Politics

[FireArrow]

Huh I didn't know people younger than 50 used the term "politically correct/incorrect." Most of the time I see people use that term to describe how offended they are when other people tell them that what they said is offensive. Like using queer/retarded to describe people.

The other time I see it is when people can't stomach the idea that people are different.

Well, that's why the term was invented, to criticize anti discrimination movements without looking like a bigot. If you're using it in a way that's reasonable, you're probably using it wrong.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

Political incorrectness just doesn't make sense to me. Why would you take pride in not treating people equally?
I think being too PC can be annoying, for instance even with things like feminism I get a bit pissed when everyone gets all outraged over something a comedian says.

[MaestroUGC]

In other news, I'm assembling my cabinet for my bid for Presidency in 2028.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

Who're your optimal choices?

[SlowPokemon]

I avoid this thread so I had no idea it had accumulated six pages so quickly but I got to read about gays, satanists, and hitler in the span of a few minutes so I'm satisfied

Also Ruto's got a pretty good point, the only time I hear the phrase "politically correct" is people being butthurt that they can't use words like f*g or n****r like they could back in the Good Ole Days

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

The good 'ole days, when Hitler was in power, when blacks had no rights, and when being gay was one of the worst possible things you could come out as.

[mikey]

and when being gay was one of the worst possible things you could come out as.

when was that exactly
homosexuality's been around for EVER

[BlackDragonSlayer]

Also Ruto's got a pretty good point, the only time I hear the phrase "politically correct" is people being butthurt that they can't use words like f*g or n****r like they could back in the Good Ole Days

Really? I've only heard it used that way (in a genuine situation) rarely... two different types of people, I guess.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

when was that exactly
homosexuality's been around for EVER

It's been around forever, but hasn't been accepted forever.

[SlowPokemon]

Really? I've only heard it used that way (in a genuine situation) rarely... two different types of people, I guess.

The only way people use that word is in a derogatory way. "Blinded by political correctness," etc. When something is offensive, it's not politically incorrect, it's just incorrect.

[FireArrow]

when was that exactly
homosexuality's been around for EVER

Homosexuality was pretty much nonexistent in western Christian societies until stonewall.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

Homosexuality was pretty much nonexistent in western Christian societies until stonewall.

Much of our western culture came from Greece and Rome, yes?
Because,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Greece
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome
In Rome, you were allowed to have gay sex as long as you took the dominant position  Acceptable partners were slaves, prostitutes, and entertainers.
In Greece, instead of sexuality being limited to the sexuality in and of itself, it was assigned to dominant and submissive roles, dominant roles being associated with masculinity and submissive roles being associated with femininity.
inb4 someone says "down with the patriarchy"

[blueflower999]

When something is offensive, it's not politically incorrect, it's just incorrect.

I read this line a while ago and it's really been bothering me, but admittedly it does offer a nice transition into one of my countless problems with modern-day leftist thinking.

I'm trying to understand exactly what this line was intended to mean, but it doesn't really hold no matter how I look at it. Labeling something as "offensive" doesn't automatically make it incorrect. That makes absolutely no sense. This notion of "Everyone has to think the same way as I do or else I'm going to get offended!!!" is really silly and is against both pluralism (which is a value that the left holds near and dear!) and all common sense.

Secondly, political correctness is not supposed to be objectively correct or incorrect. If politically correct was synonymous with correct, then why even add the politically in front? I Googled "politically correct" definition, and essentially it means neutral and unoffensive. Not right and not wrong, but intended to not insult anyone. And that's fine. The problem arises when people start calling others "politically incorrect" for holding different viewpoints than them, and then the left becomes the Spanish Inquisition or the lynch mob with torches and pitchforks to burn the heretic.

Speaking of this, it's also interesting to me how the left is all about "rights" this and "rights" that, and yet the rights that are actually in the law of the land (the Constitution) are an inconvenience to them. For instance, I can see why they'd have objections against the Second Amendment, and you could make the argument that it's outdated. Sure. I can't, however, see why we need to restrict freedom of speech. Colleges and Universities now across the country have "speech codes" to prevent "politically incorrectness" from being expressed, essentially teaching students that they have a fundamental right to not hear things that offend them, that they should be challenged in no way by other ways of thinking, and that they don't have a right to freely express their individual ideas, only the ideas that the college deems appropriate.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

I'm trying to understand exactly what this line was intended to mean, but it doesn't really hold no matter how I look at it. Labeling something as "offensive" doesn't automatically make it incorrect. That makes absolutely no sense. This notion of "Everyone has to think the same way as I do or else I'm going to get offended!!!" is really silly and is against both pluralism (which is a value that the left holds near and dear!) and all common sense.

Secondly, political correctness is not supposed to be objectively correct or incorrect. If politically correct was synonymous with correct, then why even add the politically in front? I Googled "politically correct" definition, and essentially it means neutral and unoffensive.

You're right here, that objectivity and neutrality are not one and the same, which is a problem I also have with the left, specifically journalism in that regard.

(Describing political correctness)Not right and not wrong, but intended to not insult anyone. And that's fine. The problem arises when people start calling others "politically incorrect" for holding different viewpoints than them, and then the left becomes the Spanish Inquisition or the lynch mob with torches and pitchforks to burn the heretic

Well it would depend on what exactly the viewpoint is; if it's hate speech then that's where that comes into play. Which I think personally the left should calm down about somewhat but I think the right has a tendency to let anything slide, especially when under the grounds of "religious liberty", but had a Muslim said it it would've been jail time.

Speaking of this, it's also interesting to me how the left is all about "rights" this and "rights" that, and yet the rights that are actually in the law of the land (the Constitution) are an inconvenience to them. For instance, I can see why they'd have objections against the Second Amendment, and you could make the argument that it's outdated. Sure. I can't, however, see why we need to restrict freedom of speech. Colleges and Universities now across the country have "speech codes" to prevent "politically incorrectness" from being expressed, essentially teaching students that they have a fundamental right to not hear things that offend them, that they should be challenged in no way by other ways of thinking, and that they don't have a right to freely express their individual ideas, only the ideas that the college deems appropriate.

I'm pretty sure the speech codes you're referring to are designed to stop hate speech, not any contrasting ideas.
For instance, in most parts of the US, if you put a swastika on a synagogue (jewish temple) you can get charged with a hate crime. You won't get charged with a hate crime by flying it on your car, though, as that's freedom of expression with your own property.
Also keep in mind that any publicly funded university is taking tax dollars and does have to remain somewhat neutral.
An example of neutrality vs objectivity is Kim Davis. She, under secular law, had to give out marriage licenses to gays, after the Supreme Court ruling, citing religious freedom. Unfortunately for her, religious liberty does not override secular law so she got jail time (IIRC because there was some other offense as well, but don't quote me). There were other people in her position who left their jobs and are free to be homophobic as they wish; but this case is objectively unconstitutional. Person violates updated secular law after a SC ruling, they can't do that.
Hate crime is another issue, one we recently dealt with on this forum with another member, in fact. Here's the definition, and then some things that fall under it; "speech that attacks, threatens, or insults a person or group on the basis of national origin, ethnicity, color, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability."
Thus, the N word is technically hate speech (but only when used in a derogatory way), just as most other racial slurs.
Technically the term "four-eyes" could be considered hate speech, if you're visually impaired 
Anyways I'll shut up now

[mikey]

pls stop using the word homophobe to describe people who view homosexuality as morally wrong.  Thanks.