It's About Bloody Time

[jahcs]

I consider it discrimination to ask about race on college or job apps.  Or any sort of paperwork.  If it truly doesn't matter (as is the point of this whole racial equality thing), it should never occur to them to ask about it.
[right][snapback]80696[/snapback][/right]

*begin sarcastic rant*

Ah, but these self appointed Do-Gooders get to show how correct they are when they help the less fortunate rise above what they could not have achieved without the benevolence of their program. Without labeling people and keeping track of subgroups that obviously require a hand up from those of us fortunate enough to be born of Western European descent how will they have a yardstick to measure their goodness?

*end rant*

I wonder when we'll be able to move from "unkind" labels, to PC labels, to no labels.

[Occhidiangela]

Have you read "The Myth of Male Power" (Warren Farrell)?

I think you would like it.

I wont give a synopsis since it is such a profound book.
[right][snapback]80675[/snapback][/right]

Will see if the library has it. My I suggest, in reciprocation, Born Fighting. James Webb. Excellent discussion of the Scots-Irish influence on American culture.

Occhi

[Lady Vashj]

I wonder when we'll be able to move from "unkind" labels, to PC labels, to no labels.
[right][snapback]80719[/snapback][/right]

The problem is that if they sit around long enough, PC labels become "unkind" labels, and then we have to start all over again. Even worse, the shelf life of a PC label isn't very long. We may end up having to move straight from unkind labels to none. The problem is that it's a very big leap. Problems, problems.

[eppie]

Clickity.

It's about time they got around to making this right.

It's never to late to make something right.

The KKK is already out in full force, saying that it's wrong to put an old man on trial. Although, I am betting, if that old man were another colour, the KKK would be all for putting him on trial if the situation was reversed.

I dunno.

I can only hope the right thing will be done this time, and that old bones can finally be brought to rest, and all these old wounds will finally have a chance to heal. God knows that's what we need more than anything.
[right][snapback]80387[/snapback][/right]

He got 60 years now if I'm correct.
But does this mean also others who committed these crimes will be put on trial?

[TaMeOlta]

The problem is that if they sit around long enough, PC labels become "unkind" labels, and then we have to start all over again.  Even worse, the shelf life of a PC label isn't very long.  We may end up having to move straight from unkind labels to none.  The problem is that it's a very big leap.  Problems, problems.
[right][snapback]80760[/snapback][/right]

Besides , everything needs a label ... otherwise we wouldn't know if it is safe to eat them or not ... :whistling:

I think "PC" started off as a good idea ... then somehow it morphed into something ugly :ph34r:

[Occhidiangela]

Besides , everything needs a label ... otherwise we wouldn't know if it is safe to eat them or not ...  :whistling:

I think "PC" started off as a good idea ... then somehow it morphed into something ugly  :ph34r:
[right][snapback]81479[/snapback][/right]

It was never a good idea. It was and is a form of censorship.

Look up the "Frankfurt School" of philosophy.

Occhi

[Doc]

It was never a good idea.  It was and is a form of censorship.

Look up the "Frankfurt School" of philosophy. 

Occhi
[right][snapback]81585[/snapback][/right]

I'd rather look up Dr Frankenfurter.

I'm just a sweet, aw crap. I'm just not in the mood.

[Chaerophon]

It was never a good idea.  It was and is a form of censorship.

Look up the "Frankfurt School" of philosophy. 

Occhi
[right][snapback]81585[/snapback][/right]

Not sure of why you included that last bit... perhaps you could elaborate. Are you implying that political correctness is a phenomenon born purely out of neo-Marxist theory? I would suggest otherwise. I would also suggest that not all forms of political correctness are created equal. There are some shifts in that direction that I find it difficult to argue with. Others may be a bit extreme. That the notion itself has become a political whipping boy strikes me as pure, generalizing, propagandism.

