NationStates Jolt Archive

People on here can name at least 5 things that they think are screwing up the world. Democrats, Republicans, crazy conservationalists (note the crazy part) the U.N. , Islam, Christianity, gays, lesbians, whatever.

But I think that people being afarid of being persecuted for mentioning them is what is really screwing this world up.

So what is the most pressing issue in the world (or your country) to you that you can't mention for fear of being harrased for becuase it's not "P.C."?

So what is the most pressing issue in the world (or your country) to you that you can't mention for fear of being harrased for becuase it's not "P.C."?

There is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves for being bigots in the first place.

nationalism, statism, jack layton, public education, high taxes
edit: the un as well

Nationalism/Patriotism

And religious fanatism, of all major religions.

There is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves for being bigots in the first place.
Ladies and gentlemen........................ Exhibit A.

Ladies and gentlemen........................ Exhibit A.

Exhibit A of what? The only people who bitch about PC are bigots who have it come in their way of calling people "niggers, gooks, fags etc."

Exhibit A of what? The only people who bitch about PC are bigots who have it come in their way of calling people "niggers, gooks, fags etc."
Your lack of understanding of my OP should give you the hint that you aren't qualified to post here intelligently.

"Is P.C. destroying thw world?"

No, but it is trying to remake it in it's own image.

you aren't qualified to post here intelligently.

That doesn't seem to have stopped you from posting, ever, so cura te ipsum.

Exhibit A of what? The only people who bitch about PC are bigots who have it come in their way of calling people "niggers, gooks, fags etc."
Um ... I "bitch" about PC, my friend. Yet I don't recall referring to anyone as "niggers, gooks, fags." Perhaps you are in need of sleep? :)

Um ... I "bitch" about PC, my friend. Yet I don't recall referring to anyone as "niggers, gooks, fags." Perhaps you are in need of sleep? :)

It's 10 in the morning here. I have a patient in five minutes. No sleep needed, thank you.

And you bitch 'cause you are a curmudgeon with outdates ideas.

Um ... I "bitch" about PC, my friend. Yet I don't recall referring to anyone as "niggers, gooks, fags." Perhaps you are in need of sleep? :)

I heard that....

That doesn't seem to have stopped you from posting, ever, so cura te ipsum.
Latin? Oh wow, I guess you are smart! :rolleyes:

"Ah! Stop oppressing us!", shout the oppressors, in a familiar refrain.

According to me, the 5 most important threats to the world, in that order: Capitalism, Nationalism, Militarism, Imperialism (esp, USA imperalism), Religious fanatism.

It's 10 in the morning here. I have a patient in five minutes. No sleep needed, thank you.

And you bitch 'cause you are a curmudgeon with outdates ideas.
ROFLMAO! You only think they're "outdated" 'cause you're still wet behind the ears! :p

Latin? Oh wow, I guess you are smart! :rolleyes:

Torpid sarcasm. I guess you are not that inventive.

ROFLMAO! You only think they're "outdated" 'cause you're still wet behind the ears! :p
How old are you Fass?

ROFLMAO! You only think they're "outdated" 'cause you're still wet behind the ears! :p

Rather wet than sandy, if you catch my drift.

Torpid sarcasm. I guess you are not that inventive.
"Torpid." Now there's a word you don't hear very often. I would have said "tepid," but that's just me. :D

Rather wet than sandy, if you catch my drift.
Um ... quite frankly, I'm afriad to! :D

According to me, the 5 most important threats to the world, in that order: Capitalism, Nationalism, Militarism, Imperialism (esp, USA imperalism), Religious fanatism.
How is Capitalism a threat to the world?
Without it, no one will have the money for research into the most important fields, including computer science, medicine, energy, and the sort.

Unless, of course, you want the government to have all the money, in which case I say that's scarier than Capitalism ANY day.

How is Capitalism a threat to the world?
Without it, no one will have the money for research into the most important fields, including computer science, medicine, energy, and the sort.

Unless, of course, you want the government to have all the money, in which case I say that's scarier than Capitalism ANY day.

I thought the goal was to determine what things were evil that are protected by PC.

Last I checked the items the poster mentioned were not only not protected by PC, but those who openly attack them are protected by PC.

You should point that out, rather than trying to start an arguement, methinks.

Microsoft

Microsoft

I thought MS was perfectly PC to criticize....

I thought the goal was to determine what things were evil that are protected by PC.

Last I checked the items the poster mentioned were not only not protected by PC, but those who openly attack them are protected by PC.

You should point that out, rather than trying to start an arguement, methinks.
Yeah, my bad. I'm sure there are millions of threads for that, huh?

I thought MS was perfectly PC to criticize....
I would say so.

As said by some, arguing about the evils of capitalism is not the topic of this thread (even if I'd be glad to summurize my arguments).

But I do confirm my position, that among my top 5, all but the last (religious fanatism) or protected more or less strongly by PC. The most dangerous thing, in my opinion (capitalism) is indeed one of the most protected by PC. Just look at the reaction of people here when I state that capitalism is a threat ;)

Political correctness... ah, how the debate can range on. This is what stops me from being able to say "It's gay." When I don't like something, without a frown coming to someone's face, where I am considered a homophobe... despite being gay myself. This interests me, for it is just something that had embedded itself into my vocabulary, and yet, it can be used to label, just like any other word. I think that the problem is not with PC, so to speak, but with the need to label people, and put things into boxes, to figure them out, so to speak. Perhaps this is what will be the fall of mankind. xD

"Ah! Stop oppressing us!", shout the oppressors, in a familiar refrain.

Tiss true. Tiss so true

Tiss true. Tiss so true

Ah, but who is the oppressor and who is the oppressee? Or is it, perhaps, that all oppress and all are oppressed?

As said by some, arguing about the evils of capitalism is not the topic of this thread (even if I'd be glad to summurize my arguments).

But I do confirm my position, that among my top 5, all but the last (religious fanatism) or protected more or less strongly by PC. The most dangerous thing, in my opinion (capitalism) is indeed one of the most protected by PC. Just look at the reaction of people here when I state that capitalism is a threat ;)

Last I checked, it was cool to wear the visage of Che, but no one would be caught dead wearing the visage of Bill Gates (or any other capitalist).

I think that ignorance, of other people and the world around us, is the major thing destroying the world. That and greed.

Ah, but who is the oppressor and who is the oppressee? Or is it, perhaps, that all oppress and all are oppressed?

Um kinda

I percieve it this way. All want a world they can feel cozy in. All make attempts to influence the world to become cozy for them. And I do mean all. But what is cozy to one is a nightmare for the other and disputes erupt.

There is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves for being bigots in the first place.

Fass babe, it has nothing to do with bigotry; most people here are willing to be polite, know when to say the something and when to keep it to oneself.

With that being said, all the fun, quite frankly, has been zapped out of work - send around a funny email and its almost a certainty that 99% of the work place will find it bloody hilarious with one moustacheo feminist with her tuba voice going, "I find that demeaning" - she didn't even get the joke, but hey, lets just bloody well whine about something and make the work place even more bloody depressing!

At the place where I work, we've officially called it a PC free-zone, piss taking, innuendos and double entendre's are the in thing - and believe me, when you get up at 6:00am and work in a refridgerated environment all day, the last thing you want to hear is someone whining about something said.

Life is too short to a zealot, to those PC zealots, grow a humour gene or two, or do the world a damn service, stay at home and avoid contact with humans - lord knows life is difficult enough as it is, without it being made doubly worse having a damn wet blanket in the workplace.

Fass babe, it has nothing to do with bigotry; most people here are willing to be polite, know when to say the something and when to keep it to oneself.

With that being said, all the fun, quite frankly, has been zapped out of work - send around a funny email and its almost a certainty that 99% of the work place will find it bloody hilarious with one moustacheo feminist with her tuba voice going, "I find that demeaning" - she didn't even get the joke, but hey, lets just bloody well whine about something and make the work place even more bloody depressing!

At the place where I work, we've officially called it a PC free-zone, piss taking, innuendos and double entendre's are the in thing - and believe me, when you get up at 6:00am and work in a refridgerated environment all day, the last thing you want to hear is someone whining about something said.

Life is too short to a zealot, to those PC zealots, grow a humour gene or two, or do the world a damn service, stay at home and avoid contact with humans - lord knows life is difficult enough as it is, without it being made doubly worse having a damn wet blanket in the workplace.
*applauds*

Fass babe, it has nothing to do with bigotry; most people here are willing to be polite, know when to say the something and when to keep it to oneself.

With that being said, all the fun, quite frankly, has been zapped out of work - send around a funny email and its almost a certainty that 99% of the work place will find it bloody hilarious with one moustacheo feminist with her tuba voice going, "I find that demeaning" - she didn't even get the joke, but hey, lets just bloody well whine about something and make the work place even more bloody depressing!

