PC is just another form of censorship and repression. Discuss.

[Speck Tater]

It is not politcally correct to criticize a group of people. But what if that group is doing something that deserves to be criticized? Sorry, PC ties your hands. You can't call the pot or the kettle black for fear of being called insensitive or bigotted.

The cultural pressure to be politically correct is nothing more than a subtle (and occasionally blatent) form of censorship and repression of your freedom to tell it like it is.

When PC and truth collide, which should win out?

Reactions?
Refutations?
Counterexamples?

[jobycom]

1. You don't know what PC is.

It's just manners. It doesn't stifle creativity. Only bigotry. It doesn't prevent you from criticizing a group for doing something wrong. It requires you to be specific about the group that is doing something wrong, and not to make generalized comments that shouldn't be applied to the larger group. For instance, one could criticize the Israeli government for its actions--that's acceptable (debatable, of course, but acceptable). One couldn't blame all Jews for the actions of the Israeli government. Or, one could blame a black man for a crime. One could not say "most black men commit crimes."

PC is the simple idea that you are careful and specific in your words.

[silverweb]

7. Well said!

:thumbsup:

[porphyrian]

51. As long as those words aren't being predetermined for you.

And, you must admit, there has been some of that associated with political correctness and/or those seeking to "enforce" it. Manners and politeness are subjective, and should not be required any more than people should be forced to pray before meals or hold doors open for others. One's behavior should be, and is, judged on an individual basis according to the situation, not by some prescribed ceremony or language use.

I believe wholeheartedly that sweeping generalizations are inherently false, and that they can be harmful or damaging, especially when used to condemn or defame. However, our Constitutional right to freedom of speech trumps the desire of others to be addressed in a specific manner, unless doing so otherwise inflicts harm or infringes on the target's Constitutionally-protected rights, as with hate crimes (though I believe there is still some gray area where hate speech is the only offense). Words only have the power we give them, and the PC movement itself is in part responsible for empowering the very things it was meant to eliminate, as evidenced by the backlash today (albeit that backlash has been fanned by the fascism and racism sweeping the world as well).

[jobycom]

53. I don't agree with anything you said.

First, there is no law requiring PC, it is only social pressure, and that always exists to influence what people say. SO there is no infringement of any rights. You have the right to express yourself, others in society have the right to express disapproval at what you say and even put social pressure on you to not say it. That's the whole point of the First Amendment, to be sure all voices are allowed to be heard, not to require that everyone hear them.

Second, nothing is predetermined. Certain was of talking about people are frowned upon by society. Again, that's as it should be. YOu have the right to insult someone and drive them to tears if you want. Society, or the individuals who make it up, have the right to do the same back at you if they disapprove of what you say and your methods.

Third, hate crimes are attempts to stir up anger at a person or group, to threaten their lives or safety or property. I'm sure over-zealous law enforcement sometimes crosses the line and punishes for speech. We have courts specifically because law enforcement isn't perfect. But the spirit of these laws isn't to limit speech, it is to protect people from violence. The right to life does trump the right to speech, so you can't claim free speech when you are inciting someone toa specific act of violence.

And "the PC movement" has existed for all eternity, it didn't just spring up last week and suddenly start empowering words. The term "politically correct" may have only emerged two decades ago, but the idea has always been in effect. At times in history you could be burned alive for violating the contemporary ideals of "PC," no matter what they called those ideals. The only objection to "PC" now comes from people who don't like the current ideals. They don't like that you aren't supposed to refer to half the population as "girls," or "babes." They don't like that ou are supposed to treat others as equals, rather than degrading them with sexual, racial, or ethnic terms. They don't like that they can't feel superior and show it through their language. THAT's what's being protested, not the idea that certain words and language are rude and unacceptable. The concept of rude and unacceptable language has always existed, and everyone inherently knows that you don't cross certain lines. The only thing this current anti-PC mentality disagrees with is where the lines are.

[porphyrian]

57. That doesn't surprise me at all.

Correct, there is no law requiring political correctness. Yet.

