I am wondering just what are people referring to when they make an issue of "political correctness" usually in the sense of something they're against. I most often see it used by individuals who support the dominance of Christian white male heterosexuals, and want to reverse the gains in equality made by other groups in recent years. Is this an accurate perception of how the phrase is used, or am I just trippin?
It's the state of not being able to laugh at a good joke.
It is not getting caught.
Quote from: Nero on December 21, 2007, 03:26:25 PM
It's the state of not being able to laugh at a good joke.
:eusa_clap: Perfect definition Nero!
It was the cognitive output of anal-retentive academics promoted by semantics onanists in order to inflate their ego*by policing our language and to confine our thoughts according to their fascistic views.
*or in plain English:
it was invented and enforced by constipated poo-faced wankers and other wind-bags who want to stop us calling a spade a spade but to call it a digging implement instead! :o
A couple of exemples:
Sanitary technician instead of bin-man
Verticaly chalenged person instead of dwarf
and plenty more... please feel free to post the best ones you ever came accross! >:D
LLL&R
Maebh
I think every group has language that is more better and language that is less good. In naming, in describing, in pronouns, in all sorts of things. We refer to things being P.C. when we tend not to like that choice. However we think our choices are not only proper, but should be the common usage.
It is keeping to the laws of speech in polite society, even if trampling over good manners, decency or meaning. It is useful only for those who don't want to be caught.
the expression, Political correctness is often used by those will little social grace, clearly jerks.
to justify their assholness and their unwillingness to become a better person.
If you specifically know something offends, why say it!
But...
The problem with PC comes when language is "fixed" even when just a few are really bothered
by the original designation or those that want he change have a specific narrow agenda.
Not calling blacks, "->-bleeped-<-" is a good thing considering its background
(though blacks call themselves variations of such all the time, good example of reappriopriation
of a word, which is a much better solution often than banning it),
Also not calling someone crippled which has such bad connotations is a good thing.
But, where does is stop
Crippled -- Good -> handicapped -OK I guess -> disabled
--UH -> physically challenged -OMG ---> differently-abled
As for the "womyn" words, HATE is not strong enough a word for how
stupid I feel that word is!!!!!!
IMHO, political correctness is the avoidance of telling it like it is. Others have given examples and I can only add more. I believe that political correctness is a legacy of President Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" initiatives of the mid-1960s and are not made to replace pejorative terms. Rather, they can create them by inference
Poor became underprivileged.
Handicapped became physically challenged
I had a doctor who was rather short. She asked me to reach something on an upper shelf for her, which I did. She thanked me and told me that she was "vertically challenged," and we had a laugh about political correctness.
Hypatia, the last people I would expect to be politically correct would be those whom you described in your post. They would still be using pejoratives to describe religions, nationalities, skin color, ethnic clothing, and many other things. They want to erase everyone's gains other than their own because they believe that to rule is their entitlement.
Sincerely,
Wing Walker
Quote from: Wing Walker on December 21, 2007, 10:17:46 PM
Hypatia, the last people I would expect to be politically correct would be those whom you described in your post. They would still be using pejoratives to describe religions, nationalities, skin color, ethnic clothing, and many other things. They want to erase everyone's gains other than their own because they believe that to rule is their entitlement.
This is actually what I was talking about, not the tendency to use euphemisms, which is irrelevant.
I asked because I posted a criticism of a racist group on another message board and some blowhard gets in my face about how I shouldn't accuse others of racism because political correctness means you can't have a discussion of race in this society. Then I posted massive evidence that this group advocates white supremacist ideology and has ties to the Ku Klux Klan and neo-Nazis. This made the guy backtrack, but he still badgered me to agree with him about "political correctness." So I said I don't know what you mean by that term. But when someone starts making an issue of it in an argument about race, I get wary.
I also think the guy took an aggressive attitude toward me because he has a high post count and I don't, and he assumes women can be browbeaten into submission.
Not very PC is he Hypatia? LOL. Which is why Keira's definition appeals to me most.
Quotethe expression, Political correctness is often used by those will little social grace, clearly jerks.
to justify their assholness and their unwillingness to become a better person.
If you specifically know something offends, why say it!
A very nice summary. S/he did very well with hir definition, no? (apologies, Keira, but I couldn't resist!)
Nichole
Lets define un-politically-correct language first.
First, the "N" word. Basically it carries with it the connotation of "I'm already better than you, so don't start no $#^! with me, Boah!"
