Political Correctness thread

[Whiskeyjack]

Hot Take: PC culture helped propel Trump's campaign. Political correctness doesn't actually make people any less bigoted. It just forces them to hide and channel their fears in a way that makes them susceptible to demagoguery.

 

[connor_in]

I really hope that was real. I'm almost crying.

Look at their faces. I think they knew what to expect, but some of them still look taken aback. Its like the difference knowing the tackle is coming and feeling the tackle actually occurring.

 

[connor_in]

LOL. For real... there will be copious amounts of microaggression, veiled racism, and minute sexism flowing through this thread. Needs a disclaimer IMO.

So you are saying I need to post a micro aggression warning?

 

[connor_in]

Might as well change the title of this thread to "The Pinko Commie Liberal Bashing Only Thread"

No no no no no...Liberals can be outraged by some of the levels of PC

Lax said he leans left and this taken to the degree it sometimes is taken to sometimes bothers him as well.

I posted the Tina Fey item...not exactly bosom buddies politically with Sarah Palin.


I am not looking for people to go full monty the other way. But for someone to get upset because someone refers to Bruce instead of Caitlyn Jenner, especially when referring to Olympic era Bruce or even early career Kim K Bruce (the times he still went by Bruce), is just silly.

 

[wizards8507]

I am not looking for people to go full monty the other way. But for someone to get upset because someone refers to Bruce instead of Caitlyn Jenner, especially when referring to Olympic era Bruce or even early career Kim K Bruce (the times he still went by Bruce), is just silly.

He also has a Y chromosome and a penis, so... yeah...

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

#safespace #diversity

 

[woolybug25]

No no no no no...Liberals can be outraged by some of the levels of PC

Lax said he leans left and this taken to the degree it sometimes is taken to sometimes bothers him as well.

I posted the Tina Fey item...not exactly bosom buddies politically with Sarah Palin.


I am not looking for people to go full monty the other way. But for someone to get upset because someone refers to Bruce instead of Caitlyn Jenner, especially when referring to Olympic era Bruce or even early career Kim K Bruce (the times he still went by Bruce), is just silly.

Can you give me one example of a topic regarding something being "non-PC" where the topic in particular wasn't a left leaning topic? Even the Tina Fey example wasnt that.

I give this thread 3 pages before it turns into a horrific bloodbath where it ends up being a safe-zone for any racist, bigoted, sexist, etc comment one desires.

A horrid idea for a thread.

 

[GoldenDome]

He also has a Y chromosome and a penis, so... yeah...

How do you know bro??

 

[Cackalacky]

No no no no no...Liberals can be outraged by some of the levels of PC

Lax said he leans left and this taken to the degree it sometimes is taken to sometimes bothers him as well.

I posted the Tina Fey item...not exactly bosom buddies politically with Sarah Palin.


I am not looking for people to go full monty the other way. But for someone to get upset because someone refers to Bruce instead of Caitlyn Jenner, especially when referring to Olympic era Bruce or even early career Kim K Bruce (the times he still went by Bruce), is just silly.

What is microaggression? How does my microaggression feel? Does microaggression count as trolling? Maybe there should be a disclaimer that microaggression is allowable or nonexistent? Conflicted. Confused. I am of course kidding. This thread has much. potential.

 

[IrishLax]

Can you give me one example of a topic regarding something being "non-PC" where the topic in particular wasn't a left leaning topic? Even the Tina Fey example wasnt that.

But that's not what he was saying. He wasn't talking about liberal topics, he was talking about liberal people. He said that "liberals can be outraged by some level of PC"... which isn't exactly a mind blowing statement.

Political correctness is a leftist invention, so it's virtually impossible to find an application of political correctness by any right winger to a right wing ideology. But, again, that's not what connor said.

An illustration of what he's saying is someone like Seinfeld (or other comedians) that are avowed liberals but refuse to play college campuses anymore for fear of triggering the PC police.