Nothing is predetermined? That's as ridiculous a claim as saying everything is predetermined. The rest of that paragraph, the parts that are intelligible, anyway, I agree with.

You obviously didn't read or comprehend what I wrote regarding hate crimes. Try again and maybe you won't embarrass yourself.

Now you're trying to redefine the accepted meaning of "PC," which is understandable considering my argument made sense and can't really be refuted. Thanks for trying, though.

[jobycom]

59. I am simply explaining PC, not redefining it. You are too used to

hearing it defined by people who want to destroy it. Just as Ann Coulter's definition of liberalism is wrong, you definition of PC is wrong.

And you'll have to explain specifically why you disagree with my post on predetermination, hate crimes, me embarrassing myself, and my unintelligible parts. Otherwise you've said nothing.

[porphyrian]

61. You have no idea what I am or am not used to.

Don't waste your time making assumptions about me and I won't waste my time explaining to you what should be apparent from what is already written.

[jobycom]

64. I made no assumptions about you in any way at all.

My comments were about your post, and about the general concept of PC. I'm not sure why you took anything I said as directed at you personally. I even controlled my impulse to lash back at you when you went personal in the post above this. My only comments were about your post, not you, not any assumptions I have about you (I have none, I don't recognize your name as anyone I've had dealings with before, and if I did I wouldn't include that in any responses I made, and I don't assume I know anything other than what you wrote).

So again, if you have a point other than insulting me for some perceived slight, make it. If it were apparent from what either of us wrote, I wouldn't have to ask. I'll even assume the failure is mine--I'm an idiot, I don't understand where you are disagreeing. Elucidate, please.

[porphyrian]

67. "You are too used to hearing it defined by people who want to destroy it."

Do you even know when you're contradicting yourself?

[jobycom]

70. That's a comment based on your post, not on any assumptions

about you. Do you even know when you are violating the rules by personally attacking someone instead of giving a reasoned response?

[porphyrian]

74. You can't be having the same conversation I am.

Everything I said was perfectly clear, despite your inability to understand it. You are the one who "disagreed with everything I said." You are the one making assumptions about my experiences and motives, including your invention of my being somehow wounded by your comments. If I were to insult you or make a personal attack, there would be no ambiguity about it whatsoever, believe me. Are you trying to instigate me into some kind of argument so you can get the post deleted or what? Anyway, I stand by my posts and think yours are ridiculous and not really worth any more of my effort.

[jobycom]

75. Yeah, cause everyone else is having so much trouble understanding my

post. Life's too short. Bye.

[porphyrian]

76. Yes, please go. - n/t

[Lorien]

60. Indeed. I've always said that being politically correct simply implies

that one is thoughtful and accurate in one's statements. Blanket statements about any group are simply never accurate. My best friend is Jewish and he's pissed with the Israeli government; does that make him a "self hating Jew" or one human being who doesn't feel that another group of human beings are acting morally? Ascribing certain behaviors or beliefs to all people who can be labeled as one thing or another (White, Black, obese, Muslim, female, teenage, American, attractive, etc.) shows ignorance and a lack of critical thinking skills.

[jobycom]

66. Yes. I don't like labels, in general, not even positive ones.

They are all meant to de-humanize, or at least de-individualize. (ANd I just had the weirdest and clearest deja vu...)

[ClassWarrior]

68. In other words, what the RW has derided as "PC" is simply...

...the underlying Democratic value of responsibility.

Well said, joby.

NGU.

[jobycom]

77. Thanks. nt

[Swamp Rat]

92. Right wing knuckle-draggers also blame Lenin and Marx too.

:eyes:

[Jade Fox]

81. Well put. Thanks....n/t

[Erika]

2. Huh?

What are you talking about? Be specific. Thanks.

