# Political correctness - the devil!



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

For any political correctness discussion let's have it out - while we still have free speech.

Here is a good site worth reading:
http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/
Quote:


> So what is political correctness, how did it start and how did it become so successful? Political correctness is first and foremost an attack on free speech, clear thinking and discussion. Political correctness is perpetrated by the left in politics as a cover for their flawed ideology - a sort of cultural Marxism. By cloaking their strange ideas under the cover of not wishing to offend anyone (which naturally appeals to peoples' better nature), they try to bypass debate and give a 'received wisdom' which must not be questioned. And anyone who disagrees with this 'received wisdom' must therefore be a really nasty person and deserves to be ostracised by their peers. This peer pressure is instrumental in enforcing and expanding political correctness.




Tonight on radio I was listening to a cab driver who plays carols while he is driving. Some teachers got into his cab and said he wasn't politically correct by playing the carols.  Australia is a christian secular country and Christmas - the celebration of Christ - is normal. So why the mentalistic attitudes? 

But here we have an example of cultural Marxism being spread by the left. 

The average Australian has the requisite skill available to see through the cultural Marxist. It is called *"common sense."*


----------



## chops_a_must (10 December 2008)

"Christian secular" is a pretty big oxymoron there Snake.

But Christmas has now transcended christianity and is really just a secular celebration for most.

I doubt you will get many true lefties arguing against the stupid use of political correctness.

After all, a lot of civil rights activists are angry at the use of it, as it actually stops the discussion and inhibits the progression of said rights. It's very difficult to discuss incarceration rates for aboriginals without some ninny crying foul for instance. But that just stops the discussion about what needs to be done.

But you do have to be careful about the anti political correctness argument being used as the thin end of the wedge to allow blatant racism to surface once again. Very difficult to separate the two though on a broad scale.


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 December 2008)

Thats sounds ridiculous. Especially considering Christmas is 2 weeks away.

A lot of these people have been brainwashed, I mean imagine a future where we are judged by the thought police for anything we read, write, listen to or sing along with. 

The cabbie should lodge a complaint with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission for being religously vilified in his workplace. Come to think of it why not?


----------



## cuttlefish (10 December 2008)

Give it up and get a life Snakes.


----------



## wayneL (10 December 2008)

Is it politically incorrect to discuss the negative aspects of political correctness? 

It's a tough one this. It is good that we have tried to do things like remove pejorative racial/cultural tags in the name of PC, such as... well we all know what they are. But PCness so obviously goes way too far at times, as the various Xmas examples (and numerous others) show.

Where is the line? It's a bit fuzzy really. But totally agree that excess PC should be sternly addressed.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

> "Christian secular" is a pretty big oxymoron there Snake.



Yes it is one of the failings of our language. We are christian and everythng is based on christianity in a very indirect way but we are secular in that religion and state are not one. The way it should be.


> But Christmas has now transcended christianity and is really just a secular celebration for most.



For most in Australia. And to an increasing extent in Japan where it is a disneyland like celebration.


> I doubt you will get many true lefties arguing against the stupid use of political correctness.



That is the nature of the marxist isn't it?


> After all, a lot of civil rights activists are angry at the use of it, as it actually stops the discussion and inhibits the progression of said rights. It's very difficult to discuss incarceration rates for aboriginals without some ninny crying foul for instance. But that just stops the discussion about what needs to be done.



It is the biggest problem for a progressive society and will be the cause of continued decay. Surely we can have a critical look at things and call them what they are?


> But you do have to be careful about the anti political correctness argument being used as the thin end of the wedge to allow blatant racism to surface once again. Very difficult to separate the two though on a broad scale.



What we do not need is fascism and the racist diatribe that goes along with that. Doesn't common sense rule out racism?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

cuttlefish said:


> Give it up and get a life Snakes.



Please explain.


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 December 2008)

Lets juxtapose this cabbies situation. 

Imagine the cabbie was a cashed up fella with an awesome cab. 
Tweeters, a couple of sub-woofers in the back as well as the boot. 
A GPS system that also had a PMP connection for rear passenger entertainment and he was playing David Lee Roth's Hot For Teacher.

Would that be politically incorrect? Or is he meant to be telepathic and realise they are Teachers before they enter his cab?

Great song by the way
Comes from the Album 'Best of Both Worlds' :


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

wayneL said:


> Is it politically incorrect to discuss the negative aspects of political correctness?
> 
> It's a tough one this. It is good that we have tried to do things like remove pejorative racial/cultural tags in the name of PC, such as... well we all know what they are. But PCness so obviously goes way too far at times, as the various Xmas examples (and numerous others) show.
> 
> Where is the line? It's a bit fuzzy really. But totally agree that excess PC should be sternly addressed.




