, or their country of origin, or what "politically correct term" you should use, it's how they look. The person has white skin, or black skin, or whatever other tone, and that's how you describe them. At some point over the past 10 years, "black" and "white" stopped being "acceptable" terms in conversation. Now they have to be replaced with "African American" or "Caucasion". What the hell? Why? Most of my friends that are BLACK don't care if I refer to them as BLACK if i'm describing them. My WHITE friends sure as hell don't care if I say they are WHITE. But for some reason, PC says that you shouldn't refer to people as BLACK OR WHITE. But for some reason the radical PC advocates seem to think it's wrong. I fail to see how, it's a color....it's a descriptive ADJECTIVE. The shirt is blue, the person is black/white. By society and PC advocates supporting the changing of language in order to please a minority, all it is doing is enforcing the gender/race divisions that it claims to get rid of. When I need to think about people specifically as "African-American" or "Caucasion", all it is doing is reminding me that there is some racial based need for me to change my language which sets up even more of a division.

[Lotharr]

Interesting points.....I was just wondering.

But a few things...

quote:

---

men were not made to be single parents. it is not in our genes to be caring and loving... men are hunter gatherers by nature, and its a culture shock for us to be thrown into a situation to where we need to take care of a child by ourselves, and to play both roles.

---

I don't agree with that. I find the potential in anyone exists to be anything. Just because I'm male does not genetically predispose me to walk with a swagger, prefer beer to wine, or not be as caring or loving as a female parent.

I think that is all it is. Culture shock. In our society (and almost everywhere) else it falls on the woman to take care of the kids. It is just expected because of systems of patriarchy that still exists in many forms. I feel that any man can make an outstanding single parent if they deprogram.

Any single parent environment is considered lacking. But I can't say for sure that just because a woman is that single parent it is better for the child.

The only thing I will give you is that higher levels of testosterone in males make us inherently more aggressive. But that's about it. Well the above is all perception maybe I'll get back with after I hit college and see some hard data to the contrary.

quote:

---

you show me a guy who says he is just as sensetive and nurturing as a woman and I will show you either a full blown homosexual or someone who wishes they were a woman.

---

I guess I should switch to wine and lose that swagger....NOT!

quote:

---

This is thought control, just as "hate crimes" is thought control. How do you know what a person was thinking as they comitted a crime?

---

Your kidding right? Hate crime is something that can be proven with supporting evidence. Hate crime is a serious threat to a multicultural society. A person can say whatever they like but if they cross the line their history will catch up with them....drop the axe then the house.heh heh!

quote:

---

Like I said, I don't go around insulting people for sport, and most people don't either. But if I wanted to, then yes I could because we have this thing called the First Amendment (another topic for another time). And, if 245,000,000 decided to call the other 5,000,000 names, who's going to stop them?

---

The people of course. As time goes on people realize that what was once acceptable is no longer. Justice and liberty. That is why one can say whatever one wants but they have be prepared to interact with a society that is going to review those ideas. I think most people would agree that sesitivity to others has done nothing but allow for more positive interaction between various groups.

quote:

---

Yes.

Today, it goes even further than that. As Soback and Tac were illustrating, Political Correctness is a one-way street. If you're a protected class belonging to the American Left then PC rules, but if you are on the Right, then the rules rule against you

---

I'm not following on that last part. I do believe the majority have more responsibility to take care in what is said. However if anyone slanders another they can face prosecution. I donÔÇÖt think it is such a burden or unfair.

I am a white male and I work with African American females. I have to be careful what I say. I want to be careful what I say. They are good people and competent professionals who assist me greatly in accomplishing the mission. I don't want to offend them...I wouldn't want them to look at me with disappointment because I didn't respect a cultural sensitivity. This, in my opinion, is a byproduct of PC...not too bad in my opinion.

quote:

---

i respect everyone, until they give me reason to not respect them anymore. criminals i have no respect for. men who beat on their women i have no respect for. hypocrites i have no respect for... and i dont care if theyre white, black, hispanic, chinese, japanese, jewish etc... you see where im going. and im sure the majority of people that post here agree.

---

So then if a small group come together to represent the greater group that is busy trying to make ends meet and say: "Using the term oriental in language is offensive to this group of citizens after we examine where this word came from and what it really means to us etc" Then you should have no problem in using the correct term because this shows respect. Right? So no one should have to cover their ears because you have that respect and will choose to do the right thing by those people ...right?

[Lotharr]

So really all I'm sayin is I'd rather have PC than not. Anyone can review a situation and say "that was just crazy". It happens a lot I bet. But I think PC is just a manifistation of people wanting to do the right thing. Sometimes it's a great thing and sometimes it gets goofy....

quote:

---

I should be able to say anything I want, and if it offends someone who hears it, they should be able to express their discontent with it, and if I decide to apologize or change the way I talk based on their objection, so be it, but I should be able to have that choice without all of society being immersed in this idea that certain words and phrases are off limit even if it doesn't offend them. What annoys me the most is when people advocate PC *not* because they or any of their friends advocate it, but because it is percieved by the media as the "right" thing to do.

---

See I just wanted a little explanation to go with that fine initial summary. And I believe PC goes deeper than the media. The media have a way of doing strange things to reality.

[echo]

I just want to know one thing

Can I still sit "Indian" style???

[Guest Grayfox]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lotharr:

But I think PC is just a manifistation of people wanting to do the right thing

---

true, but people tend to blow that waaaaaaaaaay out of proportion, which ruins the true meaning of it for most everyone else.

[CommanderJohnson]

Note on Hate Crimes:

Ok, I think murder, rape, torture, and other hideous acts are bad things and people should be thrown in jail until they are rehabilitated (under the current system, life or the death penalty, since the rehabilitation/justice system sucks). Labeling things as "hate crimes" though, is wrong and goes against freedom because your punishing people more because of their personal beliefs. Beliefs should never be punished, only actions based on them. If a bunch of black people decide to take a white male and torture him, saw off his limbs, and then shoot him through the head, they should be charged with whatever logical, basic crimes they committed (torture, murder in the first degree, illegal possession of a firearm, etc). Whatever applies. There should not be specific "hate crime" legislation that says because the black person(s) belief(s) was that all white people should be killed, tortured, etc, they should be punished more. How is THAT crime any worse than a white male doing the same stuff to another white male because the target person was screwing the perpetrator's wife? What matters is the crime, not the belief system or motivation behind it. At the point you start legislating belief systems and motives as bad, your oppressing people's ability (right?) to believe what they want.

Side note, sort of off topic on the justice system and rehabilitation of criminals:

Currently, the ability/system for rehabilitation for major criminals in the US is a joke. It doesn't work, and there isn't much that says it does. Easiest proof it doesn't work? The US government keeps tabs on sex offenders who are let out of prison to warn people they are living near (if they were rehabilitated, there would be no need for a warning...), then, to top it off, the people who are let out usually get arrested AGAIN anyway. Moral of the story? "Rehabilitation" in it's current form, doesn't work. There should be more life sentences.

[Lotharr]

quote:

---

I just want to know one thing

Can I still sit "Indian" style???

---

Your fired!

[CommanderJohnson]

I dont have a link to the article cause it was a few months ago on MSNBC, but did you hear about the group that had a petition because they wanted them to rename the Lord of the Rings Movie "The Two Towers" because they claimed it was a "marketing ploy" to get money off of September 11th's destruction of the WTC towers?