Political correctness

What are your thoughts on people having to watch what they say out loud so they can be politically correct?

Do you feel that people are just being too sensitive about "offensive" jokes or remarks or do you believe that people should be a lot more considerate about the things that they say?

For me, I believe that people are just being too sensitive. If we hold back our thoughts, then we are living in a world of lies of fake smiles and kindness. We all have some unpopular opinions that when said out loud, will cause people to turn heads with disgusted faces. It happened to me in my English class yesterday. My friend was looking up articles for her research paper about drunk driving and the articles were all from Ireland. I crack a joke about Irish drinking and then my English professor is at my throat lecturing me about how I am politically incorrect and to avoid being called a racist. I ignored her and carried on and only 1 other student said that it was a stereotype. I agree, it can come off as rude if people want to believe it was rude. I was joking and I shouldn't be taken seriously yet some people are just too sensitive while other people in my class took absolute no offense to it. Who knows, maybe my professor is Irish and didn't enjoy the remark. My bad, I'm human. I'm no saint and I make mistakes. I shouldn't be judged.

It seems we have to watch out about what we say when we refer to those who are mentally ill, or handicap, or very short, etc. Or even watching our words about stereotypes. It's something I have to put up with especially if I want to be employed. I guess I just have to suck it up and put up with sensitivity to other people's emotions.

The national origin and phenotype used to classify racial identities are dubious. I wish there was more uniformity.

For instance, would an "African-American" be an African-African (African-South African) or an American-African (American-South African) if moving to an African nation?

National Origins and race/ethnicity are convoluted, and therefore makes identity and the use of correct terminology difficult and inconsistent.

"Asian-American", the "Asian" component is now used as a phenotypic indicator of fair skin and almond eyes. An Asian person may be from South Korea or Indonesia with different cultures or "ethnicity", yet have similar phenotypic indicators we percieve as "Asian".

It's difficult to hold people to any standards since, well, there isn't a good system of terminology.

I think it's incredibly important to be able to differentiate between when it's appropriate and when it's not appropriate to be politically correct. it depends on many factors.

I think couching something as "politically correct" is a way to distance people from what's actually happening when someone speaks out against something said or done - they're hurting people. They're not being politically incorrect, they're casually hurting people for the sake of a joke. By making it about politics and not about the person who screwed up the courage to mention something to them (and trust me, for the vast majority of people who talk about this it is incredibly hard because there are social consequences), they make it seem like it's this abstract thing and they get to ignore that what they're being told is "this is hurtful, if you care about me as a person please stop saying it because it is hurting me and/or someone I care about." When I was in middle school, my best friend had a small chest. Once I cracked a joke about it - I think it was something dumb like we misheard our teacher saying 'test' as 'chest' and mentioned she didn't have one. She got very upset and told me that her having a small chest was a sore spot for her, and even though I didn't see it as a negative thing and joked about it the same way I would joke about how short she was, she was very hurt by me teasing her about it. Then I stopped, because why would I want to hurt someone for a laugh? Why would I find something funny, knowing that as I made that joke I'm hurting someone I care about?

If someone punched me in the arm jokingly and tears sprung to my eyes because it hurt me, that person would be rushing to apologize because they didn't want to hurt me and even if that punch doesn't normally hurt people, they can see that it hurt me and saying 'well it shouldn't have hurt you' won't remove the pain so an apology is in order. But we don't do this for emotions; if someone is more sensitive to jokes about how all women are mentally ill, the person making the joke laughs at their sensitivity and tells them they're wrong and they need to toughen up and learn to take a joke and they don't deserve an apology because their intention was to make a joke, not hurt.

So I don't have a problem watching what I say, because I care about people as a whole and if people are telling me that they're being hurt by what I say then I'll make an effort not to say those things anymore. I find it baffling when people stand up for their right to say whatever they want, at the expense of everyone else, because it's so self-centered. Sure, you have the right to say what you want. You are physically capable of it and in most instances won't result in legal consequences. That doesn't mean that it's the kind or thoughtful thing to do, and it doesn't make someone a good person for taking advantage of it to hurt other people.

Oryx said:

I find it baffling when people stand up for their right to say whatever they want, at the expense of everyone else, because it's so self-centered. Sure, you have the right to say what you want. You are physically capable of it and in most instances won't result in legal consequences. That doesn't mean that it's the kind or thoughtful thing to do, and it doesn't make someone a good person for taking advantage of it to hurt other people.

Click to expand...

You're right about that one. I am able to say what I'd like but I guess there should be a limit if I learn that it hurt someone. (I can't know if it hurts till I try it y'know lol).
Guess I was caught up in the moment of anger of having my professor lecturing me in front of everyone, causing a scene and all. It would have been better had she spoken to me after the class ended so that I wouldn't be plagued by other students for joke that unintentionally hurt someone.

