Political Correctness gone mad

[Lincsong]

The Cleveland Indians' Chief Wahoo comes under fire about every season.

I remember when Clinton became President he refused to wear the Cleveland cap when he threw out the first pitch. So I immediately ran out, bought that cap and wore it throughout his presidency. When I moved to Florida people would ask what part of Ohio I was from.lol I'd tell them why I wore the cap and they would laugh.

 

[Terry Lennox]

apparently it seems that most people here believe that being P.C. is being white. I see a lot of "us vs. them" here with the great graphics and lingo being tossed around.

Well being P.C. is not being white, it's respecting those that are different than you.

 

[Twitch]

Those security guys' names are Bubba and Lamont if that matters.

PC has absolutely nothing to do about race or using epithets or slurs. It has to do with societies on the planet going to extrordinery lengths not to use verbiage that obviously describes ANY person being discussed.

That guy isn't short he's vertically challenged. She's not homely she's plain. She's not heavy she's weight challenged...and so on. When you feel it will offend somebody, anybody if you were to say the "middle-eastern-looking guys over there," then you know a problem exists simply because you point out one obvious visual cue in a description. If there are 6 black men, 4 hispanics men and 3 caucasian women standing together and you tell someone, "go ask the black man with the green shirt," you're not being racist or PC, you're directing someone in the most efficient way possible. The PC way is to say "ask that person over there." You can't discuss their race, sex or clothing preference. Of course if you point that's rude too. So, what to do?[huh]

The bottom line is that 'middle eastern terrorists' is an accurate description of those who have peretrated acts of terror so far. They are out to kill blacks, caucasians, asians, hispanics, aboriginals and anyone who is not an islamic extremists. This includes others from the middle east who do not share their fanaticism as has been proven by their lack of regard for the lives of middle eastern folks as well. There are many christians who live in the middle eastern countries also. They are enemies too.

 

[Terry Lennox]

Those security guys' names are Bubba and Lamont if that matters..

Wow, I didn't think you'd do it but you sure did.. good job on the name choice!

PC has absolutely nothing to do about race or using epithets or slurs.

PC here does have a lot to do with race.
What's a good example.. let's go up a few and see that Maj. Nick Danger thinks that a banner called "Cacausians" is a good counter to (vs.) the Indians....
James Powers, a bartender here shows us the "Fighten White Guy" to counter (vs) the Indians mascot. Then goes on to say he'd like to have a t-shirt or something to wear it around town I guess?

Seems to me that "White is (vs) PC" to me on this thread.

Stop me if I'm missing their points...

She's not homely she's plain.

I've never heard that one. I don't think that's a PC term actually.

If there are 6 black men, 4 hispanics men and 3 caucasian women standing together and you tell someone, "go ask the black man with the green shirt," you're not being racist or PC, you're directing someone in the most efficient way possible. The PC way is to say "ask that person over there."

I agree...

Then if someone says which one, you say the Black guy with the green shirt, or better yet the African American guy with the green shirt.

I don't have a problem with calling them 4 black guys, 4 hispanic guys and 3 white guys. I've never said caucasian. Then again, I'm not the PC police. I'm just a guy who respects his fellow man, whoops!... Fellow Person.

 

[John in Covina]

SENSATIVITY

I see a lot of "us vs. them" here with the great graphics and lingo being tossed around. Well being P.C. is not being white, it's respecting those that are different than you.

PC has become where the most sensative people controling the conversation, it has nothing to do with respect. It tends to often be about people being "offended" when no offense was meant yet it was taken.[huh]

I'd like to officially protest all of you non scandinavians with your horrid Sven & Ole Jokes, they are insensative and are going to emotionally scar Scandinavian-Americans!:rage:

 

[John in Covina]

They are not Zombies they are the Living Challenged.

 

[Phil]

They are not movie monsters, they are acting persons with a skin condition and/or speech impediment and/or personailty disorder.

 

[Mr. Lucky]

PC has become where the most sensative people controling the conversation, it has nothing to do with respect. It tends to often be about people being "offended" when no offense was meant yet it was taken.[huh]

I'd like to officially protest all of you non scandinavians with your horrid Sven & Ole Jokes, they are insensative and are going to emotionally scar Scandinavian-Americans!:rage:

If it weren't for someone taking a stand, or a SIT as the case may be, someone saying "enough is enough", someone saying that it's not okay to say that anymore, than, well, certain folks would still be riding in the back of the bus, certain folks would still have to wear little yellow stars and certain folk would still not have the right to vote. Oh, and certain folk would be put to death for believing certain things that are akin to heresey - and I ain't talkin' about those who worship Allah.

