POLL: Is Political Correctness good or bad?

[strummingram]

That reminds me. My girlfriend and I went to the movies last night- first time in years. I wore a Washington Redskins shirt. I had 4 different people literally walk-up and speak to me saying "I like your shirt."

Now, my question for you is, if I had been wearing this:

Would that have been acceptable in your world of selective censorship?

Clearly my attire wasn't offensive. In fact, I haven't been complimented on a t-shirt at the movies in my life. 4 people positively commenting to me directly, while wearing a shirt with an allegedly offensive term on it, speaks volumes to me.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

But you make me sound that way.

You really shouldn't play these games. Even drunk I'm more clever than you.

I disagree with that Natch. The most clever poster by far is myself. So my opinion on this, matters. Family matters, urkel, urkel was tall, tall people wear large pants, large pants take longer to fabricate, fabrication rhymes with masturbation, masturbation makes more sense than continuing this. Later.

 

[naturalmwa]

I disagree with that Natch. The most clever poster by far is myself. So my opinion on this, matters. Family matters, urkel, urkel was tall, tall people wear large pants, large pants take longer to fabricate, fabrication rhymes with masturbation, masturbation makes more sense than continuing this. Later.

Your bar for clever is pretty low, even dogs masturbate.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Your bar for clever is pretty low, even dogs masturbate.

Not as cleverly as I do.

 

[naturalmwa]

Not as cleverly as I do.

Yeah? Do you lick your own junk? Thats always a fun move. Share your creativity with us.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Yeah? Do you lick your own junk? Thats always a fun move. Share your creativity with us.

It starts with a plan, diagrams,.....prepping is key. Secrets are secret for a reason. That is all I can share. A clever whacker is a silent whacker. I don't literally mean silent.

 

[naturalmwa]

prepping is key.

Most of that is BS, but this point is key.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

That reminds me. My girlfriend and I went to the movies last night- first time in years. I wore a Washington Redskins shirt. I had 4 different people literally walk-up and speak to me saying "I like your shirt."

Now, my question for you is, if I had been wearing this:

Would that have been acceptable in your world of selective censorship?

Clearly my attire wasn't offensive. In fact, I haven't been complimented on a t-shirt at the movies in my life. 4 people positively commenting to me directly, while wearing a shirt with an allegedly offensive term on it, speaks volumes to me.

So . . . what you are saying is that if I want to out the closet racists, I should wear a Redskins shirt to a movie theater.

I think this is a great idea. Video them outing themselves and put them on YouTube. Obviously merely asking people to be more civil isn't working any more.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Most of that is BS, but this point is key.

Nay, the MASTER-bator has much to teach you.

 

[naturalmwa]

Nay, the MASTER-bator has much to teach you.

I'm skeptical of this. First because I gave you that opportunity and you ran from it and second because I'm pretty sure I know more than you. Prove me wrong. Dazzle us with your knowledge.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

I'm skeptical of this. First because I gave you that opportunity and you ran from it and second because I'm pretty sure I know more than you. Prove me wrong. Dazzle us with your knowledge.

No.

 

[naturalmwa]

No.

That's what I thought. Step back pretender.

 

[strummingram]

So . . . what you are saying is that if I want to out the closet racists, I should wear a Redskins shirt to a movie theater.

I think this is a great idea. Video them outing themselves and put them on YouTube. Obviously merely asking people to be more civil isn't working any more.

It was really rhetorical. There's nothing racist about the Washington Redskins or the Red Mesa Redskins. If Redskins, as a mascot name, were racist, or a racial slur, then Native Americans wouldn't be using the word as their mascot?

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

It was really rhetorical. There's nothing racist about the Washington Redskins or the Red Mesa Redskins. If Redskins, as a mascot name, were racist, or a racial slur, then Native Americans wouldn't be using the word as their mascot?

And if the N-word was racist then black folks wouldn't use it. See how that does NOT work?

 

[strummingram]

And if the N-word was racist then black folks wouldn't use it. See how that does NOT work?

If black people started naming their sports teams "The N-words", then I'd feel sorry for them. Using a white person's euphemism? How sad! However, if they started using N*ggers as mascots/nicknames of sports teams, then they'd better be prepared to allow others, who participate in the sport, to use it. You're condoning it's use and acceptance when you use it. It's very simple. You don't remove or eliminate prejudice by restricting the use of words, symbols, or anything else to YOUR RACE ONLY! Do you see how that only perpetuates prejudice, and/or racism?

