Abolish political correctness

Post Reply New Topic

I hate The Right and people like Trump, Hungary's Orban and the Polish right wing government, despite the fact that I wrote earlier that I agree with them on some issues, though I disagree with them in regards to their views on abolishing human rights.

However, I also hate The Left for taking the woke movement too far and use political correctness to censor political discussions. Of course black lives matter and people of different genders, skin color, and beliefs should have equal rights and not be bullied or oppressed - as long as they don't force others to change their way of living.

But the political correctness is taken too far, I think.

It's becoming impossible to have a political discussion on various topics because if you word your opinions in just a slight "wrong" way you're in trouble, you get warnings, locked and deleted posts on social media.

I think we need to allow more room for debate on various topics, and I don't think ANY topic should be considered "controversial".

Making a topic "controversial" allows for means of censorship. This is not good for a political discussion.

Please explain if and why you disagree.

---

SMiLes, A Civil Society Requires Order Away From Chaos.

'Political Correctness', Sets Mutually Determined Borders
For What is Order Among Human Beings in Behaviors
of Social Interaction. These Borders Continually Change,

Depending On the Cultures Human Beings Are Part of.

It's Worth Noting That it Requires Healthy Social-Empathic-
Emotional Intelligences to Keep Up With What Culture Demands

For Political Correctness this way. It's Worth Noting, this is one of

the Major Functional Disabilities Associated With the Autism Spectrum.

It Worth Noting That This is Why the Moderators of This Internet Site Exercise
Great Levels of Patience And Assistance With Folks on the Spectrum Who Have

More Difficulties With this;

Such As A Post Title That Speaks
in 'Absolute Terms' of Abolishing
Political Correctness As If Cultures Did

That they Would Fall Apart into Chaos,

Out of the Order of Civility That is Required
For Any Working Civilization. And Yes It's Also

Worth Noting that Specifically, 'the Wrong Planet' is
Not Only A Place For Debate; Yet Additionally, A Place for

Supporting Folks Who Have Been Bullied in Other Places All
Their Life For Being Different. Being Outcast This Way is Difficult,

And May Result in Impacts As severe As Mental Illness, Ranging As Far As Suicide.

Humans Are Social Animals; And the Instinct to Be Part of the Social Group, Evolutionary
Speaking By Instinct is the Difference Between Surviving or Not; The Consequences in
Our Modern Cultures Are Not So Severe With the Aid of Technology; Never the Less,

The Instinct

to Belong

Is Very Strong;

Some of Us Are More Weathered
Warriors of Life With Skin Thick Enough
Almost to Be Skinned; Others Of Us Are

Barely Dog Paddling Almost Below the Ocean
Surface From Drowning Now With More Insult

to Our Integrity

of Being Human;

The Moderators of this Site Have a Very Difficult
Job Balancing The Needs of Those With Thick Skin
Versus The Needs With Those of Thin Skin; So What

This Means is We All Need to Understand the Needs of
Both and Find Some Balance and Indeed That is What Moderation

At Best Offers, A Balance Within A Group of People That Usually Doesn't
Take As Much Effort For What that Will Mean on A Support Site for Folks With Autism.

i Am Not Politically Correct in Much of What i Do With Freedom of Expression As Far as
what is considered Normal In Society; However, i Take Great Care In not Harming Anyone Along the Way;


It's An Art That We All

Flub Up Now And Then;
Never the Less, it is A Huge Gray
Area with Many Colors too that

Never Reasonably Will Be Handled

In Just All or Nothing Ways; And That is
Why the Site Here Has Rules For Folks to
Conform With At Best on Their Own without

Moderation Help; However, Again, Folks On the Autism
Spectrum Often Have Difficulties Seeing the World Through
The Eyes of What Might Harm Others; So Indeed, The Moderators

Here Have a tough Job That We are Fortunate Anyone Volunteers to Do...

If Not For the Moderators
HERE THIS SITE WOULD
BE INTOLERABLE AND GO AWAY...

Thank A Moderator today if you like this place
And
Try to Do things that make them wanna stay

Like Following The Rules And Listening Carefully to What they Have to say...

i Worked at A Military Bowling Center For Almost two Decades With Groups
Of Drunken Sailors Often Ready to Fight Each Other Over Almost Anything

Of Disagreement

When They Got

Drunk Enough;

Indeed i Moderated that
Place Successfully for Almost
Two Decades And Did That As An Administrator,
Manager And Supervisor In Other Areas of Federal
Employment After That; When the Owner of this

Site Asked me to be a Moderator; i Told Him

No As Doing it For A Quarter of A Century WAS ENOUGH.

IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A MODERATOR TO GET ENOUGH AND GO AWAY...

We Don't Have Many Moderators; If We Want this Site to continue, Do
Treat them With ALL Due Respect;

And That Statement
Is General, i Haven't

Seen You Directly
Attacking Any Moderators...

And Indeed You Seem Willing
to Admit it Sometimes When You
Feel You Are Incorrect; That's Kinda
Rare Around Here And Admirable too
When Someone is Willing to Admit They Can Learn SomethIng New.

