RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Politically Correct. Where is the line?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/16 1:51 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Washington Post again...

Trump May be Winning the War Against Political Correctness

Jenna Johnson January 4 at 9:53 PM

Cathy Cuthbertson once worked at what might be thought of as a command post of political correctness the campus of a prestigious liberal arts college in Ohio.

You know, I couldnt say Merry Christmas. And when we wrote things, we couldnt even say he or she, because we had transgender. People of color. I mean, we had to watch every word that came out of our mouth, because we were afraid of offending someone, but nobodys afraid of offending me, the former administrator said.

All of which helps explain why the 63-year-old grandmother showed up at a recent Donald Trump rally in Hilton Head Island, S.C., where she moved when she retired a year ago.

The Republican front-runner is saying what a lot of Americans are thinking but are afraid to say because they dont think that its politically correct, she said. But were tired of just standing back and letting everyone else dictate what were supposed to think and do.

In the 2016 Republican presidential primary season, political correctness has become the all-purpose enemy. The candidates have suggested that it is the explanation for seemingly every threat that confronts the country: terrorism, illegal immigration, an economic recovery that is leaving many behind, to name just a few.

Others argue that growing antipathy to the notion of political correctness has become an all-purpose excuse for the inexcusable. They say it has emboldened too many to express racism, sexism and intolerance, which endure even as the country grows more diverse.

Driving powerful sentiments underground is not the same as expunging them, said William A. Galston, a Brookings Institution scholar who advised President Bill Clinton. What were learning from Trump is that a lot of people have been biting their lips, but not changing their minds.


norwester



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6367
Location: Seattle


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/16 11:36 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm a big fan of political correctness. But I would be happy if this whole thing changed how we hold discourse about it in this country. I think it's a little too flip of Mr. Galston to say people have been biting their lips but not changing their minds. Sometimes that might be true. But in others, the lip-biting is the emotional backlash against shaming when no offense was actually intended. It's hard to have a good conversation when both sides fear being judged on something other than the content and intent of their statements.



_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/16 12:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

norwester wrote:
I'm a big fan of political correctness. But I would be happy if this whole thing changed how we hold discourse about it in this country. I think it's a little too flip of Mr. Galston to say people have been biting their lips but not changing their minds. Sometimes that might be true. But in others, the lip-biting is the emotional backlash against shaming when no offense was actually intended. It's hard to have a good conversation when both sides fear being judged on something other than the content and intent of their statements.


if you guys can't see behind the pay wall to the rest of the article, let me know. Because the rest of it is really really good.

and I always knew you were a big fan of political correctness. Razz


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15690
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/16 3:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I dunno. PC is a dynamic-not-static, living, breathing entity unto itself. To me, it all hearkens back to the ancient Golden Rule of "Treat others...."

Why is that repulsive or repressive to any? People will always utter words and ideas others find offensive. I do it....mostly to no one other than myself, my husband or closest friends. BUT....when we enter the arena of public discourse, like cream rising to the top (or terds sinking to the bottom) one's ideas and words will identify their intent and reveal their hearts.

No "Merry Christmas"? "He/She" dilemmas? Absurd. That's PC gone awry, beyond serving its purpose as a measuring stick of elevated discourse.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/16 5:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Jammer dear, that first passage just affirms what we've been saying about Trump supporters.

This woman is offended because she's being asked to be sensitive to people different from herself. She's being asked to be sensitive to individuals who more than likely have had suicidal thoughts because of who they are (transgendered individuals have a huge rate of suicide).

She's offended that she is being told to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." Because god forbid we acknowledge there are more than just Christians in this society.

Because here's the truth Jammer about "real people." (aka..blue collar republican leaning white people) It's not that they don't know better. If a mistake is innocent enough, 99 out of 100 times someone will gently correct the mistake. The truth is, they know better..and they are offended that they have to know. They are offended that they have to be inclusive. That they have to be inclusive to someone outside of their "norm." That's a Trump supporter. And that person deserves criticism.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/16 5:30 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
She's offended that she is being told to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." Because god forbid we acknowledge there are more than just Christians in this society.