[felman87]

3. Political Correctness? I say f**k it!

Political Correctness could also be viewed as being soft. Like, if I ran for office I'd be all over shit (figuratively not literally) I'd say whatever was on my mind regardless of the consequences. Sure, I might be out of the "traditional democrat mold" but I never viewed myself as a traditionalist. Besides, what democrats need is someone who's just badass and has a "devil-may-care" and "fuck you!" attitude.

[Erika]

5. Huh What are you talking about?

I've never heard a democrat with those views.

[Bluebear]

9. Well, from their blog:

People often ask me “Fel, why are you so gay” and I assume they mean happy so I say “Are you being sarcastic, bitch/bastard (choose appropriate)?” to which they promptly grab a police officer and arrest me for being black.

[beam me up scottie]

18. Hmmm, looks like calling women "bitch" is a common theme.

From the entry "10 things I don’t know about women"

(Hm, I don’t produce any of the world’s food nor to I own the land. You’re paying for your half of the dinner, you fucking bitch.)

(Why don’t they remember exactly how much money I loaned them or that they promised to meet me somewhere at 12? In your face bitch!)

(Come to think of it, Men were responsible for inventing everything else. Fuck you, ungrateful bitch!)

(I thought women were great at remembering things, or did you forget that. In your face, bitch!)

Charming.

Oops, I forgot this little gem:

(Women are free to think they’re the CEO, just as long as they realize they’re the secretaries.)

Kind of a turn off, although the pirate is kind of cute.

[Bluebear]

22. Not exactly progressive on choice issues...

When a woman has reckless sexual intercourse, or just reck intercourse, with a man, so this doesn’t apply to lesbian couples, she gets pregnant, possibly. I fell asleep during Sex ED and I’m not certain what happens where and when but I’m sure it happens sooner or later. So, with this fetus, an unborn baby, is in her stomach and now all the guys look at her but never ask her out. That makes the woman sad because she looks and feels like those women dancing in the background during Richard Simmons’ show. So she’s like, “screw this, I’m getting rid of this worthless pile of tissues” and that’s when she goes to the bar to have a drink because she’s tired. That’s probably the reason why extremely shallow women obtain abortions but for others there are social ills that affect her. Perhaps money is an issue or maybe she feels inadequate at rasing a child, especially if she’s single. Or maybe she just wanted the sex but not the responsibility that came with it. It’s like buying a box of chocolates, eating them all and then trying to get a refund, only before Roe V Wade, there was a No Dice policy. Long story short, she goes to the doctor and has the doctor kill it in ways not even Freddy Kruger could dream of....



Abortion is wrong and should be illegal. Women should have to suffer the consequences of their actions just like all other human beings in the world. They should use better judgement in their actions. The baby’s right to life comes before the woman’s right to privacy. (Although my friend pointed out that we should give women abortions because if they’re dumb enough to have reckless sex then maybe they shouldn’t be given important duties like, I don’t know, raising a human being. He’s a crazy chestnut, isn’t he?) In case you didn’t get the gist of things, I’m against abortion. Call me an insensitive jerk all you want, ladies, I’m only doing what’s right and it’s your own fault…..and also cause I’m still mad cause you always turned down my date proposals. Why don’t you love me? Why?!

http://felsbestpageintheworld.com/archives/15#more-15

[beam me up scottie]

25. My, my, my.

Aren't we the little progressive?

[Warren DeMontague]

27. I think you got the "little" part right.

I'd say 15, max.

[beam me up scottie]

28. Bitch.

:rofl:

[Warren DeMontague]

30. That's not very politically correct of you!

:thumbsup:

[Warren DeMontague]

26. "you always turned down my date proposals"

...Wow. Wonder why.

[beam me up scottie]

29. Women are from Venus.

We can smell fear.

[NMMNG]

39. Oh yes

Because every woman who seeks an abortion is an irresponsible slut. :sarcasm:


And that's all I can say without resorting to stuff that could get me banned.

[Warren DeMontague]

41. And you know what else?

It doesn't matter what they do, or how "responsible" they are or aren't. They still have the right to control their own bodies, just like everyone else.

