Political Correctness: A Blessing or A Curse?

[Grey Wind]

Really? Because I see a bunch of radical feminists spewing **** like #killallmen. I'd still defend them even if they were being charged, such as Bahar Mustafa. It's still their freedom of speech, and if it is a private Facebook and not a public one it shouldn't matter until it leaks into the public one and they start spouting hate speech.

What does this have to do with what I said or the discussion at hand? I know that radical people exist. Just because an idea can be taken too far doesn't mean that a healthy medium can't be found.

It is a majority. Just look at any college in America. You will have a majority of idiotic college students who don't want to here other peoples opinions, claim that x is privileged when they are themselves privileged, and other holier-than-thou ****.

So... young adults can be pretentious? Again, you're blowing things out of proportion, and again, I don't really see the relevance of this.

The idea of safe spaces are to save our idiot college students from other opinions because they don't feel like wanting to listen to them.

Um... no?

A "safe space":

A place where anyone can relax and be fully self-expressed, without fear of being made to feel uncomfortable, unwelcome or challenged on account of biological sex, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, cultural background, age, or physical or mental ability; a place where the rules guard each person's self-respect, dignity and feelings.

It's literally just a group where people who face discrimination can go to be sure of being treated with respect. I don't understand your problem and I think, again, you're jumping to conclusions about something you don't actually know that much about.

So you don't find it a problem for not stating facts such as America is the land of opportunity? I find this idiotic that you would be pro-censorship over this kind of phrase.

I already told you I thought it was over the top. I think the general idea is a good one, though, regardless of some of the weirder parts. Like I said in my first post in this thread, I know that there are cases of people going to far with political correctness. That doesn't make it a bad idea.

If I have no place, then why do the neo-Progressives think they have a place to be offended for other people? Clearly that is illogical. Again, we can ignore and use block buttons if they're just spouting racist/sexist ****. If they're doing bigoted actions, spewing hate speech, or discriminating people (such as denying someone a job based on sex), then they should be fired.

What? This is so exhausting. You change what you're arguing every time you reply. What relevance do "neo-progressives who think they have a place to be offended for other people" have and when did I mention them? We were talking about the effect words (slurs or generally bigoted statements) can have on marginalized groups, not whatever "neo progressives" you've decided to complain about. Also, what is "being offended for other people"? Just because I'm white doesn't mean I'm going to ignore someone when they're being blatantly racist. Yeah, people can get self righteous about being progressive but like... "some people are annoying" isn't a new concept and doesn't have anything to do with political correctness being a bad idea or not.

My point was the bigoted statements/actions aren't something that we should be taking lightly, and that "just toughen up" is a dumb thing to say, especially if you have never been targeted for your race/sexuality/whathaveyou. Obviously you can block people who harass you online, but these things don't always come from internet trolls. You can't just block friends and family who are bigoted towards you (which is where political correctness comes in - people should know better than to make those kinds of comments).

I wanna quote Psychic here because I think this applies to you:

A lot of people don't benefit from political correctness, so it's unsurprising that they're the ones who push back against it the most

You've pretty continuously made little of the effect of discrimination and bigotry in favour of complaining about where your problems are, radical internet progressives. You think the cons outweigh the pros because the pros rarely affect you.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

What does this have to do with what I said or the discussion at hand? I know that radical people exist. Just because an idea can be taken too far doesn't mean that a healthy medium can't be found.

Honestly, after some reflection, I realized how close to the extremists that I describe I really am (in political theory; see the Horseshoe Theory). While I still necessarily don't agree with political correctness, maybe it was a overstatement for me trying to make it a black and white issue.

 

[«Chuckles»]

I think Political Correctness has definitely gone too far, but I really only believe that because of my sense of humour. I guess the times are changing and not all people want to hear what's being said. I hear a lot of oldies criticize it. If it's people going soft or something I don't know but I think sheltering people as well can sometimes have some bad effects on people later on in life because we aren't all the same and some people don't have that filter that others do.

Also I'd like to add my 10 cents and say that you can't have free speech with hate speech laws. I'm a firm believer in freedom of speech and that it should be the most important civil right.

 

[Crystal Berry]

There's a line between exercising your free speech and just being for lack of a better word, a nasty person. There's also a line between being being offended by something offensive, and being offended by everything. Basically what I'm trying to say is that there's an extreme on both sides so I'm not entirely for or against political correctness.