This is exactly right. She's not being asked to say something different, she's being told to. In a free society she ought to be able to say whichever she likes without being ordered to do the other.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/16 5:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
mercfan3 wrote:
She's offended that she is being told to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." Because god forbid we acknowledge there are more than just Christians in this society.


This is exactly right. She's not being asked to say something different, she's being told to. In a free society she ought to be able to say whichever she likes without being ordered to do the other.


My guess is it's more she was told in sensitivity training that "Happy Holiday's" is the preferred term.

The University..and any other job.. is just asking it's employees to be accepting and inclusive. There is nothing wrong with that. There is something wrong with being offended by that.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie


Last edited by mercfan3 on 01/05/16 5:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/16 5:50 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
mercfan3 wrote:
She's offended that she is being told to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." Because god forbid we acknowledge there are more than just Christians in this society.


This is exactly right. She's not being asked to say something different, she's being told to. In a free society she ought to be able to say whichever she likes without being ordered to do the other.

I actually agree with this. It is a personal message from an individual. They should wish people whatever they want. If the message is coming from the business itself, then "Happy Holidays" makes sense since they should be inclusive to all their employee's various beliefs.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/16 6:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
Jammer dear, that first passage just affirms what we've been saying about Trump supporters.

This woman is offended because she's being asked to be sensitive to people different from herself. She's being asked to be sensitive to individuals who more than likely have had suicidal thoughts because of who they are (transgendered individuals have a huge rate of suicide).

She's offended that she is being told to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." Because god forbid we acknowledge there are more than just Christians in this society.

Because here's the truth Jammer about "real people." (aka..blue collar republican leaning white people) It's not that they don't know better. If a mistake is innocent enough, 99 out of 100 times someone will gently correct the mistake. The truth is, they know better..and they are offended that they have to know. They are offended that they have to be inclusive. That they have to be inclusive to someone outside of their "norm." That's a Trump supporter. And that person deserves criticism.


I'm sorry, did you say something? I never made it past you calling me 'dear.'


jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 9:16 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

WSJ has a strong paywall so I'm posting this entire piece by Daniel Henninger.

Revolt of the Politically Incorrect

Soon well all be camped in the fields of primary politics, as that great threshing machine called the American voter methodically separates the contender wheat from the candidate chaff. Lets not go there, though, without recording 2015 as the year that political correctness finally hit the wall.

Many thought political correctness lived on in our lives now as permanently annoying background noise. In fact, it has been more like a political A-bomb, waiting for its detonator.

On Dec. 7, Donald Trump issued his call for a ban on Muslim immigration into the U.S.until our countrys representatives can figure out what is going on. Its hard to recall a statement by a public figure that was met, instantly, with almost universal condemnation, including from most of the Republican presidential candidates.

Between that day and the end of 2015, Donald Trumps support in the national opinion polls went up to nearly 37%, a substantial number by any measure.

Welcome to the revolt of the politically incorrect.

Forget the controversy over Donald Trumps Muslim ban. This unique political campaign is about more than that. Donald Trump and indeed Ben Carson popped the valves on pressure thats been building in the U.S., piece by politically correct piece, for 25 years. Since at least the early 1990s, a lot of the public has been intimidated into keeping its mouth shut and head down about subjects in the political and social life of the country that the elites stipulated as beyond discussion or dispute. Eventually, the most important social skill in America became adeptness at euphemism. It isnt an abortion; its a terminated pregnancy.

Some keywords in PCs history:

Identity, gender, gender-neutral, diverse, inclusive, patriarchy, workplace harassment, multiculturalism, dead white males, sexism, racism, organic, privileged, hate speech, speech codes, prayer in schools, affirmative action, respecting our differences, microagressions, trigger warnings. Thats just the tip of the icebergwhich political correctness slammed into with the Trump and Carson campaigns.

