Political Correctness

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Let's go with my life for example.

 

If I'm an Atheist/Deist/Agnostic (all three have happened at one pt) am I allowed to dislike Islam as much as I dislike Christianity and every other religion? Or do I have to pretend I think it's really cool so I'm not called a racist bigot?

 

If I think that the LGBT community engaging in pride parades now that they've won their landmark case is a waste of time, do I instantly become a homophobic bigot?

 

If I casually call my black friend a nigha, and HE doesn't mind, but you, as the moralistic bystander you are, do, am I a racist?

 

If I use the word cancer to describe a situation 

 

can·cer

 

2) a practice or phenomenon perceived to be evil or destructive and hard to contain or eradicate, am I suddenly an insensitive bigot?

 

If I say calling someone a bigot inherently means you're also a bigot since you're being intolerant to their views, does that make me a right wing strawman?

 

PC culture is shutting down Freedom of Speech in a posh way. You all are NO better than a brutal dictator who has you executed for speaking, worse even because instead of dead, I'm ridiculed and turned into a joke for disagreeing 

[Night]

This thread is cancer

[ihop]

just worry about it less

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

This thread is cancer

Yes it is, but if the leftist had their way you'd be lynched for daring to compare some bored 19 year old's rant to a deadly illness

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

What you personally think really doesn't matter. If you don't support the LGBT (did i miss a letter in there..?) community, that is fine. 

 

However, just as much as there is an issue with people fussing over meaningless word choice, there is a very real problem with people using said fuss as an excuse for legitimately bigoted or insensitive behavior.

 

Some might argue that the world is so sensitive, but it really wouldn't matter how sensitive people were if everyone wasn't just a jackass.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

What you personally think really doesn't matter. If you don't support the LGBT (did i miss a letter in there..?) community, that is fine. 

 

However, just as much as there is an issue with people fussing over meaningless word choice, there is a very real problem with people using said fuss as an excuse for legitimately bigoted or insensitive behavior.

 

just worry about it less

 

 

SC ruled in your favor. Are you really so thin skinned you care what some a****** says?

 

Like what PC give to the left irritates me. Somehow Trump saying not letting in ANYMORE Muslims, has devolved to him wanting concentration death camps for Muslims living in the US and channeling Mein Kaumf.

 

PC gives the liberal media the power to play telephone and twist words into anything they want.

 

For the record, republican hypocrites in congress basically stopped the refugee inflow, but are now joining with Obama in criticizing Trump for doing the EXACT same damn thing. 

 

PC is a cancer that the political machine uses for it's propaganda, not a niceity tool

[Aerion Brightflame]

Freedom of Speech has never allowed you to say purely offensive things without consequences to it. It just stops the goverment denying your right to say them. Thus a PC culture really doesn't reduce the value of freedom of speech, unless that s*** changes. Private organisations and individuals still have every right to judge you and punish you on what you have said. 

 

The dictator example you cite is silly, because individuals making you feel sheet for a controversial opinion is different to a goverment killing you over it. By a long ass margin. 

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Less thin skin, more wondering why people feel the need to behave that way.

 

The sentiment of "back in my day, everyone was cruel and insensitive" makes absolutely no sense.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Less thin skin, more wondering why people feel the need to behave that way.

 

The sentiment of "back in my day, everyone was cruel and insensitive" makes absolutely no sense.

Why does it matter? Let them be petty. It's their loss and gradual selection will clean them out. It's not like we executed every KKK member, that s*** still died out. Let nature flow it's course

 

It sets undue standards, and while it may decrease usage of truly "offensive" slurs now, it's a slippery slope. Our definition of what is political and what is correct is constantly warped by those in power it's nothing fixed. 

[Goose]

holy sheet good point everyone who has ever ridiculed someone is as bad as a dictator who kills his people 

[Aerion Brightflame]

Like what PC give to the left irritates me. Somehow Trump saying not letting in ANYMORE Muslims, has devolved to him wanting concentration death camps for Muslims living in the US and channeling Mein Kaumf.

 

PC gives the liberal media the power to play telephone and twist words into anything they want.

 

For the record, republican hypocrites in congress basically stopped the refugee inflow, but are now joining with Obama in criticizing Trump for doing the EXACT same damn thing. 

 

PC is a cancer that the political machine uses for it's propaganda, not a niceity tool

 

I think you are confusing political correctness with politicians and the media spinning things. 

 

Like, this sort of sheet has been happening through-out history, that people take words and quotes out of context and twist them to make people look sheet, despite any hipocrasy or the like. It's got nothing to do with Political correctness. 

 

Like, if you are going to hate on PC, hate on it for something it's actually the root cause of, not something that would exist one way or another. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

holy s*** good point everyone who has ever ridiculed someone is as bad as a dictator who kills his people 

Tom was right, it's a bad comparison. PC effectively stifles the voices of dissent the same way though

 

I think you are confusing political correctness with politicians and the media spinning things. 