And an example of what he's saying in practice would be a liberal that doesn't abide by PC might engaging someone like Milo on the topic of the gender wage gap and say "I disagree with your statement, and here's why"... whereas someone who is PC would say "your statement is sexist and misogynistic and makes me fear for my safety". Ergo, many liberals hate that kind of dismissive, overly-sensitive person for either 1) making the entire progressive movement look petulant 2) refusing to discuss the actual merits of the argument and therefor fail to sway anyone to their side or 3) for making it impossible for even liberal-aligned people to talk frankly for fear of saying the smallest thing deemed "offensive" and incurring backlash.

I give this thread 3 pages before it turns into a horrific bloodbath where it ends up being a safe-zone for any racist, bigoted, sexist, etc comment one desires.

A horrid idea for a thread.

Can't tell if this is high brow sarcasm.

 

[NDPhilly]

Can you give me one example of a topic regarding something being "non-PC" where the topic in particular wasn't a left leaning topic? Even the Tina Fey example wasnt that.

I give this thread 3 pages before it turns into a horrific bloodbath where it ends up being a safe-zone for any racist, bigoted, sexist, etc comment one desires.

A horrid idea for a thread.

Found the liberal

 

[connor_in]

I was sent this anonymously. I will credit later if they give the ok.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iKcWu0tsiZM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Bubbles]

Chapter 1, page 1 of the liberal handbook: mock, deride, smear and slander until popular opinion is on your side for fear of the same treatment.

You have all been warned.

 

[greyhammer90]

Chapter 1, page 1 of the liberal handbook: mock, deride, smear and slander until popular opinion is on your side for fear of the same treatment.

You have all been warned.

Found the moderate.

 

[Bubbles]

Found the moderate.

You haven't been paying attention.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Was actually watching a youtube video of "The Year in News" from MTV from around 1989. Kirk Loder made mention of how this new thing called PC was gaining roots across some college campuses. Said something to the effect that "short" people were now being called "vertically challenged."He went on to referenced a Time magazine front page cover article about it.

I guess my question is this: What, when, and where did the origins of PC actually start?

 

[IrishLax]

Was actually watching a youtube video of "The Year in News" from MTV from around 1989. Kirk Loder made mention of how this new thing called PC was gaining roots across some college campuses. Said something to the effect that "short" people were now being called "vertically challenged."He went on to referenced a Time magazine front page cover article about it.

I guess my question is this: What, when, and where did the origins of PC actually start?

This is a really good question. It's sometimes hard to trace the roots of terminology or movements to a singular event/time pre-internet. It's interesting because ideas like "micro-aggressions" did not exist until circa 2012 and this is verified via Google. But political correctness pre-dates the internet.

Growing up in the 90s everyone was taught "sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me"... kids are taught the literal opposite today. They're told their verbal actions can be considered "violence" that does "irreparable harm" to someone.

 

[Wild Bill]

This is a really good question. It's sometimes hard to trace the roots of terminology or movements to a singular event/time pre-internet. It's interesting because ideas like "micro-aggressions" did not exist until circa 2012 and this is verified via Google. But political correctness pre-dates the internet.

Growing up in the 90s everyone was taught "sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me"... kids are taught the literal opposite today. They're told their verbal actions can be considered "violence" that does "irreparable harm" to someone.

Just started googling the history and it's interesting. Looks like I'm going to have myself a wild Friday night.

It's going to be a real treat dealing with these enlightened little pricks in the workplace.

 

[NDgradstudent]

This is a really good question. It's sometimes hard to trace the roots of terminology or movements to a singular event/time pre-internet. It's interesting because ideas like "micro-aggressions" did not exist until circa 2012 and this is verified via Google. But political correctness pre-dates the internet.

Growing up in the 90s everyone was taught "sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me"... kids are taught the literal opposite today. They're told their verbal actions can be considered "violence" that does "irreparable harm" to someone.

The 'old left' view held famously by Hugo Black among others was that the whole point of free speech is to protect the person who thinks differently. This includes cultural pressure as well as legal injunction, as Tocqueville and Mill understood.