At the place where I work, we've officially called it a PC free-zone, piss taking, innuendos and double entendre's are the in thing - and believe me, when you get up at 6:00am and work in a refridgerated environment all day, the last thing you want to hear is someone whining about something said.

Life is too short to a zealot, to those PC zealots, grow a humour gene or two, or do the world a damn service, stay at home and avoid contact with humans - lord knows life is difficult enough as it is, without it being made doubly worse having a damn wet blanket in the workplace.

Quite frankly, that is just downright offensive. :p

Quite frankly, that is just downright offensive. :p

Well good for you, suck on a popsicle *gives Fenland Friends a popsicle*

oh, and for the record, the original post (which Fenland Friends replied to) is coming from a gay man who loves cock, and makes no damn apologies about it.

Well good for you, suck on a popsicle *gives Fenland Friends a popsicle*

oh, and for the record, the original post (which Fenland Friends replied to) is coming from a gay man who loves cock, and makes no damn apologies about it.

Cheers. :fluffle: Poor attempt at humour on my part. Nice popsicle though.

That's pretty insulting right there. I make the damn thread, and do I get a popsicle? Noooooooooooooooo. That's messed up man. :(

There is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves for being bigots in the first place.
Oh go on, a hate crime never hurt anyone.:(



_________________________________________________________________




It is no longer the in thing to do to kill prostitutes.
Back in the day noone cared.

There
is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is
just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being
publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves
for being bigots in the first place.
Probably because you only hang wityh alike minded people. Plently of real minority leaders speak out against P.C.

How can censoring statistical facts in the name of P.C. be good for ay society? It is ok for phyllicia rashad to say on T.V. "Nobody can dance like us, nobody." or Deon sanders to point out that Black coaches in the NFL have a hardertime with their players than White coaches because they black players expect sympathy from other blacks.

But when it is pointed out that Balcks are more athletically gifted than whites as a whole, the White coach is fired. and that hardly is an insult to blacks.

P.C. is nothing but a Moral based form of censorship developed because liberals cannot get all their views made mandatory by law.

nice to see how you just made a fool of your self by blindly generalizing then insulting people you do not know. Thought that was what P.C. was supposed to be stopping?

Too blind to see.

Is P.C. destroying thw world?
That's a bit overly dramatic, but it is annoying!

Exhibit A of what? The only people who bitch about PC are bigots who have it come in their way of calling people "niggers, gooks, fags etc."
I bitch about it despite the fact that I'm strongly anti-racist. But yes I also understand that many of the other people who bitch about it are actually racists.

I thought the goal was to determine what things were evil that are protected by PC.

Last I checked the items the poster mentioned were not only not protected by PC, but those who openly attack them are protected by PC.

You should point that out, rather than trying to start an arguement, methinks.
Capitalism is usually protected by political correctness. If it wasn't, then you might see anti-capitalists portrayed as something other than "the loony left". Question is, where does PC come from?

Last I checked, it was cool to wear the visage of Che, but no one would be caught dead wearing the visage of Bill Gates (or any other capitalist).
Blame stupidity, rather than political correctness.

P.C. is nothing but a Moral based form of censorship developed because liberals cannot get all their views made mandatory by law.
Why blame liberals? Do you care so much when right-wing Christian groups says that plays and books about gay people shouldn't be allowed?

There is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves for being bigots in the first place.
Dead right: most of what idiots like Camille Paglia and Julie Burchill call Political Correctness is just good manners.

Dead right: most of what idiots like Camille Paglia and Julie Burchill call Political Correctness is just good manners.
I don't think that good manners and political correctness have anything in common. If anything, I would say that PC is more analogous to "stealth bigotry". There is nothing correct about lumping people together for discriminatory purposes.

In short: Yes I am.

I don't think that good manners and political correctness have anything in common. If anything, I would say that PC is more analogous to "stealth bigotry". There is nothing correct about lumping people together for discriminatory purposes.
Which is strange, as that seems to be what people who complain about PC are upset about being stopped from doing.

Question is, where does PC come from?
It's a kind of reactionary strawman assembled by rightwing media pundits, as far as I can tell: it's not like you ever see evil liberals using the term, is it?

Exhibit A of what? The only people who bitch about PC are bigots who have it come in their way of calling people "niggers, gooks, fags etc."

Not true in all cases.

Now, even if you have a group that has a real problem, and it's associated strongly with them, and they are the victims, it's politically incorrect to point it out or for them to even address it themselves.

The current epidemic of black on black violence is a good example - while they only comprise less than 17 percent of the general US population, they account for over 53 percent of the instigators AND victims of firearm death, wounding, and crime - and 98 percent of their victims are black.

Cold statistics. But every time even a black man gets up and says that blacks need to get their act together and stop this culture of violence (i.e., Bill Cosby and a few others), he is castigated as a traitor who is espousing race hatred.

Ah, but who is the oppressor and who is the oppressee? Or is it, perhaps, that all oppress and all are oppressed?

I just realized my post could be taken in two contradictory ways; that's what comes from posting at 3:00 in the morning while simultaneously arguing about something totally different on another political forum.

What is laughable about all the rage concerning political correctness is the actual situation. We live in a society where white and male privilege is still prevalent. "Affirmative action," that nasty evil PC force, doesn't even come close to matching those institutional prejudices. If racial minorities were really oppressing anyone else, then that would not be the case.

Words matter. That is the crucial element. Certain terminology is offensive. It's tied to certain societal structures, ones of subordination and oppression. "Negro," for instance, is a name assigned by whites to blacks, thus reinforcing the imbalance of power between them. If society is really going to treat black people as equals, the terms it uses to describe them should be terms based on equality, not terms distorted by power. It's saying, "we aren't just people who will submit to you and be servile anymore; we are human beings in our own right, deserving respect as such."

It's no accident that every social movement aiming at equality over the past few decades - women's liberation, black liberation, gay liberation - has revolutionized parts of the terminology. It's this assertion of equality, this rejection of the traditional hierarchies imbedded in the traditional language, from which political correctness comes. I have no problem with that.

It is only to be expected that some of those engaging in, or privileged by, prejudice and discrimination would feel somewhat threatened by revolutions in language, the same way heterosexists, always insisting that they have nothing against gays as people, talk about the grievous threat gay sex and gay marriage pose to their tenth marriage and the family values embedded in it.

There are serious criticisms of political correctness, and obvious excesses that I do not need to review. But at heart the message of the new terminology - that these people are not perverse, are not inferior, are not lesser people we should shut away, but are full, complete, and equal human beings - is a good one.

HMMMM so judging by the responses to this thread...

the only thing that is too "un-pc" to talk about here is that those who are against being pc are either bigots or people who want to be able to say mean things about other groups while pretending it was all in good fun.


interesting.

Exhibit A of what? The only people who bitch about PC are bigots who have it come in their way of calling people "niggers, gooks, fags etc."

How about "Indians" instead of "Native Americans?" This drives me nuts, as I consider myself to be a native American, having been born in this country.

There's also the whole "gender neutral" thing. When I was growing up, "man" could mean generic human, not just males. A female head of a committee, for example, was addressed as "Madame Chairman," not "Madame Chairwoman," or, worse, "Ms. Chairperson." That's the kind of P.C. that irritates me, not the inability to use racial slurs.

There are serious criticisms of political correctness, and obvious excesses that I do not need to review. But at heart the message of the new terminology - that these people are not perverse, are not inferior, are not lesser people we should shut away, but are full, complete, and equal human beings - is a good one.
I guess this explains the recent ability of the Democratic Party to officially sponsor that idea, and then to turn around and officially be vile and disgusting and racist - and get away with it.

Nothing brings out racist slurs like an ambitious black man who doesn't know his "place." So when Maryland's lieutenant governor, Michael Steele, announced his candidacy for the US Senate recently, the bigots reared up. On one popular website, The News Blog, Steele's picture was grotesquely doctored, making him look like a minstrel-show caricature. "I's Simple Sambo and I's Running for the Big House," read the insulting headline accompanying the picture.

This wasn't some white supremacist slime from the right-wing fringe. The News Blog is a liberal site, and the reason for its racist attack on Steele, a former chairman of the Maryland Republican Party, is that he is a conservative. Specifically, a black conservative. As far as too many liberals are concerned, blacks who reject liberalism deserve to be smeared as Sambos and worse.

I think that's what I hate about a lot of political correctness - it's not done because the people who push it actually believe it - they only use it as another tool in the bag to bash people with - and when it's not convenient to be politically correct, they can turn around and under the mantle of "holier than thou" they can be as racist as possible.