My problem with political correctness is that I'm for the most part against unnecessary forms of censorship. If someone says something truly offensive it's usually not going to be tolerated regardless of rather or not rules are put in place to prevent them from happening. Basically I believe that as long as you're a decent person there shouldn't really be a problem. Here's a really bad analogy. Think about a firewall. You can run two firewalls, but you only need one, and running multiple firewalls can cause a conflict. Free speech is pretty similar. I know there are people who disagree with me, but I generally support free speech because I know that if someone crosses the line there will usually be consequences. This doesn't mean I'm completely against censorship. In some circumstances I do believe censorship is necessary. I believe some words are very hurtful and the usage of these words should be as minimized as possible for legitimate reasons. I just don't find it necessary to ban everything deemed as offensive because of what it can lead to in the long run.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

I think Political Correctness has definitely gone too far, but I really only believe that because of my sense of humour. I guess the times are changing and not all people want to hear what's being said. I hear a lot of oldies criticize it. If it's people going soft or something I don't know but I think sheltering people as well can sometimes have some bad effects on people later on in life because we aren't all the same and some people don't have that filter that others do.

Also I'd like to add my 10 cents and say that you can't have free speech with hate speech laws. I'm a firm believer in freedom of speech and that it should be the most important civil right.

Now don't get me wrong, I'd defend Bahar Mustafa's hateful racial comments for the sake of Freedom of Speech, but I wouldn't defend hate speech such as a bunch of Stormfronters on /b/ or /pol/ posting for the need for some sort of genocide. People like that who make posts or speeches that incite violence should be jailed and rightfully so.

Now, the reason why I criticize it are the extremists (which are probably a minority) and the fact that it along with safe spaces could make people soft. Mentally or emotionally weak individuals fall prey to the unchangeable psychopath, who seems to be more and more prevalent in the world now (such as politics, corporations, the professional victims, etc) who would use them. It's the main reason why I think it's unneeded.

 

[Juno]

Okay, I only read the first page of this and skimmed a bit of the second, and I'm sorry if this has already been pointed out but

Focusing on just the extremists doesn't make your point right. Your original point argues that political correctness is inherently bad and wrong, yet you've already admitted in your response to Psychic that it's good when it's not extreme (beneficial sometimes, even), so what are you really trying to say? You can argue anything is bad if you focus on the extremists of that group.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

Okay, I only read the first page of this and skimmed a bit of the second, and I'm sorry if this has already been pointed out but

Focusing on just the extremists doesn't make your point right. Your original point argues that political correctness is inherently bad and wrong, yet you've already admitted in your response to Psychic that it's good when it's not extreme (beneficial sometimes, even), so what are you really trying to say? You can argue anything is bad if you focus on the extremists of that group.

Did you miss the post where I pointed out I was being hypocritical per the Horseshoe Theory in political science? I was literally just going at it earlier like a belligerent extremist similarly to the very extremists I was trying to say were a majority in political correctness. Comparable, even. Just without the constant barrage of name-calling instead of actual logic, instead just finger-pointing and the likes. I just personally don't like it because I'm frankly tired of seeing it.

 

[Juno]

Did you miss the post where I pointed out I was being hypocritical per the Horseshoe Theory in political science? I was literally just going at it earlier like a belligerent extremist similarly to the very extremists I was trying to say were a majority in political correctness. Comparable, even. Just without the constant barrage of name-calling instead of actual logic, instead just finger-pointing and the likes. I just personally don't like it because I'm frankly tired of seeing it.

Probably, I did say I didn't finish reading the entire thread since I'd seen enough of said belligerent posts to make me not want to. The point of the opening post is to outline the rest of the discussion, so naturally I responded with that in mind, but glad that's settled.

 

[zakisrage]

Political correctness is a danger to society. Nowadays, it seems like people get offended over everything. I'm personally disgusted by the SJWs patronising attitude towards minorities, treating them as being unable to speak up for themselves. The thing is, SJWs treat minorities as a collective, not as individuals. For example, individual Muslims might have differing opinions on something related to their religion, but that doesn't matter to the SJWs - they think we're all one group. For example, I'm fine with non-Muslims eating pork and drinking alcohol - plenty of my non-Muslim friends do both. I find the idea of schools banning pork to avoid offending us ridiculous. We acknowledge that most Australians/Americans/British/etc. have a different culture from us and don't expect them to do everything like us.

 

[User Anon 1848]

To me a PC extremist is someone who will use their moral outrage as an excuse to justify doxing, harassing or bullying/cyberbullying someone. They are by far the worst offenders but they're not the only part of the problem.

