13
   

Thoughts on Political Correctness

 
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jan, 2009 07:10 am
@boomerang,
Quote:

I'm willing to bet whoever came up with African-American was some white guy somewhere and not a member of the minority community at all.

Does anyone know where the term origionated?


I have found several sources that claim that Ramona Hoage Edelin originated the term African-American in the 1970's (although some suspect it is older). She said of the term...

Quote:

The shift in our self-concept that results from calling ourselves
African-American could be the beginning of a
serious cultural offensive. ...
When a child in a ghetto calls himself African-American, immediately
he's international. The change takes him from the ghetto and puts him
on the globe. It helps us realize that we are not just former slaves
living in the U.S. and makes it easier to change our children's
dwarfed perceptions of themselves.


This is an example of successful effort to remove words from common use.

If you don't believe me, go to your next social event and refer to someone there as a Negro. You will feel uncomfortable using the word, and other people will be uncomfortable-- not because it is archaic (you could use the term horseless carriage without the same unease) but because the word "Negro" is now offensive.

This word was once in common usage. Now it is offensive in all but historical contexts (and Republican Christmas gifts).

The change from "colored" and "Negro" to "black" and "African-American" was the result of an organized effort by the African-American community to change the way they were described.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jan, 2009 08:46 pm
@ebrown p,
Quote:
The change from "colored" and "Negro" to "black" and "African-American" was the result of an organized effort by the African-American community to change the way they were described.


as long as we all get to decide how others view us I suggest that from this day forward all persons formerly known as "men" are now to be referred to as "studs".
0 Replies
 
Scaramouche2
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 11:26 pm
@ebrown p,
1) You have the right to say things that I consider offensive or even outrageous.


Well, as long as what you say isn't frighteningly offensive ie. "I'm going to kill your wife and rape your children you lousy jew" I see no problem with a "racist joke." As long as you don't physically discriminate against the person such as attacking them or refusing to hire them based upon race, I see no issue with saying what you want.


2) I have the right to be offended or outraged.

You also have the right to think you are the Queen of England. If you are actually going to cry yourself to sleep because someone called you "a stupid jew" then you seriously have issues.


3) In many situations, it may be a good idea to refrain from using terms that others find offensive even when you don't understand the offense. This is a good way to get along with others.

What's the point of getting along with others if it is based upon completely false set of pretenses? If someoen enjoys saying screw black people all day long, then, they probably won't have many black friends. Or many friends of other races for that matter.


4) There are some times when offending people is a fine idea. There are some people I simply don't care about getting along with. There are some issues that I find more important than getting along

Exactly. Toleration and getting along are different things. Toleration would be not discrimination in a physical way, like I mentioned before. Getting along is pretending to be "racially harmonious." And a fake society, in my eyes, is worse than an honest society that makes racist jokes.


Basically, "political correctness" is just a way to control language, and thus thoughts, since we all think in the same way we speak. Besides, if someone is seriously offended by some harmless words, then they have some serious problems.


0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 12:30 am
@ebrown p,
In essence, the "cure" of censorship is worse than the "disease" of freedom of speech!

As to how best to act in "polite society"? Well, that's a function of the assumed social mores.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 12:39 am
@Chumly,
Quote:
In essence, the "cure" of censorship is worse than the "disease" of freedom of speech


there are other options, taking offense is not the only one. For instance humor could be employed as in when someone says something nutty to laugh at it, or at the one speaking. Another is to pass off the speaker as a crank, ie one who should not be taken seriously. Deploying PC laws is clearly a poor response.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 12:49 am
Other options of what?
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 01:37 am
@Chumly,
Quote:
Other options of what?
for free speech be a disease then it must be a problem. If no offense is taken then the speech is not a problem. We choose how to take what we hear, and what we do as a result. Being offended is all on the one who is offended. Whom ever decided that the person who decides to be offended has the right to compel the speaker to conform to his sensibilities was a knucklehead. I want names, and charges filed.
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 03:20 am
@hawkeye10,
speaking of using humor to approach what some consider silly or intrusive sensibilities:


*featuring the late great Phil Hartman
**you have to click on the link - embedding was not allowed for some reason
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 07:05 am
@hawkeye10,
You misunderstand the intent of quotes in the context given.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 07:29 am
@ebrown p,
There's a racial componant to the term 'Welfare Queen'?
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 10:27 am
@aidan,
I love the clip you linked to, Aidin... I think you missed the point of the humor. The clip was a satire of racist cowboys. People who think the word "Jew-boy" is offensive in general language aren't going to be offended by its use in this skit.



ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 10:28 am
@maporsche,
Maporsche,

Tell me the impression that most "Welfare Queens" are black and live in cities isn't a problem.
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 10:50 am
It certainly is a problem for black 'welfare queens' in cities, but I think only a racist would automatically equate 'welfare queen' with 'black'. All statistics I have ever see indicate that a disproportionate percentage of black people are poor but nevertheless most poor people are white and I am guessing there are a lot more white 'welfare queens' than black ones.

Qualifier: I don't see all people receiving government assistance as 'welfare queens' either. Just those who choose to leech off government as much as they possibily can to avoid taking responsibility for their own welfare.
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 10:56 am
@Foxfyre,
Quote:
All statistics I have ever see indicate that a disproportionate percentage of black people are poor but nevertheless most poor people are white and I am guessing there are a lot more white 'welfare queens' than black ones.


Absolutely. The vast majority of welfare recipients are white and rural, rather than black and urban.
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 11:07 am
@ebrown p,
ebrownp said:
Quote:
I love the clip you linked to, Aidan... I think you missed the point of the humor. The clip was a satire of racist cowboys. People who think the word "Jew-boy" is offensive in general language aren't going to be offended by its use in this skit.


um yeah - I think I got that- thirty years of watching SNL kind of clued me in..
I was providing an example of what Hawkeye is advocating as okay- in an effort to show that though it SOUNDS really good and perfectly reasonable to say everyone should be able to say exactly what they feel like saying without worrying how it's received on the other end - it probably wouldn't work as smoothly as he envisions it.
It also illustrated his point that humor can be used to make the offensive language user look more stupid than the ones the offensive label is used to identify.

I have a fairly well developed sense of satirical humor - don't worry about that. I think you missed the point of my post - but I'm happy to explain.
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 11:20 am
@aidan,
Yeah aidan,

I guess I was in forge ahead mode, responding brashly before thinking. Sometimes people on the internet can be blockheads... I guess that includes me. Sorry.
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 11:28 am
@ebrown p,
no problem.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 03:46 pm
I saw Grand Torino this weekend and it was a breath of fresh air because
they resisted making the characters speak this bullshit, made up PC talk.

Excellent movie BTW Cool

http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/freshloaf/files/2008/12/torino2.jpg
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Sun 25 Jan, 2009 04:22 pm
@ebrown p,
I guess I've never had the impression to begin with ebrown.

I never would have known that it was a common impression to have, which leads me to believe that it's not a common impression at all, but likely something you need to work out for yourself.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Lipstick vs. Uppity - Discussion by A Lone Voice
Word for a belief that ... ? - Discussion by Charli
Political correctness - Question by saab
Sports PC Run Amok - Discussion by Advocate
The NFL and political correctness - Discussion by maxdancona
Stormfront is Full of Lies - Discussion by JoeBruno
Nothing wrong with political correctness - Discussion by maxdancona
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/14/2020 at 11:03:15