There is a difference between making fun of a stereotype and perpetuating one. Humor and sarcasm can be a tension-reducing exchange. We see comedians of all colors, physical features, sexual orientation, ect. on stage, movies, and television addressing stereotypes with sarcasm and intent of showing the idiocy the stereotype.

In addressing humor and political correctness some parties indulge in Perpetuating Stereotypes and others indulge in Self-Victimization (which necessarily means there is an offender, in some cases in which there is no offender).

For instance, making light about a person's body, as used in an example above isn't making fun of a stereotype it's literally pointing out a deviation from the conventionally "ideal" sexual characteristic.

The teacher example, however, by placing a social punishment on the OP, by publicly and openly expressing her offense rather than pulling him to the side, demonstrates that the teacher was not only closing the dialogue (which she may have been justified in doing depending upon the remarks), but she also had retributive intent. Her actions go beyond expressing hurt feelings, which is extremely unprofessional and causes more conflict than need be.

Now, I didn't hear the remark(s), so beyond that, I cannot say whether one or both parties failed in having an amicable exchange, but it's certainly not the case, opposite of what is insinuated in another post, that any and all sensitivity and actions out of that sensitivity are justifiable.


Beyond the topic of humor,

Another example is of Raven Simone and Oprah. Simone stated that she doesn't identify as an African-American, she is divorced from her African heritage, culture, and attachment of any sort. Rather, she identifies as American. Oprah took offense and race-baited the situation by stating, people on twitter would (and should be) be offended, which didn't predict, but rather caused, a flame war on Twitter in response to Raven Simone's expression of identity.

Oprah's offense and the way she responded with offense caused a break in productive dialogue, and rather a mixture of condemnation and shaming of Simone as being "ignorant". The same can be said at the individual level, in common day scenarios. Being offended or hurt isn't always innocent or justifiable as a response, such as dialogue hostility.

The Dark Avenger said:

Another example is of Raven Simone and Oprah. Simone stated that she doesn't identify as an African-American, she is divorced from her African heritage, culture, and attachment of any sort. Rather, she identifies as American. Oprah took offense and race-baited the situation by stating, people on twitter would (and should be) be offended, which didn't predict, but rather caused, a flame war on Twitter in response to Raven Simone's expression of identity.

Oprah's offense and the way she responded with offense caused a break in productive dialogue, and rather a mixture of condemnation and shaming of Simone as being "ignorant". The same can be said at the individual level, in common day scenarios. Being offended or hurt isn't always innocent or justifiable as a response, such as dialogue hostility.

Click to expand...

I'd agree with Raven Simone. Africa's a much more different place than the US is, and I think most of us would agree if I argued African-Americans are more American than African, culturally speaking. For one, recent immigrants from Africa have an immigrant identity that Black people who've lived in the States, perhaps for generations, simply don't have.

I think that when people "take offence", it is very easy for them to take a course of action which, like how The Dark Avenger described, shuts down discussion. It introduces a taboo and consequently perpetuates any resentments because the matter of discussion is "off the table", so to speak. The main assumption in this social script, I think, is that the integrity of one's emotional state is more important than having a discussion.

In my opinion it's up to the offended person not to escalate things any further. In all likeliness the person who made the off-colour remark didn't target it at you. Trouble occurs when the person who's offended takes a moral tone and stance and this comes across as a challenge to the person who made the remark. Nobody likes anybody who's on their high horse. In short, if you're offended at something someone else said and take a morally indignant tone, don't be surprised if the offending party lashes out in return.

Limerent said:

Political correctness gone mad- just call them black because that's what they look like. I also find this "Asian American" terminology ridiculous because nationality is overwhelmingly more important. If you have citizenship you are an American regardless of ethnic background, not a sub-category.

Click to expand...

Could you explain what you mean by political correctness gone mad in relation to my post?

When skin color is used as a classification since it's "what they look like", it can cause more confusion. Does black refer to anyone with dark skin? It's hardly logical to place Australian "aborigines" with anyone with African descent, but using the logic of that skin color should define a phenotype, it hardly seems a useful terminology. Should should "Asian" and "White" folks, with fair skin be identified as white? Should a tan child with a parent with dark skin and another parent with fair skin, be classified in the same way with Native American with tan skin?

It's difficult to succinctly describe unique phenotypes, we end up with this mishmash of phenotype, ethnicity/race, and national origin when we construct terminology, and this mixture of these concepts is employed inconsistently, and therefore, holding someone to a standard of labeling a person "correctly" is a bit preposterous.

The same with GLAAD stating that "homosexual" is an offensive term whereas "bisexual" is an appropriate term for sexual orientation. I find that inane. Modern political correctness is subjective when it comes to terminology. Standards of political correctness should only apply if there is at least some standardized/logical terminology.