Many 'new left' Marxists, particularly in the academy, rejected all of this in the 1960s. Herbert Marcuse introduced the idea of "repressive tolerance" which is basically a Marxist rejection of free speech as serving the interests of the bourgeois and status-quo forces in a society. 'PC culture' is a crude application of this sort of theory (e.g., white men are not allowed to hold opinions about topics such as affirmative action).

It is very difficult to have an adult discussion with students about serious topics when they are so delicate and cannot handle hearing an opinion other than their own expressed. As I said earlier in my experience ND students are much better at handling disagreement than students at other schools. The reason for this in my view is that a lot of the students here are conservative and so there are decent odds you aren't the only person arguing from that perspective. At typical schools the would-be conservative or libertarian students who reject the diversity cult are so few that the Asch effect kicks in and they are afraid to express a different view.

Why does this bizarre behavior on campus matter? One reason is that our entire political and legal system is based upon argument and division. Can today's college students sustain that culture and its institutions? Don't count on it.

And by the way, when they do start passing 'hate speech' laws, which are commonly used in other countries to repress unpopular opinions, the First Amendment will not save us. These people will be (in some cases already are) the judges who will be enforcing these provisions.

 

[JughedJones]

I was about to post in the "What Are You Drinking" thread, and I saw this.

The "anti-PC" thing is both the most hateful, ridiculous, backward institution I've ever seen in my 40 years, and also justified to a degree.

Liberals and progressives were the first to coin the term as a self-mocking pejorative to check folks among our ranks that had gone too far. Now it's turned into a reflex argument against anyone that says anything rude and racist people disagree with.

Trump's entire campaign rests in the (very popular notion) that politically correct speech is less favorable than any horrible thing that one can possibly come up with. A significant amount of the last (R) debate was devoted to how large the front-runner's penis is.

This is fucking ridiculous. We should all be ashamed.


I spend almost all of my waking hours convincing at-risk youth that there are certain levels of appropriateness that are expected in our community... I'll just leave that there.

When I grew up. We called 'politically correct' 'polite.'

Where has that America gone? We're all fucked.

 

[kmoose]

I was about to post in the "What Are You Drinking" thread, and I saw this.

The "anti-PC" thing is both the most hateful, ridiculous, backward institution I've ever seen in my 40 years, and also justified to a degree.

Liberals and progressives were the first to coin the term as a self-mocking pejorative to check folks among our ranks that had gone too far. Now it's turned into a reflex argument against anyone that says anything rude and racist people disagree with.

Trump's entire campaign rests in the (very popular notion) that politically correct speech is less favorable than any horrible thing that one can possibly come up with. A significant amount of the last (R) debate was devoted to how large the front-runner's penis is.

This is fucking ridiculous. We should all be ashamed.


I spend almost all of my waking hours convincing at-risk youth that there are certain levels of appropriateness that are expected in our community... I'll just leave that there.

When I grew up. We called 'politically correct' 'polite.'

Where has that America gone? We're all fucked.

You obviously didn't watch the debate if you think that was "a significant amount".

 

[JughedJones]

You obviously didn't watch the debate if you think that was "a significant amount".

Any amount of discussion about penis size in a Presidential debate is significant. Please. Let's keep the bar somewhat off the ground.

Was actually watching a youtube video of "The Year in News" from MTV from around 1989. Kirk Loder made mention of how this new thing called PC was gaining roots across some college campuses. Said something to the effect that "short" people were now being called "vertically challenged."He went on to referenced a Time magazine front page cover article about it.

I guess my question is this: What, when, and where did the origins of PC actually start?

It's Kurt Loder, and I hope I've answered your question!

 

[woolybug25]

But that's not what he was saying. He wasn't talking about liberal topics, he was talking about liberal people. He said that "liberals can be outraged by some level of PC"... which isn't exactly a mind blowing statement.

Political correctness is a leftist invention, so it's virtually impossible to find an application of political correctness by any right winger to a right wing ideology. But, again, that's not what connor said.

