Rice - getting away from "Punish France, ignore Germany..."?

Foxfyre wrote:

To say some black people are more unemployed because they don't speak proper English or have a good work ethic - this may or may not be true but it will almost always be un-PC to say regardless of whether it is true or not.

Thanks to your explanations.

Obviously, the use of PC is another point, which brings up irrritation: your above example (well, similar, here referring to new citizens and 'immigrants') is used for creating special programs and written explicite so in a couple of bye-laws, e.g. the Federal Integration Bye-Law.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

You have to find a more realistic example. Ugly is ugly--whether you are a man or a woman.

That's just not sexist.

And Condi WAS flirtatious - the photos prove that, I think.

The point is not whether there was, or was not, flirtation - as I said in the post I made on the topic, BOTH sexes tend to use sexuality in diplomacy. Your point, as I understood it, is that only Condi was accused of it - that this was used as a descriptor only of her - and that was sexist. (I am on prehistoric computer - it takes too long to go back and see what was actually said more than a page or so back - sorry - can't afford to pick new one up from hospital!)

Similarly (and do not find evidence of aging ugly - as it happens - so the ugly stuff is purely subjective) whether ot not Coulter, Clinton or Thomas are, or are not, ugly/sexy etc, it is common to condemn only women for their looks when they are in positions of power etc (though I do note some change in that, gradually, here at least - where some people abuse both sexes for this - whatever floats your boat, I guess) - however, I think you would be hard pressed to make a case that more attention to this nonsense is not paid to women.

Both sexes coquette - both may be ugly.

Why is mention of Rice's coquetting sexist - and focussing on Clinton/Thomas's/Coulter's looks in criticizing them not?

As for the hue and cry stuff - can't remember quite what Lash said - - you see, that is exactly what we experience from the right - that is a subjective phenomenon in terms of how much each side does it.

Fox - little time tonight - I will try to read and respond to your post later - not wanting you to think i was ignoring it.

0 Replies

Can I just interrupt for a sec to say I think those Belgian bozos need some adult supervision?

Good Lord. I'd say boycott Belgium, but they have nothing we want LOL. They're bankrupt, morally and politically and this latest evidence just removes all doubt.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Regarding references to fat, ugly, old, etc., these could apply to anybody and are not PC terms. To use them might be cruel or insensitive or hateful, but it wouldn't violate PC.

OK, but now I'm confused - and I might be wrong in that I dont remember whether you personally were in that thread - but perhaps you'll remember it: the kid who on some university campus had stuck up a note on the elevator door telling fat people (girls?) to go take the stairs instead of filling up the elevator - would do them some good too? Long thread about that.

Kid was something like, expelled from the dorms by the university administration initially, based on the complaints of the girls studying there who felt greatly offended - upon which a conservative action group took up his case as a "victim of PC" one, and stirred up a media storm about it. (I remember lots of O'Bill posts in that thread lambasting the PCness of it all - and remember cause I was on his side for that one.)

Now in the definition of PC according to Foxfyre, were the university administrators being overly PC when they had, metaphorically speaking, the kid's head roll?

0 Replies

I guess I am also just looking for consistency here. At the moment, after everything I've seen conservative posters put up here as examples of "PC" and their rebuttals to stuff thats obviously not PC, the only bottom line I can discern is that if a conservative expresses outrage over something someone said, its by definition not a question of PCness, while if a liberal does it, its almost by definition him/her just being PC. And sometimes it seems the standards are twisted in some odd ways to make that mold fit.

What complicates the matter is the double layer wherein consistency would have to be applied. A) on what is deemed OK to say and B) on whether asserting something is not OK to say is a question of PCness or not.

Example Condi/Thomas. If its wrong to comment or joke on Condi's looks, why would it be OK to joke or comment on Thomas's? But also - second layer: if its PC to complain when Thomas's looks are disparaged, why wouldn't it be PC of someone to complain about how Condi's brushed aside in comments about her looks?

0 Replies

To comment on somebody's looks is a matter of courtesy/class/kindness/propriety, but not as a matter of PC - UNLESS - the comment is specifically to denigrate a woman, a black, or whatever. I know this may seem inconsistent but it really isn't.

To suggest that Condi Rice is a better Secretary of State that Colin Powell because of her ability to use feminine wiles is definitely a sexist remark and would be un-PC.

To suggest that Condi Rice is a better Secretary of State because of her superior knowledge and/or diplomatic skills (or whatever), is okay. You would say the same of a man that you preferred of his predecessor.

If you say Condi Rice is ugly could be considered unkind, but it is not un-PC.

To say Condi Rice is ugly for a woman or for a black person would be definitely un-PC.

Now we can argue whether liberals or conservatives apply standards of PC-ness or exercise double standard or whatever, and we will end up at the same dead end we always wind up with people getting angry or insulting. That, in my view, is entirely irrelevent to this discussion.

Maybe this is like the International dateline. You either understand it or you don't.