But, hey, back in 'dem good ol' days before PC, well, everyone knew their place. Everyone ELSE could say what was on their minds. And everyone who remained might, after a generation or two, fit in.

I'd rather err on the side of caution and have to watch my step in what I say and to whom than have a little, hard working woman have to go to jail because she wants the right to vote or won't give up her seat. When someone wrote that "ALL men are created equal", I think he knew what he was talking about - even now. If I have to have some of my time taken and be searched just like the swarthy skinned man at the airport, so that another can avoid the indignity of 'profiling' at an airport, so be it. Livin' in a free society ain't free. We all rise together or we all fall. There is mid-ground.

 

[Doh!]

Years ago, I was temping in a bank office and was asked to bring some papers to "Bob" in Accounting. I didn't know Bob so asked what he looked like and was told he was "tall, thin, with a beard." When I walked over to Accounting, there were actually a couple of guys who fit that description so I asked for Bob and he introduced himself. Bob was black.

Oh, and the ONLY black guy in Accounting. Would it have killed the person who wanted me to drop off the papers to tell me that Bob was black -- or at least African-American? (Unless, of course, Bob's ancestors were from Jamaica or some other place.)

Is referring to someone as "black" such a terrible thing? As a "white" guy myself, I'm most content NOT being referred to as European-American. Now on St. Paddy's Day, I strongly embrace my Irish heritage but for some reason don't feel the same way about my German side during Octoberfest...

 

[carebear]

I'd rather err on the side of caution and have to watch my step in what I say and to whom than have a little, hard working woman have to go to jail because she wants the right to vote or won't give up her seat.

What does what you as a private individual say have to do with unConstitutional treatment under the law?

This is where PC goes wrong. It is the job of government to ensure that all citizens are treated equally under the law by government (public busses), it is not their job to control the speech of private individuals so that other individuals aren't offended (calling me a stupid Mick).

While some ignorant bigot of any race calling another person a racial slur is rude, oh well. People are rude in various ways all the time.

The PC trend toward some kind of Pharisaical, contrived "niceness" is shallow and stupid on its face, who hasn't hissed "yes, dear/mom/sir" through slitted teeth? The words are "polite" but the evil thoughts and intent remain. The larger attempt to enshrine forced private niceness into law ("hate speech" legislation) is a gross overstepping of the bounds of government.

We got rid of "fightin' words" as a legal justification for action years ago, we're now properly expected to have the self-control to not get violently riled up by "mere words".

"Hate speech" is the same thing reversed, censuring speech with legal consequences because we can't expect some folks to have the self-control to not get violently offended by "mere words".

Don't get me started on the culturally divisive, scientifically inaccurate, and patently false pseudonyms for "race" that are in vogue....

 

[John in Covina]

You just better what what you say in this country.

If it weren't for someone taking a stand, or a SIT as the case may be, someone saying "enough is enough", someone saying that it's not okay to say that anymore, than, well, certain folks would still be riding in the back of the bus, certain folks would still have to wear little yellow stars and certain folk would still not have the right to vote. Oh, and certain folk would be put to death for believing certain things that are akin to heresey - and I ain't talkin' about those who worship Allah.

But, hey, back in 'dem good ol' days before PC, well, everyone knew their place. Everyone ELSE could say what was on their minds. And everyone who remained might, after a generation or two, fit in.

I'd rather err on the side of caution and have to watch my step in what I say and to whom than have a little, hard working woman have to go to jail because she wants the right to vote or won't give up her seat. When someone wrote that "ALL men are created equal", I think he knew what he was talking about - even now. If I have to have some of my time taken and be searched just like the swarthy skinned man at the airport, so that another can avoid the indignity of 'profiling' at an airport, so be it. Livin' in a free society ain't free. We all rise together or we all fall. There is mid-ground.

Profiling works ask the Israelies, when was the last time someone blew up one of their jets?