This clown should worry about his own genitalia. Not other people's.

[NMMNG]

43. Oh no they don't

Women aren't capable of controlling their own bodies. They need men and fundamentalists to do that for them. :sarcasm:

[Bluebear]

23. dupe

.

[alarimer]

56. Well that's just plain sexist, not politically incorrect

people get upset when they are called "un-PC" when in fact, they are just bigoted (or sexist) assholes. I am not going to visit that blog but it appears to be immature, sexist drivel from what you have posted here.

Actually, it appears written by a 12 year old who can't get a date.

[Truthiness Inspector]

78. Lovely

I wonder if his parents know about his blog.

[WindRavenX]

80. nice ripoff of Maddox, assmonkey

:thumbsdown:

And your blog is full of misogynistic crap. Fuck off.

[Bluebear]

4. PC is graciousness and politeness to me, not censorship.

PC has become the Republican's rallying cry... like when you make fun of somebody, hurt their feelings and they say "Oh, you are just being politically correct." I hate the term, personally.

[jobycom]

11. Exactly. It's also used to squash an argument.

If you criticize a Republican for the human costs of their actions or legislation, they will say something like "My views aren't PC, but they are right." Too many people use the phrase to justify being mean.

[cynatnite]

6. Well...and I may completely fuck this up...

I do believe in self-censorship. We are our own best judges to determine how much, if and when we should or should not censor ourselves. Some are better at it than others. I also am a great believer in tact. There are good ways to say things and bad ways. I guess it depends on what is being said and whether or not it needs to be said.

I do have this example that my mother tried on me a long time ago:

She said that when it comes to expressing disagreement with homosexuality, people should be free to do so. This was a talking point of some kind and I have no clue where she got it from. She told the story of a teenager who wore a t-shirt condemning homosexuality to school, that's his right to expressing his opinion, she said. She did say the school made him go home and change it. I told her it was not right because it is gay-bashing. She argued it's his opinion and his freedom of speech was violated. For one thing schools are not freedom of speech zones and for another they can dicate dress code. Aside from that, his rights stepped on someone else's and that is not acceptable.

Anyway, I'm not sure if that's what you're looking for :shrug:

[Erika]

10. Yeh. Gods hate gays on T shirts

might make a few right wingers have an orgasm in joy. But it is harmful to our country. Gays pay taxes like all the rest of us.

[terminal_concept]

8. You can't define it.

It's like hearing all over the media that you can't talk about christianity in the media.
It is an ever changing thing.

[Erika]

13. What media said that?

W/Falwell/Dobson, etc are all over the media. Please explain.

[terminal_concept]

15. the corporate IOW all of them

Where have you been.I'm new but I seem to notice you disagree with everyone here .

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NMMNG]

40. You can't talk about Christianity in the media?

You really need to crawl out from under your rock. The media is saturated with Christianity.


And here is a definition of what you said couldn't be defined, since you don't seem to have a dictionary either:

po·lit·i·cal·ly cor·rect


adjective

Definition:

deliberately avoiding offense: relating to or supporting the use of language or conduct that deliberately avoids giving offense, e.g. on the basis of ethnic origin or sexual orientation

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861738200

[terminal_concept]

42. obviously a misunderstanding

what I said was the media said you can't talk about Christianity in the media.
And by doing so they where talking about Christianity ....in the media.
Relax,I'm on your side!

[newyawker99]

65. Hi terminal_concept!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[beam me up scottie]

12. Your subject line is a reich wing talking point.

I hear it almost daily here in red state hell.

Usually coming from jackasses who are whining because they were chastised for making homophobic, misogynistic and/or racist comments.

[Bluebear]

16. The definitive post.

:)

[beam me up scottie]

20. I "chastise" them every chance I get.

And, contrary to popular opinion, even though I'm a liberal, I'm also a feminist, an atheist and an ex-Marine, and I'm not worried about hurting their widdle feelings at all.
:evilgrin:

[Speck Tater]

17. Exactly, which is why...

we need to be prepared to address claims like this in a rational way that exposes faulty logic for what it is.

