Against Political Correctness

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Call you anything I want? Oh, boy. I honestly have no idea why you're being so defensive. I assure you I wasn't trying to offend you.

I say that because the whole “cudgel” argument, right down to the exact terminology, has been made plenty of times before.

Unlike your groundbreaking treatise on political correctness, filled with unique observations and heretofore unseen arguments?

As I tried to show was that your statement was categorically untrue.

This statement?

"Political correctness is a pejorative bludgeon that conservative bullies have abused for decades"

If some liberals have used the term, conservatives couldn't have bullied liberals with the same term? That's a non sequitur.

The fact that they are deceased or of a different country than yours says absolutely nothing of their arguments, but instead proves fallacy is your only way out of talking about it.

We're experiencing a serious breakdown in communication I'm afraid. I wasn't trying to find a way out of talking about anything.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
Unlike your groundbreaking treatise on political correctness, filled with unique observations and heretofore unseen arguments?

Sure missed you in this party:
Political Correctness is Politically inCorrect!

originally posted by: theantediluvian
We're experiencing a serious breakdown in communication I'm afraid. I wasn't trying to find a way out of talking about anything.

Uh huh.

PC is totally brought to it's current level of debauchery by social media. Instead of people setting their own bars on what is acceptable speak, and what is not, most people now let the opinionated swirls in social media dictate how they set those bars. They borrow more of the ideals of others.

Independence is needed.

a reply to: charlyv

Yep. The Tech Giant's, like the Big 6 Media, all need to be busted up ala Ma Bell. And they should do like journalism is supposed to, like all other businesses do if they're smart, keep their own personal politics out of their company mantra and let people be who they are.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Well, apparently it’s a “cudgel” liberals use also, nor do you take into account all the dead and foreign conservatives who have been speaking about it for in decades. That’s reserved for a certain class of thinkers.

I’m fairly certain I didn’t bring up liberal or conservative, left or right, either way. That’s your own doing. It appears almost instinctual.

No, you’re good at repeating verbatim the arguments of your ideological handlers, while as for confronting the arguments, you have done very little.

I'm anti-PC just because that's how I rather be. I don't like walking on eggshells to protect everybody's feelings. I was never coddled, so why should I coddle others?

Obviously I don't take it to extremes, but I'm pretty anti-PC about a lot of S#

sticks and stones ya know?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So ... folks should emulate you and make fallaciously general statements, offer no evidence or background supporting those statements, and expect them to be accepted as holy writ?

Nah. You are regularly confronted here by contrasting or disuputive evidence, and your only tactic deployed in your posts is to either dismiss that evidence out of hand, to attempt to castigate the one providing the evidence, or a simpering combination of both.

What we call political correctness at this stage is very little more than empty perjorative rhetoric.

All “political” sides have words and meanings that are acceptable to their outlook and those that aren’t.

As it happens, in the beginning of attention to such things, the effort was meant to make us aware of the suppositions and automatic assumptions that some speech portrays thus allowing us to become aware of our own prejudices and stereotypical thinking.

At this point, PC is merely another slur, usually out of context, almost always self-contradictory.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So ... folks should emulate you and make fallaciously general statements, offer no evidence or background supporting those statements, and expect them to be accepted as holy writ?

Nah. You are regularly confronted here by contrasting or disuputive evidence, and your only tactic deployed in your posts is to either dismiss that evidence out of hand, to attempt to castigate the one providing the evidence, or a simpering combination of both.

It looks like you just fabricated a bunch of nonsense without saying how it applies. At this point it’s fairly typical.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
What we call political correctness at this stage is very little more than empty perjorative rhetoric.

All “political” sides have words and meanings that are acceptable to their outlook and those that aren’t.

As it happens, in the beginning of attention to such things, the effort was meant to make us aware of the suppositions and automatic assumptions that some speech portrays thus allowing us to become aware of our own prejudices and stereotypical thinking.

At this point, PC is merely another slur, usually out of context, almost always self-contradictory.

As I stated earlier to someone who made the same comment, obviously parroted, is that there are plenty of instances of folks on both sides calling out the politically correct. What you’re parroting is absolutely false.

I hate the term "PC". It's too broad a term. Manners is PC? Or is it labeled PC because some don't want to use manners in their digital life? Nothing wrong with manners. I've seen you say that yourself. So what exactly is PC then? That "chief" thing in Toronto I would consider PC. That's when things get taken too far. Too seriously.

a reply to: intrepid

Many people try to pass off PC as manners. For instance, there was a plug-in you could add to your browser that changed the word Political Correctness to “treating people with respect”. It’s nonsense.

Political Correctness is a form of intolerance and censorship. Conservative George Carlin, of course, explains it better.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Oh I understand and agree. I think I disagreed with Carlin once in the 40+ years I've listened to him. It's some that confused the two. A lack of manners isn't a fight against PC.

Perhaps the simplest explanation is when (tribalist) ideology is the guiding hand in shaping and molding the "politeness". There's decency, and then there's mind control. Because that's what it is after all; mind control isnt inherently brain implants or microwave beams, its hardcore indoctrination / brainwashing over existing indoctrination poised to keep people thinking and not thinking in specific ways to perpetuate / maintain a ideological stranglehold over the subjects / population.

Perhaps the best one ever is this hate speech trend, where everything that we dont like gets conflated as "HATE SPEECH" and then that should STOMP that idea out of the minds eye of the populace.

originally posted by: Kali74

Please explain how I am oppressing anyone if I choose the word disabled over crippled. Hasn't it always been this way as well? The way we speak in 'polite society' is different than how we speak with our friends.

No it hasn't always been that way ..... when I was growing up (probably long before

your time) 'disabled' didnt exist, the word used commonly was crippled..... and '

blind' was not as used now, 'visually impaired'

The words were used without malice, just descriptive of a condition.


There are many words from my childhood now taboo but when used then people

weren't so thin skinned and easy to take offence.


All the words mean the same so why are some considered offensive and others not


Edit to add *Gay* has always meant happy to me .....However did happen

a reply to: eletheia

I wasn't talking about specific words. Just that we talk different ways at different times. The way we speak at home is usually different than how we speak if we go out to dinner, or in Church, at a formal party, at work etc...

All the words mean the same so why are some considered offensive and others not

I don't know. Why would anyone be offended by visually impaired?

originally posted by: Kali74


I don't know. Why would anyone be offended by visually impaired?

I think you missed my point? .... apparently the offensive word is *blind*

so now it is required to say *visually impaired.*


I wonder if a blind person really is offended by the word *blind*


Whats in a word anyway?..... they both cover the same condition.....

Who is responsible for turning black and white into grey?

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: Kali74


I don't know. Why would anyone be offended by visually impaired?

I think you missed my point? .... apparently the offensive word is *blind*

so now it is required to say *visually impaired.*


I wonder if a blind person really is offended by the word *blind*

Whats in a word anyway?..... they both cover the same condition.....

Who is responsible for turning black and white into grey?

Are you offended by the word "stupid"

It's always been grey....

a reply to: eletheia

I didn't miss your point. I answered and reversed the question.

a reply to: Bluesma

Until it is used as tool for linguistic manipulation, having gone WAY too far...