All men are created equal, and we all have a right to have our own views, opinions. BUT when someone takes it the step further and decides on the basis of their religious beliefs to blow up jetliners well that does seem to go past what you have a right to do. One can not disuede such a person from their quest to take the lives of their fellow passengers with hugs, and understanding, self deriding, it just doesn't work. The idea of reaching out to these people will not work until their hearts have changed from within and the poison of hatred has been removed. That doesn't change readily.

Violence happens, it can be set as to intimidate or it can be a concerted effort to simply wipe out a whole set of people. Government sponsered genocide is evil, so is government sponsered terrorism. It is not always possible for an oppressed people to turn out their government to make the appropriate changes. Ghandi's non-violent resistance in India worked only because the British are at there core a moral people. The same would not have worked against the Nazis because they being immoral had the will to use the machine guns on the protesters.

Don't presume to teach me history. The concept of a second class citizen has no place in the US and we rail against it all over the world. In US urban centers I have seen more overt racism in Northern cities like NY and Boston than in Southern cities. Why? Perhaps because the concept that applied pressure can make changes, as in the civil war, made it so that in the South the choice of acceptance and living together and moving forward finally triumphed. It took a hundred years from the last shot in that war before changes were codified and enforced and the eyes of the nation focused on the second class citizeship entrenched in the South. In a way some probably figured that it was politically expediant to make the change and get on with life.

With the exception of the Warsaw ghetto, few people lead to the Nazi concentration camps actually resisted, so in a way their refusal to speak up could be construed as Political Correctness taken to an ugly and absurb end.
The double think of that era is a form of Political Correctness.

As to women having the vote, as adults and full citizens they are to be accorded it. Although, you can argue against it from several points of view. NOW, who's going get emotionally wipped up to condemn me for bringing that point to the table, note I have already stated the obvious BUT the mere idea that I would dare to say there could be another view places me in the evil camp by the PC crowd. They will get emotionally charged with righteous indignation over an idea like that. You are confusing civil rights with Feelings. The same people that say "No Censorship" are the same that will not allow people to use sertain words and thereby abridge the others First Amendment Rights. PC is not about Rights, it is about controling the conversation, words do have meaning even though some are emotionally charged. Is it better to be truthful or make everybody feel good? What ever happened to "I don't believe in your point of view but I will defend to the death your right to hold it?" Now to offend is equated with attempted murder or genocide. Example: Use the word Retarded instead of Learning Disabled and see what happens. Retarded can be used in a variety of context and has several meanings, but because in the past it became a term of derision it passed from accurate and usable to vulgar and emotionally charged. BAD WORD.

(Here is a question: can anyone please set up a website so we can standardize the viable from non-viable euphemisms and epiphets so we can be up to date on our political correctness? Maybe we can set up a Orwellian Ministry of Truth to handle it. TEN Minutes Hate!)



We live in an age were the coarsening of daily life has taken great steps forward. I in my life have watched the trouble in schools go from gum chewing and talking in class to students shooting other students. Many people will point at various things and say here is what the change is that made it possible. One set of people blame the object (it's the gun's fault) others say it's societies fault, but in the end it comes down to this:

IF YOU CAN'T SEE YOUR FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS AS A PERSON, THEN YOU ARE CAPABLE OF DOING ALL SORTS OF TERRIBLE THINGS TO THEM!

And that is where we fail, not teaching our children that portion of respect for others. I know we are not all capable of loving our neighbors but a live and let live attitude needs to be spread. Hatred on the other hand is a great tool for motivation, and usually leads to great excesses.

So, there needs to be an understanding and there needs to be a concept of the matter of DEGREE. If you believe that Atlanta's Braves mascot is wrong, well that just might be a matter of taking things too far.

 

[Lincsong]

If I have to have some of my time taken and be searched just like the swarthy skinned man at the airport, so that another can avoid the indignity of 'profiling' at an airport, so be it. Livin' in a free society ain't free. We all rise together or we all fall. There is mid-ground

I'd rather err on the side of good policing and not look at everyone as potential terrorists subjects in an airport. I'd rather take a little extra time with people who fit the profile rather than waste 200 people's time searching the bra of hardworking old ladies who just want to get to Cleveland to visit their great grandchildren. :rage:

If those who are so offended by racial profiling of mid-Eastern men between 16-36 care so much about society, then take their complaints on the radicals who are holding the "Death to Israel" and "Death to the West" rallies or to Tehran and the gang that wants to wipe Israel from the map.:eusa_doh: And like an earlier post mentioned, some other ethnics will fit the profile, but if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. So if you're a swarthy Maderian, Sicilian or Greek between the ages of 16-36 with a beard and you have no banned items with you, you have nothing to fear. Heck that ten minutes they keep you at security would probably save you 45 minutes of the PC crowd looking for contraband in the pacifiers of Chinese infants.

