Political correctness - the devil!

[It's Snake Pliskin]

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]

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]

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]

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]

...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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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

 

[wayneL]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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

www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

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?



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.

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."

An interesting post.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

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.