Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Are you worried about Political Correctness?

Page 4 of 7 [ 112 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Are you worried?
Yes! It's eroding freedom of speech! 58%  58%  [ 38 ]
No! 28%  28%  [ 18 ]
Not sure 5%  5%  [ 3 ]
Other 9%  9%  [ 6 ]
Total votes : 65

Cyanide
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,003
Location: The Pacific Northwest

11 Dec 2007, 12:31 am

monty wrote:
The_Chosen_One wrote:
It's all fecking BS anyway, because how can anything political be correct? Seriously, what's wrong with terms like cripple, spastic, manhole, black... They are WORDS for feck's sake, and WORDS CANNOT DO ANY PHYSICAL DAMAGE! Oh, and before someone says 'what about the mental anguish?' well, maybe if all these so-called PC idiots had a good long look at themselves, then they'd realise that if anyone gets upset over what is said has far deeper issues with life or whatever and maybe they should take a step back and get a reality check.

I mean, having to change Christmas because some other group gets offended. Grow up!! Changing Noddy and Enid Blyton stories because golliwogs were found to be racist. Grow the feck up!! People getting their arse kicked for voicing their opinion in whatever means and not being 'PC'. Grow up!! It's all just WORDS!!

So to sum it all up, no, I'm not worried about political correctness, because anyone who tries to bastardize the language just because of feelings needs to take a few valium and have a good lie down. Insanity at it's worst.


Don't get so upset about this so-called PC stuff ... its just words!

Yeah, they're just words!....that are slowly being forced upon us.



Cyanide
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,003
Location: The Pacific Northwest

11 Dec 2007, 12:32 am

Anubis wrote:
The thing is, spastic, ret*d and all, are considered insulting, and lower the self-esteem and worth of disabled people, persecutes them for that which they have no control over. That, in what I consider a modern, civilized, and educated society, is unacceptable. Using the words as strictly MEDICAL terms is ok, but they are considered as insulting by the general public, and should be used sparingly, only at the people who really deserve derogotary comments regarding their intelligence and mental competence, and have brought it upon themselves through choice and lifestyle.

Mentally disabled, physically disabled and so on are appropriate terms, and are not directly insulting, but at the same time true.

A person with no legs is physically disabled, a Down's Syndrome sufferer is mentally disabled. There are things that these people, in reality, cannot do. No matter how much you pump them up with political steroids, their condition will remain the same, and respect, dignity, and understanding is all that should be asked. Not unrealistic expectations.


You can't get rid of insults. Insults will always be around. Insults exist for every type of person. If you ban the current insults, new ones will take their place. Banning words stops nothing.



ion
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 476
Location: Sweden

11 Dec 2007, 1:48 am

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWGIaIjs1hc[/youtube]


_________________
Nae king! Nae quin! Nae laird! Nae master! We willnae be fooled again!


Anubis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 136
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,911
Location: Mount Herculaneum/England

11 Dec 2007, 3:31 am

Cyanide wrote:
Anubis wrote:
The thing is, spastic, ret*d and all, are considered insulting, and lower the self-esteem and worth of disabled people, persecutes them for that which they have no control over. That, in what I consider a modern, civilized, and educated society, is unacceptable. Using the words as strictly MEDICAL terms is ok, but they are considered as insulting by the general public, and should be used sparingly, only at the people who really deserve derogotary comments regarding their intelligence and mental competence, and have brought it upon themselves through choice and lifestyle.

Mentally disabled, physically disabled and so on are appropriate terms, and are not directly insulting, but at the same time true.

A person with no legs is physically disabled, a Down's Syndrome sufferer is mentally disabled. There are things that these people, in reality, cannot do. No matter how much you pump them up with political steroids, their condition will remain the same, and respect, dignity, and understanding is all that should be asked. Not unrealistic expectations.


You can't get rid of insults. Insults will always be around. Insults exist for every type of person. If you ban the current insults, new ones will take their place. Banning words stops nothing.


Of course you can't get rid of insults, but at the same time, civilized, educated people should know not to use such derogratory insults against people who are clinically disabled.


_________________
Lalalalai.... I'll cut you up!


ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

11 Dec 2007, 3:51 am

Cyanide wrote:
Yeah, they're just words!....that are slowly being forced upon us.

In the UK using the wrong words can get you locked up. Even if they don't get you locked up longterm, you could be investigated by Gordon's gestapo.

The people responsible for that are the enemy, as much as any muslim extremist.



Adrie
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 464
Location: California/England

11 Dec 2007, 8:42 am

snake321 wrote:
it also puts minorities on a pedestal to where if you question anything they do, or hold them to the same expectations as you would anyone else, your "racist" or "sexist". I find it less racist for race to be a non-factor honestly. PC shows theyr trying too hard to gain their approval to the point of sucking up to them (those it is supposed to represent), rather than just treating them as true equals worthy of understanding.

That's a good point. I do try to be politically correct; I really believe it's a good thing, as long as it's not taken too far. But your point makes sense - the better thing would be for race not to be factored into the language at all. The problem is that it's too late for that, and I doubt it will ever change...