 

[John in Covina]

Did you enjoy your day at Gettysburg yesterday?

Gettysburgh is an amazing place, I wish that more people could visit it and remember the stuggle of the nation along with the the wisdome of Lincoln in the tribulation he went thru to try to win that war.

 

[Twitch]

Here is just one example of PC insanity- lots of definitions that have nothing to do with race. Remember when you get fired from your job it sounds so much more kind and gentle to say "output."
http://www.languagemonitor.com/wst_page20.html

"Profiling works ask the Israelies, when was the last time someone blew up one of their jets?" Yes, I agree 100%. If we don't face facts we'll PC ourselves to death...literally.

And since I an pushing 59 my black friends call themselves black as I do. Back in the 1960s the friends I had then actually called themselves Negros. Shocking, huh? The NAACP is more "vintage" with colored people. My sphere of associates are comfortable with the word black. Perhaps if we were 20 something as I was in the 60s I and my friends would use the term Afro-American.

 

[jamespowers]

James Powers, a bartender here shows us the "Fighten White Guy" to counter (vs) the Indians mascot. Then goes on to say he'd like to have a t-shirt or something to wear it around town I guess?

Seems to me that "White is (vs) PC" to me on this thread.

Stop me if I'm missing their points...

You are missing my point. First of all it is the Fighting Whites. Secondly it is meant as an example of how stupid it is to get all bent out of shape about a stupid mascot. I am not bent out of shape about the Fighting Whites. So what?! I am not going to run down and tell them to change it to something else. I will even buy one. That is the inverse of the fools involved in taking down mascots they don't like. I see it as an honor to be a mascot and they see it as some racial conspiracy. :eusa_doh:
It is not a white versus whatever issue it is common sense. You don't have a right to not be offended. You have a right to say whatever you want and be subject to the consequences. Mascots have nothing to do with racism. Other terms and epithets might but people can use them all they want. All it does is show the user's ignorance. I would rather know who to avoid than have some ridiculous 1984 PCism being used to cover that anyway. That person has freedom of speech and I have freedom of association. [huh]
Profiling is a no-brainer. You are looking for someone who looks a certain way and is repsonsible for 100% of the terrorist crimes committed---you look for the guys who like and think like the ones from before. History has a way of repeating itself so you go with that. Makes sense to me. [huh]

Regards to all,

J

 

[Marc Chevalier]

There was a time, not so long ago, when people of a certain race/ethnicity/sex were expected to be politically correct -- sometimes under pain of death. In America, for instance:



-- a black man or woman who walked along a public street in Glendale, California, after sundown was being politically incorrect. His or her punishment was a police car ride across the tracks to east Hollywood, and a shove out of the car. This happened as recently as the mid 1950s.


-- a black man who looked at a white woman in the street in an "impertinent manner" was being politically incorrect. His punishment ranged from a beating to a lynching, or simply being burned alive.


-- a Chinese man who tried to own a home or business was being politically incorrect. His punishment was a chain gang, or deportation back to China.



.

 

[Mr. Lucky]

There was a time, not so long ago, when people of a certain race/ethnicity/sex were expected to be politically correct -- sometimes under pain of death. In America, for instance:



-- a black man or woman who walked along a public street in Glendale, California, after sundown was being politically incorrect. His or her punishment was a police car ride across the tracks to east Hollywood, and a shove out of the car. This happened as recently as the mid 1950s.


-- a black man who looked at a white woman in the street in an "impertinent manner" was being politically incorrect. His punishment ranged from a beating to a lynching, or simply being burned alive.


-- a Chinese man who tried to own a home or business was being politically incorrect. His punishment was a chain gang, or deportation back to China.



.

