Do you think "being politically correct" is really "correct"?
One aspect, race: it seems to have moments of illogical designation to the different kinds of people. African American, for example, is a misnomer, asserting that said person is of African descent but is of American upbringing or nationality. The person could just as easily be from the UK, or somewhere in mid-Asia. Speaking of Asia, we have the designation of "Asian" for one of such ethnic background, and properly so. However, then comes the issue with one from India (one example. There is also the Middle East and Russia), a land within Asia. Now if you take the viewpoint of it being it's own landmass separate of that of the rest of Asia due to it's much more obvious differences amongst itself than the rest of the Asian cultures, then of course the idea of separating their designation becomes obvious. But then why just stop at India? If we do not take such viewpoint, then why call those from India "Indians" instead of the "Asian" as we do for those that come from other parts of the continent...spare Middle East and most of Russia.
Also, it seems being "c" seems to take the stance against joking about with other people of different groups due to the stigma behind certain jokes and/or joking manners. Why not allow people to understand that when one jokes, it is what it is at face value, a joke...and then allow the people to come together with mutual acceptance of one another with the freedom of these light-hearted jokes?
I have no qualms with being PC, unless it affects tangibly. If it's being used to be polite and nice, then fine. But if it erodes the meaning of whatever you want to get at, or if it's plain silly, then no.
When could it ever erode your meaning? Surely you'd be able to find a way to explicitly state what you want to without being offensive.
Apologies for the crudeness and foul language of this following passage, I didn't write it, but it applies to what Nich and Minotaur said well.
"the only âââcasualties of political correctnessâââ are privileged people who have to think harder about what they say or do and realise that theyre not as enlightened and open minded and accepting as they would like to tell everyone that they are literally everyone else benefits from you changing your actions and even you benefit in the long run from learning not to be a complete piece of **** stop whining omfg"x
Also, why the idea of stealing apples? Is it implying that the "rivileged side" stole their apples from the "oppressed side"? Why not mention the idea that maybe the "rivileged side" gained their apples an honest way?
Tell me how straight white males have in an honest way gained rights disadvantaged groups have not. Historically, the privileged side has been stealing their apples, or rather stripping them of their privileges.
Also, how is the "oppressed side" automatically "oppressed" solely based on the fact that they have less amount of apples?
The apples are the privileges and rights we should all as human beings be entitled to and if you failed to understand this simple metaphor I feel sorry for anybody else unfortunate enough to discuss with you the concept that in our world there are people less fortunate than yourself. I'll respond to the longer posts when I can be bothered, I forgot how draining arguing with bigots can be.
"the only âââcasualties of political correctnessâââ are privileged people who have to think harder about what they say or do and realise that theyre not as enlightened and open minded and accepting as they would like to tell everyone that they are literally everyone else benefits from you changing your actions and even you benefit in the long run from learning not to be a complete piece of **** stop whining omfg" x
I'm going to guess...Tumblr. But that's beside the point..
Let's focus on the "literally everyone" aspect..and bring the idea of "Affirmative action" back to attention. Pray tell, how does -everyone- benefit from such a faulty system?
Tell me how straight white males have in an honest way gained rights disadvantaged groups have not. Historically, the privileged side has been stealing their apples, or rather stripping them of their privilege
Historically, the privileged side has had far more advanced societies.
The apples are the privileges and rights we should all as human beings be entitled to and if you failed to understand this simple metaphor
1) Oh yes, sorry I couldn't grasp such a "simple" metaphor. I probably got confused whenever they started to -steal the apples-.
2) Ok, we will roll with it. Apples = rights. So what you are saying is the "less privileged" groups must take rights away from the "rivileged" groups in order to achieve equality?
unfortunate enough to discuss with you the concept that in our world there are people less fortunate than yourself. I'll respond to the longer posts when I can be bothered, I forgot how draining arguing with bigots can be.
Whoa, calm down with that hostility/holier than thou attitude.
Pazx, as a black individual myself and therefore part of the minority (AKA the oppressed), I feel rather offended that you, a privileged Caucasian, feel it necessary to speak on my behalf. Not only that, but I am also offended that you state that I must take an "unpolite" approach in order to achieve equality, as if to imply that because my ancestors were barbaric and got what they want through aggressive means I must do the same. Check your privileges.
Pazx, as a black individual myself and therefore part of the minority (AKA the oppressed), I feel rather offended that you, a privileged Caucasian, feel it necessary to speak on my behalf. Not only that, but I am also offended that you state that I must take an "unpolite" approach in order to achieve equality, as if to imply that because my ancestors were barbaric and got what they want through aggressive means I must do the same. Check your privileges.
There is a fundamental problem with this system of "political correctness" which has yet to be fleshed out: The euphamism.
When speaking of a subject that is sensitive for whatever reason, the "politically correct" individual will most often use euphamisms to convey their meaning. However, if that meaning itself is derogatory or otherwise objectionable, the substitution not only becomes pointless, but quickly devolves into an extension of the euphamised term (an occurrence known as "euphamism treadmilling"). Here's an example.
Idiot: originally meaning a commoner without the rare benefit of a formal education, this became a "politically correct" description of anyone whose mentality was impared to the severest degree. Mentally Retarded: literally meant having slowed mental processes, this became the "politically correct" replacement of idiot, moron, and related terms. Mentally Challenged: a more recent euphamism of retarded which is already on its way out.
And so on.
Unfortunately, as these terms continue to be deemed inappropriate by the "politically correct", otherwise neutral words continue to be reduced to vulgar insults and the underlying issues are never addressed. "Political correctness" exists, not to promote equality, but to maintain a pretence of it.
