Political correctness scares me .

The recent Trump comments are a good example of this. Facts are now Considered lies. Good is now bad, and bad is now good. The sky is purple on a clear day, not blue you racist.

Apparently now you can no longer speak the truth, which is that some illegal aliens, or excuse me I am sorry, some undocumented immigrants, rape and bring drugs over the border.

Today calling someone who has entered the USA illegally an illegal, is insanely considered racist. Common sense has clearly taken a backseat to irrationality.

Soon the label undocumented immigrant will be considered racist, because the mental disease called liberalism is madness with no end. ~$heopleNation

a reply to: Greathouse

Gee what a surprise? Despite two pages of repeatedly asking for examples now you don't want to discuss them specifically ?

Are those real examples? No - your own source proves they're not. Your own source

Let's be honest Greathouse - you don't have any examples of your own. If you did you would have put them out there right away. I wanted to understand - what is it about freedom of speech that scares you?

Yes - freedom of speech

I was up for a real discussion. I'm sorry you didn't recognize that

Maybe next time

:-)

originally posted by: nonspecific
I personally feel this is very much a two sided coin, on the one hand PC is getting oout of hand.

On the other there seems to be a growing trend of using this as a last ditched attempt at retaining the right to use offensive terminology and justify it.

We are constantly evolving and what my father would deem acceptable is no longer so, for example he actually had a frend in the late 70's early 80's called "darkie Dave" he was a black guy in a rural UK location and there was a lot of guys called Dave.

He also had mates called things like fat pete and Mincer Chris(mincer is a UK term for homosexual).

At the time it was just the way it was and no one had an issue with this but now it is deemed innapropriate.

And that's the problem. It should only be inappropriate if darkie dave doesn't want to be called darkie dave but if he doesn't care, then why is it anyone else's problem. That's the problem with PC is that it's always someone else who finds the problems with everything. The cotton picker probably wouldn't care about anyone saying "wait a cotton picking minute," but someone else will. I think people just have too much time on their hands these days.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Greathouse

Gee what a surprise? Despite two pages of repeatedly asking for examples now you don't want to discuss them specifically ?

Are those real examples? No - your own source proves they're not. Your own source

Let's be honest Greathouse - you don't have any examples of your own. If you did you would have put them out there right away. I wanted to understand - what is it about freedom of speech that scares you?

Yes - freedom of speech

I was up for a real discussion. I'm sorry you didn't recognize that

Maybe next time

:-)

Don't be ridiculous how can I name example of my own when this is a national issue that is debated regularly .

That tagline Bow out could've been used on any position I cited . What is really getting funny about you is the denial you are in and your inability to admit that even 1 inch of your position could be incorrect . You said my source claimed that all those issues I cited did not happen . Were just lying in that statement or will you state unequivocally that none of those events I cited happened ?


I've got proof so maybe next time ?

a reply to: Greathouse

Yep, and the PC police are the new fascist totalitarian regime...it's funny that those who talk so much about tolerance are actually the bigots who cannot handle any dissenting points of view.
The old tolerance was that we could agree to disagree, I could think you are wrong, but we could still have a beer together. The new tolerance in this PC world means I have to agree that your point is valid, and pat you on the back and accept and agree with your side.

Get ready to be completely flamed and bashed by those PC tyrants, just like the last thread on this topic (and another thread on a topic in which all dissenting views were seen as bigoted, old world, and hateful). I'm starting to think Jerry Seinfeld was not just right about comedy in universities, but all forms of free thought in the public venue...discussing anything openly with these people results in vile attacks, sometimes even person threats

**Edit to add: Now that I see after less than 20 hours on this forum and this discussion is 12 pages long, I submit that as proof of my response to the OP lol and bow out from here, it's not worth fighting anymore

a reply to: Greathouse

What is really getting funny about you is the denial you are in and your inability to admit that even 1 inch of your position could be incorrect .

What is my position? :-)

Go ahead - let's see if you can say what it is I'm trying to say. Is my position provable or unprovable?

I've got proof so maybe next time ?

How about now? Let's have it

:-)

a reply to: AnonymousMoose

Yup ,

I find it ironic that people will shout down an opinion, bully and threaten . All in the name of peace and righteousness .

