Political Correctness: Make a Judgment

Intrepid wrote:

Even children know what is socially acceptable and what is not. Abiding by it is another thing.

Children usually have a pretty good handle on 'fairness' too. I wonder if anybody who are slamming this guy because he included one 'offensive' word in his speech can, without looking, say what in the rest of the speech?

0 Replies

"Tar babies are our equal. Therefore we can say tar baby to their face again and again, despite their feelings." That about sums up foxfyre's argument. Ptooey. I have had my say and relinquish the floor to those smarter than myself.

0 Replies

Tolerance is a good thing.

Each group ( the Perpetually Offended and the Hapless Offenders) would be more respectable if they try to treat the other group as they'd like to be treated.

Frankly, I think with all the immediate apologies and accompanying quizzical expressions, that the Perpetually Offended could take a lesson fromt he Hapless Offenders.

I would also hope the PO's would note the difference in a legitimate insult and a miscommunication. Especially if the miscommunication was due to their own ignorance of the definition of the word in question.

I think the apologies are nice, though.

snood-- Again, as I'm sure you know, you have your term wrong. You are trying to make fun of me, using my marital status. "Old maid" would denote I had never been married: widow is the appropriate status. Doesn't seem funny to me, but since you have decided to open our insults to deaths in the family, maybe someone you love will die soon enough for me to join you in your latest endeavor.

Keep me posted.

0 Replies

Lash writes

Quote:

Each group ( the Perpetually Offended and the Hapless Offenders) would be more respectable if they try to treat the other group as they'd like to be treated.

Frankly, I think with all the immediate apologies and accompanying quizzical expressions, that the Perpetually Offended could take a lesson fromt he Hapless Offenders.

I would also hope the PO's would note the difference in a legitimate insult and a miscommunication. Especially if the miscommunication was due to their own ignorance of the definition of the word in question.

I think the apologies are nice, though

Of course one apologizes if one unintentionally offends somebody. And the one offended, if sufficiently mature, will accept a sincere apology in the spirit and context in which it is offered. That's what civil grown ups do.

The "perpetually offended" however, I think perpetuate racism or other 'isms by their taking offense at the slightest gaff and making the biggest possible deal out of it. They demand that their sensitivities be acknowledged and accommodated and vindicated while feeling absolutely no responsibility whatsoever for being sensitive or understanding of another person's point of view. Reasonable people resent that a lot.

Those who go for the "gotcha" arguments on message boards and in politics come across as intolerant, immature, tunnel visioned, and/or intellectually dishonest as well as hypocritical.

In my opinion, they are the single most powerful force in keeping all the 'isms alive and well.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

"Tar babies are our equal. Therefore we can say tar baby to their face again and again, despite their feelings." That about sums up foxfyre's argument. Ptooey. I have had my say and relinquish the floor to those smarter than myself.

Psst Edgar. A 'tar baby' is NOT a person at all and trying to say something that is not a person is equal to a person of any race, ethnic group, etc. is just silly.

0 Replies

I happen to agree with that, Fox, and I also think a large contingent of the Perpetually Offended--as was proven by Howard Dean's racial insult--are COMPLETELY politically motivated. He wasn't fired, harassed or vilified as he would have been had he been a Republican. Where's the justice and fairness? So, it's not really the words, it's nothing more than a branch of the entrenched political struggle, with language as the weapon.

This is why most of us are arguing right now. The Democrats (when you get to the base of the problem) hold the Golden Word Book, and get to make edits at will, based on whim. They then get to ruin the life of anyone who accidentally steps in one of their freshly laid poo piles. They wrote these rules, and conservatives are tired of playing.

Real racial or ethnic (sexist, age-ist, etc) slurs happen. Nobody I respect does this. Nobody most any of us respects does this. I would hazard a guess that 90% of the members here who post regularly, would make their displeasure known in some way upon hearing an intentional slur against racial and ethnic minorities--except Jewish people.

Maybe 40-50% would show some displeasure when the injured party is gay, and 20-30%, when the injured party is Jewish. These numbers at A2K are (my general guess) MUCH higher than in the general population.

My concern isn't legitimate slurs. Let's all have at them. But, I despise the game of trying to score political points, by demonizing words or phrases that everyone can easily see are innocent.

That racial wedging is just as wrong as those who do it straight-forwardly with their open racism.

Or, yeah. I could have just agreed with you, Fox. Cool

I guess maybe they all know it's a game--and of course, who's going to admit it. Sort of wrecks the schtick. They get good mileage out of it.