Nothing brings out racist slurs like an ambitious black man who doesn't know his "place."

Yes, just look at the way Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton are portrayed.

Yes, just look at the way Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton are portrayed.
The point is that people who portray Farrakhan, Jackson, and Sharpton in a bad light aren't pretending to be politically correct.

The Democratic Party in Maryland certainly claims to be politically correct - and then turns around and says it's ok for them to call a black man "Sambo".

It's called hypocrisy.

The point is that people who portray Farrakhan, Jackson, and Sharpton in a bad light aren't pretending to be politically correct.

The Democratic Party in Maryland certainly claims to be politically correct - and then turns around and says it's ok for them to call a black man "Sambo".

It's called hypocrisy.

The Democratic Party in Maryland did not call anyone "Sambo."

Anyway, the event you are pointing out has little to do with political correctness. It is more pertinent to the "race traitor" issue, and is closer to the practice of calling union-breakers scabs.

The Democratic Party in Maryland did not call anyone "Sambo."

Anyway, the event you are pointing out has little to do with political correctness. It is more pertinent to the "race traitor" issue, and is closer to the practice of calling union-breakers scabs.
The Democratic Party when asked, most certainly did say it was good and proper for them to call blacks "Sambo" if they were Republicans.

And "race traitor" is a patently absurd idea. And politically incorrect I might add - the mere act of defining people as a "race" is racist.

The point is that people who portray Farrakhan, Jackson, and Sharpton in a bad light aren't pretending to be politically correct.

The Democratic Party in Maryland certainly claims to be politically correct - and then turns around and says it's ok for them to call a black man "Sambo".

It's called hypocrisy.
I'm dubious that it's very possible to portray Farrakhan in a good light, to be honest. The man's an evil swine.

Not true in all cases.

Now, even if you have a group that has a real problem, and it's associated strongly with them, and they are the victims, it's politically incorrect to point it out or for them to even address it themselves.

The current epidemic of black on black violence is a good example - while they only comprise less than 17 percent of the general US population, they account for over 53 percent of the instigators AND victims of firearm death, wounding, and crime - and 98 percent of their victims are black.

Cold statistics. But every time even a black man gets up and says that blacks need to get their act together and stop this culture of violence (i.e., Bill Cosby and a few others), he is castigated as a traitor who is espousing race hatred.
bill cosby was propped up by the right (fox, mehlman) to attempt to divide the black left. the majority of people who heralded cosby as being "on time" with his attack were white conservatives.

funny - when you show respect to other human beings, and work to help achieve equality for people regardless of race or other differences, being "pc" isn't much of an issue.

what is killing this world? a monopolized, propagandized media, which intentionally neglects to tell us about the millions demonstrating around the world for peace and change, yet hangs on GWB's every word like a smitten schoolgirl.

People on here can name at least 5 things that they think are screwing up the world. Democrats, Republicans, crazy conservationalists (note the crazy part) the U.N. , Islam, Christianity, gays, lesbians, whatever.

But I think that people being afarid of being persecuted for mentioning them is what is really screwing this world up.

So what is the most pressing issue in the world (or your country) to you that you can't mention for fear of being harrased for becuase it's not "P.C."?

PC = pussification of the world

The Democratic Party when asked, most certainly did say it was good and proper for them to call blacks "Sambo" if they were Republicans.

Source?

I'm dubious that it's very possible to portray Farrakhan in a good light, to be honest. The man's an evil swine.

He's a racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic demagogue, yes. Like Jerry Falwell.

According to me, the 5 most important threats to the world, in that order: Capitalism, Nationalism, Militarism, Imperialism (esp, USA imperalism), Religious fanatism.

Communism, Socialism (or another form of sticky-fingered tax structure on behalf of the poor), political correctness (keeping us from saying what we feel/think...), terrorism, and sociopathy.

we can end the first two by showing people that financial freedom is far superior to forced economic equality, end the third by speaking our minds and hiring new journalists (hehe), end (or greatly curb) the fourth by introducing democracy to the middle east and killing/cracking down on the terrorists who remain obstinate, but the fifth cannot be controlled lest we attain the ability to engineer human brains.

PC = pussification of the world

yeah, right - better we all be torturers and murderers. to understand, rather than victimize, other groups of people, will make a "pussy" outta ya.

grow up, man - this is real life, not an episode of WWF.

TrashCat is reminded of a recent Film he was smuggled into - "The Family Stone"

It's a heartwarming piece that pits the Perfect (ly contrived) Artsy/Progressive NPR family against the uptight businesswoman/girlfriend of the (tolerant of his family's quirks) Businessman son.

This wonderfully Tolerant Progressive Family spends most of the movie abusing miss uptight untill she runs away, goes on a bender, gets a little stoned, then joins the clan. Aparantly, tolerance means hatefully abusing someone until they run away or become just like you. :rolleyes:

FFFttt! Not even The Village Voice liked it. I give it 4 Hairballs. http://www.websmileys.com/sm/obscene/eck31.gif

HMMMM so judging by the responses to this thread...

the only thing that is too "un-pc" to talk about here is that those who are against being pc are either bigots or people who want to be able to say mean things about other groups while pretending it was all in good fun.


interesting.

PC is built on overreacting to harmless speech.

Probably almost everyone (hopefully) would react negatively to words like dago, gook, spic, etc....

most of us who don't like PCness are against crap like the racial double-standard that's being fed by the PC Police in America (IE, only white people can be racist, say racist things, or take racist action)... and little (really unimportant, but we're griping, are we not?) changes of job titles, sexes, etc.

"Retards" are now "mentally challenged persons"... (hehe)

Firemen are now firefighters (that's not so bad)...

just add "person" to the end of words that used to say "man" and you have the PC version.... it's on overreaction to things that aren't important at all... at least in the case of remaking words.


if a man works as an anchor, he is an anchorman

if a woman works as an anchor, she is an anchorwoman

PC version is "anchorperson"

in fact, men are no longer men and women are no longer women... we are now sexless. I'm sorry, but I like the contents of my crotch. hehe

we are all sexless... you know that, right? That's how PC thinks. They're so damn hyper about not offending anyone when what they really do is overreact to a perceived offense that maybe 1% of us are probably offended by... shit, PC is built on overreactions and over-predicting the impact of words on people.

yeah, right - better we all be torturers and murderers. to understand, rather than victimize, other groups of people, will make a "pussy" outta ya.

grow up, man - this is real life, not an episode of WWF.

well i was half-joking... I just like having made up the word "pussification that I was thrilled with the chance to use it in a sentence. hehe

PC is not about understanding other groups of people. PC (at least in America) is about bowing to non-whites in every issue. Rather than treating people equally, like we should be doing, the PC School of Thought preaches that white people are fair game for any racism... only it's not racism... it's "justice".

hehehe

gotcha

PC is built on overreacting to harmless speech.

Probably almost everyone (hopefully) would react negatively to words like dago, gook, spic, etc....

most of us who don't like PCness are against crap like the racial double-standard that's being fed by the PC Police in America (IE, only white people can be racist, say racist things, or take racist action)... and little (really unimportant, but we're griping, are we not?) changes of job titles, sexes, etc.

"Retards" are now "mentally challenged persons"... (hehe)

Firemen are now firefighters (that's not so bad)...

just add "person" to the end of words that used to say "man" and you have the PC version.... it's on overreaction to things that aren't important at all... at least in the case of remaking words.


if a man works as an anchor, he is an anchorman

if a woman works as an anchor, she is an anchorwoman

PC version is "anchorperson"

in fact, men are no longer men and women are no longer women... we are now sexless. I'm sorry, but I like the contents of my crotch. hehe

we are all sexless... you know that, right? That's how PC thinks. They're so damn hyper about not offending anyone when what they really do is overreact to a perceived offense that maybe 1% of us are probably offended by... shit, PC is built on overreactions and over-predicting the impact of words on people.
STOP STOP. youre making me weep uncontrollably

yes youre right, PC is a much bigger threat to the world than aids, poverty, terrorism, globalization, malaria, desertification, war, deforestation, child labor, evil dictators, the poisoning of our air and water, the exploitation of the 3rd world,

oh i cant go on, the tears are going to ruin my keyboard...

we are all sexless... you know that, right? That's how PC thinks. They're so damn hyper about not offending anyone when what they really do is overreact to a perceived offense that maybe 1% of us are probably offended by... shit, PC is built on overreactions and over-predicting the impact of words on people.
That's what Camile Paglia was claiming ten years ago, but can you cite any branch of the evil leftist hive mind that's turning America into a country full of faggots and pussies who's seriously suggested as much or is this just a strawman?

That's what Camile Paglia was claiming ten years ago, but can you cite any branch of the evil leftist hive mind that's turning America into a country full of faggots and pussies who's seriously suggested as much or is this just a strawman?