There are also a portion of politically correct people who don't act as maliciously as extremists do but they will still try to shame others for making jokes they deem offensive, or try to prevent certain content and art from being allowed on the free market based on their own sensibilities, or those who indignantly call for an apology and or firing of someone for basically the same reasons. They aren't content with simply not laughing at a joke they find distasteful, or not supporting a game, show or person that has offended them somehow. Instead they will rally in groups in order to censor and reprimand them until they either move onto the next online rally or actually manage to get whatever form of censorship they were looking for.

I'm sure that the aforementioned portions of politically correct people don't make up the majority, but even a toxic minority of an otherwise noble movement can be cancerous for society. Which is unfortunate not only for freedom of speech and expression, but also because there are plenty of politically correct people who don't act militant about their views or sensibilities at all yet still get a bad wrap. As it's been said political correctness in moderation would probably make society a whole lot better.

 

[Crizzle]

Sometimes political correctness is appropriate. Most of the time it isn't.

 

[Thepowaofhax]

Political correctness is a danger to society. Nowadays, it seems like people get offended over everything. I'm personally disgusted by the SJWs patronising attitude towards minorities, treating them as being unable to speak up for themselves. The thing is, SJWs treat minorities as a collective, not as individuals. For example, individual Muslims might have differing opinions on something related to their religion, but that doesn't matter to the SJWs - they think we're all one group. For example, I'm fine with non-Muslims eating pork and drinking alcohol - plenty of my non-Muslim friends do both. I find the idea of schools banning pork to avoid offending us ridiculous. We acknowledge that most Australians/Americans/British/etc. have a different culture from us and don't expect them to do everything like us.

Social Collectivism is what you get with any any highly authoritarian government, whether it be Right-wing, Left-wing or Centrist. Most SJWs tend to be harbored in Left-wing totalitarianism, which also contains some very psychotic people. They also drown out legitimate voices with their hogwash, which is probably why earlier in the thread I thought the majority were extremists (or, at the very minimum, a figurative lynch mob), and as you said, patronize said groups they claim to be "helping". We're most likely dealing with a silent majority, which is not an ideal thing for such toxic extremists. Radicals of movements can easily corrupt others, especially in silent majorities that aren't trying to deal with them.

Now, when should political correctness be used is the question. Should we let comedy feel the wrath of it, etc. Honestly, to me political correctness only fits in social etiquette and not anything else from it's premise, and not other things such as works of art, political speeches unless said speeches incite violence/prejudicial action towards any malefactor groups/individuals (for example, Jews in Nazi Germany. This would probably require the extreme end of it due to this being the definition of hate speech), etc.

 

[shadowmoon522]

words don't have any power until people give them power.
take "gay" for example
it started off as the french word gai which means cheerful, joyful, bright & showy back in the 12 hundreds
by the 17 hundreds it got the definition "addicted to pleasures and dissipations" and was used towards ♀prostitutes & ♂womanizers it wasn't til the 20th century that it started to get used & aimed at homosexual people and eventually degraded into an full out insult on gay people and has slowly degraded into a catigorization over the past couple decades
additionally, i should also note that cursing after doing something like stubbing your foot deceases the pain as it helps distract the mind from it.
praying helps with various issues.
screaming & complaining release stress.
its all power given to the words by people.

 

[21stCenturyDelphox]

IMO, political correctness is fine in some circumstances but nowadays, it's getting out of hand and is just as bad as censorship. Today's society is too scared to "poke fun" at certain events (whether it's comedians or politicians taking the piss), because it might offend a minority. Yes, I agree that "ghetto" terms to describe certain people are morally and socially wrong to use but, people take this too far because some people are offended by anything.

One prime example of this is swearing on tv. On British tv, if someone even mentions the f-word, they have apologize deeply and this was on a politics programme. I mean a 6 year old child is going to see that and start effing and blinding to his/her parents. Seriously, PC is infectious and it even is ruining our very culture. I remember a year ago, Kanye West was performing on the Brit Awards, and most of his songs is filled with profanity but anyway, every single swear was censored because it might offend someone whiny opinionated SJW. Personally I don't rate his music, yet our society is so hell bent on destroying art, destroying the freedom to express feelings and ideas through music.

 

[Psychic]

One prime example of this is swearing on tv. On British tv, if someone even mentions the f-word, they have apologize deeply and this was on a politics programme. I mean a 6 year old child is going to see that and start effing and blinding to his/her parents. Seriously, PC is infectious and it even is ruining our very culture. I remember a year ago, Kanye West was performing on the Brit Awards, and most of his songs is filled with profanity but anyway, every single swear was censored because it might offend someone whiny opinionated SJW. Personally I don't rate his music, yet our society is so hell bent on destroying art, destroying the freedom to express feelings and ideas through music.

