Its a WAR against PC Culture !

[Dalak]

Having kept up with those threads, I can't really recall that happening.

What has happened is those posters(some of the ones I quoted, in particular) have pointed out a recent lack of understanding. Factoring that in, I don't think it's that hard to not be one more potentially upsetting voice because of a certain word. Even more so when the word has alternatives.

You can choose that fine, but the second you try and influence/force someone to call themselves what you want them to rather than what they want wouldn't that be oppressing them?

[numberthirty]

You can choose that fine, but the second you try and influence/force someone to call themselves what you want them to rather than what they want wouldn't that be oppressing them?

That I recall, I haven't seen anyone seriously bristle at "LGBT".

[numberthirty]

We also live in a world where you can do both. Set the word aside here, and let others decide it's use elsewhere.

[Sharkerbob]

And this is why I don't get involved in what people choose to call themselves, I just use personal nicknames or inoffensive pronouns otherwise.

And lo, doth shine the mirror.

[Dalak]

And lo, doth shine the mirror.

Yup, trying to force others to refer to themselves in any one way or another, especially if you are not a member of that group, is a recipe for disaster.

[JediMindTrick]

The real problem isn't people being offended and offenders having to own up to it. That's fine. That's problem resolution.

The real problem is people seeing this PC culture as a great way to bully people. It's way, way too easy to take anything anyone says, scream harassment, and make their lives a living hell while spouting off about how "I'm offended!"

And unfortunately, in people's desire to overcompensate and coddle increasingly spoiled generations, it's all the easier for those who abuse the power to hide amongst the people who legitimately have grievances. And then there are people who so badly want to be a revolutionary, so badly want to be a hero, they will arrange things to happen in order to make a huge spectacle over it, so they can look like an offended party and gain influence and recognition and martyrdom that way.

And the "underdog fighting against The Man" is one of the most beloved American mythos, so the media and general public instantly eat up these overly dramatized incidents, and don't want to hear it if it turns out to be a false cry.

And then eventually it gets to be too much and everyone becomes reactionary and overly skeptical, and then the people with real problems get ignored and tossed under the bus. Or even worse real incidents of offense, racism, sexism, rape, etc, get ignored while false drama gets drummed up and paid attention to, wasting resources on goose chases instead of actual victims.

This is the best post in the entire thread so far.

[dancj]

I have that browser extension that replaces the words "political correctness" with "treating people with respect" and this thread reads really creepy with it on.

Love that

[aja_christopher]

This is the best post in the entire thread so far.

No, it isn't.

No one is being "coddled" by people in society expecting a modicum of respect when addressing issues such as racism, homophobia, sexism (etc) and no one is being "bullied" when they are being held accountable for their words and actions.

Claiming that "PC culture" leads to people "ignoring real problems" is an all-too convenient way of saying that only certain people get to dictate what is a "real problem" -- for example: I could sit here all day and say that "straight white males" don't have any "real problems" in American society, but that doesn't make it true.

I've seen this happen repeatedly with people like Anna Sarkeesian, Al Sharpton, and even Barack Obama -- these individuals will address issues like sexism, racism, and police brutality and the anti-PC bigots will come out and claim that they are just making things worse by even attempting to address said issues.

People like Anna -- and Obama, who at least has the Secret Service to protect him -- receive DEATH THREATS just for speaking their OPINION on certain issues, so don't try to tell me that people like her are the "real problem" when people are out there threatening others with DEATH just for stating an OPINION -- whether you agree with it or not.

And yes, death threats and other threats of violence and hatred are a "real problem" in our society -- despite the common argument that such threats are "fake" or "empty", all it takes is one Dylan Roof or Omar Mateen or Thomas Mair or Anders Breivik (others who expressed violent and/or extremist views before acting) to make them all too very real.

Whether it's Anna Sarkeesian or Milo Yiannopoulos, EVERYONE should have the right to express their opinion without fearing for their life, and to claim that one side of the argument is the "real problem" while another is not is an unjustified attempt to diminish the views of others with whom you might disagree.

It's not the "coddled PC police" who are walking into black churches and gay nightclubs and murdering people at will or shooting and stabbing "activist" female politicians in broad daylight on British streets or "mass-shooting" 135 SCHOOLCHILDREN and their teenage mentors on an island in Norway for "race-mixing": trying to pretend that the "bullying PC Police" are the "real problem" completely ignores the overtly VIOLENT -- and sometimes MURDEROUS -- nature of the anti "PC" activists that we see all around us on an almost daily basis.

[Tendrin]

No, it isn't.

No one is being "coddled" by people in society expecting a modicum of respect when addressing issues such as racism, homophobia, sexism (etc) and no one is being "bullied" when they are being held accountable for their words and actions.

Claiming that "PC culture" leads to people "ignoring real problems" is an all-too convenient way of saying that only certain people get to dictate what is a "real problem" -- for example: I could sit here all day and say that "straight white males" don't have any "real problems" in American society, but that doesn't make it true.

I've seen this happen repeatedly with people like Anna Sarkeesian, Al Sharpton, and even Barack Obama -- these individuals will address issues like sexism, racism, and police brutality and the anti-PC bigots will come out and claim that they are just making things worse by even attempting to address said issues.

People like Anna -- and Obama, who at least has the Secret Service to protect him -- receive DEATH THREATS just for speaking their OPINION on certain issues, so don't try to tell me that people like her are the "real problem" when people are out there threatening others with DEATH just for stating an OPINION -- whether you agree with it or not.

And yes, death threats and other threats of violence and hatred are a "real problem" in our society -- despite the common argument that such threats are "fake" or "empty", all it takes is one Dylan Roof or Omar Mateen or Thomas Mair (others who expressed violent and/or extremist views before acting) to make them all too very real.