Corporate HR departments. Shall I quote my company's HR policies chapter and verse?

Lawsuits and trial lawyers are the branch of the "evil leftist hive mind" that's being offensive.

Our company no longer has a holiday party. Want to know why? First, they had to stop calling it a Christmas Party. So they called it a holiday party. Seems that a few atheists who don't celebrate anything thought that was offensive - so they changed it to New Year's. Then, because people were drinking, the company had to shell out for hotel rooms for everyone - and they never did it again. They tried for a few years to hold an alcohol-free New Year's party, but attendance was so low no one shows up now.

Used to be, just 8 years ago, that over 1200 people showed up to the company Christmas Party. Now there's no party at all.

And no, it didn't go to court. But lawsuits were threatened - and the company decided that the cost was not worth it - much easier just to cancel everything.

Destroying the world? No, I think that's a little harsh at the very least. However I do believe that the world has become far too P.C. for it's own good. Now we live in a world where we never know what we say if it's going to offend someone or not. It has certainly gone to far for sure. However, hate speech is not P.C. it's hate, and there is a difference.

'Political correctness' is a fiction. Nobody is forcing you to be "PC", and you won't be persecuted if you aren't. Insult as it pleases you.
Ladies and gentlemen........................ Exhibit A.
Well, how is calling somone a 'bigot' a "PC" thing to do? "Bigot" is a word, with a definition. Fass used this word. Whether he used it correctly or incorrectly doesn't matter, because he is not trying to force you into thinking anything, or doing anything, he is holding an opinion contrary to yours.

I can't see how that qualifies as "PC", so perhaps you could define "political correctness" for us?

Destroying the world? No, I think that's a little harsh at the very least. However I do believe that the world has become far too P.C. for it's own good. Now we live in a world where we never know what we say if it's going to offend someone or not. It has certainly gone to far for sure. However, hate speech is not P.C. it's hate, and there is a difference.
TrashCat saw this on a scrap of Sig thrown at him by Jolt on one of Cyniks posts. Makes sense to me:

"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine...

A whole lotta dishonest people out there. :headbang:

'Political correctness' is a fiction. Nobody is forcing you to be "PC", and you won't be persecuted if you aren't. Insult as it pleases you.

As long as you don't mind being fired or demoted.

I've read more than one company HR manual that explicitly defines terms "not to be used" in any correspondence, verbal or written, internal or external.

"Spokesman" is one of them. Considered "highly offensive". Qwest had these great two week "sensitivity training" courses where we were made to memorize those terms.

As long as you don't mind being fired or demoted.

I've read more than one company HR manual that explicitly defines terms "not to be used" in any correspondence, verbal or written, internal or external.

"Spokesman" is one of them. Considered "highly offensive". Qwest had these great two week "sensitivity training" courses where we were made to memorize those terms.
So it's the corporations that are doing it then? That could explain why I hadn't seen it, I suppose. But now I'm a bit confused:
If the corporations are doing it, then why are we all supposed to be angry at the Democrats about it?

Corporate HR departments. Shall I quote my company's HR policies chapter and verse?

Lawsuits and trial lawyers are the branch of the "evil leftist hive mind" that's being offensive.
It's news to me that that corporations are part of the evil leftist hive mind. I think Swallow Your Poison is onto something here.

It's news to me that that corporations are part of the evil leftist hive mind. I think Swallow Your Poison is onto something here.
If memory serves TrashCat:

Corporations do this to avoid Lawsuits from Whiny Advocacy Groups - the vast majority of which are "Leftist".

A Corporation would not do such things if it were not for these threats, so No, the Corporations are not at fault for or "part of" the "evil leftist hive mind"... just reacting to it.

Exhibit A of what? The only people who bitch about PC are bigots who have it come in their way of calling people "niggers, gooks, fags etc."

Right on!

If memory serves TrashCat:

Corporations do this to avoid Lawsuits from Whiny Advocacy Groups - the vast majority of which are "Leftist".

A Corporation would not do such things if it were not for these threats, so No, the Corporations are not at fault for or "part of" the "evil leftist hive mind"... just reacting to it.
So the whiny religious advocacy groups (who appear in the 'States to be the most whiny of all) are leftist then? That's interesting. I never knew Fred Phelps or Pat Robertson were evil liberals.

So the whiny religious advocacy groups (who appear in the 'States to be the most whiny of all) are leftist then? That's interesting. I never knew Fred Phelps or Pat Robertson were evil liberals.
What part of "vast majority of which" did you miss? Note too, that they have sued far less than the other whiners.

But yes, they are the Whiny Right. Fortunately, they are seen for the loonies they are. Wish it were true for the Left too.

If memory serves TrashCat:

Corporations do this to avoid Lawsuits from Whiny Advocacy Groups - the vast majority of which are "Leftist".

A Corporation would not do such things if it were not for these threats, so No, the Corporations are not at fault for or "part of" the "evil leftist hive mind"... just reacting to it.
Is the court system actually as horrendously incompetent as it would have to be to allow an advocacy group to win against a corporation in court over someone saying "spokesman"?

What part of "vast majority of which" did you miss? Note too, that they have sued far less than the other whiners.

But yes, they are the Whiny Right. Fortunately, they are seen for the loonies they are. Wish it were true for the Left too.
It just seems strange that you're blaming the left for the fact that a plague of ambulance chasers has made it easy for idiots to sue people for no good reason with a fair chance of success.
Also, if you can't provide details of how the vast majority is delineated from the tiny minority, I'm not obliged to pay generalisations based on hearsay any heed. Sorry.

There is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves for being bigots in the first place.
They do tend to get upset dont they
And no one ever wants to blame themselfs even if the blame is rightfully placed on them

Religious fundamentalism, tribalism/nationalism, imperialism, social conservatives/"traditional values" advocates, and socialism.

'Ism's just suck, don't they?

the left this, Democrats that
At this point I would like to remind everyone that there is almost no difference between the two parties. Both of them will be politically correct.

TrashCat is reminded of a recent Film he was smuggled into - "The Family Stone"
What's the point of this post? We're talking about reality here.

Is the court system actually as horrendously incompetent as it would have to be to allow an advocacy group to win against a corporation in court over someone saying "spokesman"?
The short answer is, unfortunately, Yes. :(
It just seems strange that you're blaming the left for the fact that a plague of ambulance chasers has made it easy for idiots to sue people for no good reason with a fair chance of success.
My only point is that the "Left" (which is not a monolithic group IMO) has been doing it longer, and more successfully, than the "Right" and, in fact, started the trend.

What was once somthing objective and based upon word definitions and classic usage has devolved into the ability to sue because your feelings were hurt.

People have the Right to not be abused, but No one has the Right to not get offended... because whether or not you take offense is entirely up to you. Rather like the question, When does Fact become Flame?

If I say: "Fass is Gay", it is simple Fact.
If I say: "Kimchi is Gay", it could be a Flame.
If I say; "Lawyers are Gay", it is a bigoted Flame.

The paradigm shift from decrying/punishing Abuse ("STFU you Niggr!") to punishing semantics ("No, you are NOT a chairman/chairwoman, you are a Chair :rolleyes: ) has largely been lead by groups that espouse left of center ideologies wanting to get publicity for their cause.

Ambulance Chasers will glom onto anything they can use to make a buck, and suing based upon subjective harm and ideology is a gold-mine. If no noe thought they could make a buck &/or publicity on it it wouldn't happen.

At this point I would like to remind everyone that there is almost no difference between the two parties. Both of them will be politically correct.Sadly.
What's the point of this post? We're talking about reality here.
The point is, if you read the compiled reviews and listen to the viewers, a great many people think this bit of "PC" behavior is a wholesome and funny reflection of their own families - which is really sad.

Ambulance Chasers will glom onto anything they can use to make a buck, and suing based upon subjective harm and ideology is a gold-mine. If no noe thought they could make a buck &/or publicity on it it wouldn't happen.
And this is the Left's fault how?

I'm afraid conservatives will just have to get tougher and learn to deal with the fact that reactionism failed. The worst that will happen if you are politically incorrect is that people won't like you for it. Why do you, a tough, conservative man, care what liberals think, though?

I'm afraid conservatives will just have to get tougher and learn to deal with the fact that reactionism failed. The worst that will happen if you are politically incorrect is that people won't like you for it. Why do you, a tough, conservative man, care what liberals think, though?
Oh yeah. Opposition to political Correctness is sooo reactionary. :rolleyes:

Not too long ago, a friend and colleague of mine - who like me is a Mel Brooks junkie - made the sage remark, "There is no way that Mel Brooks could produce the films that he did in the late 60s and 70s today." This is undoubtedly true.