Are you serious? TV censorship has pretty much existed since TV became popular. In North America, these laws have existed since the 1950's, long before even the idea of political correctness existed, and it was still perfectly okay to use all kinds of slurs we now deem offensive. Obscenity laws were pushed by religious folks and families, basically the opposite of what we associate with SJWs today. Also, political correctness focuses on slurs, not general profanity.

I know it's nice and easy to blame "crazy SJWs" for everything, but you should honestly do some basic research before making claims like this.

~Psychic

 

[Thepowaofhax]

Are you serious? TV censorship has pretty much existed since TV became popular. In North America, these laws have existed since the 1950's, long before even the idea of political correctness existed, and it was still perfectly okay to use all kinds of slurs we now deem offensive. Obscenity laws were pushed by religious folks and families, basically the opposite of what we associate with SJWs today. Also, political correctness focuses on slurs, not general profanity.
~Psychic

I can understand TV (except for adult programs), but do we really need to bleep a word every five seconds for a song because it happens to have swearing? That's nothing but a butchering of what it originally is; we shouldn't have to censor music that was originally meant for adults just because a 6 year old listens to it. It is the family's responsibility whether their child should listen to that or not.

 

[Psychic]

I can understand TV (except for adult programs), but do we really need to bleep a word every five seconds for a song because it happens to have swearing? That's nothing but a butchering of what it originally is; we shouldn't have to censor music that was originally meant for adults just because a 6 year old listens to it. It is the family's responsibility whether their child should listen to that or not.

I'm not sure why you're bringing this up in a thread about political correctness, or what you expect me to tell you. I don't have any strong feelings about obscenity laws and am not about to defend them. If you want more excuses to be outraged, you can read this list of rock and roll songs that have been censored and banned throughout the years or the censorship attempts by the Parents' Music Resource Center, which even went to the Senate.

Again, none of this is about political correctness. If you want to continue discussing censorship and obscenity laws, I'd suggest starting a new thread, as this is getting off-topic.

~Psychic

 

[gimmepie]

Let's try and keep things on topic guys, we're starting to stray a little bit. If you want to discuss media censorship then you should open a thread about it.

 

[Chicken Fingers]

As much as I would like to read the first two pages, I lack the time.

so tl;dr

However, I agree with many on this. Or the general idea of many that is. People talking about SJWs and stuff, (things people know about) it makes more sense to put it into everyday life.

For example, I was at school the other day.

We were talking about some president in history and about how he tried to give black people rights. We were working in groups of 4 and I verbalized it something like, "He tried to give black people more rights."

Two girls in my group, both gave me a weird look and said that I should say African American. I told them no. I said they are black and there is nothing wrong with saying that.

I have more examples, but I don't feel like typing that much.

Nowadays, the views of people on political correctness is distorted. It has turned from common courtesy, into a bar on language due to fear of being ridiculed.

I have actually said things at school that people look at me for and I just look back at them, similar to the example I gave. Never being rude or attacking anybody, but simple things.

So much I'd like to expand on, but no time. I'll try to be back to respond back to people though!

(Good thing cuz I'd probably end up trailing off into my thoughts on racicism and things of the like)

 

[Darklordbambi]

To me I feel like it's crossed a barrier from common sense and being polite into a territory of looking to make the world cater to us in a very pretentious manner. To me it's sort of a deviation from the social progressive movement that's gone from "live and let live and respect everyone" to "we need to push morality onto people to the fullest extent we can manage." It's become sort of a modern equivalent to the old 80's and 90's conservative soccer-mom movement that was complaining about drugs, sex, violence, profanity, and anything that didn't conform to the conservative Judeo-Christian ideology of how society should look. Instead, we've developed a society where the balance between the right to emotional safety is trumping the right to freedom of speech to some people, to where polls have people wanting even the government to intervene in what may be considered offensive speech. To me, that was where I started to see a distortion of what social progression is supposed to be about, freedom and acceptance, being turned into a movement of forcing an ideology onto others. To me I fear these ideas of safe speech are in some cases being radicalized and threatening free speech itself, and how can speech be safe if it isn't free? It scares me and reminds me of "free speech zone" cages they sometimes put protesters in near government buildings. That's just my take on it, however.