The "N-word" is racist. People like you invented "N-word" to refer to black people. It always means "n*gger." Always. You just created an acceptable alternate euphemism that means the same thing. And, you feel free to say it, use it, refer to it, as often as you like. You're still just saying "N*gger." I know it, you know it, and n*ggers really know it! My own girlfriend is black... African-descent, whatever... and she even gets incensed with the blatant over-usage of "N-word." It's nothing but a euphemism that allows white people to keep THINKING "n*gger" in their minds and speaking that euphemism. It's almost like lying to yourself. You know what you could do, instead? Retrain yourself to stop seeing people based on their skin color, ethnicity, nationality, aesthetics in general. Just see a PERSON, not a black or white person. Then those words that you, and others, call slurs become even less offensive!

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

[1] You're condoning it's use and acceptance when you use it. It's very simple.

[2] You don't remove or eliminate prejudice by restricting the use of words, symbols, or anything else to YOUR RACE ONLY!

[3] Do you see how that only perpetuates prejudice, and/or racism?

[4] The "N-word" is racist. People like you invented "N-word" to refer to black people.

[1] Yes. That's my point. I'm rather shocked that you can say this when you are actually arguing against it.

[2] No, but you do make it a little bit harder and a little bit more obvious. Both good things.

[3] Again, no. If you want to claim that these measures are too weak, I might agree with you; but they certainly aren't overly strong.

[4] No. People like me invented "N-word" to refer to racist words, not black people. Again, we are highlighting presumptively racist language in an effort to discourage that kind of language with the hope that a change in lexicon will help advance a change in cognition.

Feel free to argue that it hasn't worked all that well. I'm not sure, one way or the other. But don't argue that the motivation was racist.

 

[Hawk in SEC Country]

Good, brings civility and attention to issues that need it.

It suppresses discussion, because it pads one side of the debate by chastising the side that is deemed offensive.

 

[naturalmwa]

It suppresses discussion, because it pads one side of the debate by chastising the side that is deemed offensive.

I disagree. For example I think there is more discussion about mental illness now then when we just called then insane and locked them away in asylums. Political correctness brings the issue out in the open and gives you the language to enable actual discussion rather than just derision and judgment.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Compare the effort of liberals and other reasonable people to punish use of the N-word as unacceptable in civil society, with the effort of conservatives and fascists to transform words like "liberal" and "socialist" into epithetical synonyms for evil.

Both are efforts to transform the cognitive landscape and they use somewhat similar methods. But the similarity ends there.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

The word "socialist" offends me. It represents an institution that has been responsible for billions, upon billion, upon billions of deaths since the beginning of time. We should ban this word of death and hatred.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

The word "socialist" offends me. It represents an institution that has been responsible for billions, upon billion, upon billions of deaths since the beginning of time. We should ban this word of death and hatred.

Public education, clean water, a safety net, health care . . . . Oh yeah, these are the things we need to protect ourselves from.

 

[strummingram]

Public education, clean water, a safety net, health care . . . . Oh yeah, these are the things we need to protect ourselves from.

He's talking about the word, not what it represents to you.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

He's talking about the word, not what it represents to you.

Noooo. He talking about his propaganda-driven delusion about what the word means, not what it has actually stood for in America and other places.

 

[strummingram]

[1] Yes. That's my point. I'm rather shocked that you can say this when you are actually arguing against it.

[2] No, but you do make it a little bit harder and a little bit more obvious. Both good things.

[3] Again, no. If you want to claim that these measures are too weak, I might agree with you; but they certainly aren't overly strong.

[4] No. People like me invented "N-word" to refer to racist words, not black people. Again, we are highlighting presumptively racist language in an effort to discourage that kind of language with the hope that a change in lexicon will help advance a change in cognition.

Feel free to argue that it hasn't worked all that well. I'm not sure, one way or the other. But don't argue that the motivation was racist.

1) Except, you don't have any issue at all with the ethnic group using the word all the time. In fact, you're quite content for these "groups" to be allowed to use the words exclusively. I have no problem with them using it, when it applies, or when it's not being used to malign, but I'm not restricting others from using it in the same way. If a word is NOT being used to malign, then it's not being used to malign. The person's race, nationality, address, height, weight, or gender makes no difference. If you were trying to force everyone to stop using it, I'd still say you were attempting to censor language, but at least you'd be consistent.