Witness the commotion that has come about as a result of the release of the Broadway play "The Producers", a remake of Mel Brooks' 1968 movie classic. A lot of people have complained loudly that the play is "insensitive". In fact, Fox News Channel interviewed a Jewish lady who said that she had to leave the play when she saw "all those Nazis on stage."...
While the release of the Broadway version of "The Producers" is doing phenomenally well - it has made advance ticket sales of $100 million dollars, and is sold out until next year - we are, undoubtedly, going to have to listen to the yapping of the Politically Correct crowd who disdains anything that is genuinely funny.
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0501producers.htm
Gotta love those Conservative, Reactionary Broadway Types...

http://www.blind.net/bpg00005.htm

Copyright © 1994, 1999 by the National Federation of the Blind.

The Pitfalls of Political Correctness: Euphemisms Excoriated

As civilizations decline, they become increasingly concerned with form over substance, particularly with respect to language. At the time of the First World War we called it shell shock--a simple term, two one-syllable words, clear and descriptive. A generation later, after the Second World War had come and gone, we called it combat fatigue. It meant the same thing, and there were still just two words--but the two syllables had grown to four. Today the two words have doubled, and the original pair of syllables have mushroomed to eight. It even has an acronym, PTSD--post traumatic stress disorder. It still means the same thing, and it still hurts as much or as little, but it is more in tune with current effete sensibilities.
It is also a perfect example of the pretentious euphemisms that characterize almost everything we do and say. Euphemisms and the politically correct language which they exemplify are sometimes only prissy, sometimes ridiculous, and sometimes tiresome. Often, however, they are more than that. At their worst they obscure clear thinking and damage the very people and causes they claim to benefit.

The blind have had trouble with euphemismms for as long as anybody can remember, and late twentieth-century America is no exception. The form has changed (in fact, everything is very "politically correct"), but the old notions of inferiority and second-class status still remain. The euphemisms and the political correctness don't help. If anything, they make matters worse since they claim modern thought and new enlightenment. Here is a recent example from the federal government:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

United States Department of Education
Washington, D.C.
May 4, 1993

Memorandum
TO: Office for Civil Rights Senior Staff
FROM: Jeanette J. Lim,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
SUBJECT: Language Reference to Persons with a Disability


As you know, the October 29, 1992, Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 replaced the term "handicap" with the term "disability." This term should be used in all communications.

OCR recognizes the preference of individuals with disabilities to use phraseology that stresses the individuality of all children, youth, and adults, and then the incidence of a disability. In all our written and oral communications, care should be given to avoid expressions that many persons find offensive. Examples of phraseology to avoid and alternative suggestions are noted below.


"Persons with a disability" or "individuals with disabilities" instead of "disabled person."

"Persons who are deaf" or "young people with hearing impairments" instead of "deaf people."

"People who are blind" or "persons with a visual impairment" instead of "blind people."

"A student with dyslexia" instead of "a dyslexic student."
In addition, please avoid using phrases such as "the deaf," "the mentally retarded," or "the blind." The only exception to this policy involves instances where the outdated phraseology is contained in a quote or a title, or in legislation or regulations; it is then necessary to use the citation verbatim.

I hope this information has been helpful to you. If you have any questions about any of these favored and disfavored expressions, feel free to contact Jean Peelen, Director, Elementary and Secondary Education Policy Division, at (202) 205-8637.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is what the memorandum says, and if it were an isolated instance, we could shrug it off and forget it. But it isn't. It is more and more the standard thinking, and anybody who objects is subject to sanction.

Well, we of the National Federation of the Blind do object, and we are doing something about it. At our recent national convention in Dallas we passed a resolution on the subject, and we plan to distribute it throughout the country and press for action on it. Here it is:


Resolution 93-01
WHEREAS, the word blind accurately and clearly describes the condition of being unable to see, as well as the condition of having such limited eyesight that alternative techniques are required to do efficiently the ordinary tasks of daily living that are performed visually by those having good eyesight; and
WHEREAS, there is increasing pressure in certain circles to use a variety of euphemisms in referring to blindness or blind persons--euphemisms such as hard of seeing, visually challenged, sightless, visually impaired, people with blindness, people who are blind, and the like; and

WHEREAS, a differentiation must be made among these euphemisms: some (such as hard of seeing, visually challenged, and people with blindness) being totally unacceptable and deserving only ridicule because of their strained and ludicrous attempt to avoid such straightforward, respectable words as blindness, blind, the blind, blind person, or blind persons; others (such as visually impaired, and visually limited) being undesirable when used to avoid the word blind, and acceptable only to the extent that they are reasonably employed to distinguish between those having a certain amount of eyesight and those having none; still others (such as sightless) being awkward and serving no useful purpose; and still others (such as people who are blind or persons who are blind) being harmless and not objectionable when used in occasional and ordinary speech but being totally unacceptable and pernicious when used as a form of political correctness to imply that the word person must invariably precede the word blind to emphasize the fact that a blind person is first and foremost a person; and

WHEREAS, this euphemism concerning people or persons who are blind--when used in its recent trendy, politically correct form--does the exact opposite of what it purports to do since it is overly defensive, implies shame instead of true equality, and portrays the blind as touchy and belligerent; and

WHEREAS, just as an intelligent person is willing to be so designated and does not insist upon being called a person who is intelligent and a group of bankers are happy to be called bankers and have no concern that they be referred to as persons who are in the banking business, so it is with the blind--the only difference being that some people (blind and sighted alike) continue to cling to the outmoded notion that blindness (along with everything associated with it) connotes inferiority and lack of status; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in convention assembled in the city of Dallas, Texas, this 9th day of July, 1993, that the following statement of policy be adopted:

We believe that it is respectable to be blind, and although we have no particular pride in the fact of our blindness, neither do we have any shame in it. To the extent that euphemisms are used to convey any other concept or image, we deplore such use. We can make our own way in the world on equal terms with others, and we intend to do it.

Them damn conservative reactionaries... :rolleyes:

yes youre right, PC is a much bigger threat to the world than aids, poverty, terrorism, globalization, malaria, desertification, war, deforestation, child labor, evil dictators, the poisoning of our air and water, the exploitation of the 3rd world,

Globalization isn't a threat...if anything it's going to save the world rather than threaten it. It was protectionism and isolationism that created the Third World, not globalization. True globalization, if realized will almost certainly bring about the first real way to combat the poverty created by years of self-serving economic policy and nationalism.

http://www.aniota.com/~jwhite/words.html#PC

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS: BE SILENT AND CONFORM OR BE PUNISHED!

Perhaps the greatest guarantor of truth that we have had in this country has been our First Amendment right - that of Freedom of Speech. I say "have had" because we have already lost much of it - and we have given it up voluntarily in order to be politically correct.

"Political Correctness" is a manipulation so powerful it overpowers rational thought, ethics, morality, common sense; it's seen as more valuable than truth or freedom. And those who follow it rely on every other fallacious argument to convert and/or silence its critics making it a self-perpetuating manipulation. It has become an ideology so powerful it pressures all of society to conform, so pervasive even the law subscribes to it. "Political Correctness" looks like, sounds like, acts like brain washing!

"Political Correctness" is a manipulation that not only uses fear but every other fallacy as well. One particularly insidious application extends the Ad Misericordiam argument to the extreme. The claim is that "feelings," a purely personal, affective state of one's own consciousness, must prescribe the course of group action, must be elevated to the level of national goals. NOTHING must be done or said that could, in any way, hurt somebody's feelings. Just recently, schools in a fair sized city in this state outlawed Halloween celebrations on the grounds that local witches were protesting. How absurd can you get!

Any reference to anyone's ethnicity or race is out! Not only are jokes taboo, but so is mentioning ethnicity or race when referring to statistical data. No matter how accurate and true the data, anyone putting it into words is seen to be racially and/or ethnically biased! And anyone thus perceived is subject to punishment by one's fellow citizens! And, because the government isn't doing it, it's not illegal.

How has it happened that a country once peopled by moral, tough- minded and rational individualists dedicated to a "live and let live" ideology has so changed in less than half a century? I suggest that the character of America's people has changed in large part to the "Marketing" character described by Erich Fromm in "Man for Himself." Fromm claims this character type is a response to a market driven economic system, and that those with this character orientation see themselves as valuable, not as individuals with integrity and courage, but as marketable commodities who, to be marketable, must be approved and accepted by others (Ad Populum.) Mass conformity, then, to the lowest common denominator is its natural outgrowth, but that in itself would not account for the direction it's taken.