An illustration of what he's saying is someone like Seinfeld (or other comedians) that are avowed liberals but refuse to play college campuses anymore for fear of triggering the PC police.

And an example of what he's saying in practice would be a liberal that doesn't abide by PC might engaging someone like Milo on the topic of the gender wage gap and say "I disagree with your statement, and here's why"... whereas someone who is PC would say "your statement is sexist and misogynistic and makes me fear for my safety". Ergo, many liberals hate that kind of dismissive, overly-sensitive person for either 1) making the entire progressive movement look petulant 2) refusing to discuss the actual merits of the argument and therefor fail to sway anyone to their side or 3) for making it impossible for even liberal-aligned people to talk frankly for fear of saying the smallest thing deemed "offensive" and incurring backlash.

I don't disagree with anything here, but what does any of it have to do with my point? This thread is already and will continue to slowly degrade into one where people post simply because it's a forum where whey can post whatever hateful topic they choose, as the stage has been set for its acceptance. I mean, who wants to be the PC Police in a thread mocking it?

Can't tell if this is high brow sarcasm.

My pinky is rising.

 

[JughedJones]

This is a really good question. It's sometimes hard to trace the roots of terminology or movements to a singular event/time pre-internet. It's interesting because ideas like "micro-aggressions" did not exist until circa 2012 and this is verified via Google. But political correctness pre-dates the internet.

Growing up in the 90s everyone was taught "sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me"... kids are taught the literal opposite today. They're told their verbal actions can be considered "violence" that does "irreparable harm" to someone.

I'm not sure where you're coming from here. I have respect for you and appreciate where you come from in this community. But, are you saying that words should never be considered violence, and that they can't do irreparable harm to people?

The term 'micro-aggression' is admittedly annoying, but it defines a very real thing. This is where smart people get hostile with each other.I know you understand all of this, but the terminology rightfully pisses you off. You're right, and I'm right.

 

[Cackalacky]

I am not gonna post in this thread any more after this as I feel this will just end up allowing the Trump in people to finally come out. That's fine and I won't judge. Speaking ones mind is great but somethings are better left unsaid and some of the assertions already being leveled in here are cringeworthy at a minimum.

For example, the ideas that verbal abuse is not as damaging as physical abuse is cookoo. As a first hand observer of Long term verbal abuse, it can forever alter and cripple a person no matter how strong their personal constitution is. Sure... Is a few personal insults that bad??? We don't know how people internalize stuff like that. But say a person is weak or stupid or dumb because of their responses to what they perceive as aggression is a bit presumptive.

As with most things, we know more about ourselves now than we did when Kurt Loder broadcasted on MTV. Remember when Jenny McCarthy was a hot piece as ass on Remote Control? Now she is an antivaxxer. We know more about the damage certain aspects of society do to our citizens. We know that long term verbal abuse can cause people to do things and think things even physical abuse can't.

Anyway, y'all have fun in here in what will eventually begin to resemble a Trump rally hosted by Sarah Palin in camo.

 

[JughedJones]

I am not gonna post in this thread any more after this as I feel this will just end up allowing the Trump in people to finally come out. That's fine and I won't judge. Speaking ones mind is great but somethings are better left unsaid and some of the assertions already being leveled in here are cringeworthy at a minimum.

For example, the ideas that verbal abuse is not as damaging as physical abuse is cookoo. As a first hand observer of Long term verbal abuse, it can forever alter and cripple a person no matter how strong their personal constitution is. Sure... Is a few personal insults that bad??? We don't know how people internalize stuff like that. But say a person is weak or stupid or dumb because of their responses to what they perceive as aggression is a bit presumptive.

As with most things, we know more about ourselves now than we did when Kurt Loder broadcasted on MTV. Remember when Jenny McCarthy was a hot piece as ass on Remote Control? Now she is an antivaxxer. We know more about the damage certain aspects of society do to our citizens. We know that long term verbal abuse can cause people to do things and think things even physical abuse can't.