 

Like, this sort of s*** has been happening through-out history, that people take words and quotes out of context and twist them to make people look s***, despite any hipocrasy or the like. It's got nothing to do with Political correctness. 

 

Like, if you are going to hate on PC, hate on it for something it's actually the root cause of, not something that would exist one way or another. 

 

PC is but the latest weapon they use to twist words. PC is basically people trying to achieve things that will happen in due time quickly since we're the entitlement generation. We can't bear the thought of getting roughed up a bit, and I don't think that spinless thin skinned future us good for us or our children

[Astolfo]

Let's go with my life for example.

 

If I'm an Atheist/Deist/Agnostic (all three have happened at one pt) am I allowed to dislike Islam as much as I dislike Christianity and every other religion? Or do I have to pretend I think it's really cool so I'm not called a racist bigot? Sure, you can choose to like or dislike whatever you want. Doesn't mean you have to talk about it or say it, and it would be extremely rude to do so to people of those specific religion for obvious reasons.

 

If I think that the LGBT community engaging in pride parades now that they've won their landmark case is a waste of time, do I instantly become a homophobic bigot? Again, no, but do you need to say that out and tell them that? No, you don't.

 

If I casually call my black friend a nigha, and HE doesn't mind, but you, as the moralistic bystander you are, do, am I a racist? Perhaps to the bystander's opinion? There's an issue of semantics and such with this one and implied tone/meanings.

 

If I use the word cancer to describe a situation 

 

can·cer

 

2) a practice or phenomenon perceived to be evil or destructive and hard to contain or eradicate, am I suddenly an insensitive bigot? Not really? It's become a sort of common word in online media/Internet culture/sites, and it can be insensitive/rude perhaps to those who actually have/had/know someone who had/have it. But do you need to go and tell others you think it's bad in such a blunt way? Probably not. There are more civil ways to do so, or sometimes you really don't have to do it anyways.

 

If I say calling someone a bigot inherently means you're also a bigot since you're being intolerant to their views, does that make me a right wing strawman? I don't pay much attention to politics, so I'm not entirely sure of what "right wing" means, but after various Google searches for definitions, my thoughts are: No, not really. But I'd also say in the case you call someone a bigot for calling someone else a bigot, I'd pay attention to the reasons why that term was used in the first place. Sure, someone could be extremely racist and thus be bigoted in certain ways due to that. But if you're intolerant of said person, by your definition, you can say they're a bigot. But are they a bigot against something most people would consider also bigot...-esque? (Dunno a better term for it) It's always been a thing with the world that unpopular opinions for one reason or another are generally discriminated against, but that doesn't mean there aren't reasons to do so in certain cases.

If I was a bigot for calling someone who was extremely sexist/racist/etc a bigot, then so be it, I'd be a bigot. But I'd say it's really not the same kind of 'bigotry', as the general implied/social connotations are more of that sexist/racist/etc person and less of those people who are intolerant of such people. I really would even perhaps reconsider whether the other person could really be considered a bigot in such cases. But eh, what do I know?

 

PC culture is shutting down Freedom of Speech in a posh way. You all are NO better than a brutal dictator who has you executed for speaking, worse even because instead of dead, I'm ridiculed and turned into a joke for disagreeing

PC? Ah, political correctness.

Eh, I'd say far from it. You still have the ability to say whatever you well please.

However, just like it always has been, that doesn't mean you get to escape the consequences of said actions.

If you have something to say that would offend someone, unless you really have a reason to say it to them/etc, then why bother?

All it does is just create bad blood.

It's smarter to sometimes not intentionally stir up things when the end result is just a whole load of meaningless argumentative crap.

[Goose]

For the most part, "PC" is about not being an jabroni.  You don't call people retarded because it creates a negative impression of people who have mental disabilities, which makes them feel like sheet.  You don't call your friend a jabroni (at least in front of other people) because the history of the word means it reinforces the old social structure and can make other people feel like sheet.  You don't call a thread cancer because it trivializes the struggle people go through every day which makes them feel like sheet.

 

The point of "PC" is generally to make the world a better place because we can.

[epicmemesbro]

The issue is that people tend to view issues in two extremes with the "either your with or against us" ideology. Although that does give a sense of urgency to supporters it does lead to bandwagoning. I understand that there can be a need for political correctness to the use of respecting other peoples wishes in a debate but there is a fine line between respect and silencing opposition. Now I'm not saying those who aren't politically correct should be taken more seriously, I'm saying that if one does get into a discussion that entails a debate one should be willing to hear a viewpoint that they will not agree with. Discussions are meant to bring forth a middle ground. Rally's on the other hand were made so you can hear what you wish to hear. Using it in doses of moderation is key.