Wayne I don't believe it has to be this or that. It shouldn't be PC or the other extreme. Why not a simple logic of treating things for what they are with consideration for the parties concerned - aka common sense?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

*Re: Political correctness - is it the devil?*



GumbyLearner said:


> Lets juxtapose this cabbies situation.
> 
> Imagine the cabbie was a cashed up fella with an awesome cab.
> Tweeters, a couple of sub-woofers in the back as well as the boot.
> ...




LOL, GumbyLearner,

Who would rock music offend? I don't know a tough one. Surely the noise aspect only.

*Disclaimer:
I am not promoting the opposite to PC. As my signature says: Discussion only! We are still allowed to talk about things.*


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 December 2008)

Lets juxtapose this cabbies situation. 

Imagine the cabbie was a cashed up fella with an awesome cab. 
Tweeters, a couple of sub-woofers in the back as well as the boot. 
A GPS system that also had a PMP connection for rear passenger entertainment and he was playing David Lee Roth's Hot For Teacher.

Would that be politically incorrect? Or is he meant to be telepathic and realise they are Teachers before they enter his cab?


Great song by the way

http://www.vh1classic.com/view/artist/1153/18151/Van_Halen/Hot_For_Teacher/index.jhtml

Comes from the Album 'Best of Both Worlds' :


----------



## cuttlefish (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Please explain.






			
				It's Snake Pliskin said:
			
		

> Here is a good site worth reading:
> http://www.politicallyincorrect.me.uk/




Let me paraphrase  "Here is a hard right wing site that is full of cr*p and not worth wasting time on."


If you presented the debate in a remotely balanced fashion it might be worth entertaining discussion on.  But you're agenda driven and thus the thread is a waste of space imvho.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

cuttlefish said:


> Let me paraphrase  "Here is a hard right wing site that is full of cr*p and not worth wasting time on."
> 
> If you presented the debate in a remotely balanced fashion it might be worth entertaining discussion on.  But you're agenda driven and thus the thread is a waste of space imvho.




Thanks for your reply Cuttlefish however devoid of content other than attack. Just for the record I am only interested in discussion without any agenda, but I am sure many disagree with you. Have a listen to any radio talkback program to hear real people's opinions. 

Just playing devils advocate
I hope the investing / trading is going well for you.

*Moderators*: if this thread should be deleted feel free to delete it. I don't want to make anyone uncomfortable by DISCUSSION.


----------



## Wysiwyg (10 December 2008)

Political correctness is a memetic phrase that has little influence in Australian society and the phrase is occasionally used when being polite or respectful.

Hopefully it will be de-memetised and  better english language used.

Like the cabbie to the teachers ... "if yer dant lark mer carols then git yer fat asses oota me cab."


----------



## chops_a_must (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Yes it is one of the failings of our language. We are christian and everythng is based on christianity in a very indirect way but we are secular in that religion and state are not one. The way it should be.



Mmm... Western secular would have sufficed.



It's Snake Pliskin said:


> That is the nature of the marxist isn't it?



Lol.

Marxist doctrine is probably some of the most politically incorrect doctrine I have ever read.



It's Snake Pliskin said:


> What we do not need is fascism and the racist diatribe that goes along with that. Doesn't common sense rule out racism?




The problem always becomes, where do you draw the line?

I may have an opinion, say, that the Japanese nation is far too proud to realise the destruction it caused the world, and the insincerity and dishonesty it continues to treat its atrocious war crimes and genocides with.

It partly has a basis in reality. There are things you can point to in their education system and culture that back this opinion up. But do you treat the individual japanese person with that bias as a basis, or grounding? Or do you treat them as an individual and not hold against them the structure that has shaped them in such a way?

To me that is the grey area with political incorrectness in practice. Most people will treat the individual as if they are a representative of that whole. Rather than having a point of view of an individual that takes into account what has made them them, and what they are a product of, and making the judgement in relation to that stereotype, rather than judging them as the stereotype.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

> Mmm... Western secular would have sufficed.



I disagree.


> Marxist doctrine is probably some of the most politically incorrect doctrine I have ever read.



Well not really. 


> The problem always becomes, where do you draw the line?



Respect for all with free speech.


> I may have an opinion, say, that the Japanese nation is far too proud to realise the destruction it caused the world, and the insincerity and dishonesty it continues to treat its atrocious war crimes and genocides with.