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

OK here you go. You made the claims that the position I listed was proven wrong by my source . this is a perfect example of a small group of people rallying to ban something that the vast majority of people find innocent . I have no problem with the atheist freedom of speech. Where I have the problem is the minority out ruling the majority with the courts and city councils backing . That's scary !!!


Santa Monica bans Christmas displays

a reply to: SheopleNation

You do know trump tried to lump in all Mexicans as rapists right? If I said all white people are heroin drug addicts I would assume they would get offended as well.

a reply to: SheopleNation

When did it become fact to generalize whole groups of people huh tell me that

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Greathouse I see it as common courtesy. The use of certain words are offensive to others, so I avoid them.
Newspeak was entirely different. The government in that world was using a brand new language to remove ways to express or think about outrage against the government and to stop thinking about love, sex for pleasure or marriage.

I can say offensive things if I want to, like calling a person illegal instead of undocumented. I don't feel an entire person can be illegal I can make fun of handicapped people and call them retards, but I don't. At one time that would have been considered 'OK'.

The 'girls' in the office prefer to be called women. That is politically correct.



Are you kidding me ? An undocumented alien is an illegal alien. It's just a term. I doubt if most ladies in the office would mind being called girls. What is the big deal ? You tell Greathouse he needs a thicker skin ? How about these poor, offended folks growing their own thicker skin ?

Your other examples were stupid, because the words you used would be derogatory regardless. All this pc crap is a ridiculous sideshow to keep our attention off the things it should be on. It doesn't affect me at all. I still believe what I believe, and I still say what I think. No amount of outside pressure will ever change who I am, and what I think.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Greathouse I see it as common courtesy. The use of certain words are offensive to others, so I avoid them.
Newspeak was entirely different. The government in that world was using a brand new language to remove ways to express or think about outrage against the government and to stop thinking about love, sex for pleasure or marriage.

I can say offensive things if I want to, like calling a person illegal instead of undocumented. I don't feel an entire person can be illegal I can make fun of handicapped people and call them retards, but I don't. At one time that would have been considered 'OK'.

The 'girls' in the office prefer to be called women. That is politically correct.

Black people do not wish to be called thugs or monkeys, if that is your plan, be my guest, but it won't be welcomed well.

Tell a homosexual person they are a fag? Do it. And deny them service of whatever it is that you do.

If all this political correctness is bullying you, you will need a thicker skin.

You may say 'just wait a cotton picking minute', I was talking about smaller things. They are all the same things.

Some of the things you just listed are a matter of eliminating a derogatory statement in place of something more civil. Some things people cry political correctness about are not derogatory without inflection. I agree with Political Correctness in the sense that it replaces words that are ubiquitously derogatory regardless of context, but to take away something just because it can be possibly said by someone at some point in a derogatory sense is, well, senseless.

The word "girl" is not inherently derogatory, it is an ageless gender identifier, whereas "woman" implies a certain level of maturity and therefore age. A guy in the office wouldn't call a six year old a woman unless he had something wrong with him. Political correctness is not bullying, not in the conventional sense anyway.

It is a useful tool to create more civil interactions between people when used in the case of eliminating inherently derogatory terms from common and civil speech, but when it is overused, as with the tongue-in-cheek example given by the OP, it is simply an exertion of power over others that is fundamentally no different than, say, making it illegal to chew with your mouth open because it bothers some people. Again, a tongue-in-cheek example but my point rests.

Political correctness is a tool, not a weapon and yet people continue to weaponize it in their personal crusade to exert power over others behavior and speech with regards to utterly trivial things and thereby detract from larger issues that fall by the wayside because a scandal is always more sensational and that is double-plus un-good.

a reply to: Greathouse

That's all I could hope for - Greathouse, and actual example and something we could actually discuss

Something more than - I'm afraid of political correctness

Something current - from April of this year:

Santa Monica's ban on park Nativity displays upheld

In a ruling written by Judge Jay S. Bybee, a George W. Bush appointee, the court said the city’s law applied to all groups and did not seek to silence any particular point of view.

“The fact that the speakers who succeeded in crowding the Nativity scenes out of Palisades Park were atheists who explicitly opposed the scenes’ display is surely a bitter pill for the committee,” Bybee wrote, joined by two other George W. Bush appointees: 9th Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta and 8th Circuit Judge Michael J. Melloy, who was filling in.