0 Replies

If you 'had just agreed with me' we would have missed several of the additional salient points that you offered, Lash.

I go back to my original post in this thread:

Quote:

I do think, however, that it is criminal to negate a person's entire life and/or wreck a person's reputation or career or opportunities just because he uses a politically incorrect word. And I think liberals are much more likely to do that to a conservative than is a conservative likely to do that to anybody.

And I probably offended a lot of you just by saying that.

Oh, and add Christians in with those Jewish people that it is okay to slur. Smile

0 Replies

Touche.

0 Replies

I think we should distinguish between "political" and "social" correctness. To me, political correctness best refers to compliance with behavioral norms because of the gains one can make or the losses one can avoid. The motive is political.
Social correctness is simply the process of civil behavior. I would not say things that would offend minorities, the handicapped, sexual groups, etc. simply because it causes unwarranted pain.

0 Replies

If people would be honest about their motivations, Nobody, it seems that your sensible distinction could end all the hoopla.

0 Replies

Agreed. And coupled with that decency is a determination of tolerance and giving people the benefit of the doubt. There are none among us who never say anything that is not heard differently than what we intended to be heard.

The decent thing, if we are offended, is to give the person an opportunity to clarify his/her intent. In Political Correctness, as has been well explained, that opportunity is not extended to ones 'enemies' lest some perceived advantage be lost. And that is unfortunate as this ugly process tends to transfer to the social process as well.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Even children know what is socially acceptable and what is not. Abiding by it is another thing.

Children usually have a pretty good handle on 'fairness' too. I wonder if anybody who are slamming this guy because he included one 'offensive' word in his speech can, without looking, say what in the rest of the speech?

The rest of the speech probably did not contain words that people consider offensive. Many people may not even care about the speech or the speaker.

It is like a goalie in a hockey game. He can play brilliantly and make several key saves, but as soon as that red light comes on.... he is a bum.

0 Replies

If anyone sees additional examples of what you consider Political Correctness in the news, please feel free to bring it in for discussion.

Very Happy

0 Replies

So, just to clarify for me, since it was news to me that this could be an offensive word...Is it offensive due to its origins in an Uncle Remus story? Are all references to those stories now deemed off-limits? Confused

Or is the word itself used as an insult just to refer to someone's color? Excuse my ignorance, but I really have never heard it used in anyway other than the "sticky situation" meaning, so I don't really know what makes it insulting.

I agree with those who've said they wouldn't use the word, knowing it could offend, and there is no reason to risk hurting someone. I wouldn't use this word now, knowing it has another connotation.

But still, I find that the examples that have been used of similar terms (which I don't particularly want to quote, because I find them upsetting too, but I need to in order to clarify what I'm referring to), like "spearchucker"-- that's a fallacious comparison as far as I can see. That has no other meaning besides being an ugly insult. Tarbaby has a completely seperate meaning. So why do we ignore the fact that this word has two seperate meanings? It's pretty easy to tell if someone is calling someone a name or if they're simply referring to an impossibly difficult situation that engulfs you all the more as you struggle with it. Wouldn't it make sense to differentiate between those two uses of the word and save our energy for more egregious offenses?

This is why I ask whether it is simply the origin of the word that makes it hurtful to people.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

Dookiestix wrote:
But there is an obvious racist element within the Republican party, and this is why the term in question has primarily been uttered by those on the RIGHT, not the left.

Why do you think the Republican party cannot attract more African American voters? I'll tell you, because it's really quite simple; the Republican party still caters to their racist constituents. They float these terms out there to show that they are still on their side, and it is subtle, for that is the state of insititutionalized bigotry today. Why do you think not a single African American Republican is currently in Congress?

As long as idiots like Tony Snow and others on the Right continue to throw these terms out as a subtle nod to their racist elements of the GOP, the less support the Republican party can expect from the African American community. Believe or not, the African American community is smart enough to know this. Add to that voter disenfranchisement, Hurricane Katrina, the hypocrisy from the GOP when it comes to the minimum wage, and many other enforced disparities by the ruling party in Washington, and you have ample reasons for why the GOP cannot be trusted when it comes to the best interests of the African American community.

Dookie,

This post made your accusations seem quite one-sided.

I think there are a few reasons blacks don't think of joing the GOP as an option.

