Political correctness gone mad

Forums: Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I'm afraid this is going to be a bit of a rant, but id like to hear what everyone else thinks about this...
There are just so many things we have to do or say to avoid offending certain groups of people. i live in switzerland, and it is not as bad as it could be here. but in places such as england, any sort of racial slur is harshly looked down upon. for example a police officer in england was recently sacked for saying 'we almost potted the black' after a black youth ran across the street. the youth did not hear it, but an officer in the car reported the comment back at the station. rediculous. the british police are insisting that 10% of their employees be gay. WHY? i have nothing against gay, but this is absolutely absurd.
We cannot refer to blacks as black, its african americans, afro europeans etc etc. black is not a derogatory term, it is simply a description of someone. an american friend of mine came to visit, and we were talking about a group we had been with. i mentioned someone, and he asked who that was. i said the black one. he looked horrified, and told me i couldnt say that. i pressed him and asked him what was wrong with fefering to someone as black. 'because you cant', 'its not nice' and 'just because' were the best answers he could come up with.
Other things of political correctenss so to speak. people get outraged about swearing on television, about the mere mention of drugs, and numerous other issues im sure you can all think of. WHY?
i just think political correctness has gone WAY to far to the other extreme, people try so hard to be normal towards 'ethnic minorities' and other groups that they treat them differently.
i am all for anti-racism, but the extreme to which people get offended is plain silly. to be honest the only thing that offends me is people who are easily offended.
i may not have expressed myself clearly, but if you understand what i am talking about then i am sure you will have some opinions about it, whether supporting my opinion, or bashing it. either would greatly interest me.
if this thread does offend anyone, then feel free to take it down, or instruct me to edit it. feedback would be appreciated.

just to be clear i am in no way racist or anything, i just think that in its own way the situation we are in is almost as bad as racism. thanks.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,096 • Replies: 48

No top replies

Hello, Hello - LOL!

Hmmm - first time I have heard objections to swearing nd drugs on TV blamed on "political correctness"! Usually it is the right (who tend to worry more, en masse, about swearing and drugs) who criticise more progressive folk for PC AND for the collapse of morals, including the depiction of drugs on TV!!!

Seems like PC is becoming a catch all thing to blame for everything.

As for the British police....I cannot comment on specifics, but I do know time and again they have been "sprung" for racist behaviour and quite gross language. There was a major attempt a few years ago to educate them about this - I believe a recent TV program (Help, British A2kers!) again revealed very disturbing attitudes - so perhaps there is a clamp down??? Re the gay quota thing, can you support this? Offhand, I would assume similar prejudice against gay people has been found to be the case...

0 Replies

hello, hello. <smile> I agree with you. It's going to come to the point where all we can do is point and say--him/her/it. At this point, WASPS are the minority group, I would think. Get my point? Smile

Welcome to A2K. Do hope you've come to stay.

(I would suggest that people just call each other by name, ya know?)
And when that is impractical, by gender.

0 Replies

In the case of the police, I agree that he was needlessly insensitive. Can you see the problem if I change it -- if it had been a woman, and he said, "we almost potted the slut," do you see that the fact that he thought of her as a slut is a problem? How can he treat people with dignity if he doesn't think of them with dignity?

On the other hand, I have felt silly describing a tall African-American man in a group of shorter Caucasian people as, "The guy in the red shirt." Seems to me all I wanted to do was describe Charlie, but was forced into an odd locution by PC. Now that part of it, I object to!

0 Replies

I'm so with this man!

Yesterday I ate a burrito that gave me gas, I'm tired of political correctness!

The day before I stubbed my toe! I could almost hear the PC police sirens.

This world has gone to hell. Why just the other day a woman flashed a boob, a BOOB I tell ya, right on TV. I was offended by her political correctness.

As an aside, are we free to call you a racist? I don't want to tip-toe on eggshells and be politically correct.

0 Replies

I jus dunno most of my african americans firends want me to say black

0 Replies

true story:

An RN who was good friends with my sister worked on the ward in a hospital. She was on night duty and heard a whimper from one of the beds. She walked over and the child in the bed said that she had to go to the bathroom. The nurse picked her up and took her and as the child sat on the toilet, she looked at the nurse and said, "God loves me better than you." Somewhat surprised, the nurse replied, " And why do you think that, honey." Upon which the child retorted, " Cause he colored me and left you plain."

0 Replies

Wy, what are you talking about!?

How do you sanely jump from black to slut? If he had been addressing a woman, he would have simply stated "woman."

0 Replies

I think "He is a black man" is not a slur. I think "that black over there" is a slur. When you define a person with only a racial aspect and no other, you are being demeaning.

0 Replies

You could say the same about any label, though. Just because he said the word 'black' doesn't mean that he is racist. If there were two people in a room, one black and one white, wouldn't you say, "Oh yeah, the black guy was very nice"?

By the way, I hate those kinds of labels. It should definitely be brown and beige. Melanin enhanced and melanin challenged.

0 Replies

I would say, "the black guy was very nice". I would not say "the black was very nice".

0 Replies

I suppose it's just a difference of opinion, then.

0 Replies

I find the terms "African American" and "European American" offensive. If a black person's family has lived for 10 generations in India and then moves to the states, they are still called "African American." It's almost like implying they are not American, which is bogus (no one really is "Amercan," but I feel that if you live in America/ were born in America, you are American...)