Ben Carson especially made PC an explicit tenet of his campaign. In a 2014 essay for the Washington Times, Mr. Carson wrote: Political correctness is antithetical to our founding principles of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Its most powerful tool is intimidation. If it is not vigorously opposed, its proponents win by default, because the victims adopt a go along to get along attitude.

The left found Mr. Carsons PC concerns almost quaint. But the email traffic I was seeing last summer suggested the Carson anti-PC critique was a big reason for his surge among middle-class voters. My favorite Carsonism: When asked in the Fox News debate if hed resume waterboarding, he replied, There is no such thing as a politically correct war.

When Donald Trumps mostly working-class voters repeatedly said that he tells the truth, this is what they were talking aboutnot any particular Trump outrage but the years of political correctness they felt theyd been forced to choke down in silence.

American society has never been static. A fair-minded person would concede that many of these controversial subjects involve legitimate and complex issues. Politics exists to mediate them.

Mediation? We should have been so lucky. The left never modulated its PC offensive. The 2006 Duke University lacrosse scandal, a travesty of PC trampling on individuals, should have been a red flag. Instead the Obama Education Department imposed what are essentially kangaroo courts on American campuses to enforce Title IX sexual-abuse cases.

Policies like that dont emerge from the marketplace of ideas, much less political debate. They come from a kind of Americanized Maoism. The left goes nuts when anyone suggests political correctness has totalitarian roots. But the PC game has always been: We win, you lose, get over it, comply.

But people dont get over it, and they never forget. For a lot of voters now, possibly a majority, their experiences with enforceable, politically correct behavior, speech and thought have bred a broad mistrust of elites.

Average people think individuals in positions of leadership are supposed to at least recognize the existence of their interests and beliefs. The institutions that didnt do that or were complicit include the courts, Congress, senior bureaucrats, corporate managers, the press, television, movies, university administrators.

Somehow, the standard model of political comportmentrepresented by most of the GOPs presidential candidatesjust isnt up to dealing with a degree of voter social alienation that isnt particularly rational at this point. So voters turned to outsiderspeople more like them.

The elections two big issues remain: a weak economy and global chaos. But for many voters, the revolt against political correctness is on. Hillary Clinton, hostage to a PC-obsessed base, must mouth politically correct pabulum. Donald Trump joy-rides the wave. An opening remains for an electable candidate who can point this revolt toward what it wantsa political win, at last.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 9:39 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
pilight wrote:
mercfan3 wrote:
She's offended that she is being told to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." Because god forbid we acknowledge there are more than just Christians in this society.


This is exactly right. She's not being asked to say something different, she's being told to. In a free society she ought to be able to say whichever she likes without being ordered to do the other.


My guess is it's more she was told in sensitivity training that "Happy Holiday's" is the preferred term.

The University..and any other job.. is just asking it's employees to be accepting and inclusive. There is nothing wrong with that. There is something wrong with being offended by that.


There's something wrong with being offended by someone wishing you a "Merry Christmas".



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
sambista



Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 16951
Location: way station of life


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 10:29 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
mercfan3 wrote:
pilight wrote:
mercfan3 wrote:
She's offended that she is being told to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." Because god forbid we acknowledge there are more than just Christians in this society.


This is exactly right. She's not being asked to say something different, she's being told to. In a free society she ought to be able to say whichever she likes without being ordered to do the other.


My guess is it's more she was told in sensitivity training that "Happy Holiday's" is the preferred term.

The University..and any other job.. is just asking it's employees to be accepting and inclusive. There is nothing wrong with that. There is something wrong with being offended by that.