[Cosmo.]

LGBT (did i miss a letter in there..?) 

 

 

I'd suggest adding a + (as in LGBT+) as that is what it's commonly called since that plus includes all the others. Another common name is LGBTQ+ (same concept, just one more letter not hidden under the plus)

 

Also, i feel like pride parades should still be held, since, okay gay marriage is legal, but there's still a lot of judgement left. And gay marriage is only legal in a very little part of the world. As for the other parts, i'm too tired rn to discuss/talk about.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

1) Why should I be silent? I have objective evidence it's a blight. Religion has costed a great many lives over fighting for it, and there is no proof god exist outside of a few dusty old books

2) Again why, it's an economic waste of time when you've already won. Don't rub saltin the wound, put that time to better uses

3&4) Fair

[Goose]

The LGBTQ+ community hasn't won at all.  The LGB part had a large victory but there are so many battles still to be fought.  Take a look at this website: http://equaldex.com/

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'd suggest adding a + (as in LGBT+) as that is what it's commonly called since that plus includes all the others. Another common name is LGBTQ+ (same concept, just one more letter not hidden under the plus)

 

Also, i feel like pride parades should still be held, since, okay gay marriage is legal, but there's still a lot of judgement left. And gay marriage is only legal in a very little part of the world. As for the other parts, i'm too tired rn to discuss/talk about.

Know of reconstruction? North won, basically took a piss on the south for a while cause of it. Helped a lot didn't it. Don't. Rub. Salt. In. The. Wound.

 

Being Gay is not a choice, agreed, talking like a 12 year old valley girl is. Most of the "homophobes" hate homosexuality because people have made is so f***ing out there with the rainbow and crap. 

 

You're gonna be hardpressed to find someone who can hate a dignified person like Sir Ian McKellen, it's not hard to get irrigated with the jackass living down the hall with rainbow hard loudly talking about how many dicks he sucked last night

 

[Astolfo]

1) Why should I be silent? I have objective evidence it's a blight. Religion has costed a great many lives over fighting for it, and there is no proof god exist outside of a few dusty old books

2) Again why, it's an economic waste of time when you've already won. Don't rub saltin the wound, put that time to better uses

3&4) Fair

You don't have to be silent, you can say whatever you damn well please.

But that doesn't mean it's not potentially rude/dick-ish to say it to someone/some group of people if you know it'll offend them specifically.

And that doesn't mean they have to just take whatever you say and accept it, they can respond however they want.

 

All I meant was, "If you have a controversial opinion but no real reason to go around blurting it out (especially to those it would specifically offend), then it would be better not to, because there's no reason to stir up sheet and cause people to get angry. If you do feel like saying it anyways, sure, you can do that, you can say whatever you want. That doesn't mean you can avoid any consequences thereafter."

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

You don't have to be silent, you can say whatever you damn well please.

But that doesn't mean it's not potentially rude/dick-ish to say it to someone/some group of people if you know it'll offend them specifically.

And that doesn't mean they have to just take whatever you say and accept it, they can respond however they want.

 

All I meant was, "If you have a controversial opinion but no real reason to go around blurting it out (especially to those it would specifically offend), then it would be better not to, because there's no reason to stir up s*** and cause people to get angry. If you do feel like saying it anyways, sure, you can do that, you can say whatever you want. That doesn't mean you can avoid any consequences thereafter."

So you're ok living in falsehood cause it causes less problems? Why should I not criticize religion when it clearly has proven to be a threat, Crusades, Hindu-Muslim riots, now Radical Islam...do we need more? This isn't me going around saying some falsehood, this is a time tested theory over a thousand years and 3-4 religions. That's one hell of a case study

 

GG America...GG...

[Astolfo]

Jeez, do you read what I said?

I said you can talk about whatever you want, but that doesn't make you somehow magically protected from people responding/criticizing you as well for said beliefs.

Everyone can say what they want and anyone can sheet on them for what was said, but that doesn't make either side automatically right/more valid than the other.

 

Sure, let's take religion for an example.

You perceive it as a /large/ problem. Cool.

You decide to go and start speaking about it. Cool.

Obviously, many religious people /could/ get offended. That's fairly reasonable.

 

Can they get mad at you and criticize you for what you said/are they allowed to do/be so? Sure they can.

Can you also say what you said? Sure you can.

 

Now what happens?

Ensue large shitstorm/debate about religion and all the various things that are entailed with it and probably devolving to base insults somewhere here and there.

So what happens in the end?

People are mad on both sides, neither side will probably change their stance, and it just uses up a whole bunch of time to get mad at people over the Internet/real life.

What's achieved by having done all this?
Basically nothing.

 

So?

Just save time/effort and don't start up sheet if there's no reason to do so.

If you really want to, then go ahead, but you should be prepared for the kinds of things it can bring.