And where does the utterer of the pejorative 'she-male' stand in relation to the pre-op transsexual have-to-work-in-the-sex-trade person he (almost always the speaker of this term is a 'he') is referring to?
Currently, if you use the terms "African-American" or 'Transgender' instead, there is not that automatic offset that connotes the speaker is on some sort of moral or power high ground looking down on the person referred to.
Sometimes it's nice to call a spade a n*****, but it's almost never polite and almost always demeaning.
PC terms also tend to be on a treadmill -- a new term without the emotional baggage of the previous term picks up that emotional coloring that signals an offset in status, and bye-the-bye is replaced by a new term. Witness colored -> negro -> afro-american -> black -> african-american -> ??? The same thing happend in the hispanic community, along with fragmentation where different communities took on one term as being 'correct', while other communities saw the same term as disrespectful.
That is also why - while it's scientifically incorrect - I prefer to refer to myself as 'transgender', even though it is seen as an umbrella term including weekend warriors (a slightly pejorative term used here for example,) and anybody else that doesn't fit the binary. A segment of our poplation gets ung-up on the emotionally-loaded term -sexual that is in 'transsexual', and can't get past that to see me as anything higher than pond-scum. But if I can get them to see me as 'transgendered', I get an instant promotion -- maybe not to status of 'equal', but far better than pond-scum.
Sorry, I see a need for 'politically correct' speech, if only to remove rhetorical advantage from bigots and those who are prejudiced. Chapter 7 of Steven Pinker's book, The Stuff of Thought, has a great analysis of how certain terms trigger knee-jerk emotions in people, and makes the case for politically correct speech to defuse those emotions in susceptible individuals.
Just my thoughts;
Karen
I think PC is an epiteth used by those who can't be bothered to have empathy for
the person in front of them, or to admit that their position is flawed.
PC discourse has always existed and its called common decency and caring
for the other person's feeling. People defending their own insensitivity also
has always existed.
Dismissing the other person point of view
as overreacting, oversensitive, overemotional, needing to grow a spine,
is a well known rhetorical device.
So, political correctness is a heavily loaded, agenda driven word,
so ironically, political correctness would need an euphemism
also :D
May I suggest a euphemism for political correctness? How about "newspeak?"
1984 has not yet left us.
Wing Walker
Quote from: Wing Walker on December 22, 2007, 08:07:29 PM
May I suggest a euphemism for political correctness? How about "newspeak?"
1984 has not yet left us.
Wing Walker
I dunno, Wing Walker, "common decency" sounded pretty good to me.
Nichole
Quote from: Nichole W. on December 22, 2007, 08:53:22 PM
Quote from: Wing Walker on December 22, 2007, 08:07:29 PM
May I suggest a euphemism for political correctness? How about "newspeak?"
1984 has not yet left us.
Wing Walker
I dunno, Wing Walker, "common decency" sounded pretty good to me.
Nichole
You're entitled to your opinion Nicole. I'll agree not to demeane anyone by any unapropriate word or name that would
cause them offense. Common decency is not the same as political correctness gone mad. So, in the defence my freedom of expression, I will never accept to let some self proclaimed and pontificating experts to dictate
ad nauseum what I should or shouldn't say or think. I agree with Wing Walker, to me it smacks too much of facism and totalitarism.
LLL&R
Maebh
Quote from: Maebh on December 22, 2007, 09:14:52 PM
Quote from: Nichole W. on December 22, 2007, 08:53:22 PM
Quote from: Wing Walker on December 22, 2007, 08:07:29 PM
May I suggest a euphemism for political correctness? How about "newspeak?"
1984 has not yet left us.
Wing Walker
I dunno, Wing Walker, "common decency" sounded pretty good to me.
Nichole
You're entitled to your opinion Nicole. I'll agree not to demeane anyone by any unapropriate word or name that would cause them offense. Common decency is not the same as political correctness gone mad. So, in the defence my freedom of expression, I will never accept to let some self proclaimed and pontificating experts to dictate ad nauseum what I should or shouldn't say or think. I agree with Wing Walker, to me it smacks too much of facism and totalitarism.
LLL&R
Maebh
:D :D Sorry, Maebh, I cannot help it.
And you got through all of that by using common decency and some tact!! :o
Very nice, did that feel totalitarian and facist?
It's not what is said in discourse as much as it is how it's said. I expect that people can have opinions about TSism for instance and be able to dismiss its possibility, efficacy, etc w/out absolutely demeaning the person with the syndrome? I spoz.
One can say, with decency, that one thinks people of color are less than human? I spoz.
