Originally posted by KingsGambit
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Americans Strongly Dislike PC Culture
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostCould not answer the poll as worded. PC is a recent loaded political agenda issue, and used as a word club.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostPolitical Correctness is a loaded term. It basically means "speech regulation that I don't like".
There's "Political Correctness" on this forum, there are certain words that can't be said, discussions that can't be had, images that can't be linked to etc. If you want a free speech forum go to 4chan, there you'll find pedophilia cartoons, industrial accidents gloried in, hyper explicit racism, and so forth. Anything less than that could in some fashion be considered "Politically Correct"
So while I get that Conservatives have gripes about some toxic Leftists deeming some things microaggressions, or threatening people for not using a preferred pronoun, we shouldn't forget that there was a time when the Moral Majority wanted to regulate all manner of things and whether they could be shown in television.
On the topic of 4Chan; That website is populated with both children, and man-children. They're not really a reflection of society with free-speech taken to it's extreme, than they are the grubby, Doritos-eating, Mountain Dew-chuggin, anime/video game-obsessed, unwashed masses living in their mom's basement. They represent Peter Pan syndrome taken to it's extreme under the veil of total and utter anonymity. And even that website has censorship (it's not very broad, but it's there). If larger society had even an inkling how degenerate and childishly stupid that website was, they'd be horrified. So, no, it's not really an accurate representation of "free speech" in society.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostI don't agree with this. Communities, religious institutions, work places, and the like have all had rules on what was considered acceptable or unacceptable speech for various reasons. I don't believe that political correctness was/is the same thing. Political correctness seemed to be the ideology that society at-large ought to talk and behave a certain way, that took into consideration the under-privileged, disadvantaged, and powerless. And initially, I think most people found this to be a good thing, and perhaps healthy for society. But political correctness was really championed by progressive secularists that leaned increasingly post-modern, and they couldn't really ground their "ought" in anything substantial, and because of this, what ended up happening is that this good thing was pushed into the realm of absurdity where people started to look for offence where no offence was ever intended. And that's why people don't like Political Correctness.
Many years ago, I worked at a truck terminal where tractors and trailers were matched up for their journeys, and there was a large cafeteria where these truckers would eat or relax, waiting for their loads from dispatch. My job was to move tractors around the yard, but union rules required others to do the actual combining of tractors and trailers.
One of my favorite things to do was to come into the cafeteria on my break, and truckers would have they Playboy and Penthouse magazines, and be telling their "colorful" stories and using foul language, but I would plop open my King James Bible onto the table, and open my lunch kit and just sit there. The "slickback" magazines would disappear, the language would clean up a bit..... truckers would be talking about their wives instead of their girlfriends....
I really doubt that would work in this day and age. I'd probably be cussed out and run off.
So, yeah, 'political correctness' may have begun with this recognition that we really need to be civil when we talk about the under-privileged or minorities or whatever --- but it has gotten WAY out of hand.
I think that's actually something that helped elect Trump - that political correctness had gotten so out of hand, and he was slapping it down. Granted, he could well have gone too far - but at the time he was campaigning, it was getting really crazy.
It really hit home to me when I saw comedians mock PC by attempting to tell a joke.... "There was this fat guy... no, sorry, can't say fat guy... there was this MIDGET... nope, can't... ok, so there was a black ... um... person of color... African-American..... no, um..... a JEW.... "
It has just gotten absolutely insane.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostYes, and the "acceptableness" of language or terminology or certain topics has long been governed by varying social norms. We use phrases like, "Well, I can't really discuss this in polite company", which is a recognition that there are accepted limitations one should not violate.
Many years ago, I worked at a truck terminal where tractors and trailers were matched up for their journeys, and there was a large cafeteria where these truckers would eat or relax, waiting for their loads from dispatch. My job was to move tractors around the yard, but union rules required others to do the actual combining of tractors and trailers.
One of my favorite things to do was to come into the cafeteria on my break, and truckers would have they Playboy and Penthouse magazines, and be telling their "colorful" stories and using foul language, but I would plop open my King James Bible onto the table, and open my lunch kit and just sit there. The "slickback" magazines would disappear, the language would clean up a bit..... truckers would be talking about their wives instead of their girlfriends....
