Too Politically Correct is Wrong

cwes99_03 · 11-29-2006

Not wishing to pick a fight. I myself have perhaps been offended by some in their use of the term "religious". Would you agree that I have a right to be offended if they use it in a way to mean "irrational, absolutist, dogmatic, aggressively critical, offensive and make really bad neighbors."?

How about it Pyro?

I will not stand up for your right to say it, but I respect your right to be wrong.

How's that interrobang thing work?

InfiniteNow · 11-29-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwes99_03

Not wishing to pick a fight. ...I will not stand up for your right to say it, but I respect your right to be wrong.

Your two points contradict one another...

Perhaps, if nothing else, the extreme PC'ness many of us have witnessed will open our eyes to nonsensical aspect of much of it. However, at it's heart, PC is respect for other individuals and any differences they may have... i.e. a good thing.

HydrogenBond · 11-29-2006

It is not clear why the N-word is such a big deal among the blacks. A little history lesson could help change its emotional valence. The word "nigger" loosely comes from the Latin "niger", with a long i (like tiger) which means black. The good ole boys didn't know how to pronouce the Latin correctly, but mistakenly called it nigger with a soft i. What the whole confusion amounts to was the good ole boys acting superior, when all along they didn't even know how to pronouced the word properly. The blacks should turn it around and get a few laughs.

Too politically correct can be understood with an analogy. Picture a mother or father who loves their child so much that they fear for his or her health. Their fear solution is to create this hypoallergenic bubble of nice words around them so they can avoid exposure to the germs, dander, mold, pollen, etc, of political incorrectness.

The problem with this is although this will protect their child, it will also limit their exposure to normal things in the environment that their rapidly learning immune system should be exposed to. When they become an adult and decide to go out on their own, they are now an a disadvantage. Things like measles, which are harmless for a child, can become very dangerous to an adult.

Some of these young adults may go full force into life, trying to shed their bubble. But now, it has become a self forfilling prophesy of the feared ill health, since their immune system was overly protected and not allowed to evolve naturally. Other adults, may decide to carry their bubble into their future. Because they know they are now even more vulnerable, they may begin avoiding even things with no rational basis, requiring a constantly higher tech bubble. They may marry and pass this weakness, both psychological and genetically onto their children. The result becomes new generations with weaker and weaker immune systems.

Maybe the compromise is regulated exposure to help build up the immune system. One doesn't have to dose the child with every hazzardous verbal biogen. But they should allow them to get some exposure to the things that are natural into their social environment. If they get sick, then doctor them with wisdom, like "sticks and sticks can break yours bones but name can never hurt you". That is a cure-all for politically incorrect bio-hazzards.

CraigD · 11-29-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwes99_03

Not wishing to pick a fight. I myself have perhaps been offended by some in their use of the term "religious".

Cwes, what is you reaction to being called a “super”, as in “I am a bright, you are a super”? Though admittedly artificial terms by a recent social movement (the brights), the terms are intended to distinguish only ones belief or lack of belief in the supernatural, so “super” is not a synonym for “religious”, nor even a subset or superset of it.

cwes99_03 · 11-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Your two points contradict one another...

Perhaps, if nothing else, the extreme PC'ness many of us have witnessed will open our eyes to nonsensical aspect of much of it. However, at it's heart, PC is respect for other individuals and any differences they may have... i.e. a good thing.

Sorry, I will not stand up in the way of voting, or fighting (militarily or demonstratively), or what have you in the name of human philosophy on how to govern people. I do however respect that you have been given a right to say nearly anything you want by a nation that likewise gives me the right.

cwes99_03 · 11-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by CraigD

Cwes, what is you reaction to being called a “super”, as in “I am a bright, you are a super”? Though admittedly artificial terms by a recent social movement (the brights), the terms are intended to distinguish only ones belief or lack of belief in the supernatural, so “super” is not a synonym for “religious”, nor even a subset or superset of it.

Well, as others on this post have pointed out, the term 'super' has to be defined in context.

If you are referring to a recent book in which, I think, the author proposes calling people of a religious nature 'super' I have already discussed that on this site.

http://hypography.com/forums/135610-post158.html
http://hypography.com/forums/135620-post161.html
http://hypography.com/forums/135745-post168.html

cwes99_03 · 11-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

It is not clear why the N-word is such a big deal among the blacks. A little history lesson could help change its emotional valence. The word "nigger" loosely comes from the Latin "niger", with a long i (like tiger) which means black. The good ole boys didn't know how to pronouce the Latin correctly, but mistakenly called it nigger with a soft i. What the whole confusion amounts to was the good ole boys acting superior, when all along they didn't even know how to pronouced the word properly. The blacks should turn it around and get a few laughs.

Hydro, I don't know how much American history or what levels of it you have taken, but that post leads me to suspect that you need to read more about it.
Particularly the treatment of black people during the 1930s-70s in the US. Most American high school classes will only go over it topicly with a bit about Martin Luther, Rosa Parks, the black panthers, maybe a bit about SNIC and the NAACP. I have to say though that, until you've hit it with a couple of biographies written by those people who you've never heard about, who endured beatings, lynchings, and so many numerous other hatred filled days and nights from the time they were old enough to speak until they were dieing in Vietnam, then you'll understand the use of the word nigger to them. Imagine every time you heard a single two-syllable word you felt the sting of a whip across your back. Then take that for 30 years day in and day out, then you'll understand.

However, as you have said, today's children through those 30 or even 40 years old aren't likely to know any of that because they haven't been well taught it in schools. That is why there is a Black History Month, but even then, the surface isn't scratched. So, today's children, black and white, don't really have a full understanding of the term and it's conotations (sp?). The only reason I know anything about it is I have two friends that grew up in Detroit and that were both members of the Black Panthers at one time, and I read a book for a class in college. It chilled me to the bone hearing some of the things that went on every day.

I do however find it funny that Matt Lauer on the today show who interviewed the two guys who Michael Richards cursed out, repeatedly used the term "n-word", and that wasn't insulting. I think saying "n-word" is just as insulting as the word "nigger". It demotes the essense of the word that was being used. I don't think it is wrong to say the term nigger in the press as long as the press isn't using it to describe a person or their actions. Likewise, when I have used it here, it should not be insulting that I typed the word out instead of using "n-word".

Likewise, I was not insulted when someone discussed the work suggesting brights or supers, but were someone to suggest that we start calling religious people supers instead of religious, I would be insulted. It doesn't resolve the issue of the attitudes towards religious people, it just creates a new way to make them feel put down.

cwes99_03 · 11-30-2006

Hey to add to this discussion, yesterday I caught a bit of cspan and the reivew of today's violent games and they didn't bleep out any of the offensive words. Nigger, fuck, and many other words that I myself would never use were clear as a bell as they (the committee) displayed the most violent video games on the market today to show how bad they are.