I think we on DU should discuss all the various slogans they use to distort the truth in order to prepare ourselves to refute those slogans in real life confrontations. If we don't think about the slogans and discuss them and disect and refute them, then we let ourselves by one-upped by them.

What is your response when someone says: "You liberals can't even muster the courage to hurt someone's delicate feelings, how can you be strong enough to lead the war on terror?" How do we respond to that? How do we knock the pins out from under that kind of faulty logic?

Reactions?

[beam me up scottie]

19. Um, we HAVE been discussing them.

Where have you been?

Half the time when someone protests a slur made by another DUer, they're attacked for being "PC" and/or overly sensitive.

For example, check out all the comments about "Mann" Coulter.:mad:

[Warren DeMontague]

31. Bill Hicks was a liberal.

I just wish he was still around to stick the big boot of his righteous rants up the collective bung of today's GOP.

It's not about "not hurting someone's delicate feelings", it's about addressing people and issues on more than a single-digit IQ level.

[beam me up scottie]

32. The bigots want to have their hate speech protected.

And for the most part, it is.

But those who rant about political correctness resent the fact that it's no longer acceptable.

[Warren DeMontague]

36. And that's the funny thing.

If you insist on being ig'nant, why give a shit?

[beam me up scottie]

37. I haven't figured that one out yet.

Maybe it's because they are honestly ignorant, as opposed to being willfully so?

[salin]

62. Because I am really lazy, maybe I can be of help.

In my four + years here, I have only had three sig lines. That is because I am too lazy to go into my profiles and change them. I only cleared one out when the DU traffic was so high that all sigs were turned off.

That said, quite some time ago I read a post on a website that was linked in the DU editorial-opinion forum. I found it very thoughtful, and thought provoking. Hoping that may be a few people would read it if I put it in my sig (as it would appear long after the thread on DU was archived). Being lazy, I have never gotten around to changing it.

Sorta ironic, as the issue is not one of my "key" issues that I care passionately about, nor that I follow closely. However there it is, at the end of each of post I make, until I find something else of interest at the same moment in time that I am 'unlazy' enough to bother changing the sig ;-)

Point being - take a read and see what you think of the discussion points raised.

[Telly Savalas]

85. We tell them to go fuck themselves.

[nealmhughes]

14. I dunno. Sometimes it can border on the ridiculous when exaggerated.

But at the same time, in my own writings, I always alter the use of he and she when having a person performing an action or having a thought, and I even frequently alternate "traditional" gender occupations such as "Dr. Wong, brought her nurse a homemake cake, for which he thanked her greatly."
That's just manners and reality...

But at the same time, I don't mince words and like to use short Germanic forms rather than the Latinate or French to make my point. I refuse to use a phrase when there is a shorter version to say it...unless it is racist/sexist/ageist/etc. since I am a Democrat and an Episcopalian!

[Warren DeMontague]

21. If you don't give a shit about being "politically correct"

then why should you care if someone tells you you aren't?

The First Amendment applies equally to everyone, asshole or not. Calling someone "insensitive" or "bigoted" isn't censorship.

[LTR]

24. PC is sooooo 1990s!

I mean, does anyone other than the cons talk about political correctness anymore?

The only ones talking about it are the cons who like to live in the past, and are usually the ones that rail against the New Deal, the counterculture movement, etc. Also seem to think Joe McCarthy was right. Shit, half these asswipes weren't even alive during all this shit.

When a con brings up PC, all it means is that he or she ran out of substantial stuff to talk about.

[Blue_Tires]

88. my thoughts exactly

"PC" is just one of those RW-demons they like to bring out every now and then....

[Ignoramus]

33. The phrase PC is a phrase used to crush expressions of caring

Literally, it is nonsense to be opposed to being politically correct. No one can be against their own politics, since that would be a paradox.