Perhaps the question is not "have we" but "why have we" become the stepford wives on a national scale? Is it possible that an evolution in the national character could produce such an emasculated, maleable and submissive population without some driving force behind it? I don't think so. Manipulations of all kinds (especially those that reach this level of brain washing) do not happen accidentally; they are designed to benefit someone. This intense pressure to conform started long before 9/11, but now, the current administration claims protecting ourselves from the fear of terrorism makes conformity and the loss of personal freedoms necessary. If the political elite did not, in the first place, instigate the fear and conformity of Political Correctness, they have certainly taken advantage of it.

I think this essay on "Greed" (http://www.g-r-e-e-d.com/GREED.htm) by Julian Edney, PhD, goes a long way toward explaining what we, as a nation, have become, how we got here and what we, the people, can do about it.

Wow. Another reactionary... Just look at the essay: "An essay concerning the origins, nature, extent and morality of this destructive force in free market economies. Definitions. Paradoxes and omissions in Adam Smith's original theory permit - encourage - greed without restraint so that in a very large society over two centuries it has become an undemocratic force creating precipitous inequalities;divisions in this society now approach a kind of wealth apartheid, and our values are quite unlike Smith's: this is an immensely wealthy society but it is not a humane society."

I bet he and Ayn would get right along. :rolleyes:

Globalization isn't a threat...if anything it's going to save the world rather than threaten it. It was protectionism and isolationism that created the Third World, not globalization. True globalization, if realized will almost certainly bring about the first real way to combat the poverty created by years of self-serving economic policy and nationalism.
YAY Global Markets and decentralized Economies!

"What is most disgusting about current political correctness on campus is that its proponents have managed to convince their students and the media that they are authentic Sixties radicals. The idea is preposterous. Political correctness, with its fascist speech codes and puritanical sexual regulations, is a travesty of Sixties progressive values."(Vamps & Tramps p, 118)

"My message to the media is: Wake up! The silencing of authentic debate among feminists just helps the rise of the far right. When the media get locked in their Northeastern ghetto and become slaves of the feminist establishment and fanatical special interests, the American audience ends up looking to conservative voices for common sense. As a libertarian Democrat, I protest against this self-defeating tyranny of political correctness. (Vamps and Tramps, p. 431)

Oh the Reactionary Horror! :rolleyes:

I bet he and Ayn would get right along. :rolleyes:
Don't even get me started on Ayn Rand. I have more respect for the fuckwit who wrote The Turner Diaries: It's a better book than Anthemn.

Don't even get me started on Ayn Rand. I have more respect for the fuckwit who wrote The Turner Diaries: It's a better book than Anthemn.
Rand was mentioned because her position on Capitalisim and Greed are diamerically opposite to that of the essay author - and she IS often considered a reactionary.

But it was nice of you to pull her out rather than address all of my other "reactionaries". :rolleyes:

Rand was mentioned because her position on Capitalisim and Greed are diamerically opposite to that of the essay author - and she IS often considered a reactionary.

But it was nice of you to pull her out rather than address all of my other "reactionaries". :rolleyes:
I just don't like the woman'd work: I'm glad that she's dead and hope to piss on her grave one day.

Nationalism/Patriotism

And religious fanatism, of all major religions.

Or just NATIONS and RELIGION, to make it even more simple.

Ethnic equality, yes, blatant political correctness and positive discrimination, no.

My list of 5...

George W. Bush
Tony Blair
Kim Jong-Il
Xbox 360s
Capitalism

That's pretty insulting right there. I make the damn thread, and do I get a popsicle? Noooooooooooooooo. That's messed up man. :(

Hey, you're better than that, you deserve a Tip Top Trumpet ice cream, known as a 'Cornetto' in Australia - damn site better than the scundgy popsicle :p

ps. I did get the humour Fenland Friends, *gives fenland a nice big politically correct hug, without too much groping of his ass* :p

Probably because you only hang wityh alike minded people. Plently of real minority leaders speak out against P.C.

How can censoring statistical facts in the name of P.C. be good for ay society? It is ok for phyllicia rashad to say on T.V. "Nobody can dance like us, nobody." or Deon sanders to point out that Black coaches in the NFL have a hardertime with their players than White coaches because they black players expect sympathy from other blacks.

But when it is pointed out that Balcks are more athletically gifted than whites as a whole, the White coach is fired. and that hardly is an insult to blacks.

P.C. is nothing but a Moral based form of censorship developed because liberals cannot get all their views made mandatory by law.

nice to see how you just made a fool of your self by blindly generalizing then insulting people you do not know. Thought that was what P.C. was supposed to be stopping?

Too blind to see.

Depends on how you define liberal :p

For me, I don't want people simply to accept me because the 'powers that be' demand that they must hug a homo each day - if a person doesn't want to be associated with me, I don't feel any less of a person, and neither does the other person.

15 years ago in New Zealand, we used to have a wonderful comedy scene, no matter who you were, you could take the piss out of someone else - yes, even if you were a white fella - it was seen as good damn humour and no one felt bad laughing about themselves.

Flash forward 15 years and all I see on television are stand up comedians whine about inane things that don't humour me in the slightest - shows from the US that are so drizzled in political correctness, I still try to work out the plot of the show an hour after it has finished!

It gets even worse when the PC Troopers start demanding quotas and 'token jestures' - sorry, that is indirect racism, racism is still racism, even if it isn't said overtly, and I'm sorry, pandering and demeaning a person is hardly what I would call polite.

My cousin is the prime example of this 'token jesture' - she was offered the position as a prefect (chiefly Brit. in some schools, a senior student authorized to enforce discipline.), as my uncle said, "you're the token Maori, a few upper class white folk feel sorry, so they throw you a bone', she went to school the next day and said, 'I won't be your token Maori' - and he was right, she was the token Maori, bright, intelligent etc. etc. she would have taken it had she won it on merit, but tokenism? thats covert racism.

Pc is really wonderful. Sometimes in the bad old days before PC you could be forced to listen to someone for 10 even 15 minutes before realizing they were a twit. Now you can detect morons within the first three sentences. Those hyphenated abominations of language are like a warning sign....

Ok, whilst on political correctness, here is a good Billy T James skit on 'how to speak Japanese':

http://www.amplifier.co.nz/assets/download/iwbdru2blp/Speaking%20Japanese.mp3

for those who can't handle good old pissing taking humour; look elsewhere.

Computer/Video Games
Fast Food
T.V.
Overpayed Celebrities
Cell Phones

Latin? Oh wow, I guess you are smart! :rolleyes:
Well, it's been established that you're too tasked when someone presents you with another language to deal with, especially if it's an accurate assessment of yourself.
My biggest bitch at this point is bad spellers. You're what's f*cking up the world.

Now you can detect morons within the first three sentences.
...or, with sentences that contain three-letter words.

I thought the goal was to determine what things were evil that are protected by PC.

Last I checked the items the poster mentioned were not only not protected by PC, but those who openly attack them are protected by PC.

You should point that out, rather than trying to start an arguement, methinks.
As is often the case, it would appear that SOME posters or threadstarters simply invite criticism through an argumentative subject matter, and then bare their fangs at first opportunity.
Keywords: ULTERIOR MOTIVE

I haven't read the past 7 pages, but I doubt anyone has said it so I will.

Greed
Greed
Greed
Greed
Greed

That's pretty insulting right there. I make the damn thread, and do I get a popsicle? Noooooooooooooooo. That's messed up man. :(
You could. Consider the context of whom you're replying to, and what they were talking about. ;)

HMMMM so judging by the responses to this thread...

the only thing that is too "un-pc" to talk about here is that those who are against being pc are either bigots or people who want to be able to say mean things about other groups while pretending it was all in good fun.


interesting.
What you say is interesting ... very interesting.
Could an example be, oh, i don't know ... capitalism?

I guess this explains the recent ability of the Democratic Party to officially sponsor that idea, and then to turn around and officially be vile and disgusting and racist - and get away with it.

Nothing brings out racist slurs like an ambitious black man who doesn't know his "place." So when Maryland's lieutenant governor, Michael Steele, announced his candidacy for the US Senate recently, the bigots reared up. On one popular website, The News Blog, Steele's picture was grotesquely doctored, making him look like a minstrel-show caricature. "I's Simple Sambo and I's Running for the Big House," read the insulting headline accompanying the picture.

This wasn't some white supremacist slime from the right-wing fringe. The News Blog is a liberal site, and the reason for its racist attack on Steele, a former chairman of the Maryland Republican Party, is that he is a conservative. Specifically, a black conservative. As far as too many liberals are concerned, blacks who reject liberalism deserve to be smeared as Sambos and worse.

I think that's what I hate about a lot of political correctness - it's not done because the people who push it actually believe it - they only use it as another tool in the bag to bash people with - and when it's not convenient to be politically correct, they can turn around and under the mantle of "holier than thou" they can be as racist as possible.
The integrity of your post is evermore qualified by your obvious lack of political bias.

