Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Is political correctness going too far?

Jump to new
drsmith said:
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...or-misogynistic-question-20141015-116oqg.html

Whether male of female, the higher professions will only ever be occupied by the minority.

Civilisation as we know it would collapse if there was no one to serve the higher professions their coffee. ;)
Click to expand...

It's true! What we aspire to =! what we actually do.

Still, that's a confused as hell story. The only actual outrage seems to be on social media - where you can find outrage about anything, anytime.

Then they find one person to give a garbled answer - on one hand she doubts the survey is real, because she doesn't think people would answer like that, and on the other hand she thinks it shows we're sexist, because the survey is real...? I'd put good money that there was a much longer interview, they didn't tell her what the actual question was, and they chopped the bits out and rearranged things to get the result they wanted.

The question was: name something people think is a woman's job

...so I reckon the more reasonable conclusion is that people think OTHER PEOPLE are sexist.

Which 'aint a leap.
 
‘Genderless gingerbread figures’ hit Melbourne bakery

IS this the most equal opportunities snack of all time?

A Melbourne bakery is selling “genderless gingerbread figures” for $2.50 a pop.

And they’re vegan and organic into the bargain.

A photo of the politically correct treats was posted on Reddit with the words: “So this is what the world is coming to...”

It could mean an end to cookie-cutter gender stereotypes in bakeries, with some naming the Muffin Man as a possible future target.
Click to expand...

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/food/genderless-gingerbread-figures-hit-melbourne-bakery/story-fneuz8zj-1227098688271

What's next? 'White Bread' ??
 
DB008 said:
‘Genderless gingerbread figures’ hit Melbourne bakery

What's next? 'White Bread' ??
Click to expand...

Blackberries.
Black Currants.

... and how come nobody has yet complained about those gender-stereotypical A-men? What kind of image does it convey to growing minds in preschool and throughout their student lives, when the Commonwealth-funded Chaplain terminates every Prayer in the name of less than half the humans? "Ahh-Persons!" :cool:
 
pixel said:
Blackberries.
Black Currants.

... and how come nobody has yet complained about those gender-stereotypical A-men? What kind of image does it convey to growing minds in preschool and throughout their student lives, when the Commonwealth-funded Chaplain terminates every Prayer in the name of less than half the humans? "Ahh-Persons!" :cool:
Click to expand...

The word "Persons!" contains the sub-word "sons!"


RE White bread ... (yes, I have an opinion on most everything) :p:

I see that wholemeal bread is now made in a way to appear white.
Apparently to fool kids?!

I remember when ya could buy
1.) Pumpernickel - black bread (Very tasty, especially with Coon Cheese)
2.) Rye Bread - dark brown
3.) Brown Bread - Beyonce brown
 
See 7mate is about to screen the old "Love Thy Neighbour" series.

We keep getting told we are a mature society (whatever that means) and coupled with us passing through the Y2K purification of the mind magic gates (where all the old draconian values and myths of Judeo Christian era were left at the stoop):- so why are groups still telling us what we should watch, accept and obey?

Surely we are so freiken tolerant we can discriminate between right and wrong (as prescribed by the City Of London nursery of PC and inetrnational tree huggers) without guidance?
 
Tisme said:
See 7mate is about to screen the old "Love Thy Neighbour" series.

We keep getting told we are a mature society (whatever that means) and coupled with us passing through the Y2K purification of the mind magic gates (where all the old draconian values and myths of Judeo Christian era were left at the stoop):- so why are groups still telling us what we should watch, accept and obey?

Surely we are so freiken tolerant we can discriminate between right and wrong (as prescribed by the City Of London nursery of PC and inetrnational tree huggers) without guidance?
Click to expand...

I wonder if we will ever see "Kingswood Country" again ?

"Leave yer money on the fridge wog !". I doubt if this ever caused much consternation to people of foreign descent, they probably enjoyed it as much as anyone else, as it was a satire and condemnation of bigoted attitudes and not an attack on migrants. Unfortunately, people with no sense of humour can't see that. Some more enjoyment has been taken out of life in this increasingly PC country.
 
Then there was "Tell Death Do Us Part" and it's sequel series "In Sickness and in Health"
 
Just sharing some quotes..

Brave men among us, whose honour compels them to uphold the truth, must wage a spiritual battle against the forces of political correctness.

The beautiful, honourable and brave souls who dare challenge the politically correct paradigm are routinely ostracised, smeared, and abused.

That we even countenance discussing the question whether fathers are still necessary in families shows how far we have fallen as a country.

Fascism-socialism: two sides of the same coin, and they alone are responsible for the emergence of totalitarianism in Western civilisation.

Our free speech in this country is now gone, Bolt was right all along.
 
Tink said:
Our free speech in this country is now gone, Bolt was right all along.
Click to expand...

Part of freedom of speech is the ability to tell other people their opinions are crap. Part of freedom of speech is the ability to ask people to boycott something - even to boycott it because of something someone said.

Freedom of speech does not come with freedom from consequence.

...and as the court told Bolt, a legitimate defence would have been "the statement was true". Fact is, you're not allowed to lie about stuff as a way of insulting people about their race.

Pretty sure Abbott sued someone for printing lies about him. Right? Freedom of speech, though....?

Ha! Here's a snippet from the court docs - golden!

Mr Bolt said of Wayne and Graham Atkinson that they were “Aboriginal because their Indian great-grandfather married a part-Aboriginal woman” (1A-33). In the second article Mr Bolt wrote of Graham Atkinson that “his right to call himself Aboriginal rests on little more than the fact that his Indian great-grandfather married a part-Aboriginal woman” (A2-28). The facts given by Mr Bolt and the comment made upon them are grossly incorrect. The Atkinsons’ parents are both Aboriginal as are all four of their grandparents and all of their great grandparents other than one who is the Indian great grandfather that Mr Bolt referred to in the article.
Click to expand...