I really doubt that would work in this day and age. I'd probably be cussed out and run off.
So, yeah, 'political correctness' may have begun with this recognition that we really need to be civil when we talk about the under-privileged or minorities or whatever --- but it has gotten WAY out of hand.
I think that's actually something that helped elect Trump - that political correctness had gotten so out of hand, and he was slapping it down. Granted, he could well have gone too far - but at the time he was campaigning, it was getting really crazy.
It really hit home to me when I saw comedians mock PC by attempting to tell a joke.... "There was this fat guy... no, sorry, can't say fat guy... there was this MIDGET... nope, can't... ok, so there was a black ... um... person of color... African-American..... no, um..... a JEW.... "
It has just gotten absolutely insane.
On Trump, yeah, I totally get your point there. I think he goes too far the other way though. The President of the United States calling people "loser" or other derogatory name on social media dirties the office that he holds. He ought to be above that, and not for any abstract or absurd reason, but because as Commander-in-Chief, tact and diplomacy should be guiding principles, and as the leader of America (and arguably the free world), he's a reflection of America and Western (and Christian) social mores as a whole. But that's how it goes with people. Whenever we see what we believe to be error, we seek to correct it, but we often go to the other extreme. It's hard for people to find the even-keeled middle. That's nothing new though. We see that going as far back as history records.
Comment
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostRight, many people claim to be for absolute freedom of speech. Few are in practice, and those who are I generally don't want to be around.Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostYes, and the "acceptableness" of language or terminology or certain topics has long been governed by varying social norms. We use phrases like, "Well, I can't really discuss this in polite company", which is a recognition that there are accepted limitations one should not violate.
Many years ago, I worked at a truck terminal where tractors and trailers were matched up for their journeys, and there was a large cafeteria where these truckers would eat or relax, waiting for their loads from dispatch. My job was to move tractors around the yard, but union rules required others to do the actual combining of tractors and trailers.
One of my favorite things to do was to come into the cafeteria on my break, and truckers would have they Playboy and Penthouse magazines, and be telling their "colorful" stories and using foul language, but I would plop open my King James Bible onto the table, and open my lunch kit and just sit there. The "slickback" magazines would disappear, the language would clean up a bit..... truckers would be talking about their wives instead of their girlfriends....
I really doubt that would work in this day and age. I'd probably be cussed out and run off.
So, yeah, 'political correctness' may have begun with this recognition that we really need to be civil when we talk about the under-privileged or minorities or whatever --- but it has gotten WAY out of hand.
I think that's actually something that helped elect Trump - that political correctness had gotten so out of hand, and he was slapping it down. Granted, he could well have gone too far - but at the time he was campaigning, it was getting really crazy.
It really hit home to me when I saw comedians mock PC by attempting to tell a joke.... "There was this fat guy... no, sorry, can't say fat guy... there was this MIDGET... nope, can't... ok, so there was a black ... um... person of color... African-American..... no, um..... a JEW.... "
It has just gotten absolutely insane.
Awhile back Jay Leno's wife was on TV having recently returned from a trip to Africa and in order to avoid saying "black" she described the black Africans as "African-American Africans."
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View Post[ATTACH=CONFIG]38162[/ATTACH]
Awhile back Jay Leno's wife was on TV having recently returned from a trip to Africa and in order to avoid saying "black" she described the black Africans as "African-American Africans."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostI don't agree with this. Communities, religious institutions, work places, and the like have all had rules on what was considered acceptable or unacceptable speech for various reasons. I don't believe that political correctness was/is the same thing. Political correctness seemed to be the ideology that society at-large ought to talk and behave a certain way, that took into consideration the under-privileged, disadvantaged, and powerless.
Same with blasphemous speech, like you and Cow Poke went off on a thick paragraph about. And here's there's a bit of an irresistable parallel to what you call the Politically Correct view. Because as far as I know there are no laws that prevent people from saying politically incorrect things, there's just them being shamed and criticized for it.
You have a point that people don't like that, and society will swing the other way. The Simpsons for instance was a response to that, showing a dysfunctional family, instead of the Brady Bunch, and people loved it because of that. Mostly I think because reality isn't so utterly sanitized as television had become at that point.