:rolleyes:

So it's the corporations that are doing it then? That could explain why I hadn't seen it, I suppose. But now I'm a bit confused:
If the corporations are doing it, then why are we all supposed to be angry at the Democrats about it?
Ka-F*CKING-pow. :sniper:
Most excellent post. *bows*

Capitalism is usually protected by political correctness. If it wasn't, then you might see anti-capitalists portrayed as something other than "the loony left". Question is, where does PC come from?

Ah, but you forget that those who refer to others as being 'luny on the left' are lambasted for being un-PC. Those who say we should tax corporations are favored by the rules of PC. And if it isn't PC, why oh why, is Robin Hood still so popular?

Blame stupidity, rather than political correctness.

That would make me a one-trick horse though. I can't blame everything on stupidity. Well, OK, I can. But it's so cliche....

People on here can name at least 5 things that they think are screwing up the world. Democrats, Republicans, crazy conservationalists (note the crazy part) the U.N. , Islam, Christianity, gays, lesbians, whatever.

But I think that people being afarid of being persecuted for mentioning them is what is really screwing this world up.

So what is the most pressing issue in the world (or your country) to you that you can't mention for fear of being harrased for becuase it's not "P.C."?
Anger, greed, hate, intolerance, envy, lust, pride,........

People on here can name at least 5 things that they think are screwing up the world. Democrats, Republicans, crazy conservationalists (note the crazy part) the U.N. , Islam, Christianity, gays, lesbians, whatever.

But I think that people being afarid of being persecuted for mentioning them is what is really screwing this world up.

So what is the most pressing issue in the world (or your country) to you that you can't mention for fear of being harrased for becuase it's not "P.C."?

Well, I am of the opinion that people who think PC is destroying the world may end up destroying the world. :p

Well, I am of the opinion that people who think PC is destroying the world may end up destroying the world. :p
Well, they certainly wouldn't be safe with physical weapons, but their wits certainly aren't anywhere near as formidable, so it would be best to let them think they're winning an argument and then draw their attention, votes, and tax dollars somewhere a little less relevant, if possible.

Well, they certainly wouldn't be safe with physical weapons, but their wits certainly aren't anywhere near as formidable, so it would be best to let them think they're winning an argument and then draw their attention, votes, and tax dollars somewhere a little less relevant, if possible.

We have to be careful though. They do have the right to hold that opinion, and aren't neccesarily stupid people[/hypocrisy-guard]

I just think that it's a dumb opinion to hold.:)

As is often the case, it would appear that SOME posters or threadstarters simply invite criticism through an argumentative subject matter, and then bare their fangs at first opportunity.
Keywords: ULTERIOR MOTIVE

Damn me and my recidivist optimism....

Damn me and my recidivist optimism....
I'm not here to damn you, i'm here to "help" you!
(What's that line on Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas ?)
Actually, i probably am here to damn a few people. I can't really tell, it's early in the day for me. I haven't even had my Wheaties yet.

We have to be careful though. They do have the right to hold that opinion, and aren't neccesarily stupid people[/hypocrisy-guard]

I just think that it's a dumb opinion to hold.:)
It could be that those types ;) just need to be distracted from important issues when they come up ... kind of like Dan Quayle and Murphy Brown.
It gives people something to argue about that they already think they know a lot about, their own opinions, while still missing the meat-and-potatoes of any factual references to things. Business as usual.

I think PC is bull. To me Queers, will always be sick perverted wierdos. And Communists the epitome of wrong. I don't want people telling me what is wrong or not.

YOu call me a bigot, I call you a PC Nazi. My right to say what I feel, you have no right to coerce your thinking on me. :D

Cybach']I think PC is bull. To me Queers, will always be sick perverted wierdos. And Communists the epitome of wrong. I don't want people telling me what is wrong or not.

YOu call me a bigot, I call you a PC Nazi. My right to say what I feel, you have no right to coerce your thinking on me. :D

There's always one. Got lost on his way to Stormfront methinks.:p

It could be that those types ;) just need to be distracted from important issues when they come up ... kind of like Dan Quayle and Murphy Brown.
It gives people something to argue about that they already think they know a lot about, their own opinions, while still missing the meat-and-potatoes of any factual references to things. Business as usual.

I guess it does serve a useful purpose, looked at from that perspective.:D

There's always one. Got lost on his way to Stormfront methinks.:p



I guess it does serve a useful purpose, looked at from that perspective.:D
Thanks. I've been well trained/familiarized with such tactic for the last 4 or 5 years.
:(

There is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves for being bigots in the first place.

"EXACTICALLY!" said the Caterpillar.

"Ah! Stop oppressing us!", shout the oppressors, in a familiar refrain.

:D

How is Capitalism a threat to the world?
Without it, no one will have the money for research into the most important fields, including computer science, medicine, energy, and the sort.

Unless, of course, you want the government to have all the money, in which case I say that's scarier than Capitalism ANY day.

Are you accusing Kilobungia of not being politically correct in his/her thinking about Capitalism?

Personally I've never had any reason to suspect Powerhungry Chipmunks of having any designs on the continued existence of the world.

I think I want to have Fass's babies after reading this thread... :p

There's always one. Got lost on his way to Stormfront methinks.:p

Its all these mild winters we've been having.

*nods sagely*

I'm afraid conservatives will just have to get tougher and learn to deal with the fact that reactionism failed. The worst that will happen if you are politically incorrect is that people won't like you for it. Why do you, a tough, conservative man, care what liberals think, though?
I'm on the left but I don't like political correctness.

Ah, but you forget that those who refer to others as being 'luny on the left' are lambasted for being un-PC.
No, they aren't.

Those who say we should tax corporations are favored by the rules of PC.
No more than those who say we shouldn't. Besides, thinking that there should be a tax on corporations is not anti-capitalist.

And if it isn't PC, why oh why, is Robin Hood still so popular?
He's not. The world doesn't look much like it's run by his principles.

In addition, are you saying that political correctness is defined by majority consent? I disagree. There are some majority opinions that run counter to political correctness.

Cybach']I think PC is bull. To me Queers, will always be sick perverted wierdos. And Communists the epitome of wrong. I don't want people telling me what is wrong or not.

YOu call me a bigot, I call you a PC Nazi. My right to say what I feel, you have no right to coerce your thinking on me. :D
What I think is that you just need some good man on man lovin to change your mind

I'm on the left but I don't like political correctness.Note too, that after all their insults to me, no one has yet refuted my postings from non-partisan Advocacy groups and Liberals decrying and explaining why PC is bad. After all, PC is just another form of bigotry...
In addition, are you saying that political correctness is defined by majority consent? I disagree. There are some majority opinions that run counter to political correctness.
I agree. Just try calling a Deaf Activist "hearing impared". You might find out how sensitive your mouth feels after your insensitive bout of "sensitivity". :rolleyes:

The integrity of your post is evermore qualified by your obvious lack of political bias.

:rolleyes:

Ergo, I guess you believe that it's OK to be racist and bigoted towards Republicans.

Ergo, I guess you believe that it's OK to be racist and bigoted towards Republicans.

"Republicans" are a race unto themselves now?

"Republicans" are a race unto themselves now?
No, I've just pointed out that there's a black Republican who is being set upon by the Democratic Party in Maryland - who have said that it's OK to use racial slurs on any black Republican.

You know, the sort of thing that would ordinarily get you called a racist.

No, I've just pointed out that there's a black Republican who is being set upon by the Democratic Party in Maryland - who have said that it's OK to use racial slurs on any black Republican.

You know, the sort of thing that would ordinarily get you called a racist.

Oh, okay. So they're being racist to a black dude, who is incidentally a Republican? That's a pretty crappy thing to do, now isn't it? Ah well, that's the US Democrats for you.

Both your major political parties suck in the extreme. You guys should get new ones.

Oh, okay. So they're being racist to a black dude, who is incidentally a Republican? That's a pretty crappy thing to do, now isn't it? Ah well, that's the US Democrats for you.

Both your major political parties suck in the extreme. You guys should get new ones.

I'm of the opinion that the two-party system is actually one party, with a collusion on fooling people into thinking that there's more than one party.

Both parties are philosophically inconsistent, and one does not differ markedly from the other, except on a very small number of issues where they are the most inconsistent.

I'm of the opinion that the two-party system is actually one party, with a collusion on fooling people into thinking that there's more than one party.

Both parties are philosophically inconsistent, and one does not differ markedly from the other, except on a very small number of issues where they are the most inconsistent.

Indeed. I completely agree with you, actually. It's much the same in my own country. What's even sadder is that, across the ditch, we have a country (New Zealand) that is doing quite admirably with MMP.