As far as using "Caucasian" as opposed to "white" goes I suggest you use the latter as there are significant differences.
White suggests skin color, which includes elements of discrimination which are still used today.
As "retarded" became commonly used as a slur rather than it's intended usage (which you are correct on) it makes sense for the technical term to be altered to something that would be considered less negative.
Since we are allowing time to dictate how a word is used, we are no longer allowed to use sausage or wallet in public, because these both are now pornographic words in context.
It's pathetic to see posts like this from people who are supposed to moderate our community.
I'm offended that moderators are viewed as only janitors and not members of the community.
"gay = bad" is harmful.
Your mention of "white = race" is harmful.
If you are going to be debating in this thread and accusing others for bigotry, please follow your own rules and do not slip up to the point of calling the kettle black.
It's pathetic to see posts like this from people who are supposed to moderate our community.
Moderators are people too. They have humor, they have perspective, to imply moderators must be mindless drones is an extremely subjective point of view and disrespectful.
"gay = bad" is harmful.
Never has gay been a bad thing. It was rejected as actually being an orientation that is acceptable, yes, but it is not bad. Many have grown to except homosexuality and do not descriminate.
Yeah, sorry Pazx, I hate to break this to you but being in the minority does not excuse you from discriminating others yourself, on behalf of equality. And saying that discrimination is a necessity because of racial "rivileges" is a extremely unproductive stance in the coarse of humanity. It is also this form of thinking that got your post deleted. So, next time, cool down on the emotional reactions (my original point).
[Post was deleted before I could begin response..will post from what I can remember off-hand]
To the "Everyday Sexism" point: Women are not the only ones that receive sexism, men receive it to. As for who receives it more, publicly we know that women do, due to the fact that they are more vocal about it, but can we say this 100% sure? No. Unless you have data that shows this to be so. This also brings up an interesting point, some women view certain acts as sexist and degrading, while some men view the same acts as compliments.
It's akin to the rape scenario in which there seems to be a hefty victimization amongst women with sexual assault, although the data shows that women and men are victimized equally, though more reports are made by women, meaning that less men than women are speaking up. [Will find data later, a tad bit busy at the moment]
-----
To the point on George Zimmerman: Er..you should know that given the workings of the legal system, they made the right call. Plus I fail to see how the killing of one minority member by another helps your point...
As for police, Have you ever seen this video? [[WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT]]. It is shown by police during their training. In it, an officer is very lenient with using force, and is shot dead because of it. The officers are taught that being too lenient can end up with you being dead. Now this alone wouldn't do it, but this, along with other videos or real life cases, could result in officers being a bit "jumpy on the gun". As for POC being more "targeted" by police for the violent actions, I question if this is because they are POC or if because statistically POC are involved in more crimes, thus increasing the opportunities for such events to happen.
-----
To what you said to Mino: I do have to point something out... You had stated previously that "If someone says "I'm offended by X because it is racist/sexist/ableist/homophobic/bigoted" (simply "that's racist" for example) or "as a member of a disadvantaged group, X offends me" then you better shut up and think about what you said because chances are they're right"...yet when Mino did such that you responded essentially arguing against him with what seemed to be pointing out your sexual orientation as a form of validation..
When could it ever erode your meaning? Surely you'd be able to find a way to explicitly state what you want to without being offensive.
Apologies for the crudeness and foul language of this following passage, I didn't write it, but it applies to what Nich and Minotaur said well.
"the only âââcasualties of political correctnessâââ are privileged people who have to think harder about what they say or do and realise that theyre not as enlightened and open minded and accepting as they would like to tell everyone that they are literally everyone else benefits from you changing your actions and even you benefit in the long run from learning not to be a complete piece of **** stop whining omfg" x
It erodes meaning because sometimes, long, synthetic sounding, politically correct phrases would skirt the phrase, and in the end around the actual meaning, making the phrase in the end sound just pitifully laughable.
For example, the way company policies dictate that janitors and bus drivers have to be called sanitary supervisor or transport captain makes it all very artificial, and a tad bit patronizing.
On what grounds do you assert that they are "retard peoples"? Do you have their medical records with you? Are you calling them "arabs" because they immigrated from the Arabian Peninsula or because they are citizens of Saudi Arabia? If not, you shouldn't be calling them "arabs". And yes, Ishmael is a biblical name.
Ok, wrong words. Ill just call them stuipeds. And they arabs because they are arabs. They speak arabic, they are most muslims but some also christians, and they identify themselved as arabs.
And for your general info, Syrians are arabs too. Also eygeptians. And Iraqis. And libyans. And algeareans. And even some afgans.
This, ladies and gentelmans, is politicly correct in action. Thanks for demonstrating it Fishpreferred.
And for your general info, Syrians are arabs too. Also eygeptians. And Iraqis. And libyans. And algeareans. And even some afgans.
No. "Arab" is short for Arabian. "Arabian" refers to someone from the Arabian Peninsula. Therefore, calling Egyptian, Libyan, Algerian, and Afgan people "arabs" is incorrect; literally, even if not politically.
The entire concept is based on a "Speech Nirvana" where no one ever says anything that could hurt anyone else's feelings, ever. It snowballed and is still snowballing to the point that I honestly don't know if what I say hurts someone else's feelings. Anything, with enough bias and persistence, can be offensive to SOMEONE somewhere.
The very last line is actually a very good point. I've actually seen plenty of satirical writings that poke at this flaw of being PC by having someone go about their day completely normal, and then get yelled at for some absolutely mundane act they did that one conceived as being offensive towards a certain group.
(i.e. walking while someone nearby is in a wheelchair, mentioning how delicious ice cream is while someone nearby is lactose intolerant, etc.)