The point of my post is to point out condemning people for using unintentionally offensive terminology can be futile if there is no coherent standards by which for them to conform. If anything, the post is arguing against political correctness in this instance of terminology, as it exists in modern society.

If anything, I find the backlash to political correctness more irritating than political correctness itself. So many times it's just a cover used by people who can't stand the suggestion that they be held accountable for what they say or do in mixed company, that they actually acknowledge that certain words carry certain implications coming from certain mouths, or that they can't be as offensive as they want to be. It's not so much that political correctness can't get out of control - it can - but one should never have a problem being mindful that people have a right to get offended at things that are actually offensive.

I can't and won't speak for anywhere else, but the USA is a diverse nation that has (to put it very mildly) very rarely handled that diversity well. It's easy for a man to make offensive jokes about women realizing how it actually sounds to them. It's easy for a white person to talk about reverse racism when they make whatever racist jokes without taking into account what that's historically meant for minorities. It's too bad that we can't live in a society where that kind of thing doesn't matter, but we do, and it's the kind of people who I often find complaining about political correctness who made it that way to begin with. They really have no one else to blame but themselves.

It's actually kind of funny. In many ways, people who whine about political correctness (and I'm not singling anyone here out in particular) are the most sensitive of all. At least people who are offended usually have something to be offended about. So many of the complaints about political correctness just boil down to people not wanting to watch what they say or do in public and not caring about why they might have to watch that. Again, this is not to say that people don't get worked up about stupid things. They do, and IMHO many times the people who constantly complain about political correctness fall under that as well.

I don't like political correctness because it rarely actually asks the people who are supposedly in question how they feel about the situation. At work, there's some guys who act in a technically politically incorrect manner regarding homosexuals. We all know they don't hate gay people but they do it for kicks. Some people are offended by it, but none of them are gay, and they don't address the actually gay person in the office (my buddy). We're intensely politically incorrect with each other, calling eachother a multitude of slurs (and having politically incorrect responses to boot) but part of our dynamic as friends is that we understand that it's a parody of actual hatred and that we both would stand up for each other in times where we actually needed it. He's definitely not offended by his coworker's behaviour - he actually thinks it's funny and sometimes joins in the fun.

What's more disturbing is the same people who are offended by this supposedly politically incorrect behaviour also tried to convince same gay guy that conversion therapy is somehow "good" and people "just don't understand themselves". I have had similar run ins with the same individual regarding gender.

Offense is described in context. Words are the least evil, sentences moreso, and paragraphs moreso. People don't have to be politically incorrect to display hatred. The worst things I have ever been told in my life were some of the most politically correct things I've ever been told. I've had a manager compare me with his sister with down syndrome because I have autism, and reduce my hours because he didn't understand me. I've had people completely talk over my experiences because of their own interpretation of how women or whatever should be, coming from other women. It's just. Yeah. Figure out the context, then determine what's wrong.

The only real exception is that if you're doing PR or something, you should usually err on the side of political corrections and inclusion, because you don't know what the audience's boundaries are.

daigonite said:

snip

Click to expand...

It's good that you mention the prospect of having certain behavioural norms imposed on others without really addressing a person who's intimately connected to an issue. I think it's a tough call that people are offended at something because "it's offensive", or "it's politically incorrect": in short, it's something you're "not supposed to say".

Such language is heavily depersonalized - you're not offended because it's a slight to your person, you perceive a slight because "it's offensive". It describes what is ostensibly a personal insult as if it is violating some kind of collective agreement, when that might not be the case. In fact, that a person might say something-or-the-other is offensive presupposes that there is some kind of collective agreement that the offending party has failed to honour, and that presupposition can be perceived as arrogant.

I think it would be a lot better if, in order to express their grievances at what somebody said, "it's offensive to me because..." Then you get a dialogue going.

e.g. Somebody makes a really crude joke regarding my race. "I'm Chinese and that joke was dark as ****. That was overkill."

"What do you mean?" etc etc etc

Maybe the person acknowledges, yeah that definitely was, maybe they refute what I said and say "come on, it wasn't that bad" and the conversation continues. The point in the example is that I am giving the subject something to talk about, instead of just saying it's offensive (therefore you should feel ashamed of yourself and no it's not a matter worth discussing further).

In short, don't be a dick. If somebody is offending you, that's no reason for you to be whiney about it. Approach the issue directly instead of using these really bad terms that depersonalize and distance yourself from the situation. And if the offending party doesn't relent, well, what can you really do yunno? It's the same as any other aspect of life - you wouldn't further aggravate a guy who made fun of your mother, you wouldn't further aggravate a person who's being unruly with their parking, you wouldn't further aggravate a person who knocks into you walking down the sidewalk and is really catty about it when you confront them with it.

As dickish people can be, they don't owe us anything and we shouldn't pretend like it's somehow different when their insult is about one's ethnicity or race.