I honestly think that what the rub is is that to approach such things without one's demeaning mode in full-swing and one's aggravation and anger and self-righteous indignation at full boil is to absolutely LOSE the point of the exercise. Sure makes it harder to be a bigot when you treat the other person as
a human being with hopes, dreams, pains and desires, just like one self.
Isn't it?
Common decency rests, having been gracefully allowed to have her own opinion. *smile*
Maebh, that was a good post, even though I disagreed with it.
Hugs,
Nichole
Quote from: Nichole W. on December 22, 2007, 09:31:33 PM
Quote from: Maebh on December 22, 2007, 09:14:52 PM
You're entitled to your opinion Nicole. I'll agree not to demeane anyone by any unapropriate word or name that would cause them offense. Common decency is not the same as political correctness gone mad. So, in the defence my freedom of expression, I will never accept to let some self proclaimed and pontificating experts to dictate ad nauseum what I should or shouldn't say or think. I agree with Wing Walker, to me it smacks too much of facism and totalitarism.
LLL&R
Maebh
:D :D Sorry, Maebh, I cannot help it.
And you got through all of that by using common decency and some tact!! :o
Very nice, did that feel totalitarian and facist?
It's not what is said in discourse as much as it is how it's said.
Point taken so let me rephrase:I'll agree not to demeane anyone by any unapropriate word or name
or tone that would
cause them offense.
Quote
I expect that people can have opinions about TSism for instance and be able to dismiss its possibility, efficacy, etc w/out absolutely demeaning the person with the syndrome? I spoz.
One can say, with decency, that one thinks people of color are less than human? I spoz.
What would be the common decency in these attitudes?
Quote
I honestly think that what the rub is is that to approach such things without one's demeaning mode in full-swing and one's aggravation and anger and self-righteous indignation at full boil is to absolutely LOSE the point of the exercise.
Guilty as charged, I must learn to control my explosive Latino-Celtic passion. It keeps getting me into trouble sometimes.
Quote
Sure makes it harder to be a bigot when you treat the other person as a human being with hopes, dreams, pains and desires, just like one self.
Isn't it?
SO right... AGAIN
Quote
Common decency rests, having been gracefully allowed to have her own opinion. *smile*
Very gracefully indeed
Quote
Maebh, that was a good post, even though I disagreed with it.
Hugs,
Nichole
Thanks, Nichole. Likewise, actually I think we might even be closer than apart on this subject.
Go raibh maait agat.
LLL&R
Maebh
PC gone mad, is when people don't trust the decency of human beings
and impose it in an arbitrary way. Some think you can legislate sensitivity
or jump ahead 20 year ahead of where society is right now by simply
adding words to the dictionary.
PC has been used as a put down by the right mostly in response to
both waranted changes in language and the frivolous ones. But,
using the frivolous changes as justification for any change being wrong.
like I said, in most case,
the changes in languages have reflected changing societal attitudes or
have been at the forefront of trends in social attitudes, so these chantes
in languages have been totally warranted.
Its when the changes seem to respond to no real imperatives, when they
seem to destroy the meaningfullness of language, that the put down
of PC seems to ring right.
Of course, you can't force people to be decent through words or otherwise,
they will find another way to demean the other person, maybe in a more
covert way.
Which is what happened in the case of racial relations in the US
in many places.
I'm not quite sure were the anger comes from Maebh, you sure agree that
some things must be discussed with sensitivity and with the other person's
point of view in mind. Even when speaking to racists and homophobes
there is a need to keep their point of view in mind even if many cases its
very difficult and its easy to reduce them to stereotypes.
Keeping the lines of communication open is the only way the other person
can know that we are not stereotypes and this will, with time, change
society.
Quote from: Keira on December 22, 2007, 07:44:32 PM
I think PC is an epiteth used by those who can't be bothered to have empathy for
the person in front of them, or to admit that their position is flawed.
PC discourse has always existed and its called common decency and caring
for the other person's feeling. People defending their own insensitivity also
has always existed.
Dismissing the other person point of view
as overreacting, oversensitive, overemotional, needing to grow a spine,
is a well known rhetorical device.
So, political correctness is a heavily loaded, agenda driven word,
so ironically, political correctness would need an euphemism
also :D
Yes.
This is totally on the money... Thanks, Keira.
Posted on: December 23, 2007, 12:45:54 AM
Quote from: Nichole W. on December 22, 2007, 09:31:33 PM
One can say, with decency, that one thinks people of color are less than human? I spoz.