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

11 Dec 2007, 12:10 pm

snake321 wrote:
Well that's the funny thing with the PC idiots, only ***certain*** minority groups are beyond question, theyr pet groups. Ethnic minorities, females, and bisexuals. But what about Jews? What about disabled people? I mean to this day the disabled are still openly scorned, degraded, stereotyped and stigmatized on a societal-wide level. That alone is a huge gulp of hypocracy.

Sure, they'll get angry about terminology sometimes when dealing with disabled people but even those people tend to treat the disabled as more of charity cases or "forever children" than as regular, normal human beings.


I have never heard of a PC person out dissing Jews or the disabled. The disabled are still widely dissed, but not because of the PC movement. In fact the one time I remember seeing someone get angry over words (not sure it was PC per se) was when some teenager refer to something he didn't like as ret*d. A nearby adult let that punk have a piece of his mind. Was it PC, or was the adult just sensitive because his sibling or his offspring or his friend was mentally disabled?



Anubis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 136
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,911
Location: Mount Herculaneum/England

11 Dec 2007, 12:40 pm

"Few are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censur of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world that yields most painfully to change. And I believe that in this generation those with the courage to enter the moral conflict will find themselves with companions in every corner of the globe." JFK


_________________
Lalalalai.... I'll cut you up!


ion
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 476
Location: Sweden

11 Dec 2007, 3:48 pm

monty wrote:
In fact the one time I remember seeing someone get angry over words (not sure it was PC per se) was when some teenager refer to something he didn't like as ret*d. A nearby adult let that punk have a piece of his mind. Was it PC, or was the adult just sensitive because his sibling or his offspring or his friend was mentally disabled?


Maybe what the kid spoke about was indeed ret*d?
ret*d means to hold back, and a ret*d is a person who's behind in mental, physical or social development.
That means I'm a ret*d, and most people on this forum as well.
As in the video I posted, I wouldn't mind a world where a white guy says "What's up, n****r?" to a black guy and gets the response "Not much, honkie." and it wouldn't be a big deal.
What's up, ret*ds? :wink:


_________________
Nae king! Nae quin! Nae laird! Nae master! We willnae be fooled again!


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

11 Dec 2007, 4:25 pm

Isn't it politically correct to insult Christianity and politically incorrect to say anything bad about Islam?

Can anyone say, hypocrisy?



snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

11 Dec 2007, 4:40 pm

I'll agree with that, but I also think it's equally hypocritical of Christian right wingers who b***h and wine about people not conforming to their expectations and when non-christians refuse to be subjected to christian laws somehow Christians think THEYR the ones being discriminated... Kinda like "Hey, your discriminating my right to discriminate".
Christians should be able to pray to themselves in school, so should muslims, bushist, jews, or people of any faith, and they should be allowed to pray in groups of people with their same faith, but beyond that religion should not factor into secular laws, there should be no establishment of religion or lack of.



snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

11 Dec 2007, 4:42 pm

I mean if you see something that isn't Christian, and you decide you don't like it, then don't mess with it. If something is on TV of that nature, either turn the channel or turn it off. It's that simple. The WRONG thing to do is have televangelists and picketers rally to attack their freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of religion.



snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

11 Dec 2007, 4:44 pm

But on the same note, this liberal attitude of attacking anything or anyone who is Christian is just as bad. I've heard the PC crowd lets muslims and other beliefs pray, but not Christians. Mind you I'm not a Christian either though.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

11 Dec 2007, 5:09 pm

People have to live themselves their own lives and make their own choices; whether for right or wrong they must make their own decisions.



The_Chosen_One
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,357
Location: Looking down on humanity

11 Dec 2007, 6:43 pm

Which is why people should be able to say what they like (to a certain extent) without all this PC crap coming into it. A perfect example was some idiots complained about a statue of a famous rugby player from country NSW that was located at the local ground (buggered if I remember the name of the town). The guy's nickname was 'n****r' Brown, and it was on the nameplate at the bottom of the statue. His family said he had no objection to the word 'n****r', and the funny thing was, he was ABORIGINAL. Another thing is the teddy bear incident in the Sudan recently. So what if the bear was named Mohammed? Doesn't mean it was an insult to their prophet. Look at how many kids were called Mohammed as a sign of RESPECT to him. So why not a bear for feck's sake? OK, what if I decided to make a whole lot of characters in riot gear and call them Christian soldiers and the leader would be a G I Joe character called Jesus? How could that be blasphemy when a quarter of the kids in Mexico are called Jesus (which is pronounced 'hey-soos')? I s'pose it's all in the interpretation, but being paranoid about terms and ideologies and changing the language just because someone gets upset is making these people out to be even bigger prats than they are. If they have a problem with words like 'n****r, honky, cripple, ret*d, spastic, wop, dago' etc, then they can either ignore them or come up with better insults themselves. Terms like 'diffable' and 'racially challenged' are just BS dumbed-down terms made up because these afore-mentioned prats couldn't handle the fact that the English language IS a vulgar language in respect of a lot of the words used, and they just can't come to grips with it. So as I said before, maybe these PC nuts should take a valium and have a good lie down before whinging about a few words.


_________________
Pagans are people too, not just victims of a religious cleansing program. Universal harmony for all!!

Karma decides what must happen, and that includes everyone.


snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

11 Dec 2007, 8:55 pm

Well I do think people should try to respect one another's cultures, but it's not necessary to go the PC route and assume minorities are always right just because their minorities either.