2) If you're an objective, functioning, human being, you know when you see them, hear them, etc. whether or not they are being used to malign other people based on race. Removing the symbols and words still does not remove the inherent, instinctive impulse to be prejudice. They can simply pick/create new symbols and words.

3) If you don't think that allowing certain groups exclusivity over forms of communication is not prejudiced, I can't help you.

4) The language isn't the problem. The IDEA, the notion, the attitude, the inherent belief that one group is superior (or inferior) to another is your target. You're missing the target.

It hasn't and doesn't work. In fact, it won't work. But, keep censoring people while you convince yourself you're advancing society. The union and coexistence will occur when the groups realize they are equal and realize they all bleed red. You'll be busy trying to censor the word red. I appreciate your motivation, and I empathize with it. But, your well-intended efforts are just easing your own personal conscience. That's proven abundantly in the results of the poll.

 

[strummingram]

Noooo. He talking about his propaganda-driven delusion about what the word means, not what it has actually stood for in America and other places.

Regardless, it's the WORD he's referring to. See? I can be as obstinate as you can about Redskin, n*gger, or any other offensive reference, or term. Censoring the word socialism doesn't stop socialism. Censoring the word Arrogance doesn't remove arrogance.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

1) Except, you don't have any issue at all with the ethnic group using the word all the time. In fact, you're quite content for these "groups" to be allowed to use the words exclusively. I have no problem with them using it, when it applies, or when it's not being used to malign, but I'm not restricting others from using it in the same way. If a word is NOT being used to malign, then it's not being used to malign. The person's race, nationality, address, height, weight, or gender makes no difference. If you were trying to force everyone to stop using it, I'd still say you were attempting to censor language, but at least you'd be consistent.

2) If you're an objective, functioning, human being, you know when you see them, hear them, etc. whether or not they are being used to malign other people based on race. Removing the symbols and words still does not remove the inherent, instinctive impulse to be prejudice. They can simply pick/create new symbols and words.

3) If you don't think that allowing certain groups exclusivity over forms of communication is not prejudiced, I can't help you.

4) The language isn't the problem. The IDEA, the notion, the attitude, the inherent belief that one group is superior (or inferior) to another is your target. You're missing the target.

It hasn't and doesn't work. In fact, it won't work. But, keep censoring people while you convince yourself you're advancing society. The union and coexistence will occur when the groups realize they are equal and realize they all bleed red. You'll be busy trying to censor the word red. I appreciate your motivation, and I empathize with it. But, your well-intended efforts are just easing your own personal conscience. That's proven abundantly in the results of the poll.

If you can't see the connection between words used and thoughts, I won't bother to address this with you further. Other than to say you are getting it wrong on most of these points. And your assumption about my comfort with discriminated-against groups using the terms of discrimination is also wrong. But it is different.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Regardless, it's the WORD he's referring to. See? I can be as obstinate as you can about Redskin, n*gger, or any other offensive reference, or term. Censoring the word socialism doesn't stop socialism. Censoring the word Arrogance doesn't remove arrogance.

I'll concede that competition if that's what you think is important.

Sure, Soup used the word "word." But then he went on to misuse that word in keeping with his blatantly incorrect prejudices. So this is yet another one of these cases where calling the dog's tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.

 

[strummingram]

I'll concede that competition if that's what you think is important.

Sure, Soup used the word "word." But then he went on to misuse that word in keeping with his blatantly incorrect prejudices. So this is yet another one of these cases where calling the dog's tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.

It does to the person saying it.

See? When you're a responsible listener, you know how to discern content. Stop trying to make us a country of dumb listeners that can be potentially offended by the entire vocabulary. You're enabling victimization. Stop that... pretty please?

 

[strummingram]

And if the N-word was racist then black folks wouldn't use it. See how that does NOT work?

By the way, in the case of Redskins, it's not a matter of "if!" Native Americans willingly choose and use Redskins as an acceptable name for a sports team mascot/nickname. There's no if about it. From my perspective, if they're using it like that then that is about all the clearance you need to use it!

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Noooo. He talking about his propaganda-driven delusion about what the word means, not what it has actually stood for in America and other places.

Socialism IS big government. Government is by far the largest mass murderer the world has ever known.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Socialism IS big government. Government is by far the largest mass murderer the world has ever known.

Yet again proving you have never bothered to learn much about socialism.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Yet again proving you have never bothered to learn much about socialism.

And how do you propose to implement socialism? Are we all going to be on the honor system?