0 Replies

Nimh asks

Quote:

Now in the definition of PC according to Foxfyre, were the university administrators being overly PC when they had, metaphorically speaking, the kid's head roll?

One answer: absolutely yes, just as it was ridiculous to suspend a first grader for sneaking a quick kiss from a classmate. The PC police however exercise vigilante justice to extremes which goes back to earlier examples I cited in this thread.

But then I prefer to operate on a principle of courtesy and refuse to be PC. So, I am definitely biased in this area.

0 Replies

Fascinating watching the Queens of PC turn into double-jointed acrobats trying to keep the lines of PC straight.

0 Replies

Oh it's just to provide opportunity for judgmental observations from the self righteous.

0 Replies

Consider it light entertainment.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Maybe this is like the International dateline. You either understand it or you don't.

I understand International dateline.

0 Replies

(edited to bundle separate posts together) (but its the second part I'm most interested in)

Foxfyre wrote:

Quote:
Now in the definition of PC according to Foxfyre, were the university administrators being overly PC when they had, metaphorically speaking, the kid's head roll?

One answer: absolutely yes [..]. The PC police however exercise vigilante justice to extremes which goes back to earlier examples I cited in this thread.

But then I prefer to operate on a principle of courtesy and refuse to be PC. So, I am definitely biased in this area.

Of course, some would say (some did say, in fact, in that thread) that chastising that kid for sticking up that note was a question of standing up for mere courtesy. That it was just plain rude of him to do so, period, and that was enough reason to chastise him - cant have that kind of behaviour going on in a place where everyone should feel at home, and all that.

Not that I'm one of 'em. Courtesy is good, but can also turn into tightarsism.

Foxfyre wrote:

To suggest that Condi Rice is a better Secretary of State that Colin Powell because of her ability to use feminine wiles is definitely a sexist remark and would be un-PC.

To suggest that Condi Rice is a better Secretary of State because of her superior knowledge and/or diplomatic skills (or whatever), is okay. You would say the same of a man that you preferred of his predecessor.

OK, I agree. To spend ample space, when reporting on Condi's diplomatic visits abroad, on her use of feminine wiles etc - for example - when one certainly would not go on like that about Powell - is sexist. And it is most definitely un-PC, as you said. It would be PC to report on them in the same way.

So - "PC", here, is a good thing then, right? Because you're saying its a bad thing when people suggest that Condi Rice is a better Secretary of State than Colin Powell because of her ability to use feminine wiles - when people say something "un-PC" like that?

Foxfyre wrote:

Maybe this is like the International dateline. You either understand it or you don't.

Or it could just be that people disagree on what it means ... no label has proven so flexible in use as that one, after all.

0 Replies

Walter writes

Quote:

I understand International dateline.

And I don't. Smile

I understand the principle; I can even explain it. But I can't think in it. Watching you and Nimh valiantly attempt to understand the concept of PC as it diferentiates from real sexism, racism, or any of the other -isms out there, I think that could be the case with you guys also. You understand the concept and maybe can explain it, but maybe can't think in it. I don't know that with any certainty of course--it's just the way it looks here in this bit of thread.

In fairness to Nimh, there are no doubt differences of opinion on what is PC. But for serious students of social trends, it is glaringly obvious.

Merriam-Webster's short definition:

Quote:

Main Entry: political correctness
Function: noun
Date: 1990
: conformity to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities should be eliminated

Most I think would also apply the term to 'social sensitibilites' and certain 'religious sensibilities'.

or this:

Quote:

Main Entry: politically correct
Function: adjective
Date: 1936
: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated

Most I think would include with eliminated - disallowed and/or punished.

NOTE to JW: I agree re your remarks on Belgium. I can't imagine there being any such large scale disrespect shown to a foreign leader visiting here.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

In fairness to Nimh, there are no doubt differences of opinion on what is PC. But for serious students of social trends, it is glaringly obvious.

Merriam-Webster's short definition:

Quote:
Main Entry: political correctness
Function: noun
Date: 1990
: conformity to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities should be eliminated

Most I think would also apply the term to 'social sensitibilites' and certain 'religious sensibilities'.

But thats already a much wider definition, for example, than the one you proposed earlier - or the one given in the second dictionary definition you list. Like I said, a variety of definitions.

This one, for example, could also encompass the belief that, say, protestors should not be allowed to burn the American flag, or stickers of the President should not be allowed to be pasted into urinals - cause it would "offend political sensibilities". I wouldnt immediately have come up with calling either belief PC, but it would fit in the definition. And where you expand the definition yourself - to, for example, "the belief that language and practices should be eliminated that could offend religious sensibilities" - you also get to encompass the belief that TV programmes that offend Christian sensibilities should be taken off the air. Would also be PC, then.

Or take the case of that notorious Jemina cartoon of Rice, and compare the second dictionary definition you list. Here was language - I think we can call a cartoon language too, no? - that was denounced bitterly because of how it was offensive in a matter of both sex and race. The belief that said language should have been eliminated thus came as close to the dictionary definition of "politically correct" as you can get.