1. They have been brainwashed for decades that Republicans are rich, racist and exclusive. This is a daily, ingrained talking point of the Democrat party.
So African Americans are so stupid that they can be brainwashed now? Oh my... As Republicans do not have a single African American in Congress, I'd say that makes their party quite exclusive.

2. The GOP economic theory is to support business, and business will support citizens. The Dems hand out more to social programs, and blacks, generally, strongly favor the latter, and consider the former as a personal affront. They consider the difference in these two economic policies a sign that Republicans are racist and greedy.
Please, do tell how African Americans consider promoting small businesses as an affront on them. Especially when banks are less likely to give them loans as opposed to white borrowers. You want businesses to support citizens? Make it illegal for offshore accounts and tax shelter, whereby the U.S. Federal Government gets cheated out of BILLIONS in tax revenues each year. It isn't the little guy doing this; it's the rich business owners, MOSTLY white, who are accomplishing this amazing feat of tax fraud.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/01/business/01tax.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1154491200&en=e09ef4772e1f3fdd&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=login

3. You are viciously harassed and ostracized by the black community if you are a Republican.
Must be something about actually not addressing their concerns.

4. The Democrat party promises the black community money and favorable changes.
Favorable changes? If favorable changes mean better equality, better opportunities for small business loans, and promoting community strength and infrastructure by addressing such horrible events as Hurricane Katrina, then I'm all for it. Money? Didn't Senator Frist promise $100 to every single American who was filling the pinch from rising gas prices? Didn't Republicans promise money to their rich benefactors by attemping to get rid of the estate tax via the minimum wage bill? Puhleeeze...

5. The Democrat party uses race as a wedge issue.
Yeah, right. BOTH parties do this. But let's also not forget gays, guns and God as the Republican's glorious wedge issues, which they will surely ressurect in the eleventh hour come November.

These are the first ones I thought of.

There are likely some failings of the GOP in this area, but I don't know quite how to frame them.

It's hard to attract people when the other person is giving them more stuff, and you're not going to change your entire economic policy to get more votes.

None of that matters, really. African Americans do not TRUST the Republican party. Ask them and they will tell you. They do not trust them with their votes nor their future. These are some of the reasons I think of when wondering why there isn't a single African American Republican in Congress.

0 Replies

But the term also has had racial implications. In his book Coup, John Updike says of a white woman who prefers the company of black men, "some questing chromosome within holds her sexually fast to the tar baby." The Oxford English Dictionary (but not the print version of its American counterpart) says that tar baby is a derogatory term used for "a black or a Maori."

So, is use of the term today a case of insensitivity? Or is the controversy caused by political correctness gone amok? The dictionary writers point out that a word's origins and its popular perception can be divergent. Current examples include the detoxification of the words suck and slut, both of which have slipped into mainstream usage. "All words have life cycles," says Erin McKean, editor-in-chief of the Oxford American Dictionary "What's really important is not etymologically what it means, but the effect it has." And that is a constantly evolving standard. Witness the debate over who can and can't use the N-word. McKean says that the next print version of the Oxford American Dictionary will note that tar baby can have derogatory connotations. Which may help public figures avoid becoming ensnared by Br'er Fox more than a century after he set his little trap.

0 Replies

cyphercat wrote:

So, just to clarify for me, since it was news to me that this could be an offensive word...Is it offensive due to its origins in an Uncle Remus story? Are all references to those stories now deemed off-limits? Or is the word itself used as an insult just to refer to someone's color? Excuse my ignorance, but I really have never heard it used in anyway other than the "sticky situation" meaning, so I don't really know what makes it insulting.

I agree with those who've said they wouldn't use the word, knowing it could offend, and there is no reason to risk hurting someone. I wouldn't use this word now, knowing it has another connotation.

But still, I find that the examples that have been used of similar terms (which I don't particularly want to quote, because I find them upsetting too, but I need to in order to clarify what I'm referring to), like "spearchucker"-- that's a fallacious comparison as far as I can see. That has no other meaning besides being an ugly insult. Tarbaby has a completely seperate meaning. So why do we ignore the fact that this word has two seperate meanings? It's pretty easy to tell if someone is calling someone a name or if they're simply referring to an impossibly difficult situation that engulfs you all the more as you struggle with it. Wouldn't it make sense to differentiate between those two uses of the word and save our energy for more egregious offenses?

This is why I ask whether it is simply the origin of the word that makes it hurtful to people.

I honestly don't know Cypher. I haven't been able to find any history on the negative connotation some are applying to the term. Like you, I had no idea is was a politically incorrect term until this came up which made me believe that it is plausible that the speaker under the gun did not see it any differently than you or I saw it.