I think the 20th century has pretty decisively proven that the two-party system is Democracy Lite, if even that.

Indeed. I completely agree with you, actually. It's much the same in my own country. What's even sadder is that, across the ditch, we have a country (New Zealand) that is doing quite admirably with MMP.

I think the 20th century has pretty decisively proven that the two-party system is Democracy Lite, if even that.
One of the reasons that I hate "political correctness" is that it is obvious that the party that sponsored most of it doesn't actually believe in it - they only use it as a cudgel to bash the other party - and when that doesn't work, the party of PC resorts to outright racism.

Still having a hard time with defining our political parties. Bush is the first Republican President since Lincoln to get the US into a war. And he spends like a Democrat. Clinton, on the other hand, according to Michael Moore, was the best Republican President since Reagan, and spent most of his administration aping Newt Gingrich's policies (end welfare as we know it, for example). I personally know many Democrats who were dismayed at the shafting they got from Clinton - they're far more upset than any Republicans were at him.

Say one thing to get elected, do something completely different when you get there.

One of the reasons that I hate "political correctness" is that it is obvious that the party that sponsored most of it doesn't actually believe in it - they only use it as a cudgel to bash the other party - and when that doesn't work, the party of PC resorts to outright racism.

Still having a hard time with defining our political parties. Bush is the first Republican President since Lincoln to get the US into a war. And he spends like a Democrat. Clinton, on the other hand, according to Michael Moore, was the best Republican President since Reagan, and spent most of his administration aping Newt Gingrich's policies (end welfare as we know it, for example). I personally know many Democrats who were dismayed at the shafting they got from Clinton - they're far more upset than any Republicans were at him.

Say one thing to get elected, do something completely different when you get there.

Sure. Politicians are still politicians, no matter which party they come from.

As for the "PC Party", I don't really think there is one. I've seen both major US political parties use it when it whenever it was convenient, and ignore it when it wasn't. It's just a political tool like any other. A good way to try and score votes and keep yourself in the power and prestige of government for another term, come the next election.

There is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves for being bigots in the first place.

Well Said

I'm of the opinion that the two-party system is actually one party, with a collusion on fooling people into thinking that there's more than one party.

Both parties are philosophically inconsistent, and one does not differ markedly from the other, except on a very small number of issues where they are the most inconsistent.

Nail on the head. The political compass analyzed the 2004 elections and found that Kerry was actually closer to Bush in his views than any other liberal candidate.

Nail on the head. The political compass analyzed the 2004 elections and found that Kerry was actually closer to Bush in his views than any other liberal candidate.

Based on what Kerry said during the election, I don't think there would be any difference in how many troops we would have in Iraq at this point - I don't think he would have done a wholesale immediate pullout. So that would have remained the same. Don't see radically different economic policies - so the past 5 or 6 quarters of solid growth would have been the same (Presidents affect this less than most believe anyway).

Maybe a little less wiretapping, maybe.

Consider that they're both from Yale, both Skull & Bones fraternity, both shameless self-promoters...

in response to the origeonal question, certainly one of the things that are screwing us ALL over, is the trivializing of common minimal courtesy and consideration as mere aesthetic 'political' 'correctness'.

at the same time of course, when it takes an act of heroism to be honest, that is tyranny, regaurdlesss of idiology, economics, or belief.

but is inconsiderateness really honesty? or merely a pretentious excuse for thoughtlessness?

=^^=
.../\...

I am probably one of the most politically incorrect people in my entire family, distant cousins included. I'm not afraid of offending people. I say it like it is without being really (insert word)ist. I don't try to be either side of the pc-bigot thing. I call the color indian red(because it originated near India) instead of chestnut(aren't those two words in that compound word sexist? I mean one is a reference to breasts[female breasts] and the other is a reference to my balls). That must drive pc tyrants crazy. I call the severaly handicapped deaf or blind or paralyzed, depending on what they are. I'm not going to use crazy acronyms just to please someone. Remember:
a man with two masters is a man with two unhappy masters. No matter what, you'll offend someone. My being American offends many terrorist groups. My being white offends minority extremists(think hispanic and black versions of the kkk). You can't please all, so quit pretending like you can. That's my stance. Don't be a pc tyrant. Don't be a bigot. Be neutral. One who tries not to offend offends as much as one who tries to offend.

There is no issue I cannot address because of "P.C." Political correctness is just a silly thing bigots blame for their bigotry no longer being publically acceptable, when in fact they should be blaming themselves for being bigots in the first place.


Very well said.
There is no issue I have ever been prevented from addressing because of "P.C"
In my opinion, political correctness has just become a scape goat for the bigots to blame for their own bigotry, and an excuse for people to prevent the expression of opinion. Once again, well said.

Ergo, I guess you believe that it's OK to be racist and bigoted towards Republicans.
You can guess that, but that again qualifies a singular wit and even less accurate perspective on the state of the world. But that's okay, tunnel vision means you won't get distracted by the important stuff, like pesky facts.
I'm only working with what you gave me so far here.

"Republicans" are a race unto themselves now?
As generalizations go, it can be easily argued that they already act like they're morally, financially, and politically superior to everyone else, and apparently don't mind in the slightest who they f*ck to get in that position, and then to force their bullsh*t mentality down everyone else's throat and berate them in the process for ever thinking they were any different. And then they deny they ever do ANYTHING wrong, and instead attempt bait-and-switches with past administrations so the negative attention is off of them. If they had their own island (U.S.) they certainly would isolate themselves in their breeding and eugenics, and thus, you could qualify them as a "race unto themselves".
As generalizations go.
And, generally speaking, DK can take that post as an "ergo" and have fun with it. It is just a generalization, after all.
Does that sound particularly PC?

I'm of the opinion that the two-party system is actually one party, with a collusion on fooling people into thinking that there's more than one party.
I'm not inconvinced of this post. I have no particular argument with it.


Both parties are philosophically inconsistent, and one does not differ markedly from the other, except on a very small number of issues where they are the most inconsistent.
The first part is definitely correct IME but the last part isn't qualified by the vast inundation of administration-biased media saturation that is CURRENTLY the deulge. I could argue about what the administration claimed as the reasons for the "mandate" and all that other BS but not much point since you're probably very familiar with that series of events and you don't really feel like making yourself look the fool for arguing against it.

Nail on the head. The political compass analyzed the 2004 elections and found that Kerry was actually closer to Bush in his views than any other liberal candidate.
They actually found out, also, that Kerry is Bush's cousin from mutual ancestor Edmund Reade, somewhere around 1600's (if memory serves).

And he spends like a Democrat.
As is obviously evidenced by the VERY CLEAR SURPLUS that Bush pissed away when he got into "power". By golly it's a good thing people can call you out on this and look it up.
Clinton, on the other hand, according to Michael Moore, was the best Republican President since Reagan,
You obviously took too early a quote that doesn't jibe with current issues.
Moore made quite clear that he thought Clinton was a fan of his show (when it was on) but as things got on he made it even clearer that it made him feel bad to have to nail Clinton's conservative traits thusly. You could bother to look it up, he starts off one of his books with that discernment, i don't remember which one. Probably Stupid White Men.
And besides, he had Bush I to compare to, AND THAT WAS IT. Not much of a good argument here.

With that being said, all the fun, quite frankly, has been zapped out of work - send around a funny email and its almost a certainty that 99% of the work place will find it bloody hilarious with one moustacheo feminist with her tuba voice going, "I find that demeaning" - she didn't even get the joke, but hey, lets just bloody well whine about something and make the work place even more bloody depressing!

When I was at school 99 people having fun at the expense of one was called bullying...

Dead right: most of what idiots like Camille Paglia and Julie Burchill call Political Correctness is just good manners.

Ugh, Julie Burchill. What an annoying human being.

Not too long ago, a friend and colleague of mine - who like me is a Mel Brooks junkie - made the sage remark, "There is no way that Mel Brooks could produce the films that he did in the late 60s and 70s today." This is undoubtedly true.

Witness the commotion that has come about as a result of the release of the Broadway play "The Producers", a remake of Mel Brooks' 1968 movie classic. A lot of people have complained loudly that the play is "insensitive". In fact, Fox News Channel interviewed a Jewish lady who said that she had to leave the play when she saw "all those Nazis on stage."...
While the release of the Broadway version of "The Producers" is doing phenomenally well - it has made advance ticket sales of $100 million dollars, and is sold out until next year - we are, undoubtedly, going to have to listen to the yapping of the Politically Correct crowd who disdains anything that is genuinely funny.
http://www.enterstageright.com/archi...1producers.htm

Gotta love those Conservative, Reactionary Broadway Types...

Which is actually quite funny if you realise the same thing happened in the film.