There's something wrong with being offended by someone wishing you a "Merry Christmas".


depends on your point of view. in a free society, as you say, why can't someone be rightfully offended by a reference to christmas? granted, a more diplomatic response might be to say, or convey, "i appreciate the sentiment. in my fill-in-the-blank, we would say, 'fill-in-the-blank.' "

where is the line, indeed.

this strikes me as a jumble of several topics or issues. one is about euphemisms. one is about political correctness, which is an enormous umbrella for everything discussed here and more. another is about what i'd call grammar, pure and simple.

let's take the easiest one: grammar. i'm resolutely old-fashioned about grammar, but i'm working for a company that teaches english to foreigners, and i'm irked on a daily basis by sentences like this: "Everyone will get their T-shirts on Friday." now, "their" is used to avoid saying "his or her," but it's grammatically wrong and bothers me. even so, "their" doesn't agree with "T-shirt," singular. (for that matter, no one knows anymore whether "everyone" is singular or plural. like "everybody," "everyone" is singular.) i don't have an answer to "he or she," but i'm irked nevertheless. when i'm writing my own emails or forum posts, i often write "s/he" if i have to, and, frankly, in the absence of a better solution, i wouldn't mind seeing that adopted in modern usage. the best solution, when it can be applied, is to recast the sentence: "Everyone will get a T-shirt on Friday." easy. but no one even tries to resolve modern grammar conficts. all that said, i applaud attempts to make modern language "gender-neutral" (how did that become a bad thing?), and i think it's a worthy endeavor. language influences mindsets. it goes a long way toward internalizing diversity and inclusion. so i'm all for "postal worker" and "police officer" and "firefighter" and other terms that avoid "-man." i once tried, unsuccessfully, to get a previous employer to use "fisher" for someone who fishes. may sound strange now, but over time . . . for years, i've said "to each one's own." to say it any other way is grating, to my mind; it's easily done, and nothing is lost in translation. ok. enough of that.

when we're talking about euphemisms, there's no definitive line between good and bad. if you consider the late, great george carlin's examples, those euphemisms are indeed laughable and stray further from the simple, harsh truth, intentionally. as he said, "shell shock" and (better) "battle fatigue" are far more honest than "PTSD." but how about euphemisms that are very old? why do people say someone has "passed away"? why, i wonder, can't you simply say "died"? is that too clinical, too dispassionate?

i guess my point is this subject frustrates me because there are so many delineations, and there are good (thoughtfulness intended) and bad (agenda intended) elements to each category of language. so when someone attacks "politically correct" language generally, i'm left asking "which pc language, specifically?"

bravo, hyperetic, for getting down to the nut of it:

hyperetic wrote:
In my life experience, its been a lot easier not to be offended by things that don't relate to me personally. But I was/am empathetic enough to learn when I do find it is offensive to others. To ignore it after learning would be insensitive, would it not? Hell, I don't even tell blond jokes anymore.


wouldn't we all be better as a society if, by the words we used, we demonstrated in a sincere and meaningful way that we embrace diversity, tolerance, empathy, sensitivity, understanding, compassion, awareness - all those good, high-minded ideals? for argument's sake, is any of that a bad thing we should avoid?



_________________
no justice, no peace.


Last edited by sambista on 01/07/16 10:50 am; edited 1 time in total
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15690
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 10:43 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

sambista wrote:
hyperetic wrote:
In my life experience, its been a lot easier not to be offended by things that don't relate to me personally. But I was/am empathetic enough to learn when I do find it is offensive to others. To ignore it after learning would be insensitive, would it not? Hell, I don't even tell blond jokes anymore.


wouldn't we all be better as a society if, by the words we used, we demonstrated in a sincere and meaningful way that we embrace diversity, tolerance, empathy, sensitivity, understanding, compassion, awareness - all those good, high-minded ideals? for argument's sake, is any of that a bad thing we should avoid?


Again...."The Golden Rule", as applied to public and private discourse, whether in personal mode or public media. It's about empathy.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 12:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
sambista wrote:
hyperetic wrote:
In my life experience, its been a lot easier not to be offended by things that don't relate to me personally. But I was/am empathetic enough to learn when I do find it is offensive to others. To ignore it after learning would be insensitive, would it not? Hell, I don't even tell blond jokes anymore.


wouldn't we all be better as a society if, by the words we used, we demonstrated in a sincere and meaningful way that we embrace diversity, tolerance, empathy, sensitivity, understanding, compassion, awareness - all those good, high-minded ideals? for argument's sake, is any of that a bad thing we should avoid?