[Occhidiangela]

Not sure of why you included that last bit... perhaps you could elaborate.  Are you implying that political correctness is a phenomenon born purely out of neo-Marxist theory?  I would suggest otherwise.  I would also suggest that not all forms of political correctness are created equal.  There are some shifts in that direction that I find it difficult to argue with.  Others may be a bit extreme.  That the notion itself has become a political whipping boy strikes me as pure, generalizing, propagandism.
[right][snapback]81589[/snapback][/right]

OK, fair enough, it is not a Marxian plot, per se. It is a form of censorship intended to control the language of public debate, which I see as a violation of the spirit of the First Amendment. I don't give a crap what it does to other countries, I care how it soils mine.

PC chose its own name, for better and for worse. It is also based on lying, obfuscating, and obscuring the truth. Simple example: garbage man, not sanitation engineer. Short, not vertically challenged. Euphamism is rooted in the Greek word for lie or falsehood.

Occhi

[Doc]

I am not a mean bastard?

I am a kindness challenged fatherless son.

[Chaerophon]

It is a form of censorship intended to control the language of public debate, which I see as a violation of the spirit of the First Amendment. 

The examples that you list are certainly fair. However, there are other examples with which I have little problem. For example, the removal of gender biases from certain titles and other such moves. 'Public debate' in liberal societies such as ours ought to involve providing sound justificatory reasons for suggested courses of action, policy choices, etc. One 'ideal' requirement of public debate is that it be conducted in a manner that is mindful and respectful of individuals as equal citizens. There are some modes of speech / titular conventions that indicate an underlying structural bias. It is through language acts that we conceive normative understanding - I do believe that by propagating a culture in which the use of certain, more respectful forms of language is encouraged, it can have some useful, positive effect on normative conceptions of, for example, gender roles. That said, I agree that when such ideas get pushed beyond the limits of what is reasonable/helpful, the notion of political correctness loses its moral force: a garbage person is a garbage person - not a sanitation engineer. However, it certainly does not hurt anyone to refer to 'policemen' as 'police officers' or to occasionally include a 'her' or 'she' in one's theoretical examples rather than the automatic 'him' or 'he'.

[Lady Vashj]

It was never a good idea.  It was and is a form of censorship.

Look up the "Frankfurt School" of philosophy. 

Occhi
[right][snapback]81585[/snapback][/right]

You are oh so very right.

It is also a sadistic self-involved language in and of itself, like Legalese, Pentagonian, and Bill. However, it is less than the other three because it's impossible to say anything meaningful in PC (stealthily degrading people is not meaningful).

[Occhidiangela]

The examples that you list are certainly fair.  However, there are other examples with which I have little problem.  For example, the removal of gender biases from certain titles and other such moves.  'Public debate' in liberal societies such as ours ought to involve providing sound justificatory reasons for suggested courses of action, policy choices, etc.  One 'ideal' requirement of public debate is that it be conducted in a manner that is mindful and respectful of individuals as equal citizens.  There are some modes of speech / titular conventions that indicate an underlying structural bias.  It is through language acts that we conceive normative understanding - I do believe that by propagating a culture in which the use of certain, more respectful forms of language is encouraged, it can have some useful, positive effect on normative conceptions of, for example, gender roles.  That said, I agree that when such ideas get pushed beyond the limits of what is reasonable/helpful, the notion of political correctness loses its moral force: a garbage person is a garbage person - not a sanitation engineer.  However, it certainly does not hurt anyone to refer to 'policemen' as 'police officers' or to occasionally include a 'her' or 'she' in one's theoretical examples rather than the automatic 'him' or 'he'.
[right][snapback]81607[/snapback][/right]

You appear to confuse convention with malign intent, however, English failed to establish a neuter pronoun, unlike the German from which it grew. The result has been a bill payer for comedians ever since. :D

[Lady Vashj]

You appear to confuse convention with malign intent, however, English failed to establish a neuter pronoun, unlike the German from which it grew.  The result has been a bill payer for comedians ever since.  :D
[right][snapback]81773[/snapback][/right]

I was given to understand that the plural was generally perfectly acceptable when used as the singular neuter.

(translation from English Department)I thought "they" was the neuter.

[Chaerophon]

Convention may have malignant consequences in the absence of intent. I'm not suggesting anything radical - only that convention can, perhaps, be improved upon in some cases.