Yes Japan caused a lot of destruction. Most don't know what really happened. A more obscure point of fact is that Korea fails to address their history where it is negative too.


> It partly has a basis in reality. There are things you can point to in their education system and culture that back this opinion up. But do you treat the individual japanese person with that bias as a basis, or grounding? Or do you treat them as an individual and not hold against them the structure that has shaped them in such a way?



Treat them as individuals based on their deeds. I have conversations with many Japanese about world war two both left and right bent. But I still treat them as they treat me - with respect. 


> To me that is the grey area with political incorrectness in practice. Most people will treat the individual as if they are a representative of that whole. Rather than having a point of view of an individual that takes into account what has made them them, and what they are a product of, and making the judgement in relation to that stereotype, rather than judging them as the stereotype.



There is education that would help with this. We are told we can't talk about stuff, but do we really know why?

Thanks for the discussion.


----------



## cuttlefish (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Have a listen to any radio talkback program to hear real people's opinions.




Radio talkback ... where the "REAL" people have their say ... thats hilarious ,,, you're not serious are you?



> I hope the investing / trading is going well for you.



Do you? Interesting that you've chosen to express this irrelevant emotion in this thread ... but thankyou for your sudden interest in my financial success or otherwise.


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 December 2008)

I agree chops. 

I treat all on face value. 

But I do think the cabbie has every right to listen to carols.

And I believe it to be reverse-discrimination by anyone who says
its not PC to listen to carols at Christmas time on the radio.



Just thought I'd throw up a different scenario which certainly has merit
when discussing this kind of topic 


In this scenario it is the Teachers who are being insensitive to the driver, rather than the driver
being insensitive to their intellectual ideals.


----------



## cuttlefish (10 December 2008)

GumbyLearner said:


> I agree chops.
> 
> I treat all on face value.
> 
> ...




The problem is this is all hearsay which is not atypical of talkback radio.  The odds on this being a true story about Australian teachers is slim imo.  But lets not let the truth get in the way of any excuse to fan the fire.

How about a link to the story Snakes ... or is this a first hand account?


----------



## chops_a_must (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Well not really.



Yes, really.

Stereotyping on mass whether from the bottom up, or top down, I would class as grossly politically incorrect.



It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Respect for all with free speech.



Respect for all with free speech?

I don't respect opponents to Mugabe because they don't have free speech? 

I will respect people on what they say, not on their ability to say it or not, and not necessarily on their propensity and ability to garner publicity. If they are a cretin like Hansen or Howard, I will treat them as such, and certainly not on the basis of their novelty.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

cuttlefish said:


> Radio talkback ... where the "REAL" people have their say ... thats hilarious ,,, you're not serious are you?
> 
> 
> Do you? Interesting that you've chosen to express this irrelevant emotion in this thread ... but thankyou for your sudden interest in my financial success or otherwise.




It was a nice goodbye - aka take a hike.

So the people who call up talk back radio are not real? Get a reality check!

You have displayed that you cannot discuss without petty attack.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

cuttlefish said:


> The problem is this is all hearsay which is not atypical of talkback radio.  The odds on this being a true story about *Australian teachers* is slim imo.  But lets not let the truth get in the way of any excuse to fan the fire.
> 
> How about a link to the story Snakes ... or is this a first hand account?



I heard it on the radio but do not have a copy to play to you. Sorry. It was part of a theme regarding taxi drivers and the discrimination by drivers over short fares and not taking old ladies two blocks etc. Some callers had valid complaints and then a cabbie got on to give information on the matter. Thent he story came up regarding the carols.

And for the record it s not about teachers in general, it just happened to be in this case some teachers as I heard on the radio. It prompted me to start the thread to see what others thought.

Wow, some discussion starting to happen. We are evolving.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

> Respect for all with free speech?
> 
> I don't respect opponents to Mugabe because they don't have free speech?
> 
> I will respect people on what they say, not on their ability to say it or not, and not necessarily on their propensity and ability to garner publicity. If they are a cretin like Hansen or Howard, I will treat them as such, and certainly not on the basis of their novelty.



So PC is all about controlling people like yourself? Cretin is not very PC.

What is wrong with free speech with respect for the people in your immediate vicinity?


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 December 2008)

Your right cuttlefish.

But certainly a healthy debate.

But there are words in English that dont come from the feminine or masculine
yet many wymynysts and thought-police will object to.

A classic example is 'man-hole'. 

Ok sounds like a compound noun man + hole. 