On the topic of 4Chan; That website is populated with both children, and man-children. They're not really a reflection of society with free-speech taken to it's extreme, than they are the grubby, Doritos-eating, Mountain Dew-chuggin, anime/video game-obsessed, unwashed masses living in their mom's basement. They represent Peter Pan syndrome taken to it's extreme under the veil of total and utter anonymity. And even that website has censorship (it's not very broad, but it's there). If larger society had even an inkling how degenerate and childishly stupid that website was, they'd be horrified. So, no, it's not really an accurate representation of "free speech" in society.
But they are the bastion of free speech. If "free speech" is defined to be the ability to say anything you want, without personal repercussions because of what you said, then those places are some of the only places on the internet where you can do that. You can say anything there. And anything that can't be said there, like organized targeted harassment and bullying campaigns, can be said on 8chan or Kiwi Farms, or whatever random BBS board is quickly put up to provide a place to organize those events in.
If free speech is defined solely that the government can't punish you for what you say. Then even then you don't have free speech. You can't use your free speech to advocate for violence against minorities, or terrorism. You're not legally allowed to slander a person in public. There are and will always be restraints on what can legally be said.
In Denmark radical Muslim groups have gotten in trouble for some of the prayers that called for the eradication of Jews, even though technically that could fall under religious freedom. Legal repercussions were had against them. The US has similar reasonable restrictions about how far you can push religious freedom as an excuse to say whatever you want. But that's not what Conservatives are complaining about. They're calling it an attack on free speech when a campus, or a college, or another private forum, doesn't allow a hyper right-wing radical a platform to spew racism like Richard Spencer.Last edited by Leonhard; 07-07-2019, 02:44 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostOn Trump, yeah, I totally get your point there. I think he goes too far the other way though. The President of the United States calling people "loser" or other derogatory name on social media dirties the office that he holds. He ought to be above that, and not for any abstract or absurd reason, but because as Commander-in-Chief, tact and diplomacy should be guiding principles, and as the leader of America (and arguably the free world), he's a reflection of America and Western (and Christian) social mores as a whole.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostYet Christian Conservatives, both in the US and in Denmark have done the same thing. Though they've used different words for it, but they've actively wanted television policed, as well as what sort of pictures can be shown in educational materials, what sort of things that can be discussed, tried to get art pieces removed from a museum, advocated for the return of blasphemy laws. And not just in the particular setting of a religious private school, but in public schools and in media outlets in general.
Same with blasphemous speech, like you and Cow Poke went off on a thick paragraph about.
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostAnd here's there's a bit of an irresistable parallel to what you call the Politically Correct view. Because as far as I know there are no laws that prevent people from saying politically incorrect things, there's just them being shamed and criticized for it.
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostYou have a point that people don't like that, and society will swing the other way. The Simpsons for instance was a response to that, showing a dysfunctional family, instead of the Brady Bunch, and people loved it because of that. Mostly I think because reality isn't so utterly sanitized as television had become at that point.
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostThis is one of the better character assassinations of that website I've seen in a world.
But they are the bastion of free speech. If "free speech" is defined to be the ability to say anything you want, without personal repercussions because of what you said, then those places are some of the only places on the internet where you can do that. You can say anything there. And anything that can't be said there, like organized targeted harassment and bullying campaigns, can be said on 8chan or Kiwi Farms, or whatever random BBS board is quickly put up to provide a place to organize those events in.
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostIf free speech is defined solely that the government can't punish you for what you say. Then even then you don't have free speech. You can't use your free speech to advocate for violence against minorities, or terrorism. You're not legally allowed to slander a person in public. There are and will always be restraints on what can legally be said.
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostIn Denmark radical Muslim groups have gotten in trouble for some of the prayers that called for the eradication of Jews, even though technically that could fall under religious freedom. Legal repercussions were had against them. The US has similar reasonable restrictions about how far you can push religious freedom as an excuse to say whatever you want. But that's not what Conservatives are complaining about. They're calling it an attack on free speech when a campus, or a college, or another private forum, doesn't allow a hyper right-wing radical a platform to spew racism like Richard Spencer.Last edited by Adrift; 07-07-2019, 04:11 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostI really hope he didn't become a trend setter for the Republican Party. Though thankfully it seems no one else has as much success when trying to replicate his style.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostI feel that you didn't even bother reading the rest of my post before replying to this. Yes, Christian society censored, but it did so with clear and present "oughts," based on Judaeo-Christian values.