The terms "African____" were born out of African nationalism during the civil rights movement. They alligned themselves with the African country and government to gain much needed political power, used for leverage at home. But I don't think this is still applicible, for reasons mentioned above.

If someone is offended by a term, they must ask themselves why they are offended.
Is the term itself inherently offensive? (ex. stupid)
Or is it historically offensive because of previous context? (ex. colored)
Is it offensive because it is true but negative? (ex: overweight)

I don't think "black" fits into any of these three categories - as it is a descriptive term for skin color (shorter than "Dark skinned" and not confused with those of Indian descent) which is not inherently offensive or descriptively negative. I don't think it is historically offensive - because black is not used in specific negative contexts (unlike the dreadful "colored only" signs, or "Irish need not apply, Chinks only, etc.... ")
So, I would be fine with another descriptive word besides "black" if that is offensive (and if you find it so, please let me know!)
But I have problems with the prefix of "African" to any description that is not of someone directly from Africa.
I don't think a fouth generation Italian immigrant or Yugoslavian immigrant or Indian immigrant is "Yugoslavian American" - I think they are American.

0 Replies

Wy wrote:

I think "He is a black man" is not a slur. I think "that black over there" is a slur. When you define a person with only a racial aspect and no other, you are being demeaning.

What if he is the only black person around? In an area with more black people in it, you would definately have to add more descriptive qualifiers. The point in describing someone in such a manner is for quick visual identification - not as an opportunity to demean or anything like that.
In addition to being overly sensitive, I think many people (Black activists, hispanic activists) forget there are many other people who are discriminated against all the time, and that discrimination happens in all societies, to all people. If a "white" man (what is white?) nay, if an American light-skinned woman were to go to India or Japan - she would experience extreme rascism. People are affraid of difference, and I think Americans (because of the civil rights movement) are very tolerant. I think the battle has been fought and won here, so continuing efforts which select only a few major groups to obsessively focus on irritate me.

When there is injustice, fix it. Doesn't matter who it is to.

0 Replies

Hello, Hello

I would go further than you and say that Britain has (P.C.wise) become the number one most ludicrous nation on earth, for example at christmas just past, one band of halfwits were campaigning for shops to be banned from having nativity scenes in their shop windows, in case our display of Christianity offended muslims.

Since we have been a christian nation for a thousand years or more, and since 95% of us are christians, you can imagine how well this idea was greeted.

0 Replies

kev- We don't have that problem in the US. Private businesses, IMO have a perfect right to put religious symbols in their displays. It is the GOVERNMENT that people get angry about. Many people do not like to see serious religious symbols, like nativity scenes, in public spaces.

0 Replies

I once tried to describe Montel's TV show to someone, and after me doing so for about ten minutes, she suddenly exclaimed, "Oh...you mean the show run by that black guy!!!"

I'm just about the least politically correct person I've ever known, but I don't think I've ever identified someone as "Black" or "Jewish" or "Christian" or whatever else would replace someone's individual qualities by identifying them as belonging to a group.

I can't even explain why that's so offensive, but I intuitively feel that it really is.

0 Replies

The purpose of visual description is to convey someone's qualities quickly to someone else. Black people have very dark skin, and in a crowd of white people saying "The black guy, Allen" Instantly makes him recognizable. The same with, "The guy with the red hair, Allen" if no one else with red hair is around. Or, "The skinny guy with the big nose, Allen."

You see how these are all descriptive qualifiers? A person should not be made to feel guilty for describing someone's visual characteristics. There is nothing helpful with pretending you are blind!

0 Replies

I agree, that's why I say "the fat chick", "the one with saggy boobs", "the bald ugly guy", "the retard mongoloid kid" and such.

See, I'm not blind. A person should not be made to feel guilty for describing someone's visual characteristics.

Portal Star, please note that your argument was absurd.

I personally have no problem with most of the examples you cite, but the argument you use for it is intellectually bankrupt.

The same argument could be used to defend walking up to a 5 year old girl and calling her a fat ugly and snotty child.

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

I agree, that's why I say "the fat chick", "the one with saggy boobs", "the bald ugly guy", "the retard mongoloid kid" and such.

See, I'm not blind. A person should not be made to feel guilty for describing someone's visual characteristics.

Portal Star, please note that your argument was absurd.

I personally have no problem with most of the examples you cite, but the argument you use for it is intellectually bankrupt.

The same argument could be used to defend walking up to a 5 year old girl and calling her a fat ugly and snotty child.

Had you read my previous post, you would notice that I pointed out the difference between visual qualifiers and negative visual qualifiers.

Even if someone is fat, no, you are not blind - but being overweight is a negative thing, so you don't want to draw attention to it - that is being polite.

But there is nothing, and I repeat, nothing, wrong with being black. Or having red hair, or a large nose, being Japanese, having freckles, or wearing a brown sweater.

I wouldn't say "the pimple face" but I would say, The girl with the blonde hair and jewish nose. Get my drift? I would say, "The black guy over there is Allen." Because I am not blind, and there is nothing wrong with being black. But there is somthing wrong with being overweight, so if there was a chance I knew someone would be offended, I would not say "The overweight black guy over there, Allen. " Or "That bald fat stupid chub over there, Allen."

0 Replies

Political correctness gone mad

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know