Again...."The Golden Rule", as applied to public and private discourse, whether in personal mode or public media. It's about empathy.


The Golden Rule would have Christian people saying "Merry Christmas", as they would very much like for others to say it to them.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
norwester



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6367
Location: Seattle


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 12:38 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
sambista wrote:
hyperetic wrote:
In my life experience, its been a lot easier not to be offended by things that don't relate to me personally. But I was/am empathetic enough to learn when I do find it is offensive to others. To ignore it after learning would be insensitive, would it not? Hell, I don't even tell blond jokes anymore.


wouldn't we all be better as a society if, by the words we used, we demonstrated in a sincere and meaningful way that we embrace diversity, tolerance, empathy, sensitivity, understanding, compassion, awareness - all those good, high-minded ideals? for argument's sake, is any of that a bad thing we should avoid?


Again...."The Golden Rule", as applied to public and private discourse, whether in personal mode or public media. It's about empathy.


The Golden Rule would have Christian people saying "Merry Christmas", as they would very much like for others to say it to them.
But they also don't want others to yell at them for saying Merry Christmas", so they shouldn't yell at others for using their holiday greeting of choice.



_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15690
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 12:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

norwester wrote:
pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
sambista wrote:
hyperetic wrote:
In my life experience, its been a lot easier not to be offended by things that don't relate to me personally. But I was/am empathetic enough to learn when I do find it is offensive to others. To ignore it after learning would be insensitive, would it not? Hell, I don't even tell blond jokes anymore.


wouldn't we all be better as a society if, by the words we used, we demonstrated in a sincere and meaningful way that we embrace diversity, tolerance, empathy, sensitivity, understanding, compassion, awareness - all those good, high-minded ideals? for argument's sake, is any of that a bad thing we should avoid?


Again...."The Golden Rule", as applied to public and private discourse, whether in personal mode or public media. It's about empathy.


The Golden Rule would have Christian people saying "Merry Christmas", as they would very much like for others to say it to them.

But they also don't want others to yell at them for saying Merry Christmas", so they shouldn't yell at others for using their holiday greeting of choice.

....and....if Christians might not want Jews to wish them a "Happy Hanukkah" , they should consider NOT wishing Jews a "Merry Christmas". It's seems trite, but....Majority-Mindedness is not the Enlightened Way.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
norwester



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6367
Location: Seattle


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 1:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Mostly, I try to give people the benefit of the doubt. What's their intent? Is this something that matters a lot to me (i.e. a potential for conversation and discussion, if it's an appropriate time to engage), or not?

Someone cheerfully wishing me joy during a time of year that means a lot to them? What's to get angry about? Thank you, hypothetical happy people, for sharing with me. Cool



_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 1:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

sambista wrote:

wouldn't we all be better as a society if, by the words we used, we demonstrated in a sincere and meaningful way that we embrace diversity, tolerance, empathy, sensitivity, understanding, compassion, awareness - all those good, high-minded ideals?


Actually, NO. lol. Quite the opposite. It is holding those kind of fantastic idealistic notions that run completely counter to reality and who and what the entire human race demonstrates is their FREE range of attitudes, behaviors, ideas, and speech and then attempting to push those notions onto human beings and cultures and then ENFORCE them with all of the economic weapons such as taking away people's livelihoods or other methods of personal destruction that has PROVEN so destructive to things like free thought and people standing up for themselves or their rights and having the weapons they need to fight their battles.

So no, is my answer to your question. That's not the way it works. Not even the way in which PC works as it's being applied. But it shouldn't be applied because, as I said, that's not the way it works.