Whether it's Anna Sarkeesian or Milo Yiannopoulos, EVERYONE should have the right to express their opinion without fearing for their life, and to claim that one side of the argument is the "real problem" while another is not is an unjustified attempt to diminish the views of others with whom you might disagree.

It's not the "coddled PC police" who are walking into black churches and gay nightclubs and murdering people at will or shooting and stabbing "activist" female politicians in broad daylight on British streets, and trying to pretend that they are the "real problem" completely ignores the VIOLENT -- and sometimes MURDEROUS -- nature of the anti "PC" activists that we see all around us on an almost daily basis.

This is definitely a far better post.

[jeanvaljean]

This is definitely a far better post.

I second that motion.

[MidTierHero]

When people like Milo Yiannopoulos is invited to speak on a college campus, his speech has to be cancelled because of the hurt feelings of people who don't agree with him. Or when someone openly supports Trump on a college campus, they are accused of fostering a "climate of hate."

Yet if a supremacist group like La Raza wants to give a speech on a college campus, it's all good.

[aja_christopher]

This is definitely a far better post.

Thank you -- I keep telling myself that I'm going to ignore some of these posts and just write these thoughts into a book instead... but ignoring problems is not the way to solve them.

I'm sure even Rosa Parks was told that she was making too much of an issue of having to sit at the back of the bus -- the more things change, the more they stay the same.

--------
"People always say that I didn't give up my seat because I was tired, but that isn't true.

I was not tired physically... No, the only tired I was, was tired of giving in."

-- Rosa Parks

[aja_christopher]

When people like Milo Yiannopoulos is invited to speak on a college campus, his speech has to be cancelled because of the hurt feelings of people who don't agree with him. Or when someone openly supports Trump on a college campus, they are accused of fostering a "climate of hate."

Yet if a supremacist group like La Raza wants to give a speech on a college campus, it's all good.

No -- it's NOT all good -- as I said above, BOTH are problems and should be addressed as such, whether it's Anna having to cancel due to death threats or Milo having to cancel due to intolerance.

-----
"I don't think it's a secret that I disagree with many of the policies of Dr. [Condoleeza] Rice and the previous administration. But the notion that this community or this country would be better served by not hearing a former secretary of state or not hearing what she had to say — I believe that's misguided," Obama said. "I don't think that's how democracy works best, when we're not even willing to listen to each other."

'If you disagree with somebody, bring them in and ask them tough questions. Hold their feet to the fire, make them defend their positions. ... Don't be scared to take somebody on. Don't feel like you got to shut your ears off because you're too fragile and somebody might offend your sensibilities. Go at them if they're not making any sense." -- Barack Obama

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama...-speech-2016-5
-----

And La Raza is not a "supremacist group" anymore than organizations like The Black Panthers or the NAACP -- they are groups formed to take a stand AGAINST (white) oppression (voting rights, immigration laws, police brutality, etc), not to CREATE and/or SUPPORT racial oppression, as we see with the KKK, Neo-Nazis, or other white "supremacist" organizations who see themselves as superior to other "races" and who have traditionally used terrorism (cross burnings, church bombings, etc) and violence to keep the "white race" in power.

-----
"Since 1968, the National Council of La Raza has remained a trusted, nonpartisan voice for Latinos. This is the community we serve through our research, policy analysis, and state and national advocacy efforts, as well as in our programs work in communities nationwide.

We partner with Affiliates across the country to serve millions of Latinos in the areas of civic engagement, civil rights and immigration, education, workforce and the economy, health, and housing. We believe in fighting for our community and for an America where economic, political, and social advancement is a reality for all Latinos." -- National Council for La Raza

http://www.nclr.org/about-us/
-----

See -- nothing in there about being superior to "whites" or any other race, nor about attacking or demeaning other races, as we often see in many "pro-white" organizations. Notice that people don't have problems with groups or scholarships or organizations that celebrate or promote "Irish" or "French" or "German" heritage -- it's just that the bloody history of "white" oppression makes other groups very wary when "white" people start talking about organizing as a whole.

And why not be wary: "pro-white" advocates like Anders Breivik and Dylan Roof weren't just trying to "advance" whites -- they were trying to KILL non-whites and those who supported them.

Thus, my point is that you don't see "PC" organizations -- or individual "PC activists" -- running around shooting up churches, mosques, synagogues, nightclubs and teen retreats to promote their views -- that's something that we primarily see from ANTI "PC" activists (homophobes, racists, anti-semites, etc) on a near global basis.

[jeanvaljean]

There are so many examples around showing how being "politically incorrect" is often just spreading hateful slander, like those lies about La Raza.

[aja_christopher]

There are so many examples around showing how being "politically incorrect" is often just spreading hateful slander, like those lies about La Raza.

I agree -- what bothers me most is that people won't inform and educate themselves about the issues that they often complain about.

I've watched Anna Sarkeesian's videos. I've debated for weeks with posters on Stormfront (many of whom couldn't believe that I was "black" based solely on my posts). I've researched extensively the formation of both the NAACP and the KKK. I've spoken directly -- and formed friendships -- with people who feel as if white males are being oppressed by affirmative action, Asians who are tired of being stereotyped as "model minorities", black people who are tired of being branded as "thugs" on sight, women who are tired of being treated as second-class citizens based solely on their gender, LGBT people who have had to accept being declared persona non grata by close family members, and Latinos and Native Americans who feel completely marginalized by the American media and the public at large.

These are not simple "black and white" issues -- these are complex problems on an international scale, and we do ourselves no favors by adopting an "us vs. them" mentality when addressing them.

We are all "us"... and we should educate ourselves and act accordingly.