I'm a Christian so I get the sentiment, but I don't know about you but I find the hyper-sanitized television shows back then nauseating to watch. Even if something represented something that was wrong, I wouldn't create laws, or lobby against it. I prefer liberty over correctness. Though from reading your post I think you seem to lean in the same direction.
Well I don't know if that speaks for all of Europe and Canada (where political correctness actually does seem to be enforced by law, or is threatened to be policed by law), but in the States, it's more than just shaming and criticism, it also includes loss of jobs and social standing.
Eesh. You're showing your age (or maybe it's just your nationality). Archie Bunker and Soap were doing this well before The Simpsons were.
Like I said, they don't necessarily represent what free speech at it's extremes would represent.
Just so we're on the same page here, I haven't been advocating for repercussion-free free speech. I'm not sure if that's what you think I'm saying, but it isn't. I'm just highlighting some facts about free speech.
So either we admit that there isn't much of a problem regarding freedom of speech, or we have to redefine freedom of speech in absolute terms in order to be consistent. I would rather resist a redefinition where its only something that favors Conservative views, even if some of those values would be grounded in objective truth.
What they're complaining about is the absurdity of people taking offense at the slightest slight.
Like meeting someone who grew up in a foreign country, yet speaks without an accent and asking them about that. Supposedly that counts as a micro-aggression, yet to me that's just me being impressed. I've spoken English since I was ten, and I still have a bit of an accent.
My feminist background is coming out there of course, but whereas those concerns are entirely reasonable, concerns about a Finish man sporting dreadlocks is not worth talking about. Nor are whatever microaggressions are supposed to be.
Perhaps this is alien to you since European universities have leaned so left for so long that it seems the norm to you anymore.
I can't answer for Britain or other countries, when it comes to details I can only talk about Denmark.
That's not like those examples I gave. Where you're talking about a Conservative group at a university in the US, challenging the status quo by calling in not a seasoned politician, or a professor of Conservative political philosophy, but some ultra-right wing crank or provocateur invited to talk openly about "Racial realism". This is protested, the university agrees that the person there has nothing of value to add, and FoxNews/Breitbart/Theologyweb flips out about evil leftists shutting down free speech, etc...
That's the example I had in mind. And the reason I talk about it is that it is example. I wouldn't consider that an attack on freedom of speech, at all.Last edited by Leonhard; 07-07-2019, 04:58 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostYet Christian Conservatives, both in the US and in Denmark have done the same thing. Though they've used different words for it, but they've actively wanted television policed, as well as what sort of pictures can be shown in educational materials, what sort of things that can be discussed, tried to get art pieces removed from a museum, advocated for the return of blasphemy laws. And not just in the particular setting of a religious private school, but in public schools and in media outlets in general.
Same with blasphemous speech, like you and Cow Poke went off on a thick paragraph about. And here's there's a bit of an irresistable parallel to what you call the Politically Correct view. Because as far as I know there are no laws that prevent people from saying politically incorrect things, there's just them being shamed and criticized for it.
You have a point that people don't like that, and society will swing the other way. The Simpsons for instance was a response to that, showing a dysfunctional family, instead of the Brady Bunch, and people loved it because of that. Mostly I think because reality isn't so utterly sanitized as television had become at that point.
...
In Denmark radical Muslim groups have gotten in trouble for some of the prayers that called for the eradication of Jews, even though technically that could fall under religious freedom. Legal repercussions were had against them. The US has similar reasonable restrictions about how far you can push religious freedom as an excuse to say whatever you want.
But that's not what Conservatives are complaining about. They're calling it an attack on free speech when a campus, or a college, or another private forum, doesn't allow a hyper right-wing radical a platform to spew racism like Richard Spencer.Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, Today, 09:50 PM
|
0 responses
4 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 09:50 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Today, 04:03 AM
|
23 responses
111 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 12:19 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, Yesterday, 12:51 PM
|
97 responses
521 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 09:31 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 06:47 AM
|
5 responses
45 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by mossrose
Yesterday, 12:18 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 06:36 AM
|
5 responses
26 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 07:37 AM
|
Comment