Also, before we lose the momentum of this reasonable conversation (which I'll have to end soon though, want to go to bed early), I do really hope you'll still get back to this one:

nimh wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
To suggest that Condi Rice is a better Secretary of State that Colin Powell because of her ability to use feminine wiles is definitely a sexist remark and would be un-PC.

To suggest that Condi Rice is a better Secretary of State because of her superior knowledge and/or diplomatic skills (or whatever), is okay. You would say the same of a man that you preferred of his predecessor.

OK, I agree. To spend ample space, when reporting on Condi's diplomatic visits abroad, on her use of feminine wiles etc - for example - when one certainly would not go on like that about Powell - is sexist. And it is most definitely un-PC, as you said. It would be PC to report on them in the same way.

So - "PC", here, is a good thing then, right? Because you're saying its a bad thing when people suggest that Condi Rice is a better Secretary of State than Colin Powell because of her ability to use feminine wiles - when people say something "un-PC" like that?

0 Replies

No Nimh, I think PC is for the most part bogus, fabricated, and used to attack, damage, and/or destroy people. It is almost always based on opinions by sanctimonious, self-righteous, self-proclaimed guardians of all that that they declare virtuous and all with big old sticks stuck up their butts.

We should not judge people by the words they use only, but also by their track record, their obvious meaning, their proven intent, their contribution to society, and their sense of propriety. What is worse? The person who burns an American flag beside the Veteran's Day parade? Or the person who waves a Confederate flag beside the Martin Luther King Jr. Day parade? Are each exercising free speech? Or are each committing a punishable act?

Violations of PC are considered punishable by most people who exercise PC. (And here is the one place where the double standard can come into effect--the 'other guy' is sometimes going to be judged far more severely than 'our own' and that too is morally wrong.)

Should a first grader be suspended for spontaneously kissing another first grader? Or should he gently be told that he shouldn't do that and the school day moves on? Should the pranskter who left the note re the girls be expelled? Or should the principal give him a lecture on good manners and send him back to class? Good lord, if every kid who ever said something insensitve or played a mean joke or said something un-PC got suspended or expelled, the schools would be empty!!!

Most of all, those who are simply speaking the truth, however un-PC it may be, should be applauded for speaking the truth, not punished.

0 Replies

Oh, and re the 'feminine wiles' thing, that would depend on the intent of the remark. If it is suggested that Condi is inappropriately 'flriting' or ' behaving in an unprofessional manner, and she wasn't, I would take that as a mean-spirited attempt to smear a very good person.

If it is meant as a backhanded compliment that she has skills and ability to get the job done and is a hell of a woman, I don't really care what words they use.

0 Replies

Without the self-appointed judges of public affairs, the media and liberal groups working together, policing, maligning and herding mobs, there would be no PC. Just people going about alternately saying what they please, and complaining about what others say.

The imposing spectre of that power hungry liberal amalgam influences firings, character assassinations and ruins lives--because the majority of the public has given them the power to do so. This is what turns a natural dialogue, good, bad and ugly, in to some Fourth Estate-controlled, false intimidation of free speech.

This fact is why FOX News beats all of them. The conservatives in this country were sick to death of the same old ****--build up the Democrats, vilify the Republicans... Bob Packwood is an old lech--but Bill Clinton has a bad boy complex and a need for love....

Robert Byrd is an upstanding old pol, but Strom Thurmond is a racist, and reminds us of an era best forgotten.

We could go on for pages. When things are biased in YOUR favor--you either like it, and keep your mouth shut--or you just don't see it.

When they are biased against you, overwhelmingly as it was before Fox--you are so surrounded by it--you breathe it.

You all act so dense about it-- And, I'm beginning to see that's your preference.

You are all liberal. You have obviously witnessed the biased lynchings that go on in the US media--predisposed to attack conervatives--and look the other way when liberals commit similar infractions.

You'll never admit Goldberg was right about Bias. If Dan Rather hadn't been caught red-handed, you wouldn't admit the extreme bias of the US news outlets.

You won't admit this, either.

We could provide tapes of news rooms' editorial meetings--wherein our grievances are proven without a shadow of doubt. You'd still deny it. A waste of time.

0 Replies

Watched, wooed or patronized, doesn't make much difference in the long run. We just need to wait for a new US administration that understands world diplomacy.

0 Replies

Lash writes

Quote:

If Dan Rather hadn't been caught red-handed, you wouldn't admit the extreme bias of the US news outlets.

Dan Rather was caught red handed, the alphabet networks still aren't admitting blatant bias, and the left still can't see it. Smile

0 Replies

Don't forget CNN and Eason Jordan. He was caught red-handed, too, and it was either show the tape or else. We all know how they chose to handle that one.

You're on notice MSM.

0 Replies

Rice - getting away from "Punish France, ignore Germany..."?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know