That's not to say there's anything OKAY or permissible about a lot of attacks and epithets or that we should ever go backwards in terms of the progress that has been made on behalf of groups which have been victimized by human bigotry and cruelty in the past. It's just that the REALITY of what the human race is and IS going to look like is never going to be simpatico with a world where the question that you're asking has becomes something we're trying to impose or enforce.


jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 1:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
norwester wrote:
pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
sambista wrote:
hyperetic wrote:
In my life experience, its been a lot easier not to be offended by things that don't relate to me personally. But I was/am empathetic enough to learn when I do find it is offensive to others. To ignore it after learning would be insensitive, would it not? Hell, I don't even tell blond jokes anymore.


wouldn't we all be better as a society if, by the words we used, we demonstrated in a sincere and meaningful way that we embrace diversity, tolerance, empathy, sensitivity, understanding, compassion, awareness - all those good, high-minded ideals? for argument's sake, is any of that a bad thing we should avoid?


Again...."The Golden Rule", as applied to public and private discourse, whether in personal mode or public media. It's about empathy.


The Golden Rule would have Christian people saying "Merry Christmas", as they would very much like for others to say it to them.

But they also don't want others to yell at them for saying Merry Christmas", so they shouldn't yell at others for using their holiday greeting of choice.

....and....if Christians might not want Jews to wish them a "Happy Hanukkah" , they should consider NOT wishing Jews a "Merry Christmas". It's seems trite, but....Majority-Mindedness is not the Enlightened Way.


It's horrible to care so much about applying the Enlightened Way (SUPER rarely what the issue or point is anyway) that you crush innocent simple non-political people with harsh and cruel and even employment and income destructive retaliations for them simply gushing out Merry Christmas innocently and sweetly. WOW how twisted a society we have when that has been allowed to become somewhat normal or expected.


norwester



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6367
Location: Seattle


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 1:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
sambista wrote:

wouldn't we all be better as a society if, by the words we used, we demonstrated in a sincere and meaningful way that we embrace diversity, tolerance, empathy, sensitivity, understanding, compassion, awareness - all those good, high-minded ideals?

That's not to say there's anything OKAY or permissible about a lot of attacks and epithets or that we should ever go backwards in terms of the progress that has been made on behalf of groups which have been victimized by human bigotry and cruelty in the past.

How do you think we arrived at that place? It was not by letting people use whatever language they wanted to unchecked. We will never be a perfect society. Granted. But striving for a civil society is not a bad goal, even if it is ultimately unachievable, because the beauty is in the struggle. In the small inroads we do make for positive change.



_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 1:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

norwester wrote:
Someone cheerfully wishing me joy during a time of year that means a lot to them? What's to get angry about? Thank you, hypothetical happy people, for sharing with me. Cool


That's a reasonable and healthy response that I'm sure most people share.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 3:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

norwester wrote:

How do you think we arrived at that place?


Oh, shoot. What was I thinking? We got here by political correctness. My bad. Let me detract everything I've been saying or thinking on the subject for the past two decades. Cool


jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 3:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
norwester wrote:
Someone cheerfully wishing me joy during a time of year that means a lot to them? What's to get angry about? Thank you, hypothetical happy people, for sharing with me. Cool


That's a reasonable and healthy response that I'm sure most people share.


Praise Allah.


norwester



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6367
Location: Seattle


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 3:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

So: censorship. What is it? If I keep you from saying something that offends me, but get angry when you keep me from showing you somethign that offends you, is that hypocrisy? It sounds like it, but it's a grave weakness of our current national discourse to give both sides of any issue the same weight as if they are equally valid.

But who decides "validity"? Some things seem obvious to me, based on logic, science, and what I'd consider decency, but are totally outside of someone else's comfort zone. Do they need to grow up? Or do I need to tone it down?

Anyway, there's some discussion of that in the comments of this article:
Cartoon Network defends decision to censor same-sex romance in Steven Universe

The gist: two characters who appear to present as human female were shown briefly dancing together. This was shown in the US, but edited out in the UK by Cartoon Network, who used the completely tone deaf justification,
Quote:
We do feel that the slightly edited version is more comfortable for local kids and their parents.