I do think to make a big deal out of that particular term, however, really trivializes real racism and weakens everybody's efforts to deal with the last pockets of true bigotry, intolerance, and prejudice that can still hurt people.

0 Replies

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/31/romney.racialremark.ap/index.html

Quote:

Black leaders were outraged at his use of the term, which dates to the 19th century Uncle Remus stories, referring to a doll made of tar that traps Br'er Rabbit. It has come to be known as a way of describing a sticky mess, and has been used as a derogatory term for a black person.

"Tar baby is a totally inappropriate phrase in the 21st century," said Larry Jones, a black Republican and civil rights activist.

For once, I agree with a Republican. Very Happy

0 Replies

Dookiestix wrote:

Lash wrote:
Dookiestix wrote:
But there is an obvious racist element within the Republican party, and this is why the term in question has primarily been uttered by those on the RIGHT, not the left.

Why do you think the Republican party cannot attract more African American voters? I'll tell you, because it's really quite simple; the Republican party still caters to their racist constituents. They float these terms out there to show that they are still on their side, and it is subtle, for that is the state of insititutionalized bigotry today. Why do you think not a single African American Republican is currently in Congress?

As long as idiots like Tony Snow and others on the Right continue to throw these terms out as a subtle nod to their racist elements of the GOP, the less support the Republican party can expect from the African American community. Believe or not, the African American community is smart enough to know this. Add to that voter disenfranchisement, Hurricane Katrina, the hypocrisy from the GOP when it comes to the minimum wage, and many other enforced disparities by the ruling party in Washington, and you have ample reasons for why the GOP cannot be trusted when it comes to the best interests of the African American community.

Dookie,

This post made your accusations seem quite one-sided.

I think there are a few reasons blacks don't think of joing the GOP as an option.

1. They have been brainwashed for decades that Republicans are rich, racist and exclusive. This is a daily, ingrained talking point of the Democrat party.
So African Americans are so stupid that they can be brainwashed now? Oh my... As Republicans do not have a single African American in Congress, I'd say that makes their party quite exclusive.
You don't have to be stupid to be brainwashed. You just have to have a brain. Blacks are not attracted to the GOP for the reasons I outlined as well as others I didn't. There are many Republicans who are trying to change that..
2. The GOP economic theory is to support business, and business will support citizens. The Dems hand out more to social programs, and blacks, generally, strongly favor the latter, and consider the former as a personal affront. They consider the difference in these two economic policies a sign that Republicans are racist and greedy.
Please, do tell how African Americans consider promoting small businesses as an affront on them.
The focus on the "trickle down theory" is considered an affront--since it is emphasized in leiu of policies they prefer.
3. You are viciously harassed and ostracized by the black community if you are a Republican.
Must be something about actually not addressing their concerns.
A black person should not be ostracized and harassed for choosing a political party other than Democrats. Are they allowed to choose, or should skin color dictate their party affiliation?
4. The Democrat party promises the black community money and favorable changes.
Favorable changes? If favorable changes mean better equality, better opportunities for small business loans, and promoting community strength and infrastructure by addressing such horrible events as Hurricane Katrina, then I'm all for it. Money? Didn't Senator Frist promise $100 to every single American who was filling the pinch from rising gas prices? Didn't Republicans promise money to their rich benefactors by attemping to get rid of the estate tax via the minimum wage bill? Puhleeeze...
You know the Democrats separate people into Special Interest groups and make promises of money and programs. Puh-llleeease!!
5. The Democrat party uses race as a wedge issue.
Yeah, right. BOTH parties do this. But let's also not forget gays, guns and God as the Republican's glorious wedge issues, which they will surely ressurect in the eleventh hour come November.
The Democrats do it better for the black vote. That's what we're talking about. Discussion about the other issues is valid, but not part of this discussion.

These are the first ones I thought of.

There are likely some failings of the GOP in this area, but I don't know quite how to frame them.

It's hard to attract people when the other person is giving them more stuff, and you're not going to change your entire economic policy to get more votes.

None of that matters, really. African Americans do not TRUST the Republican party.
I agree. I think it's because of all of the above, in addition to some failings of the GOP, which the party seems to be attempting to address.

0 Replies

My generic "they"s denote the consensus of the voting bloc referred to as blacks--for purposes of smooth--non-PC speckled to death --word choices.

0 Replies

Political Correctness: Make a Judgment

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know