I beg to differ with your contention - I don't believe those situations you described above were political correctness. No, more like unfair enforcement of Societal Misconceptions by the powers that were; hence the "correcting" of such misconceptions as cultural growth occurred and we became less and less afraid of that which we didn't/don't understand. Fear breeds hate, no question about that. And the 'language' of hate has always hads its roots in verbal attacks. Some reiterate the old platitude of "sticks and stones". They are wrong - words DO hurt people; they do everyday, everywhere. Now, once said fact is acknowledged, then progress can be made. But if some continue to operate under a false assumption, any action based on said assumption, is also incorrect. Again, it's about "correction".

 

[carebear]

I beg to differ with your contention - I don't believe those situations you described above were political correctness. No, more like unfair enforcement of Societal Misconceptions by the powers that were; hence the "correcting" of such misconceptions as cultural growth occurred and we became less and less afraid of that which we didn't/don't understand. Fear breeds hate, no question about that. And the 'language' of hate has always hads its roots in verbal attacks. Some reiterate the old platitude of "sticks and stones". They are wrong - words DO hurt people; they do everyday, everywhere. Now, once said fact is acknowledged, then progress can be made. But if some continue to operate under a false assumption, any action based on said assumption, is also incorrect. Again, it's about "correction".

You really think driving "hate words" underground bears any relation to "correction"?

So bigots can't use the "N" word in public anymore. They'll keep using it in private and in public just say "african-american" (fr example) with a knowing wink. You cannot eliminate the ignorant thinking of others.

That is unless you are willing to go much further in terms of government controlling individual speech than I hope any American would be willing to go.

Make sure the treatment of individuals is equal under the law. Punish actual physical criminal acts between private individuals (assault, murder, etc) and then get government the hell out of the way.

Let the bigots die on the vine of disdain and/or active ignoring by actual thinking humans.

 

[Mr. Lucky]

You really think driving "hate words" underground bears any relation to "correction"?

So bigots can't use the "N" word in public anymore. They'll keep using it in private and in public just say "african-american" (fr example) with a knowing wink. You cannot eliminate the ignorant thinking of others.

That is unless you are willing to go much further in terms of government controlling individual speech than I hope any American would be willing to go.

Make sure the treatment of individuals is equal under the law. Punish actual physical criminal acts between private individuals (assault, murder, etc) and then get government the hell out of the way.

Let the bigots die on the vine of disdain and/or active ignoring by actual thinking humans.

Yeah, I do believe driving hate words underground has a DIRECT relation to an overall correction. Why? Because they are OUT of the mainstream. While you are correct, I can't eliminate the ignorant thinking of others - something that I would not presume to do in the first place - with certain aspects of speech relegated to the private rants of those same said bigots, WE can at least gain some comfort in the hope that those who would use such words will practice at least some discretion, sparing the rest of us. Years ago, Hemingway in "The Sun Also Rises" used the term 'magnificent nigger' to describe a boxer. Should that word be pulled from the book? No. It was reflection of the times. But TIMES CHANGE, as does language and the meanings of words. That is how it works. And to assume that we should not grow, or that we should not police OURSELVES in our discourse, or that government has overstepped its bounds is just wrong. What happens, and which seems to always happen in these types of situations, is that the anomoly is presented as the norm by those that believe they are being infringed upon in some manner when, in actuality, these cases, that are presented as the norm, are, in reality, quite rare! And those who would REALLY attempt to control or influence others for their own gain by spreading these falsehoods use these anomolies to assert their own virulence, leading others to believe that something will be or is being taken from them - i.e. their freedom of speech.

It's easier to fear than it is to understand.

 

[carebear]

I understand what you're saying, but to my mind you're approaching it backwards.

Words lose their power when you learn that those who would use such words aren't worth your regard.

Insult my mom or family or race or anything all you want, I won't get mad because only a childish moron would do such a thing. I can't be offended by you (the theoretical speaker, not you Lucky) because you have shown yourself to be beneath my notice.

A lesser cannot, by definition, insult his better. A better man can only insult himself by lowering himself to the lower's level.

I pay such people no more regard than I do a yapping little dog, I'm just plain a better man than they are.

If that little yapping dog actually tries to nip me? I kick it in the teeth and call animal control to take the worthless animal away. Once again proving myself superior.

As long as the government doesn't give that yapping dog real teeth and punishes when it actually bites, that's all that needs doing.