The phrase "politically correct" could be a tongue in cheek way of saying that someone's political beliefs are impractical, in that they are too rigid and don't account for real life situations. For example, that is what Bill Mahr seems to be implying by his tv show's title. But, I almost always here the phrase used by people who wish to suppress any political discussion, or want to be able to spout hatred without being challenged.

The desire to suppress political discussion, is a desire to suppress giving a shit about anything, because politics is very general. Every person has political beliefs and is expressing them when they express concern about anything.

When someone objects to other people's expressions of concern about things, by accusing them of being politically correct, they are claiming that there is a default politics that everyone should accept, and that is a combination of their own beliefs and a regurgitation of a promoted mainstream political belief.

Ironically, the people that accuse others of being politically correct, are being politically correct, in the tongue in cheek sense, which means that someone holds a political belief that is impractical, in that it is too rigid and doesn't account for real life situations.

[Dogmudgeon]

34. What's with the RW talking points today?

Earlier on, someone was ranting about the "nannystate" regulating gambling, as if they were coming for his beer, smokes, and titty mags next.

The PC-whining dead-horse-beaters don't care at all about free speech. They want victory, domination, and uncontested ownership of the Free Marketplace Of Ideas™, and they're not fussy about how they get it. Cries of "Political Correctness!" are only one way of getting what they want without having to earn it, to intimidate Liberals into submission. And way too many of us are suckers for it.

Generally speaking, when someone pulls that crap on me, and adds the inevitable smirk and "witty reparteé", I try my level best to reduce him/her to tears. Sometimes, it's an honest mistake, but when it's a wingnut tripping over his or her own dick, then it's Katie-bar-the-door.

Sure, I've been "politically corrected" before by a few random "hypersensitive" women, blacks, gays, asians, etc. It's difficult for me to get mad at someone who's overstressed and lashing out against an unceasing flood of petty insults justified by "Freedom of Speech", and it's very easy to get that way in today's world. I lived down at the University of Pennsylvania during its notorious right-wing era (late 1980s-1990s), when the booze flowed freely in the frats, when Water Buffalo Boy was Big Man On Campus, and when every national news desk had a permanent crew waiting at 36th and Spruce for the next phony outrage. (Note, the Wikipedia article is slanted somewhat in favor of Water Buffalo Boy; the "crowd" consisted of four women, and the "ruckus" was normal street conversation a few feet from the poor dear's window. I plan to correct their oversight as time allows.)

But I've been ranted at, screamed at, and otherwise verbally attacked by far more right-wing bloviators, even while minding my own business. I've learned (the hard way, alas) to hit them as hard as I can, to make them suffer as much as possible, for their poseur reputations as right-wing intellectual swashbucklers. (And isn't "right-wing intellectual" an oxymoron anyway?)

You want some Pee-Cee? Try this one: "It's Wartime."

--p!

[Warren DeMontague]

38. Unfortunately, nanny state-ism is a real impulse on the part of some.

Is that a right wing talking point? Coulda fooled me. Seems like being a rightwinger these days is synonymous with wanting run everyone else's personal lives.

Frankly, I don't give a shit if consenting adults want to gamble. Or drink beer. Or smoke- cigarettes, pot, whatever. Or look at titty mags.

As long as they're in the privacy of their own home, not fouling up indoor, public air, not endangering anyone else, driving, etc. etc. I can't imagine why my tax dollars should be at all interested in dictating those kinds of "morals".

But that's a long way from saying, as the OP seems to, that people have a right to be shielded from criticism for being a flatulating ass. Hey- the First Amendment protects your right to be a bigot. It also protects the right of folks to call you on it. The "answer" to free speech is more free speech.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

44. Anti-PC is the new PC.

[deutsey]

45. The first time I heard the phrase was in the mid-'80s

A friend of mine from England used it to favorably describe someone.

I remember then feeling uncomfortable with the phrase. It just struck me as reflecting some ideological purity test, and I hated ideology then as much as I do now.

The old National Lampoon "Lemmings" had a scene where a member of SDS or some radical group shouts: "Power to the CORRECT people!"