Anyway, y'all have fun in here in what will eventually begin to resemble a Trump rally hosted by Sarah Palin in camo.

/slowclap

I would have never posted if I knew that was coming. Way better than me trying to mumble my way through.

 

[wizards8507]

A significant amount of the last (R) debate was devoted to how large the front-runner's penis is.

1. There was a single statement to that effect, not a significant portion of the debate.
2. Trump is the only person who said anything about it.
3. Most of us denouncing PC openly detest Trump and do not defend his demeanor.

When I grew up. We called 'politically correct' 'polite.'

Where has that America gone? We're all fucked.

The biggest difference is that politeness is enforced (if you want to call it that) by social norms and standards. Political correctness is enforced by intellectual gatekeepers who solely determine what is acceptable discourse. The standards they set are designed to suppress dissent, not encourage politeness.

My God, there are college campuses where you can't say "America is the land of opportunity" because that's racist. That's fucked.

Other things you can't say:
-The most qualified person should get the job.
-Everyone can succeed if they work hard enough.
-We're going to raise enough money to get Johnny that new wheelchair.
-Let me help you with that (to a person with a disability).

Are you fucking kidding me? PC literally dictates that you can't raise money for a disabled person because it'll make you feel good about yourself so the charity is illegitimate. You can't help a person who may be struggling with a physical disability because it portrays them as incapable. So be a good little PC warrior and slam the door behind you if you see someone approaching in a wheelchair. I'm sure they'll thank you for treating them as equals.

 

[notredomer23]

Words can definitely hurt for sure if you are insulting one and getting personal. Political correctness is not necessarily a bad thing, but nowadays it means if you disagree with my view, it is a personal insult to me and you are a hateful bigot. It is not just liberals. Conservatives too.

You can't discuss the wage gap without being deemed sexist.
You can't discuss women in the military without being deemed sexist.
You can't discuss guns rationally on either side.
You can't discuss problems in Chicago and other inner cities without being deemed a racist.
You can't discuss refugees without being considered an Islamophobe.
You can't discuss gay marriage without libs thinking you're a bigot or conservatives claiming you're infringing on the sanctity of marriage or it's gonna destroy churches.

These are just a few and obvious generalities, but instead of being offended, people need to embrace the other side. Have an intellectual discussion and try and see the other side. Neither side wants to listen.

 

[JughedJones]

1. There was a single statement to that effect, not a significant portion of the debate.
2. Trump is the only person who said anything about it.
3. Most of us denouncing PC openly detest Trump and do not defend his demeanor.


The biggest difference is that politeness is enforced (if you want to call it that) by social norms and standards. Political correctness is enforced by intellectual gatekeepers who solely determine what is acceptable discourse. The standards they set are designed to suppress dissent, not encourage politeness.

My God, there are college campuses where you can't say "America is the land of opportunity" because that's racist. That's fucked.

Other things you can't say:
-The most qualified person should get the job.
-Everyone can succeed if they work hard enough.
-We're going to raise enough money to get Johnny that new wheelchair.
-Let me help you with that (to a person with a disability).

Are you fucking kidding me? PC literally dictates that you can't raise money for a disabled person because it'll make you feel good about yourself so the charity is illegitimate. You can't help a person who may be struggling with a physical disability because it portrays them as incapable. So be a good little PC warrior and slam the door behind you if you see someone approaching in a wheelchair. I'm sure they'll thank you for treating them as equals.

You started off completely reasonably. Well... at least you could argue your initial position. But then you underscored your point with an article using "thecollegefix.com" as your source.

Can we not have a reasonable discussion without one side throwing out a hate piece run by the most wayward faction's of their ideologies?

Don't be dumb. I assume you're better than that.

 

[kmoose]

Can we not have a reasonable discussion without one side throwing out a hate piece run by the most wayward faction's of their ideologies?

Don't be dumb. I assume you're better than that.

So your definition of "reasonable discussion" is "I can call you dumb, but you can't cite anything that I don't agree with"?