But the Nativity scenes were “living on borrowed time” and owed their long existence to the fact that hardly anyone else wanted to put up displays in the park until recent years, Bybee wrote.

It's government land. Does a religious display belong on government land?

Should tradition be more important than the First amendment? Is this about political correctness, or is this about not being able to have things the way you want them?

Tradition is important to all of us. I personally love Christmas - and everything that comes with it. But our government is not Christian. Our government is for the people and by the people. All of us, together - at the same time

Is what you fear political correctness - or change?

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

That's all I could hope for - Gretahouse, and actual example and something we could actually discuss

Actually you could've discussed the OP at any time of your choosing. You chose not to because you could not address those issues you wanted the subject to go your way a.k.a. off topic in order that you could produce a strawman to defend .

I've had enough of your conversational terrorism. Your litany of slight of mine fallacies has run its course .


So I will part with two things.

Again in your circular argument you ignored the fact that I am offended by minority opinion over taking majority opinion . I personally could not care on what land it is on .


And seeing how you have turned the OP into a endless circular debate with the intention of drawing it to the position you would like to defend. ( straw man argument )


I leave you with this final parting word.



Potato!

a reply to: Jekka

On the subject of "girl," my husband could speak to this one and to the experience of the ones being directly involved not being the ones offended.

He overseas two lab technicians. Both are female. Both started calling themselves "the Lab Girls." The nickname caught one around the labs and everyone started using it, even my husband. Then, one day, a boss from another facility offsite came over (a temp boss I might add). He heard my husband say, "I need to go check on the Lab Girls." He raked my husband over the coals for it and ordered him to report to HR for sensitivity training.

So no one in this scenario was offended except the temporary boss from offsite, and the nickname came from the female workers themselves.

a reply to: christophoros

Because I was there, You weren't. I know the old lady. You don't. I went through security, You didn't. I saw the muslim guys. You didn't. I saw how they were treed. You didn't.

Yet you feel qualified to not only comment on the events you didn't witness but argue with me about it.

I don't know what it is with people like you. You cherish your victim status so much. Like its a badge of honor or something.

How is my believing that poor woman shouldn't be made to stand there while they disassemble and search THEIR OWN CHAIR make me a victim? Are you suggesting that every experience you don't invite is victimization? Do you have something against little old ladies? Did one of them beat you up and take your lunch money or something?

originally posted by: christophoros

You do know trump tried to lump in all Mexicans as rapists right? If I said all white people are heroin drug addicts I would assume they would get offended as well.

Let us try and use a little common sense here, I know it's difficult, but it's needed in order to find out the real truth.

Could Donald of have used more discretion when he said what he said? Absolutely he should have worded it differently, but surely you can't actually believe that he meant all illegal immigrants? Cause if you do, then we are right back to that irrationality thing I was talking about earlier. Understand now?

It's just like how the deranged liberal media replaced illegals with Mexicans, when reporting this story in their warped and fabricated headlines. Which is their typical bait for mindless, over-reactionary liberal herdism. Yeah, I made that word up just for you guys.

At the end of the day, excessive emotional behavior corrupts the truth of the matter. It's a disorder, It's a common symptom of the mental condition called liberalism. ~$heopleNation

a reply to: ketsuko

Oh, damn. The PC police strike again. Sensitivity training sounds like a euphemism for "re education".

One thing that bugs the hell out of me is the fact that they've taken everything that shows a separation of sexes (the fact that there are two sexes) and gotten rid of it. There used to be waitresses, actresses, and the like. There was nothing wrong with it and didn't imply that women were lesser than men but oh, no! That's not PC! Now they're waiters and actors. Pretty damn ridiculous.

a reply to: SheopleNation

When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending the best,” he said during the announcement. “They're not sending you, they're sending people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems. They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime. They're rapists and some, I assume, are good people, but I speak to border guards and they're telling us what we're getting.

This is what he said about illegal Mexican immigrants. We all know Mexico has programs to encourage people to come to the US illegally aided and abetted by our own government that sends pamphlets telling them how to apply for welfare and other social programs once they get here. In what way are these comments all that wrong? If people coming illegally need to be encouraged to sign up for SNAP and other assistance programs, how are they NOT bringing lots of problems at the very least?