I'm always in favor of power to all the people, especially to speak the truth as they see and experience it.

[bowens43]

46. Nonsense.

Political correctness is nothing more then common decency.

[klyon]

47. It is about respect

whether you agree with someone or not. We should have respect for each other as persons, that is what PC is. We all should be able to discuss any topic without resorting to unPC tactics like name calling, stereo typing and rude behavior.

[quickesst]

48. PC...

may be polite, but it is a manufactured politeness. The day I cave to "PC", and repress my true feelings for the sake of not offending someone's sensibilities in lieu of the truth, is the day I lose my individuality. This is just another topic the "true" progressives can claim in order to somehow enhance their standing among other "true" progressives, and as a little, "I'm more moral than you" shot for the rest of us. Truth hurts, but there it is. Myself, I don't need to be dictated by pc labels in order to form a cognizant, thoughtful, and kind statement. Why does anyone? Thanks.
quickesst

[klyon]

90. because of the Golden Rule

Didn't your mother teach you not to say any fool thing that came into your head? Someone needs to.
The only rule you really need PC or not

[ck4829]

49. PC is a trick of the Right

"Political correctness is one of the brilliant tools that the American Right developed in the mid-1980s as part of its demolition of American liberalism....What the sharpest thinkers on the American Right saw quickly was that by declaring war on the cultural manifestations of liberalism - by levelling the charge of political correctness against its exponents - they could discredit the whole political project."
- Will Hutton
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/race/story/0,,619644,00.html

[Deja Q]

50. Truth. A long time ago, people were able to lighten up and have fun.

Today, everything is so strict and PC and... boring. And to even suggest an offense is a crime, apparently.

Even a sketch comedy did a parody of dating/sex where the guy kept ruining the moment by asking his girlfriend if it's okay to continue.

[Iniquitous Bunny]

52. PC is a term coined by the right

Who were pissed off that they could no longer get away with sexist and racist language.

[LoZoccolo]

63. Not really.

It was used within Marxist-Leninist ideology after the Russian revolution in 1917.

[Iniquitous Bunny]

87. Do you have a source to site?

If so, was the meaning used similarly?

[jakefrep]

54. I see nothing wrong with it

Particularly since it seems to require one to actually think before speaking. I'm not sure why civility and self-control are so vilified.

[lonestarnot]

55. Well fuck it. I'm always politically correct!

:rofl:

[salin]

58. In all honesty, about the only times I hear "anti-PC" comments

are when they are coupled with some nasty generalization about one group or other of people.

There was a time in the eighties when there actually was a PC issue - when some college campuses tried to codify (rules/regulations) behavior that was inoffensive - to the point of absurdity. Most of that was turned back for more common sense solutions.

Since then, there isn't really an issue - since "censorship" implies some entity editing out content - and generally when the issue is brought up, it isn't about real censorship (eg a newspaper, a govt rule/reg meant to stifle speech, and employer stifling employee speech, etc.,) - generally it is used in regular conversation - as a "get out of jail card" used before saying something really obnoxious - or said just afterwords after the statement has been made.

Just an observation.

[ClassWarrior]

69. In all honesty, about the only times I hear "anti-PC" comments...

...is when some RightWingnut is trying to "cleverly" trap Progressives. Just the fact that the OP used the expression "PC" sets off alarms in my brain.

NGU.

[Odin2005]

71. PC is the scourge of all who like free speech.

PC basically says that some groups should be free from criticism and that some topics should be avoided because they might contradict what is considered "the truth". It is NOT a left-wing thing, it can be found on both sides. The Bushbots declaring anyone criticizing bush as "un-American" is an example of political correctness on the right. The dogma that "race is a social construct" is an exampke of PC on the left.

[ClassWarrior]

72. "PC" is a RW frame designed to ridicule the Democratic value of...

...being responsible - in this case responsible in one's speech.

NGU.