Any offensive statement based on this utter lack of truth would be actionable, whether race was involved or not.

...or does freedom of speech mean we can lie about people to their detriment? Slander and libel is ok, is it?
 
Tink said:
Weatsop, you may not have joined this forum yet when there was a discussion about 18C and Bolt.
The conversation is here -

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27364&page=173

Regardless of the outcome, he has a point, it needs to be changed, imo.

As has been mentioned, it is a lawyers picnic.
Click to expand...

I didn't really see discussion about how the law clearly and unambiguously gives you a free pass if what you say is true, though. I think that's kinda a bid deal.


Section 18C does not render unlawful anything said or done reasonably and in good faith:
...
(i) a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest; or

(ii) a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment.

As the court said: it's legal if it's true. You can't lie about people in public to their detriment, and you can't use lies to attack "race". This isn't a very difficult "loophole" - if what you say is true, you're fine. You can be as offensive as you like! You just can't lie.

The court found that Bolt lied. Usually he gets away with it, because usually his lies aren't actually illegal. In this case, they were.

You can say - and the court took no issue with saying - that "white skinned" Aborigines shouldn't get assistance. You can say that as much as you like. What you can't do is make claims about a person that are false, and use those false claims to humiliate that person.

I really don't see how that's unreasonable.
 
Weatsop said:
The court found that Bolt lied. Usually he gets away with it, because usually his lies aren't actually illegal. In this case, they were.
Click to expand...

he gets away with it because he uses a well worn path other self opinionated, loud mouthed social haters use to demonise, socially ostracise and besmirch the unsuspecting. And there are far too many people these days who treat the whole thing as a popcorn spectacle giving credence to the haters..........the great Australian fair go ethos be buggered, that disappeared a few generations back when "men" particularly got interested in becoming fishwives.
 
Tisme said:
he gets away with it because he uses a well worn path other self opinionated, loud mouthed social haters use to demonise, socially ostracise and besmirch the unsuspecting. And there are far too many people these days who treat the whole thing as a popcorn spectacle giving credence to the haters..........the great Australian fair go ethos be buggered, that disappeared a few generations back when "men" particularly got interested in becoming fishwives.
Click to expand...

Often, Bolt doesn't actually say anything at all. He just sort of implies, and lets his follows run away with it.

Like I said in another thread - and you don't have to believe me - but a feller I know has been on Bolt's show a couple of times. He told me that Bolt thinks it's all a big game. Doesn't believe half of what he says, but does it for effect.

He's a professional troll.
 
Weatsop said:
- and you don't have to believe me - but a feller I know has been on Bolt's show a couple of times. He told me that Bolt thinks it's all a big game. Doesn't believe half of what he says, but does it for effect.

He's a professional troll.
Click to expand...

I haven't been on Bolt's show, but even my low brow intellect recognises low acts when it sees them.

I thank Sir Rumpole for pointing out to me the congenital defect beset our Mr Bolt:

ANTIPHOLUS OF SYRACUSE
Where stood Belgia, the Netherlands?

DROMIO OF SYRACUSE
Oh, sir, I did not look so low

:D
 
Weatsop said:
.
The court found that Bolt lied. Usually he gets away with it, because usually his lies aren't actually illegal. In this case, they were.
Click to expand...

The court.:rolleyes: Bolt was ambushed. The decision was actually the opinion of one man. Judge Mordecai Bromberg.

Prior to being elevated to the bench in 2009 by the Rudd-Gillard government, Bromberg built a record as both a labour lawyer and Labor lawyer. In 2001, he ran for ALP pre-selection for the federal seat of Burke. He finished second to Brendan O'Connor. His primary motivation for running for Parliament, he said, was to reverse the Workplace Relations Act. The core of his practice was acting for unions, especially the most violence-prone, the Construction Forestry Mining and Engineering Union. He acted for the CFMEU in 2009 after it had been found to be in contempt of court. He defended the CFMEU enforcer Joe McDonald. He defended the CFMEU after its unlawful strike at the Yallourn power station. He is a former Australian president of the union-funded International Centre for Trade Union Rights. He opposed the setting up of the Australian Building and Construction Commission. He opposes secret ballots.
It was Bromberg who delivered the judgment in the Andrew Bolt racial vilification case, in which he deemed that it was not enough to find Bolt guilty but required conspicuous apologies to be published.
Click to expand...

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-labor-lawyer-and-the-death-seal-20131218-2zlca.html#ixzz3HhsAJ24u
 
Calliope said:
The court.:rolleyes: Bolt was ambushed. The decision was actually the opinion of one man. Judge Mordecai Bromberg.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-labor-lawyer-and-the-death-seal-20131218-2zlca.html#ixzz3HhsAJ24u
Click to expand...

So you're saying Bolt *didn't* lie?

Because, you know, I quoted the court's finding up above. Seems like a cut-and-dried lie to me. The court doesn't get to just make stuff up. People would notice. Bolt said something that was clearly and blatantly false.

Talking about the judge's political background as a way of ignoring the argument is a pretty perfect example of an ad hominem (which *isn't*, as so many people think, the same as "being rude to your opponent").

Please, by all means, show that either Bolt didn't say what he is reported to have said, or show that these people's entire families weren't aboriginal, as the court found.

You can't just pretend it didn't happen. Everything here is on the public record. Bolt lied about people. He really did. You can't deny it.
 
Top