 

You can sheet on anyone for your beliefs, anyone can also do the same with regards to yours.

I just find it pointless to cause trouble by doing so, because almost nothing will be achieved anyways except having just wasted time and spent energy getting all angry.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Jeez, do you read what I said?

I said you can talk about whatever you want, but that doesn't make you somehow magically protected from people responding/criticizing you as well for said beliefs.

Everyone can say what they want and anyone can s*** on them for what was said, but that doesn't make either side automatically right/more valid than the other.

 

Sure, let's take religion for an example.

You perceive it as a /large/ problem. Cool.

You decide to go and start speaking about it. Cool.

Obviously, many religious people /could/ get offended. That's fairly reasonable.

 

Can they get mad at you and criticize you for what you said/are they allowed to do/be so? Sure they can.

Can you also say what you said? Sure you can.

 

Now what happens?

Ensue large shitstorm/debate about religion and all the various things that are entailed with it and probably devolving to base insults somewhere here and there.

So what happens in the end?

People are mad on both sides, neither side will probably change their stance, and it just uses up a whole bunch of time to get mad at people over the Internet/real life.

What's achieved by having done all this?

Basically nothing.

 

So?

Just save time/effort and don't start up s*** if there's no reason to do so.

If you really want to, then go ahead, but you should be prepared for the kinds of things it can bring.

 

You can s*** on anyone for your beliefs, anyone can also do the same with regards to yours.

I just find it pointless to cause trouble by doing so, because almost nothing will be achieved anyways except having just wasted time and spent energy getting all angry.

I did, but your post made it seem more like this was a debate of two valid opinions. They can get upset, but that doesn't change the fact they got nothing.

 

Did the crusades happen over religion? Damn right. Did Hindus and Muslims take turns raping and torturing each other? Yup. Is Daesh using a holy text as justification for their crimes? Right again. 

 

You could phrase the argument the same with with regards to homophobicity. 

 

 

Sure, let's take homophobia for an example.

You perceive it as a /large/ problem. Cool.

You decide to go and start speaking about it. Cool.

Obviously, many religious people /could/ get offended. That's fairly reasonable.

 

Can they get mad at you and criticize you for what you said/are they allowed to do/be so? Sure they can.

Can you also say what you said? Sure you can.

 

Now what happens?

Ensue large shitstorm/debate about religion and all the various things that are entailed with it and probably devolving to base insults somewhere here and there.

So what happens in the end?

People are mad on both sides, neither side will probably change their stance, and it just uses up a whole bunch of time to get mad at people over the Internet/real life.

What's achieved by having done all this?

Basically nothing.

 

So?

Just save time/effort and don't start up s*** if there's no reason to do so.

If you really want to, then go ahead, but you should be prepared for the kinds of things it can bring.

 

Should we go back to banning gay marriage? Cause Religion has been the biggest serial killer alive for over a millennium so you can't say it's done nothing

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

I did, but your post made it seem more like this was a debate of two valid opinions. They can get upset, but that doesn't change the fact they got nothing.

 

Did the crusades happen over religion? Damn right. Did Hindus and Muslims take turns raping and torturing each other? Yup. Is Daesh using a holy text as justification for their crimes? Right again. 

 

You could phrase the argument the same with with regards to homophobicity. 

 

 

 

Sure, let's take homophobia for an example.

You perceive it as a /large/ problem. Cool.

You decide to go and start speaking about it. Cool.

Obviously, many religious people /could/ get offended. That's fairly reasonable.

 

Can they get mad at you and criticize you for what you said/are they allowed to do/be so? Sure they can.

Can you also say what you said? Sure you can.

 

Now what happens?

Ensue large shitstorm/debate about religion and all the various things that are entailed with it and probably devolving to base insults somewhere here and there.

So what happens in the end?

People are mad on both sides, neither side will probably change their stance, and it just uses up a whole bunch of time to get mad at people over the Internet/real life.

What's achieved by having done all this?

Basically nothing.

 

So?

Just save time/effort and don't start up s*** if there's no reason to do so.

If you really want to, then go ahead, but you should be prepared for the kinds of things it can bring.

 

 

Should we go back to banning gay marriage? Cause Religion has been the biggest serial killer alive for over a millennium so you can't say it's done nothing

sooo

 

You just wanna bash religion without anyone getting angry at you?

Well, that's just selfish, isn't it?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

sooo

 

You just wanna bash religion without anyone getting angry at you?

Well, that's just selfish, isn't it?

Defend it then. I'm saying you have nothing to defend it with since's it's a reactionary, age-old, coping mechanism that we've been tryna use as a crutch due to holes in science that are not currently filled. Can you despite all the life lost in name of religion? Cause I'd have no valid case then.

 

What I'm criticizing, is instead of having a valid point against my criticism, you seek to shut me up cause "muh feelings hurt, microagressions!"