[Odin2005]

73. Being courteous does not require the ephemism diarrhea PC causes.

[misanthrope]

79. The dogma...

...about "race" as a "social construct" isn't just a popular meme, it's an axiom of anthropology arrived at through many years of academic scrutiny and research.

The first example you give is merely a poilitical tool.

[Odin2005]

83. The race article on Wiki says only 16% of biolgists think race is a...

social construct compared to around 41-53% of anthropologists, so biologists obviously disagree and even anthropologists are split, it is NOT a generally held attitude. A recent paper (Rosenberg 2005) also gives a blow to the cline-based argument against race.

[Ignoramus]

82. This is a fundamental concept to understand reactionary politics...

I think.

The phrase "politically correct" is a newspeak phrase, like "conspiracy theory" and "liberal", where an attempt is being made, probably not intentionally, to give words their opposite meaning, and have them serve as thought killers.

Being charged with being "politically correct" or "a liberal" or having a "conspiracy theory" is supposed to stop debate dead in it's tracks.

It's an oxymoron to say that "politically correct" is bad, or that "liberal" is bad, or that "conspiracy theories" are bad.

Of course, people using the phrase don't necessarily have the same intention as other people.

If "politically correct" is being used to refer to rigid ideology, then the phrase isn't problematic.

If "politically correct" is being used to refer to being polite, then the phrase may or may not be problematic. Requests for politeness might be hypersensitive.

But I almost never hear "politically correct" used in either of those two ways. From when I first heard the phrase in the 80s, it's almost always used to shut someone up, who has expressed that they care about some issue.

For a representative example, I saw someone get attacked for being "politically correct" when they simply posed the question, does a certain japanese kanji character have it's meaning because it was invented by people who lived in a misogynist culture. The guy wasn't saying, let's ban the use of this character, he was simply posing a question.

This type of exchange happens constanty in my experience, and the cumulative effect is to discourage any expressions of empathy or awareness of the relationship between things in society.

Part of this is that there is confusion about what "politics" is. The impression is given that politics is separate from your daily concerns, when that is not true.

Another way to say that is tha tone definition of progressive politics, is that our daily concerns are a political issue. Politics is not limited to which person gets to be pack leader. Your mother being ill, is related to your environment which is related to industry etc.

Literally, complaining that something is bad because it is politically correct is an oxymoron. The judgment that something is bad, is part of your politics, so if you think it's bad, you can't think it is politically correct.

Another side of the use of "politically correct", is that it's used to disguise hatred and avoid criticism or debate about it. This also happens frequently in my experience. The effect is a 2 sided attack: expressions of caring are attacked as "politically correct", and questioning other people's racist or etc. remarks are also attacked as being "politically correct".

The cumulative result is that groupthink is established representing a rigid ideology in favor of aggression and against caring.

So, this is an important issue. This "politically correct" idea is a meme that is very dangerous.

[Guy Fawkes]

84. Like many of our freedoms, the 'nose test' applies here.

It goes like this: My freedom to punch you ends at the tip of your nose. In other words, you can say what you want- if you don't hurt anyone. Sure, go ahead and tell off-colour jokes to your friends. You know who they are and how they will react. But standing on a street corner yelling the 'n word' at people is going to far.

[Telly Savalas]

86. Can someone please cite an example of a non-PC statement

which isn't racist, sexist, homophobic, or assholeish in nature?

89. People think they are open-minded

until something hits too close to home. Then hypocrisy rules supreme.

[mark414]

91. PC is the word police

typically the staunchest defenders of what is commonly referred to as PC are people who don't actually do what they do because it's really the right thing to do but only because they THINK it's the right thing to do and people will not like them if they don't do it and they don't want people to think bad of them.

a word is a word is a word. there are very few words that simply shouldn't be directed at people - racial slurs, for example. i'd never call a black guy a nigger or a latino a spic but i don't refrain from those words because "people might think i'm bad," i refrain from those words because i don't believe in that shit.

it's the policing of language for the sake of policing the language, which, imo, is the wrong way to go about it.