In the Other thread that You are Part of in the Wrong Planet
Administration Part of the Site, i Suggest You Copy And Paste
That Well Written Twitter Copy of Why 'Transgender' is A REAL THING;

And Gender is Not ONLY BINARY; Even the American Indians Understood
This As They Were Primitive Enough to Have Common Social-Empathic-Emotional

Intelligences to See the Differences As That is Often Lost IN A World of Mechanical Cognition.

i Didn't Have An Opportunity to Provide the Research; Yet That Was Well Done

And In Fact worth

Repeating

Again Here,
Indeed, Just
For 'Record Books'...

"Quote:
Friendly neighborhood biologist here. I see a lot of people are talking about biological sexes and gender right now. Lots of folks make biological sex sex seem really simple. Well, since it’s so simple, let’s find the biological roots, shall we? Let’s talk about sex...[a thread]

If you know a bit about biology you will probably say that biological sex is caused by chromosomes, XX and you’re female, XY and you’re male. This is “chromosomal sex” but is it “biological sex”? Well...

Turns out there is only ONE GENE on the Y chromosome that really matters to sex. It’s called the SRY gene. During human embryonic development the SRY protein turns on male-associated genes. Having an SRY gene makes you “genetically male”. But is this “biological sex”?

Sometimes that SRY gene pops off the Y chromosome and over to an X chromosome. Surprise! So now you’ve got an X with an SRY and a Y without an SRY. What does this mean?

A Y with no SRY means physically you’re female, chromosomally you’re male (XY) and genetically you’re female (no SRY). An X with an SRY means you’re physically male, chromsomally female (XX) and genetically male (SRY). But biological sex is simple! There must be another answer...

Sex-related genes ultimately turn on hormones in specifics areas on the body, and reception of those hormones by cells throughout the body. Is this the root of “biological sex”?? “Hormonal male” means you produce ‘normal’ levels of male-associated hormones. Except some percentage of females will have higher levels of ‘male’ hormones than some percentage of males. Ditto ditto ‘female’ hormones. And...

...if you’re developing, your body may not produce enough hormones for your genetic sex. Leading you to be genetically male or female, chromosomally male or female, hormonally non-binary, and physically non-binary. Well, except cells have something to say about this...

Maybe cells are the answer to “biological sex”?? Right?? Cells have receptors that “hear” the signal from sex hormones. But sometimes those receptors don’t work. Like a mobile phone that’s on “do not disturb’. Call and cell, they will not answer.

What does this all mean?

It means you may be genetically male or female, chromosomally male or female, hormonally male/female/non-binary, with cells that may or may not hear the male/female/non-binary call, and all this leading to a body that can be male/non-binary/female.

Try out some combinations for yourself. Notice how confusing it gets? Can you point to what the absolute cause of biological sex is? Is it fair to judge people by it?

Of course you could try appealing to the numbers. “Most people are either male or female” you say. Except that as a biologist professor I will tell you...

The reason I don’t have my students look at their own chromosome in class is because people could learn that their chromosomal sex doesn’t match their physical sex, and learning that in the middle of a 10-point assignment is JUST NOT THE TIME.

Biological sex is complicated. Before you discriminate against someone on the basis of “biological sex” & identity, ask yourself: have you seen YOUR chromosomes? Do you know the genes of the people you love? The hormones of the people you work with? The state of their cells?

Since the answer will obviously be no, please be kind, respect people’s right to tell you who they are, and remember that you don’t have all the answers. Again: biology is complicated. Kindness and respect don’t have to be. [end of thread]"

---

Which should we do?

Obey the title of this thread and "Abolish Political Correctness"?

Or obey that thread in the WP Website forum and start to "Have zero tolerance for Hate Speech"?

Maybe we could have a thread devoted to the original poster of each thread having a one on one debate on the topic?

I think it's important not to blanket-blame "The Left" for being totally sold on this thing we call political correctness:
"Early usage of the term politically correct by leftists in the 1970s and 1980s was as self-critical satire; usage was ironic, rather than a name for a serious political movement. It was considered an in-joke among leftists used to satirise those who were too rigid in their adherence to political orthodoxy."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness

Apparently these days in the UK, the use of the term is confined mostly to very rich men who own tabloid newspapers that propagate their right-wing agenda. I think the term often gets used to shut down ideas and arguments. Somebody expresses an idea, somebody else trots out the pejorative phrase, and that's dealt with that hasn't it? Rather than trying to abolish the things that get labelled by their opponents as PC, maybe it would be more useful to ease off on the use of the label, and then maybe people who don't agree with a particular initiative or idea will explain rationally what they don't like about it.

I suppose it would be nice if we could abolish all the seemingly pointless, over-the-top and unfair things the Left say and do, but if so I think it would be important to extend the same treatment to the Right. Otherwise it could just end up as a wing-clipping exercise to damp down the influence of those who want a more equal society, like it did when Thatcher passed laws purportedly to curtail the "excessive power" of the trade unions. Personally, I don't want the rich to get richer or the poor to get poorer.