In fact, its just a folk etymology and manhole simply means

"hole through which a person may pass" 

Oh its gender specific so many of the lingo enforcer brigade at academic institutions will argue. 

You know the types you meet at uni with 15 piercings in their face walking around with green, blue and pink their hair. "Daddy wouldnt buy me a pony, so I decided to become a militant vegetarian radicalist" types. 

All usually done to offend their parents, and of course they get the piercing and dye taken out after graduation and after being threatened by Daddy they will get kicked out of the Family Trust. Most of them not entitled to Austudy because their folks are wealthy, but they want to empathize with average aussie battlers who have text books to pay for. 

This is where I draw the line and tell them to stick their dogma.
And by the way I know talkback has plenty of bigots but australian universities also have
a their fair share of mad radicals with their own agendas too.


----------



## cuttlefish (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:
			
		

> ...And for the record it s not about teachers in general, it just happened to be in this case some teachers as I heard on the radio. It prompted me to start the thread to see what others thought.




Well my thoughts are: So what.  If I had a dollar for every person I've ever come across thats spouted some racist BS comment or joke I'd be a multi-millionaire.  

A few teachers make some comment as per some hearsay by a taxi driver relayed by a talkback host with no agenda whatsoever (they don't have any they really care about you) and I'm supposed to roll around in agony at the hurt for poor who knows who.


----------



## cuttlefish (10 December 2008)

GumbyLearner said:


> You know the types you meet at uni with 15 piercings in their face walking around with green, blue and pink their hair. "Daddy wouldnt buy me a pony, so I decided to become a militant vegetarian radicalist" types.
> 
> All usually done to offend their parents, and of course they get the piercing and dye taken out after graduation and after being threatened by Daddy they will get kicked out of the Family Trust. Most of them not entitled to Austudy because their folks are wealthy, but they want to empathize with average aussie battlers who have text books to pay for.
> 
> ...





Ahah it all makes sense now ... and then after graduating they got a cab home, paid for by daddy, and the cabby phoned talkback radio ...


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

cuttlefish said:


> Well my thoughts are: So what.  If I had a dollar for every person I've ever come across thats spouted some racist BS comment or joke I'd be a multi-millionaire.
> 
> A few teachers make some comment as per some hearsay by a taxi driver relayed by a talkback host with no agenda whatsoever (they don't have any they really care about you) and *I'm supposed to roll around in agony* at the hurt for poor who knows who.



Not at all.


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 December 2008)

No, the thread is entitled political correctness!

Im just sharing some valuable experiences I have observed
while studying at Uni. I also had many part-time jobs to pay for it
while I attended and was fortunate to be employed within my field
once I graduated. It helps to have plenty of work experience when applying for graduate positions. One page CV's arent great sellers!

To those radicalists all I could say back then was stop pontificating and
get a job!


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

GumbyLearner said:


> To those radicalists all I could say back then was stop pontificating and
> get a job!



If only they would listen to this good advice.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

cuttlefish said:


> Ahah it all makes sense now ... and then after graduating they got a cab home, paid for by daddy, and the cabby phoned talkback radio ...



Not tax payers money?


----------



## wayneL (10 December 2008)

GumbyLearner said:


> Your right cuttlefish.
> 
> But certainly a healthy debate.
> 
> ...




I wonder how they'd go where every noun has a gender; German for eg.

*das* Pferd (The Horse {neuter})
*die* Hund (The Dog {feminine})
*der* Tisch (The Table {masculine})


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

wayneL said:


> I wonder how they'd go where every noun has a gender; German for eg.
> 
> *das* Pferd (The Horse {neuter})
> *die* Hund (The Dog {feminine})
> *der* Tisch (The Table {masculine})




For German it would be easy by just making everything neuter.

But in French and Spanish for example they would have some issues as they don't have a neuter.(not to my knowlege anyway)

Interesting to see how a language could change.


----------



## chops_a_must (10 December 2008)

wayneL said:


> I wonder how they'd go where every noun has a gender; German for eg.
> 
> *das* Pferd (The Horse {neuter})
> *die* Hund (The Dog {feminine})
> *der* Tisch (The Table {masculine})



According to my professor and other lecturer, it's not actually an issue. Because  with most latin based languages, they pertain to plurals and possessives, and they don't have the connotations that seem peculiar in english.

But it causes a lot of problems in women's studies and things when they translate french writers like Foucault and Sartre for instance. When they argue for equality in the sexes, but use language that would be deemed "masculine centric" to do so. Gets them real fired up apparently.


----------



## Wysiwyg (10 December 2008)

S.P. matey, can you explain why you are unhappy about other people being (or perceived so) victimised?