No... such a thing is inherently indecent, not to mention inhuman. I'm fighting racism because racism is just plain wrong--calling me names isn't going to dissuade me from the fight.
Quote from: Keira on December 22, 2007, 10:07:59 PM
PC gone mad, is when people don't trust the decency of human beings and impose it in an arbitrary way. Some think you can legislate sensitivity or jump ahead 20 year ahead of where society is right now by simply adding words to the dictionary.
Unfortunately it is what has happened. I agee, it isn't words that need to be changed but attitudes
Quote
PC has been used as a put down by the right mostly in response to both waranted changes in language and the frivolous ones. But using the frivolous changes as justification for any change being wrong.
Unfortunately it is the frivolous that makes its way to the mass media and become the representative of the rest.
I have no beef with the warranted ones.
Quote
Like I said, in most case, the changes in languages have reflected changing societal attitudes or have been at the forefront of trends in social attitudes, so these changes in languages have been totally warranted.
Its when the changes seem to respond to no real imperatives, when they seem to destroy the meaningfullness of language, that the put down of PC seems to ring right.
Exactly
Quote
Of course, you can't force people to be decent through words or otherwise, they will find another way to demean the other person, maybe in a more covert way. Which is what happened in the case of racial relations in the US in many places.
One could imagine a PC Klan Member saying to others: " Ok lads let go out and string up some African Americans!"
Quote
I'm not quite sure were the anger comes from Maebh, you sure agree that some things must be discussed with sensitivity and with the other person's point of view in mind. Even when speaking to racists and homophobes there is a need to keep their point of view in mind even if many cases its very difficult and its easy to reduce them to stereotypes.
My anger is fuelled by my absolute hatred of abuses of power. Unfortunatly some vested political and economical interests, with constant access to the medias, have jumped on the bandwagon of political correctness for their own self agrandissement and taken the roles of: legislator, judge, jury and executioner. If this is not facism or totalitarism what is it?
Will we ever learn from history that the last thing humanity needs for a better and harmonious future is a new generation of Goebbels and Berias with their Gestapo and KGB?
Quote
Keeping the lines of communication open is the only way the other person can know that we are not stereotypes and this will, with time, change society.
Of course, I am all for dialogues, but when it gets stuck, sometime, a good kick up the .... can let people know that we are no push-over, we really mean business and are ready to fight back for our rights :icon_2gun:
Down from the soap-box.
LLL&R
Maebh
Quote from: Hypatia on December 23, 2007, 12:49:29 AM
Quote from: Nichole W. on December 22, 2007, 09:31:33 PM
One can say, with decency, that one thinks people of color are less than human? I spoz.
No... such a thing is inherently indecent, not to mention inhuman. I'm fighting racism because racism is just plain wrong--calling me names isn't going to dissuade me from the fight.
Hi Philosopher-Lady, how're the halls of Alexandria? *smile*
Of course you aren't. I think my difficulty is that conversation among educated and culturally-modified Westerners has taken on all of the aspects of warfare without, generally, the actual use of weaponry like guns, artillery, rockets and H-bombs. But, we do have and use the linguistic equivalents of those.
My point is simply that if we defuse that warfare, see and react to the person/s we 'fight' against as though they are flesh and blood humans with the same innate traits as ourselves: give them the common decency of seeing their humanity, then to be able to argue that people of color are sub-human, that TGs, Republicans, Democratic-Socialists, Quebecois or Arabs are not the 'same people' as myself, it becomes impossible for me to demean them, often impossible for me to argue things I might have argued before.
I believe in common decency. I believe that to hold to that is to haul myself away from Western-style argument that places all in a black/white juxtaposition. In removing that irate, demeaning, dismissive tenor to whatever I am arguing for or against is to allow the other the full humanity and dignity I allow myself.
It seems to me that it is also to defuse, completely, my self-righteousness and willingness to do in 'intellectual warfare' what I would never do to my own child, or loved ones.
With 'common decency' I allow the other her humanity. In doing that I disarm myself and meet with her on a common ground of similar dreams, hopes, pains and triumphs. I do not meet her as if she were an alien monster who eats her own children.
No, not all arguments are worthy of the same adherence as others. But, I also think that when I can change the basis for the argument to one of shared dignity and common decency that I also begin conversation and end warfare.
So, I would definitely agree that one cannot be viciously racist or violently transphobic when she allows her fellow conversationalist to be as real, tender, hopeful and worthy of life as she is herself. I suppose if that is PC, then I am PC. I would rather see it as being human and able to recognize another's humanity as well.
Nichole