Stop censorship with cancelation(SMH).

Who decides what is politically incorrect? I bet it will be a different group of self-satisfied close-minded people.

I expect in many instances no particular individual person or palpable group decides. Who decided that the N word was to become taboo? Society, or a large part of it, just kind of drifted that way some time in the 1970s. But I suppose certain authority figures in (e.g.) religion and schools, and sometimes parents, may wield an influence.

Maybe the way to find out is to defy it and see who tries to punish you or coerce you into toeing the line. Then at least you might get the chance to ask of them "Why are you doing this? Who sent you?"

If it is abolished there has to be a law. The law has to be passed, interpreted, and enforced. That is a limited amount of people.

What do you mean by "it" ?

It" would be political correctness.

You would have to make laws ...to make political correctness politically incorrect.

In America, you would need to pass a constitutional amendment and that to happen it has to be proposed by two-thirds of both houses of Congress or two-thirds of the state legislators, then ratified by three-quarters of the states. It won't happen.

Polish right wing government? I guess most of the thing you know about them are lies propagated by their political opponents who miss the times when they were in charge, yes?

The question that always comes to mind in see this topic, is when do these people think that "Political Correctness" did not exist, because it has been forever. If there is a difference now, it is probably because much of power in building the narrative is in the hands of the minority groups, rather than just the people already in power, those who would benefit from pushing down minority groups, and or already more intelligent discussion outside to look at the claims.

As a counter to the idea of political correctness as one side, you have the antivaxxers, of which an argument could be made as Right wing minority group, and which push political correctness to push for widespread medical vaccination. And yet in the fact of that and the political correctness, the argument can be made that they don't receive the same kind of success as the more Left wing kind, which probably comes down as being more illogical. That political correctness also being in criticising the wrongful recommendation of using anti-parasite treatment for a viral infection, especially from saying people are using horse paste because a lot of people who can't get a hold of the human version were taking ones for horses. Or what about the classic of not being allowed to say Happy Holidays rather Merry Christmas? Or dare I say, pushing socialism?

Sure, open discussion is good, I just wonder what abolishing political correctness means. Does it mean a person can't be stopped from bullying queer people? You just have to let people say whatever they want about queer people, to follow their own version of it being politically incorrect to be queer or even say being queer is okay, because by doing that you would be acting "politically correct". The thing is, that being anti-LGBT isn't the same as being anti-anti-LGBT. Bing intolerant to intolerance is not the same thing as just being intolerant.

And with the hypothetical no topic is not allowed free from political correctness end? Could we have people just recounting their rape fantasies in extreme detail, and wild fetishes because it is otherwise treated as politically incorrect to do that? There is always going to be things that are inappropriate, and I think those who complain of those things being politically correct either missed the memo about something not need to be appropriate, perhaps not understanding why, or need to do a better job at selling their point of view as being appropriate. And while I can imagine some good arguments for why an open discussion of certain fetishes can even be healthy in outweighing the downsides, I can't imagine the same for saying the N word.

Hasn't the Polish government done a whole bunch of anti-LGBT stuff in the last couple of years. Kind of making it politically incorrect to be LGBT or push for equal treatment of them? Seems pretty Right Wing to me.

If your political discussion is not about the paradise papers, about government surveillance and about global heating and their consequences, then they're not politival discussions but entertainment anyway.
political correctness is part of this game - it makes the entertainmrnt appear important, some people even lose their jobs etc.
Never their assets, though. So cancel culture is only affecting the working class, anyway.

In my opinion, there is a difference between hate speech and being politically incorrect.

I agree that hate speech - if defined as bullying and discrimination - should be dealt with, with severe consequences.

Expressing one's opinions and questioning of cultural, religious and political values in a decent, though perhaps in a awkward phrasing, is not hate speech and should be allowed.

I thought it might be, but wasn't sure. I doubt it could be done. The wording would be too difficult. And one man's harmless political incorrectness is another man's hate speech (Or woman's. Or person-of-no-binary-gender's).

No, they didnt to any anti-LGBT stuff. As I said lies propagated by their political opponents. They printed signs "no LGBT zone", posted them in some locations, photographed and wrote article (in english too) that polish government is fighting against LGBT people. And so now people in the west believe Poland have some kind of right wing government. In fact it is common for PO, so called "left winged party" and their media (which call themselves free) to propagate fake news or pay some bullies to make it happen (For example they paid for burning car of one of their most faithful TV chanel during independence march and forbid police to prevent it becouse they wanted to show that people on independence marches are fascists. Or in another year independence march they posted photography of seemingly beaten man lying on the ground. I seen telephone recording how they photographed him casually lied down in front of camera, and after was photographed he just casually stand up, but next day there were later article on first page of common newspaper that he was beaten.) And about so called "left winged" opposition, they have no political program for their own, they care only about money. This is their leader with family about 20 years ago, when catholicism was seen as good way to earn votes https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E6rCqt6WEAEKg5-.png He tried to pretend he was hollier than pope then, now he pretends to assist LGBT people, but all he cares for is money he gets from his patrons in UE.