----------



## wayneL (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> For German it would be easy by just making everything neuter.
> 
> But in French and Spanish for example they would have some issues as they don't have a neuter.(not to my knowlege anyway)
> 
> Interesting to see how a language could change.




True, German is the only language with masculine, feminine and neuter, but try assigning the wrong gender and you get a blank stare and are treat with ignore. I doubt that could ever happen in Germany, particularly with formal speech/writing.


----------



## theasxgorilla (10 December 2008)

GumbyLearner said:


> A classic example is 'man-hole'.
> 
> Ok sounds like a compound noun man + hole.
> 
> ...




Anyone bothered by this has too much time and/or is too sensitive.  In Swedish man=man and man=one...so on a daily basis women use the word MAN to refer to themselves in the third person.  Language means NOTHING when it comes to cultural masculinity or sexual equality.


----------



## Spanning Tree (10 December 2008)

Many say that this is a Christian country and therefore we have to get rid of socialism. I think the biggest mistake people make is equating Christianity with capitalism.

I think that in order to be a Christian you have to be a socialist. Either the government intervenes in trade (socialism) or they don't (capitalism). If we had pure capitalism, actions like incest would be legal. For example, if an 18-year-old daughter consented to sex with her father in return that the father gives the daughter $100, capitalism would allow that because the transaction of sexual service for cash is made with consent. What Christian would want incest?

I have heard about capitalists who claim that marriage itself should be privatized and deregulated, thereby giving individuals the right to marry anyone they like, including e.g. donkeys. It would also give individuals the right to have multiple spouses just as a company can hire multiple accountants. The argument capitalists make is that since humans are allowed to kill non-human animals to eat them, why not have sex with them? Would Christians want necrophilia, bestiality, and polygamy?

Christians value life. They oppose euthanasia. Even if a person wants to kill himself, Christians won't allow it. Yet not only do capitalists want euthanasia but they also approve of consentual cannibalism. Would Christians want cannibalism?



> Tonight on radio I was listening to a cab driver who plays carols while he is driving. Some teachers got into his cab and said he wasn't politically correct by playing the carols. Australia is a christian secular country and Christmas - the celebration of Christ - is normal. So why the mentalistic attitudes?




Actually, many Christians are offended by Christmas. This is because Christmas celebrations have their roots in paganism. There is no mention of Santa, flying reindeer, or Christmas trees in the Bible. There is no mention at all of Christmas in the Bible. Proverbs 12:22 states that lying is an abomination, yet Christmas encourages parents to lie to their children about Santa Claus.



> We are christian and everythng is based on christianity in a very indirect way but we are secular in that religion and state are not one. The way it should be.



Doesn't the Bible say that the state is established by God? Romans 13:1 says, "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God."

This whole idea of "Christian secular" doesn't make sense. Many Muslims are offended by women who wear sexually suggestive clothing. Some may claim that Muslims need to assimilate to the secular culture that encourages freedom of sex. However, Christianity cannot be equated with sexually promiscuous secular culture. This can be proven from the Bible. Matthew 5:28-29 says, "Anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell." Therefore, we have proven that the Christian position on this matter is at odds with the securlar position and actually the Christian position is compatible with the Muslim position. If we must conform to a "Christian secular" culture then must Christians assimilate to secular culture by allowing freedom of sexuality or should non-religious people assimilate to Christian culture by restricting freedom of sexuality?

I spoke to a Muslim friend about this topic recently. He came to me to ask me how he could better assimilate to Australian culture. He claimed that based on his study of the ABS Census 2006, 70 per cent of Australians (the majority) are Christians, so therefore he must assimilate to Christian culture. The Bible states that divorce is a sin. However, the majority of Australian marriages end in divorce. Therefore, if you marry a woman and do not get divorced, you are a minority. Assimilating to whatever the majority does therefore is impossible. If you marry and don't get divorced, you are not assimilating because most people get divorced. If you marry and do get divorced, you are not assimilating because you have gone against Christianity, the majority religion. I simply told the Muslim guy, "Stuff assimilation."


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 December 2008)

Here's a great website to check out the epistemology of nothing

www.elsewhere.org/pomo/


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

Spanning Tree said:


> Many say that this is a Christian country and therefore we have to get rid of socialism. I think the biggest mistake people make is equating Christianity with capitalism.
> 
> I think that in order to be a Christian you have to be a socialist. Either the government intervenes in trade (socialism) or they don't (capitalism). If we had pure capitalism, actions like incest would be legal. For example, if an 18-year-old daughter consented to sex with her father in return that the father gives the daughter $100, capitalism would allow that because the transaction of sexual service for cash is made with consent. What Christian would want incest?
> 
> ...



An interesting post.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

Wysiwyg said:


> S.P. matey, can you explain why you are unhappy about other people being (or perceived so) victimised?




Not sure what you mean but Wayne put it well:


> It's a tough one this. It is good that we have tried to do things like remove pejorative racial/cultural tags in the name of PC, such as... well we all know what they are. But PCness so obviously goes way too far at times, as the various Xmas examples (and numerous others) show.


----------



## Wysiwyg (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Not sure what you mean but Wayne put it well:





Nice dodge! Do you think one day you will express what you really think or (from what I see) continue to hide in the shadows of someone elses thoughts/opinions/writings/stories?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

Wysiwyg said:


> Nice dodge! Do you think one day you will express what you really think or (from what I see) continue to hide in the shadows of someone elses thoughts/opinions/writings/stories?



Sorry for your percieved grievance. I agree with what Wayne said. Not a dodge. I am concerned with the destruction of language and the defence of individuals when they are accused of being not PC for simple matters that pre 1980's were problem free. Look at any child today and see how corrupted they are. Some PC has made progress but it has been hijacked.


----------



## Julia (10 December 2008)

Political correctness, imo, started out with noble motives, i.e. to prevent human beings being insensitive and divisive.

But, like many well intentioned ideas, it has gone too far in some areas.

What it has led to, I think, is a greater level of hypocrisy as we watch what we say and how we say it, so as not to be jumped on for being incorrect, while our underlying opinions do not change.   Not the greatest basis for a well functioning society imo.

Just a basic philosophy of treating others as we would like to be treated should be enough.  Doesn't that cover most of it?


----------



## Wysiwyg (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Sorry for your percieved grievance.




Nonsensical = "1. Lacking intelligible meaning: a nonsensical jumble of words.
2. Foolish; absurd: nonsensical ideas."



> Not a dodge. I am concerned with the destruction of language




See above.



> and the defence of individuals when they are accused of being not PC *for simple matters *that pre 1980's were problem free.




Water off a ducks back = " if criticism is water off a duck's back to someone, it has no effect on them at all."

See above again.



> Look at any child today and see how corrupted they are.




Is that any child? 

See above again.




> Some PC has made progress but it has been hijacked.




Political correctness has been hijacked?Do you think about what you are going to type much?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

Julia said:


> Political correctness, imo, started out with noble motives, i.e. to prevent human beings being insensitive and divisive.
> 
> But, like many well intentioned ideas, it has gone too far in some areas.
> 
> ...




Julia thanks for your comments.

It seems to be about controlling much like the marxist does. We are too afraid of being attacked for what we say so we say what is accepted. This is the control aspect. And you are right because most don't change their opinions but never voice them. 

Your last sentence is what I have said. Treat others with respect but call it what it is. If it is a man hole, then it is a man hole. 

Cheers..


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

Wysiwyg said:


> Nonsensical = "1. Lacking intelligible meaning: a nonsensical jumble of words.
> 2. Foolish; absurd: nonsensical ideas."
> 
> 
> ...




An attempt at control.


----------



## Wysiwyg (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> An attempt at control.




Nonsensical = "1. Lacking intelligible meaning: a nonsensical jumble of words.
2. Foolish; absurd: nonsensical ideas."

Do you think about what you are going to type much?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

Wysiwyg said:


> Nonsensical = "1. Lacking intelligible meaning: a nonsensical jumble of words.
> 2. Foolish; absurd: nonsensical ideas."




LOL.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> LOL.




Nonsensical = "1. Lacking intelligible meaning: a nonsensical jumble of _*letters*_.


----------



## Happy (11 December 2008)

Part of our ability to survive in the past and even now was/is to be able to make conclusions from available information and form stereotypes for future reference and quick reaction to possible danger/reward/opportunity.

We form stereotypes about everything and this includes other people, and other people who have low score card instead of trying to improve cry foul.





Julia said:


> Just a basic philosophy of treating others as we would like to be treated should be enough.





Would work if it is reciprocal.


----------



## chops_a_must (11 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> It seems to be about controlling much like the marxist does.



You need to stop flogging that dead horse, seriously.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (11 December 2008)

Happy said:


> Part of our ability to survive in the past and even now was/is to be able to make conclusions from available information and form stereotypes for future reference and quick reaction to possible danger/reward/opportunity.
> 
> We form stereotypes about everything and this includes other people, and other people who have low score card instead of trying to improve cry foul.




Good points Happy. But stereotyping is a no-no and considered uncool and can lead to racism. But that is the hard part of it as it is natural to quickly determine the danger. 

People who don't use spaces after full stops, or periods as the US calls them, cry foul. 


> Political correctness has been hijacked?Do you think about what you are going to type much?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (11 December 2008)

chops_a_must said:


> You need to stop flogging that dead horse, seriously.



So a Marxist is all about the redistribution of wealth and there is no control as a result?


----------



## chops_a_must (11 December 2008)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> So a Marxist is all about the redistribution of wealth and there is no control as a result?




Nice to see you can't continue a coherent line of argument.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (11 December 2008)

chops_a_must said:


> Nice to see you can't continue a coherent line of argument.



So a Marxist is all about the redistribution of wealth and there is no control as a result?


----------



## stockGURU (8 October 2009)

Given the furor over the Red Faces skit on Hey Hey last night I thought it was time to bump this old thread on political correctness.

Is Australia becoming (or is it already) a humourless nation obsessed with political correct thoughts and actions?

Your thoughts please.


----------



## wayneL (8 October 2009)

stockGURU said:


> Given the furor over the Red Faces skit on Hey Hey last night I thought it was time to bump this old thread on political correctness.
> 
> Is Australia becoming (or is it already) a humourless nation obsessed with political correct thoughts and actions?
> 
> Your thoughts please.




I'm getting highly irritated about the leap to take offence these days. There is a whole apology culture that leaps on ANY mention of race, religion or whatever. 

Let's look at the dictionary definition of racism:

rac⋅ism  [rey-siz-uhm]  Show IPA
–noun
1.	a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2.	a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3.	hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

That's pretty clear and there are a whole raft of ridiculous issues being incorrectly dragged under the banner of racism. The skit was clearly not racist according to the above definition.

Give yourself an uppercut Mr Connick, you pompous imbecile.

Racism needs to be addressed, but lets attack true racism, not humour.


----------



## overit (8 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> I'm getting highly irritated about the leap to take offence these days. There is a whole apology culture that leaps on ANY mention of race, religion or whatever.




Do people really take offense at this stuff or are they just using it as leverage to further their own agenda. ie Kyle sandilands.


----------



## wayneL (8 October 2009)

overit said:


> Do people really take offense at this stuff or are they just using it as leverage to further their own agenda. ie Kyle sandilands.



I strongly suspect that that is true. However, much of the unthinking masses are dragged into the mindset.


----------



## wayneL (8 October 2009)

There is also the appalling double standard.

We can name a movie "White Man Can't Jump", with the clear inference that black people are superior at the sport of basketball. 

I have no problem with this, it is pretty demonstrable that this is the case, but with a massive overlap of course.

The reverse inference in some other sport where the statement would be true, would initiate outrage and indignation.

I understand the dynamics of why this is and accept that is must be so to some extent for now, but it has gone waaaaaaaaaaaay too far.


----------



## Riddick (8 October 2009)

it's amazing that in such a short time the origins of this notion of being 'politically correct' has been mangled beyond all recognition and hidden.

so

* the history of political correctness lies in the 80's and harkens back to the notion of removing language and symbolism that coule be interpreted as exclusionary in some way, from the legal and governmental framework of many western nations, one of then Australia.
seems pretty simple enough and honourbale in a developed society that prides itself on ideals of legal justice, a 'fair go' for all, and social equality.

that is the complete exent of it, nothing more.

however-- FFWD 20 years and what we have is essentailly:
* a highjacking of the meaning of political correctness so that the notion of PC in 2009 is essentially [I to avoid language or meaning[/I] where individuals may take offense. that is to reduce the usage of terms like,for example "fat" "lazy" "incompetent" "bludging" "stupid" "drain on society".

* The second notion, closely linked in with the first assertation of avoiding conflict (that is avoiding "plain speaking") is that political correctness is no longer judged from a legal perspective but is, rather open to judgement by the loudest members of the ever present, (if i was to use plain language i could say "self righteous" "protest culture orientated" "maggots at the carcass of somone elses kill" ) mob. this basically means PC is at the whim of whoever is essentially feeling the most rightous at any given time and the interpretation of PC is whimsical. ( in plain speak: everyone laughs at the "fat guy" joke until someone takes offence and utters the "thats not PC" phrase. then everyone stands around pointing at each other and passing the blame)

* An advanced society is not only a society where peopleare not persecuted by official and legal language but is also a society where people have the freedom to express criticism of aspects of the society they may not agree with. eg. "I hate red heads" is not contrary to PCness. it is simply as statement of an individuals personal philosophy. the distinction is CLEAR ( sorry for yelling but i was directing that coment to the guy at the back who is using the sour milk face at me)

* similarly attacking a religious ideal is not counter to PC. it is simply expressing an opinion. However discrimination or personal vilification on the grounds of religious persuasion is not only anti PC it is (now) illegal.

so now, people who retain traditional beliefs are all labelled Politically incorrect at the whim of the afore mentioned mob and the finger-pointing-vein-in-the-forehead-bulging-sermonising-closes-the-eyes-whilst-pontificating zealot is hailed as educated, fair and a paragon of social virtue to be admired.

And as an interesting socal phenomenon, the rise of PC has brought with it a whole host of new afflictions and diseases that were unhitherto 'not invented'.
I guessif you could get medicare assistance for your chronic "weight control disorder" or your "overly active underangaged child" then why would you not?


glad i could clear that up. you can all go back to making money on the stock market now.


----------



## Julia (9 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> I'm getting highly irritated about the leap to take offence these days. There is a whole apology culture that leaps on ANY mention of race, religion or whatever.
> 
> Let's look at the dictionary definition of racism:
> 
> ...




I agree.  We have become way too precious about all this.
Riddick, you make some good points.

There was a well publicised case here in Qld earlier this year where something (I think a sportsground of some sort) was named after a bloke who was called N1gger Brown.  No idea what his first name was originally but for most of his life he had happily been known to everyone as 'N1gger'.
He had no problem with this at all.

So the sportsground or whatever was duly named after him as a tribute to a good bloke.  

Then a Stephen Hagan, an aboriginal activist decided the name had to be changed because it was racist.  He was poo poohed by most people but was determined.  
The following is a quote from the Brisbane Times reporting the result of the court action:


> Mr Hagan launched the action against Toowoomba Sports Ground Incorporated in 1999 over the name of a stand in the city's main football stadium - the ES 'N1gger  Brown Stand.
> 
> The grandstand was demolished in September and Toowoomba Sports Ground Inc agreed not to use the offensive word in any future tribute to Mr Brown, the city's first rugby league international.
> 
> ...




Now, I reckon if the late Mr Brown knew what had happened, he'd be pretty damn amused but probably downright annoyed.

And now apparently next on Mr Hagan's spurious list is "Coon" Cheese which was named after its creator, Mr Edward Coon.
PS  I have just had to edit this post because originally I typed in the original name in its correct form but when the post came up on the thread N...er is replaced with a series of asterisks!!
Can't believe the PC on this forum has reached such a silly extent.


----------



## Tisme (29 January 2017)

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/34287540/joggers-must-wear-helmets-signs-appear-on-sydney-beaches/#page1

If nothing else, this is quite plausibly the way we are going.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/34287540/joggers-must-wear-helmets-signs-appear-on-sydney-beaches/#page1
> 
> If nothing else, this is quite plausibly the way we are going.




The hunch is a hoax, a stunt by the "liberationalists". But NSW has a "Liberal" government doesn't it ? Why would they introduce such silly stuff ?


----------



## Tisme (30 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> *The hunch is a hoax*, a stunt by the "liberationalists". But NSW has a "Liberal" government doesn't it ? Why would they introduce such silly stuff ?




 I hope it is!!!


----------



## noco (3 February 2017)

Political correctness has gone too far and should be curtailed.

Louise Clegg sums it up very well.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/w/news-story/92be77d222eda627371cdc58c3fe125e


----------



## Tisme (7 June 2018)

Virginia and her boy robin Michael invited author Kevin Donnelly of the new anti PC book in for conflab and metered out the usual inquisitional "do you still beat your wife" questions.

Silly old bugger should have boned up on what PC is  ...... it's sheep who make for the middle of the mob while the border collie circles, if one shows some individual gumption and makes a break for it,  the rest remain, stare and bleet as the rules prescribe, until the bewildered loner returns to the mob to bleet too.


----------



## dutchie (9 June 2018)

Absolutely insane
We need to stop this *BS
*

*Political correctness gone mad: Outrage as students are marked down for using 'mankind' and 'workmanship' in essays – and some universities have even banned the word 'she'*

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...g-gendered-language-universities-country.html

By the way.....

man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man
man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man
man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man man
she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she
she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she
she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she she


Jordan Peterson was right to refuse to use state (university) legislated language. I'm joining him!

VIVA LA REVOLUTION !!!!!!


----------