The comments section has some discussion of this.
Andy Diamond wrote:
This is scandalous. For LGBT people to be fully accepted, same-sex relationships need to be portrayed as "normal" and not as a problem. It all starts with a children's show like this. So does that mean the network thinks if children see a same-sex kiss on a cartoon show that the children will turn automatically gay?! Or that children (or is it their parents) may be offended by such a kiss? Because I am sure children won't be offended unless their parents tell them too.

He has a point. I think. We've discussed the importance of representation. To me, that's something that has benefits that clearly outweigh another person's discomfort with viewing the "real world" through the lens of a fantasy world.

Then politicalcynic weighs in.
politicalcynic wrote:
SJWs demand safe spaces. SJWs demand they not be exposed to anything "offensive".

Cartoon network edits a cartoon to ensure people aren't "offended"

SJWs go berserk.

Hoist by your own petard. THIS is the problem with the ENTIRE concept of "offendedness" controlling what gets broadcast, published, developed in video games etc. It is perfectly FINE-until someone censors something YOU think is fine.

It's called being hoist by your own petard. Perhaps those who are currently demanding everything have "trigger warnings" be "non-offensive" and be suitable for their "Safe spaces" should learn a lesson.

Appropriately, this comment was reigned in a little after the author was counterattacked, and the reply was a bit less combative and defensive, and perhaps more coherent.
politicalcynic wrote:
Who gets to decide that? The very people who claim they get to silence others based on their "offendedness"? SJWs? Feminists? The right? The left? Whites? Blacks? Who?

Sorry-you've missed the point entirely. When you allow ANYONE to define what others can and cannot say-this is exactly what you open the door to. If, on the other hand, as you appear to be claiming, it's okay to use a "good for me but not for thee" standard-then you are basically saying you have a right to decide what others may say, see, hear, or read-but they have no equal right to do the same to you. In which case you're an authoritarian hypocrite hiding behind a claim that you have a "right" not to hear something YOU think is "mean spirited" or "bigoted".

Now, I don't totally agree with this person, but I do agree that anything can be taken too far, and it's been a pet peeve of mine in politics when whoever is in power makes a power grab that they then vociferously malign the use of when their opposition is in power.



_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15690
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/16 4:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
Howee wrote:
norwester wrote:
pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
sambista wrote:
hyperetic wrote:
In my life experience, its been a lot easier not to be offended by things that don't relate to me personally. But I was/am empathetic enough to learn when I do find it is offensive to others. To ignore it after learning would be insensitive, would it not? Hell, I don't even tell blond jokes anymore.


wouldn't we all be better as a society if, by the words we used, we demonstrated in a sincere and meaningful way that we embrace diversity, tolerance, empathy, sensitivity, understanding, compassion, awareness - all those good, high-minded ideals? for argument's sake, is any of that a bad thing we should avoid?


Again...."The Golden Rule", as applied to public and private discourse, whether in personal mode or public media. It's about empathy.


The Golden Rule would have Christian people saying "Merry Christmas", as they would very much like for others to say it to them.

But they also don't want others to yell at them for saying Merry Christmas", so they shouldn't yell at others for using their holiday greeting of choice.

....and....if Christians might not want Jews to wish them a "Happy Hanukkah" , they should consider NOT wishing Jews a "Merry Christmas". It's seems trite, but....Majority-Mindedness is not the Enlightened Way.


It's horrible to care so much about applying the Enlightened Way
(SUPER rarely what the issue or point is anyway) that you crush innocent simple non-political people with harsh and cruel and even employment and income destructive retaliations for them simply gushing out Merry Christmas innocently and sweetly. WOW how twisted a society we have when that has been allowed to become somewhat normal or expected.

Laughing "Enlightenment" crushes NO one, and is never cruel. To strive for it is paramount, whether or not one is surrounded by Darkness or Light.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 5 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin