View Full Version : Does Political Correctness Exist?
M Swanson
05-Feb-13, 11:30
It seems incredible, but apparently, some folks do not believe that PC exists. :confused So I thought it may be a good idea to run a poll to gauge posters' thoughts. It would also be interesting to read where PC was 'invented,' and by whom. Even more important, what did the creators hope to achieve?
That's if you believe in its existence, of course.
Anyway, here's a definition which I think best describes my thoughts.
'1) Doing the reverse of what common sense would suggest
2) Inconveniencing the innocent while making life easier for the wrong do-er
3) Not telling the truth in case it offends
4) Changing the language where you perceive it may offend
5) Doing exactly the opposite of what you preach
6) What you do has the effect of making the problem you were trying to cure far worse
7) Doing ridiculous things just for a political reason
8) Favouring a minority just for a political reason.'
As I read a while ago - 'The liberals are just folks who haven't been mugged yet!' :lol:
Political correctness is an evolutionary process and like all things natural there will be wind and rain as well as sunshine.
Human behaviour is a proces too and in my opinion it always trys to be the best it can be. Thats a law of nature too.
Modern communications have pushed the process forward much quicker since the Second World War and especially since the advent of the internet when ordinary people found they had a voice too. How many of us would have been able to share opinions like we do on the org before the internet? The surge in communications has meant more knowledge too. It takes time to assimilate knowledge and that's what I think is happening now. Humans yearn for knowledge and always feel better when they are treated respectfully. The modern surge in political correctness is a symptom. Not sure what its a symptom of but its a symptom. :confused
To me political correctness is just buzzword to describe old fashion manners which now applies to everyone, not just to those that share your skin colour, place of birth, beliefs or sexual preference etc.
MerlinScot
05-Feb-13, 14:22
Political correctness in a broad meaning doesn't exist, just my opinion. Then...I think the term is even overused today, you read a gossip article and someone mentions 'to be politically correct' :roll:
M Swanson
05-Feb-13, 14:57
Political correctness is an evolutionary process and like all things natural there will be wind and rain as well as sunshine.
Human behaviour is a proces too and in my opinion it always trys to be the best it can be. Thats a law of nature too.
Modern communications have pushed the process forward much quicker since the Second World War and especially since the advent of the internet when ordinary people found they had a voice too. How many of us would have been able to share opinions like we do on the org before the internet? The surge in communications has meant more knowledge too. It takes time to assimilate knowledge and that's what I think is happening now. Humans yearn for knowledge and always feel better when they are treated respectfully. The modern surge in political correctness is a symptom. Not sure what its a symptom of but its a symptom. :confused
Interesting points, Gleebs. Isn't it ironic though, that the Master of Evolution, Darwin, would be the arch enemy of PC, with his theory of "survival of the fittest," if he'd published his results today! I think there is a desire by most, to be as"best as one can be," but there are always those elitist groups whose remit is to grab as much power, influence and wealth as they can. I think this was at the heart of the inventors of PC. So far, in my research, it seems to have started as an exercise in Cultural Marxism. The Frankfurt School is certainly deserving of more scrutiny.
The internet has made an enormous difference in all of our lives. But it is heavily biased towards those who tow the PC line, imo. They do not have the same constraints imposed on questioners of the totalitarian principles of Cultural Marxism. I should know! :lol: Tried and found guilty, M'lud, even though no evidence was offered and no defence permitted! Indeed, PC is a "symptom," and gawd help us all.
M Swanson
05-Feb-13, 14:59
Political correctness in a broad meaning doesn't exist, just my opinion. Then...I think the term is even overused today, you read a gossip article and someone mentions 'to be politically correct' :roll:
I don't get your logic on this one Merlin. If PC doesn't exist, then how can it be "overused?" Can I ask what you mean by, "broad meaning, please?"
It is a shame M Swanson, and I am sorry to say this, but, when you first came to this forum you were a pleasure and refreshing to read (was it all an act?)but now you just come up with all this narrow-minded UKIP bile. We all know why you don't like political correctness and that is because you don't like what you get accused of being if you say what you really would like to say. Free-speech isn't about having the freedom to insult people or ripping a stripe off their arm if you get annoyed with them. You can still question the validity of why people act in the way that they do and stay politically correct. But then that tact would probably question the validity of why you act the way you act, I suppose!?!?
We don't have an empire anymore, people who are different have come here and are here to stay. Get over it. Let's us just get along. Remember, it is just nice to be nice.
It is a shame M Swanson, and I am sorry to say this, but, when you first came to this forum you were a pleasure and refreshing to read (was it all an act?)but now you just come up with all this narrow-minded UKIP bile. We all know why you don't like political correctness and that is because you don't like what you get accused of being if you say what you really would like to say. Free-speech isn't about having the freedom to insult people or ripping a stripe off their arm if you get annoyed with them. You can still question the validity of why people act in the way that they do and stay politically correct. But then that tact would probably question the validity of why you act the way you act, I suppose!?!?
We don't have an empire anymore, people who are different have come here and are here to stay. Get over it. Let's us just get along. Remember, it is just nice to be nice.
Thats a bit harsh Rheg, even coming from you, much of the nonsense you post gets up my nose, but I try to be nice to you and bite my tongue. :D
M Swanson
05-Feb-13, 15:28
I'm sorry you feel that way Rheg, but I'm afraid you couldn't be more wrong. I have absolutely no idea what UKIP preaches about PC ...... I've never researched their attitude. I also, care not a jot, what I'm "accused of being," especially by those who use the most flimsiest of evidence, if any at all. Too often, it's accepted that if one on the side of the self-righteous (PC'ers) declares a poster to be this, that, or the other, then that's good enough and acceptable. When challenged, usually nothing is the firm reply, or more of the same old predictable insults. Show me, Rheg, when I have ever "insulted," anyone on the Org? I've disagreed; I've questioned and I have expressed my own opinion, but "insulted," NO, never! BTW, I can assure you nobody has ever "annoyed," me on this Forum. A few have bored me and I've taken remedial action, though. :D
Quite frankly, I didn't think that I would ever have had to explain any of this to a person of your intelligence. And why you should refer to the "Empire," is anyone's guess. I have absolutely nothing to "get over." :lol: But you're right ..... "it is nice to be nice," in spite of whatever is thrown at you! We're all grown-ups, aren't we?
M Swanson
05-Feb-13, 15:31
Thats a bit harsh Rheg, even coming from you, much of the nonsense you post gets up my nose, but I try to be nice to you and bite my tongue. :D
Thank you, Golach. That's it in a nutshell. :cool:
Remember, it is just nice to be nice.
You been watching Bambi again Rheg? Ill look forward to you practicing such a philosophy yourself
It is nice to be nice. I always think that the PC and anti PC brigades see things from two opposite points of view. Those who try to be politically correct are trying to think about things and how they look and feel from someone else's point of view and those who are anti PC only seem to think about things and how they look and feel from their own point of view. So its ok to call the shop the Paki Shop for example because I have always said that and I am not prepared to put myself out and consider other people's feelings. Whereas those who say you shouldnt call it that know that many people find the word Paki an insult, that it has a lot of baggage along with it and that it may offend others and so they dont use it.
Of course Political Correctness can be overdone. Sometimes we try too hard but better to try too hard than not to try at all.
The denouncement of things which dont meet someone's point of view as "Political correctness" or "liberalist" as if that is an insult is common amongst message boards everywhere - it allows those with no ideas or vision or social conscience to get out of a debate without actually having to think about anothers point of view and its boring.
MerlinScot
05-Feb-13, 15:39
I don't get your logic on this one Merlin. If PC doesn't exist, then how can it be "overused?" Can I ask what you mean by, "broad meaning, please?"Applying political correctness in everything is not possible (that is what I meant with broad meaning).I find that the two words themselves (term) are overused in the media, meaning mentioned everywhere even out of context.Sorry if I was not clear in my previous post, touch screen keyboards annoy me and I end up cutting too much when I write ;)
You been watching Bambi again Rheg? Ill look forward to you practicing such a philosophy yourself.
I'm always nice! It is when my comments come home to roost with certain folk that is when I'm not perceived as such. ;)
M Swanson
05-Feb-13, 15:58
You been watching Bambi again Rheg? Ill look forward to you practicing such a philosophy yourself.
The denouncement of things which dont meet someone's point of view as "Political correctness" or "liberalist" as if that is an insult is common amongst message boards everywhere - it allows those with no ideas or vision or social conscience to get out of a debate without actually having to think about anothers point of view and its boring.
Now, be nice, Squidge! :lol:
I think your post definitely shows sign of "boredom," Squidge, so why bother? :D
Lighten up people. A student at the Texas A&M University defined political correctness thus; "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
It seems incredible, but apparently, some folks do not believe that PC exists. :confused So I thought it may be a good idea to run a poll to gauge posters' thoughts. It would also be interesting to read where PC was 'invented,' and by whom. Even more important, what did the creators hope to achieve?
That's if you believe in its existence, of course.
Anyway, here's a definition which I think best describes my thoughts.
'1) Doing the reverse of what common sense would suggest
2) Inconveniencing the innocent while making life easier for the wrong do-er
3) Not telling the truth in case it offends
4) Changing the language where you perceive it may offend
5) Doing exactly the opposite of what you preach
6) What you do has the effect of making the problem you were trying to cure far worse
7) Doing ridiculous things just for a political reason
8) Favouring a minority just for a political reason.'
As I read a while ago - 'The liberals are just folks who haven't been mugged yet!' :lol:
I thought rather than accept Ms Swanson’s “definition” I would google the term and came across the following:
“Political correctness is a term which denotes language, ideas, policies, and behaviour seen as seeking to minimize social and institutional offence in occupational, gender, racial, cultural, sexual orientation, certain other religions, beliefs or ideologies, disability, and age-related contexts, and, as purported by the term, doing so to an excessive extent. In current usage, the term is primarily pejorative, while the term politically incorrect has been used as an implicitly positive self-description.”
I find this more objective than Ms Swanson’s list.
In my experience the term has been used over the whole range of political standpoints (I remember it being thought politically incorrect to question the legality of the Anglo-French invasion of Egypt in 1956) but more recently it has been principally aimed at the left of the political spectrum by social commentators (of all levels) deriding them for not supporting the somewhat authoritarian and, often, libertarian instincts of the user.
macadamia
05-Feb-13, 17:39
Political correctness replaced freedom of thought when the prophecies in George Orwell's 1984 began to come true with regard to Newspeak and Doublethink - and of course, Big Brother on permanent watch. It is a haven for shrivelled intellects, liberal fascists, and the kind of human sheep who require a total road map, rather than a moral guide, to live a rich and fear-free life.
Political Correctness is founded on fear, in exactly the same way etiquette was once used to alienate those below the salt. PC adorns the "we" with a carapace of high moral standing, and denigrates the "they" of unenlightened proledom as ignorant savages with potty mouths and unrefined thinking. PC bullies humans into the "Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad" prescriptive way of thinking which atrophies the brain and hardens the heart.
To me, the Great Victory (albeit temporary) of PC came when British magistrates were told that the concept of "common sense" could not be used as a legal benchmark, as "common sense" was not necessarily "common" to all cultures. The arrant nonsense exposed by this Diktat was enough to subject the by then pervasive PC culture to howls of derisive laughter. The Emperor was seen to be wearing no clothes.
The good news is that so many proponents of PC culture are growing out of it, getting a life, and getting on with life, thus achieving greater harmony with their fellow man than ever they would have done spouting sanitised slogans at each other.
M Swanson
05-Feb-13, 19:33
Lighten up people. A student at the Texas A&M University defined political correctness thus; "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
:lol:[lol] Brilliant and just the humour this thread needed, G. Repped. :lol:
M Swanson
05-Feb-13, 19:42
Political correctness replaced freedom of thought when the prophecies in George Orwell's 1984 began to come true with regard to Newspeak and Doublethink - and of course, Big Brother on permanent watch. It is a haven for shrivelled intellects, liberal fascists, and the kind of human sheep who require a total road map, rather than a moral guide, to live a rich and fear-free life.
Political Correctness is founded on fear, in exactly the same way etiquette was once used to alienate those below the salt. PC adorns the "we" with a carapace of high moral standing, and denigrates the "they" of unenlightened proledom as ignorant savages with potty mouths and unrefined thinking. PC bullies humans into the "Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad" prescriptive way of thinking which atrophies the brain and hardens the heart.
To me, the Great Victory (albeit temporary) of PC came when British magistrates were told that the concept of "common sense" could not be used as a legal benchmark, as "common sense" was not necessarily "common" to all cultures. The arrant nonsense exposed by this Diktat was enough to subject the by then pervasive PC culture to howls of derisive laughter. The Emperor was seen to be wearing no clothes.
The good news is that so many proponents of PC culture are growing out of it, getting a life, and getting on with life, thus achieving greater harmony with their fellow man than ever they would have done spouting sanitised slogans at each other.
Yet another brilliant post from you, Macadamia. It tells it like I really believe it is. The only thing I would add, is the abomination, aka, PC's positive discrimination, which by definition is discriminatory in itself and serves to undermine real equality and damages race relations, imo. Lived with it and seen it happen!
Unfortunately, I need to spread some.
Interesting points, Gleebs. Isn't it ironic though, that the Master of Evolution, Darwin, would be the arch enemy of PC, with his theory of "survival of the fittest," if he'd published his results today! I think there is a desire by most, to be as"best as one can be," but there are always those elitist groups whose remit is to grab as much power, influence and wealth as they can. I think this was at the heart of the inventors of PC. So far, in my research, it seems to have started as an exercise in Cultural Marxism. The Frankfurt School is certainly deserving of more scrutiny.
The internet has made an enormous difference in all of our lives. But it is heavily biased towards those who tow the PC line, imo. They do not have the same constraints imposed on questioners of the totalitarian principles of Cultural Marxism. I should know! :lol: Tried and found guilty, M'lud, even though no evidence was offered and no defence permitted! Indeed, PC is a "symptom," and gawd help us all.
Darwins theory is not about survival of the fittest. It's about the most suitable genes for natures purpose passing on its traits to future generations to make them the best they can be to survive in the process we call nature.
Darwin would have seen political correctness for what it is. It's an evolutionary process in human thought and it happens in spite of mans intelect not as a result of it. Everywhere in the natural world you see life striving to survive. Much of that life force happens in the dark and man has no control over it. He's a part of it. Throw a plywood board on top of the grass and come back a year later and lift the board. Its teeming with life under there. Long spindly white roots of grass are still crawing around looking for light. The life force gives it its determination to survive and much to mans displeasure and sometimes denial he can do little about it apart from using it to his advantage. Political correctness is a display of the human life force in action. Once it has taken its rightful place in nature it cannot be destroyed only transformed. Sometimes though that transformation can be more dangerous than the original thought because of mans interference. Thats where its at now. Political correctness is a part of nature and mans fighting it rather than using it to his advantage although in my opinion, and thankfully too, its a losing battle. Rather than throw the baby out with the bathwater I try to understand how it applies to me. Am I the baby or the bathwater? They both need consideration but dont think you can destroy it.
It seems incredible, but apparently, some folks do not believe that PC exists. :confused So I thought it may be a good idea to run a poll to gauge posters' thoughts. It would also be interesting to read where PC was 'invented,' and by whom. Even more important, what did the creators hope to achieve?
That's if you believe in its existence, of course.
Anyway, here's a definition which I think best describes my thoughts.
'1) Doing the reverse of what common sense would suggest
2) Inconveniencing the innocent while making life easier for the wrong do-er
3) Not telling the truth in case it offends
4) Changing the language where you perceive it may offend
5) Doing exactly the opposite of what you preach
6) What you do has the effect of making the problem you were trying to cure far worse
7) Doing ridiculous things just for a political reason
8) Favouring a minority just for a political reason.'
As I read a while ago - 'The liberals are just folks who haven't been mugged yet!' :lol:
Your opening post does not reflect your poll.
Your poll does not reflect your thoughts.
I've not voted.
To me political correctness is just buzzword to describe old fashion manners which now applies to everyone, not just to those that share your skin colour, place of birth, beliefs or sexual preference etc.
Political correctness is certainly a buzzword, but one introduced by politicians to garner votes. They legislate for the minorities who scream loudest in the hopes that those they legislate for will ensure their party gets more votes from them in the next election than they will lose from those they have legislated against who are then less likely to vote for them.
Old fashioned manners is not political correctness. Old fashioned manners taught me, at least, to treat everybody, regardless of skin colour, race, religion etc the same as I would expect everybody of a different skin colour, race, religion etc to treat me. That's not political correctness, because political correctness would require that I treated those of a different skin colour, race, religion etc better than I would expect them to treat me.
I have always thought, and in my lifetime nothing has changed my mind on this, that you can't legislate to change attitudes, particularly if they are already firmly entrenched for whatever reasons. Education over time may work to change attitudes if you get people young enough, and their parents haven't already formed their perceptions....but legislating won't, imo.
You can certainly legislate to punish those who break the attitudes laws (and however governments describe them in their legalistic blurb, all their plethora of discrimination laws are simply attitudes laws..but you aren't going to change the mindset.and therefore not the attitude by using the law as a hammer. So somebody gets fined/jailed for being an arsehole, because of (say) not deciding to employ someone who is not British, white, male, Christian, heterosexual, healthy etc, ...does that immediately make them someone who has learned a lesson because of the fine/jail sentence....or just somebody who will then scrabble around to find legitimate excuses for not employing someone who is not British, white, male, Christian, heterosexual, healthy etc...because that is the kind of employee with which they feel comfortable for whatever reasons?
Again, imo, the very fact of punishing people for arseholism, particularly in the employment situation, will only serve to entrench that arseholism because they would kinda wonder, particularly in small business situations, as an employer, do they have any rights left that are not Government controlled....and if not, why not just chuck the business, claim benefits themselves and chuck their employees onto the mercy of the taxpayer along with themselves? Why hack the hassle imposed by Governments if they don't have to? Would you? Sure as hell, I wouldn't!
M Swanson
05-Feb-13, 23:50
Your opening post does not reflect your poll.
Your poll does not reflect your thoughts.
I've not voted.
It asks the question - 'Does Political Correctness Exist?' and invites those that have an opinion to record their answer ........ or not!
I then gave my own thoughts and invited others to do so, if they wished to. There was no obligation for anyone to vote, or even take part in writing their own thoughts. So what's the problem?
That's your prerogative!
"Political Correctness is a tyranny with manners." Charlton Heston.
I remember well this article, http://www.scotsman.com/news/nhs-staff-told-to-eat-away-from-desks-for-ramadan-1-1327653 Good manners or political correctness?
Quite frankly my dear I don't give a damn!
It asks the question - 'Does Political Correctness Exist?' and invites those that have an opinion to record their answer ........ or not!
I then gave my own thoughts and invited others to do so, if they wished to. There was no obligation for anyone to vote, or even take part in writing their own thoughts. So what's the problem?
That's your prerogative!
"Political Correctness is a tyranny with manners." Charlton Heston.
No matter how many exclamation marks you throw my way, your poll is flawed. How did you propose to use the results of a flawed Poll?
No matter how many exclamation marks you throw my way, your poll is flawed.
You've expressed your opinion but if you want it to be taken seriously I suggest you explain why the poll is flawed and what you would offer in its stead.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 01:17
I remember well this article, http://www.scotsman.com/news/nhs-staff-told-to-eat-away-from-desks-for-ramadan-1-1327653 Good manners or political correctness?
Political correctness or not, I do not agree with that. If the people that observe ramadan feel that strongly about it, then they should take time off to observe it wherever they wish. The last I heard this was a multicultural society, not predominantly muslim, and it would be down to them to show good manners and accept the situation, or as I said, take leave.
A few years back I worked with somebody that was a convicted pedophile (he could'nt hide it, it was all over the front of the local paper)as he had been struck off as a doctor. We were told (by our bosses) if we even as much as mentioned this to him, we would face disclipinary action. Now, would that be classed as political correctness, or good manners ?
I remember well this article, http://www.scotsman.com/news/nhs-staff-told-to-eat-away-from-desks-for-ramadan-1-1327653 Good manners or political correctness?
It would depend on whether they had asked the staff observing ramadan or just assumed. If they have asked the staff observing ramadan and they have said that this is what they would like then its good manners. If they simply assume that this is what they need then its political correctness. So many times you see this and then you find another report which says "we never asked for this". Often you find that rules like this are put in place because there have been incidents where some one has been on the end of offensive behaviour like sitting eating bacon sandwiches and doing the "oooooooooooh look at this lovely BACON sandwich, MMMMMMMMMM I love eating piggy and you cant eat anything na na na na naaaaaa" I would actually hope that ANYONE sitting alongside someone who was observing Ramadan would say "I know you arent eating do you mind if I have my dinner here or would you prefer I ate somewhere else". now THATS good manners.
With the Paedophile its hard - people have a right not to be harrassed in the workplace ... even convicted criminals - but paedophiles raise such extreme reaction. I would suggest that it was the right action to take to prevent harrassment. What would you have wanted to say? You might have wanted to say " I know what you did and I dont want to be your friend or talk to you" but some might have wanted to kick their chair as they walked past and say something vicious or worse and by making it clear that the subject was off limits they tried to prevent that happening.
.... "oooooooooooh look at this lovely BACON sandwich, MMMMMMMMMM I love eating piggy and you cant eat anything na na na na naaaaaa"....
That would be going too far & should be pulled up over such an incident, other than that, no, they shouldn't expect everybody else to pander to someone's superstitious beliefs...
As for time to pray.... they can do that in their break times, but by all means adjust their break times if it needs to be done at a certain time.
As for the Paedophile case, it should be open to discussion but not harassment & I'm sure there are already employment laws out there to stop such harassment.
To me political correctness means not being discriminatory by gender, race, age, sexual orientation etc. through behaviour, action or inaction, or language.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 10:20
With the Paedophile its hard - people have a right not to be harrassed in the workplace ... even convicted criminals - but paedophiles raise such extreme reaction. I would suggest that it was the right action to take to prevent harrassment. What would you have wanted to say? You might have wanted to say " I know what you did and I dont want to be your friend or talk to you" but some might have wanted to kick their chair as they walked past and say something vicious or worse and by making it clear that the subject was off limits they tried to prevent that happening.
In our case, we did as we were told - and nobody spoke to him - at all. I, along with a lot of people (especially parents) felt very uncomfortable in his presence. He left shortly after the story broke in the papers. Lets face it though, in the light of the Jimmy Saville scandal, the BBC can't exactly be accused of being politically correct, that's all they talked about for weeks.
M Swanson
06-Feb-13, 10:22
No matter how many exclamation marks you throw my way, your poll is flawed. How did you propose to use the results of a flawed Poll?
Oh! Right. Would you care to tell us in what way you believe the Poll is flawed, Moira? Then we may have some idea what you're on about. :cool:
M Swanson
06-Feb-13, 10:24
I wonder how many would agree with this evaluation? I do!
'Have you ever stopped to wonder why 40% of people don't bother to vote anymore? Have you ever stopped to wonder why, which ever party is in power, nothing ever gets any better? Have you ever stopped to wonder why all the three major political parties in the UK have broadly the same policies? The answer is simple - political correctness. This left wing ideology has very cleverly, and by stealth, replaced British politics. The PC Brigade effectively hold a gun to the head of political parties - none of the main parties now dare suggest any policy that is not politically correct otherwise the PC Brigade will label them the 'nasty' party. Witness the Conservative party policy U turns. In a desperate effort to lose their 'nasty' party label they have become Blue Labour, a slightly diluted form of New Labour!
So we now have the three main parties all occupying the same small piece of 'centre ground'. Many people don't vote on the grounds that it is pointless - you will get the same whoever wins. Some people don't vote because they realise that politically correct policies are what has got us into this mess in the first place.
M Swanson
06-Feb-13, 10:44
In our case, we did as we were told - and nobody spoke to him - at all. I, along with a lot of people (especially parents) felt very uncomfortable in his presence. He left shortly after the story broke in the papers. Lets face it though, in the light of the Jimmy Saville scandal, the BBC can't exactly be accused of being politically correct, that's all they talked about for weeks.
A perfectly normal reaction, I would say Cpt and I'd have done the same. As far as the BBC are concerned, I believe that it's because of PC that Savile was allowed to get away for it for so long. It's not surprising that they are now trying to off-load their guilt and culpability. It's my opinion that PC dominates the Beeb and is its most ardent follower.
Yes it does exist. But I don't see the actual point of your poll.
Your post however does seem to try and stir up a hornets nest, which has failed.
Maybe you should have been a little more up front and pointed:
Does it exist?
Has it gone mad?
Is it a good thing?
Is it different from good manners & common sense?
I remember well this article, http://www.scotsman.com/news/nhs-staff-told-to-eat-away-from-desks-for-ramadan-1-1327653 Good manners or political correctness?
A case of political correctness badly applied, good manners would have been to engage with the Muslim workers and asked how they felt about it first.
Political correctness or not, I do not agree with that. If the people that observe ramadan feel that strongly about it, then they should take time off to observe it wherever they wish. The last I heard this was a multicultural society, not predominantly muslim, and it would be down to them to show good manners and accept the situation, or as I said, take leave.
A typical kneejerk response to misunderstanding a piece of Political Correctness perceived as PC madness deliberately misconstrued by the media, which manifests itself by creating the appearance of intolerance and ignorance.
Political Correctness in it's simplest form exists and I think it is with good intentions. It has however become a weapon to try and stir up racial & cultural tensions, gladly helped along by the media. (And I hate to say it, the likes of the Daily Mail are a good example)
And then it is picked upon by certain people who apply definitions which don't appear to fit, to further try and stir up trouble.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 10:57
A perfectly normal reaction, I would say Cpt and I'd have done the same. As far as the BBC are concerned, I believe that it's because of PC that Savile was allowed to get away for it for so long. It's not surprising that they are now trying to off-load their guilt and culpability. It's my opinion that PC dominates the Beeb and is its most ardent follower.
Thinking about it you are probably right, the BBC and every other organization he was involved in brushed it under the carpet, I am not sure if that would have been down to PC or because of the "power" for want of a better word, he held at the BBC, or because of the money he raised for his various charities, I honestly do'nt know.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 11:06
A typical kneejerk response to misunderstanding a piece of Political Correctness perceived as PC madness deliberately misconstrued by the media, which manifests itself by creating the appearance of intolerance and ignorance.
No it is not a "typical kneekjerk response" I was not referring to political correctness - I was referring to the situation.
M Swanson
06-Feb-13, 11:12
Yes, that was an unfair comment Cpt, because your opening words were that you didn't know if it was a case of PC, or not. :cool:
Perhaps you'd like to read this to clarify a few points, folks.
'So what is political correctness, how did it start and how did it become so successful? Political correctness is first and foremost an attack on free speech, clear thinking and discussion. Political correctness is perpetrated by the left in politics as a cover for their flawed ideology - a sort of cultural Marxism. By cloaking their strange ideas under the cover of not wishing to offend anyone (which naturally appeals to peoples' better nature), they try to bypass debate and give a 'received wisdom' which must not be questioned. And anyone who disagrees with this 'received wisdom' must therefore be a really nasty person and deserves to be ostracised by their peers. This peer pressure is instrumental in enforcing and expanding political correctness.'
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 11:39
Yes, that was an unfair comment Cpt, because your opening words were that you didn't know if it was a case of PC, or not. :cool:
Perhaps you'd like to read this to clarify a few points, folks.
'So what is political correctness, how did it start and how did it become so successful? Political correctness is first and foremost an attack on free speech, clear thinking and discussion. Political correctness is perpetrated by the left in politics as a cover for their flawed ideology - a sort of cultural Marxism. By cloaking their strange ideas under the cover of not wishing to offend anyone (which naturally appeals to peoples' better nature), they try to bypass debate and give a 'received wisdom' which must not be questioned. And anyone who disagrees with this 'received wisdom' must therefore be a really nasty person and deserves to be ostracised by their peers. This peer pressure is instrumental in enforcing and expanding political correctness.'
Thank you, as I said, I was not sure what political correctness was, however that has clarified it somewhat. The point I was trying to make is - if you work in a place that has say, 100 people, and out of those 100 people 7 observe Ramadan, should the other 93 people not eat incase it offends the 7? Or would it be the same if out of the same 100 people 7 were vegetarians, should the 93, not eat meat incase it offends them?. This is not a muslim country, now, if I went to say Iran, then out of politeness, because it is their country, I would not eat in front of them. As discussed at length on another thread, I have no problem with religion or religious faiths, I would not force my views on anybody, and I expect likewise.
Absolutely its not a muslim country but most muslims aren't foreigners and havent just arrived and no one said that people couldnt eat - just that people should be eating in the canteen. And if they sat next to a muslim worker who was observing Ramadan wouldnt they ask them if they minded you eating? If not why not? I have been on diets and people have said to me "Ohhh - you are on a diet!!! Ill go eat my fish and chips elsewhere" and done that without me even asking, so if people have a muslim colleague observing Ramadan then why wouldnt they do the same. We dont know why this policy in this particular employer was introduced but is it important? Its hardly forcing someone's views on a person to suggest they eat in the place designated for eating in. If there was a canteen i would make people eat in the canteen instead of at their desk every day - its not healthy to eat at your desk.
People dont vote because we have a pile of politicians that dont care one iota for anyone else except themselves. We have a new political class, rich, highly educated people who dont know the price of a pat of butter and who have never worked in a real job in their lives. People who dont care about others, for whom politics is a "career" not a duty, A nice little earner, not public service. Who have several homes and live in 8 bedroomed houseswith only their wife .... oh and Staff of course.... and tell a divorced man living in a three bedroomed house that e his three children should share a sofa bed when visiting him. It seems to be young people and the lower socio economic groups that dont vote - largely because no one gives a toss about them. All the young hear is how many of them are out of work or how much their debt will be if they go to university. All the poor hear is mainly that they are skivers scroungers and "LTBs" who should get off their backsides and find a job the other side of the country because of course its SO EASY to move when you get £71 per week.
No it is not a "typical kneekjerk response" I was not referring to political correctness - I was referring to the situation.But the link was a news story about an email. There was no 'situation'.
Your response is to the story, an alleged email and a wholly perceived situation that probably didn't exist.
Thank you, as I said, I was not sure what political correctness was, however that has clarified it somewhat. The point I was trying to make is - if you work in a place that has say, 100 people, and out of those 100 people 7 observe Ramadan, should the other 93 people not eat incase it offends the 7? Or would it be the same if out of the same 100 people 7 were vegetarians, should the 93, not eat meat incase it offends them?. This is not a muslim country, now, if I went to say Iran, then out of politeness, because it is their country, I would not eat in front of them. As discussed at length on another thread, I have no problem with religion or religious faiths, I would not force my views on anybody, and I expect likewise.The religion in question here has not forced anything on anybody, they are a completely innocent bystander, it appears the Muslim community / workers haven't even been given any opportunity to comment!
Yet you seemed to have been whipped up into a frenzy about who observes what and when and whilst you say we live in a multicultural society it is others that have to take time off to deal with it!
My point is that this thread about whether or not PC exists has used it as a weapon to cause religious & cultural divide, specifically with a story about an email. Your response was to a totally fabricated situation, I'm not saying you've fabricated it but it just isn't there.
And why would you not eat in front of them? I guess you'd find they would lay on a spread for you as a guest. It is their choice what they observe, as it is your choice what you observe.
I'm afraid you've been hoodwinked into being offended about something that would otherwise have passed you by without any concern.
oh and Staff of course.... Good god woman, suggesting they have 'staff'. How dare you!
They are servants as anyone with a modicum of education would know.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 12:24
Absolutely its not a muslim country but most muslims aren't foreigners and havent just arrived
I never said they were.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 12:26
But the link was a news story about an email. There was no 'situation'.
Your response is to the story, an alleged email and a wholly perceived situation that probably didn't exist.
I did'nt write the story, or put the link on here.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 12:33
Yet you seemed to have been whipped up into a frenzy about who observes what and when and whilst you say we live in a multicultural society it is others that have to take time off to deal with it!
If it offends them that people eat during whatever hours ramadan covers, that is their issue, not anybody elses.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 12:37
But the link was a news story about an email. There was no 'situation'.
Your response is to the story, an alleged email and a wholly perceived situation that probably didn't exist.
The religion in question here has not forced anything on anybody, they are a completely innocent bystander, it appears the Muslim community / workers haven't even been given any opportunity to comment!
Whether it is true or not it was in a newspaper and online. The Muslim community / workers can comment if they want.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 12:42
[QUOTE=Phill;1005906]. And why would you not eat in front of them? I guess you'd find they would lay on a spread for you as a guest. It is their choice what they observe, as it is your choice what you observe./QUOTE]
In their country - or did you just ignore that bit? Do you honestly think they would provide a meal during these hours - hardly. And I certainly would not expect them to.
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 12:48
I'm afraid you've been hoodwinked into being offended about something that would otherwise have passed you by without any concern.
Nope - I just answered a question put on here, however it seems I have offended just about everybody on this thread. And I will just point out Squidge - Phill, no matter how much you try to twist my words or take them out of context - I am not a racist, I just think everybody should be treated equally.
I did'nt write the story, or put the link on here.I never said you did.
If it offends them that people eat during whatever hours ramadan covers, that is their issue, not anybody elses.But they have not said whether they are offended or not. The situation to which you relate does not exist in that media snippet.
Whether it is true or not it was in a newspaper and online. The Muslim community / workers can comment if they want.Not in that article.
In their country - or did you just ignore that bit? Do you honestly think they would provide a meal during these hours - hardly. And I certainly would not expect them to.Yes, in their country, in their home I would think they would look after their guests. You'd be surprised. But we're drifting away from what the trolls want.
Again, you are still responding to something that isn't there. The troll has laid the bait, Gronnuck took it and added too it then you have unwittingly been taken in.
All the while the OP's poll is irrelevant but the outcome is to try and stir up religious & cultural hate and bile by proxy because they haven't the balls to front it out themselves.
M Swanson
06-Feb-13, 13:02
No, I don't think that's true, at all, Cpt. You have not offended everyone on this thread and I'm sure there are many readers who agree with you, but don't want to find themselves bullied by the PC tactics of the few on here. Everyone should have the right to disagree; especially in the inoffensive manner that you ALWAYS do, but if you refer back to my post on criticising PC and it's disciples, you will find the truth in that post. Like myself, I have never considered you a racist, or bigot in anyway whatsoever, but it suits some to label you as such in an attempt to shut you up. It only takes one, for the rest of the small flock to follow. PC is not to be questioned and we run the gauntlet if we have the temerity to do so. Such is democracy, PC-style.
Nope - I just answered a question put on here, however it seems I have offended just about everybody on this thread. And I will just point out Squidge - Phill, no matter how much you try to twist my words or take them out of context - I am not a racist, I just think everybody should be treated equally.I'm not twisting your words. I fully accept you want to see everyone treated equally, as do I and I believe squidge also.
You've not offended me at all. I'm just trying to point out that this PC thread is about anything other than that. It was designed to mix it up, a link was posted with a very biased article and there was a response out of context. As I put it kneejerk, you responded to a perceived situation that the article led you to believe.
Exactly what the troll and the media want, to mix it up.
:confused
M Swanson
06-Feb-13, 13:06
Again, you are still responding to something that isn't there. The troll has laid the bait, Gronnuck took it and added too it then you have unwittingly been taken in.
All the while the OP's poll is irrelevant but the outcome is to try and stir up religious & cultural hate and bile by proxy because they haven't the balls to front it out themselves.
The only troll who is stirring up "religious and cultural hate," is you, by falsely accusing others! A "troll," can be many things and assume many identities, or as in your case, anonymously, but one thing they NEVER do is post in their own name. Take a bow, Phil. :lol:
Like myself, I have never considered you a racist, or bigot in anyway whatsoever, but it suits some to label you as such in an attempt to shut you up.Who's labelled who a racist? Who's try to shut anyone up?
The only label I think that has been posted is that of a troll. And that is what I believe you are doing.
Nope - I just answered a question put on here, however it seems I have offended just about everybody on this thread. And I will just point out Squidge - Phill, no matter how much you try to twist my words or take them out of context - I am not a racist, I just think everybody should be treated equally.
I absolutely never said that you were racist - talk about twisting words:roll:. None of my posts were about racism and I am surprised that you thought they were. I responded to comments that you made and challenged them. The story linked to by Gronnuck and the passages copied and pasted by M Swanson from a ranting bizarre sort of website are designed to do what those people who complain about Political Correctness do best - that is use the term to belittle, demean and dismiss arguments for things they dont understand. As for equality, you dont achieve equality by treating everyone the same but by responding to the different needs of people as this cartoon illustrates. And as for posting in your own name - how do you know that Phill isnt Phills name? I use an alias and I am not changing my user name now M Swanson but there were good reasons why I didnt use it in the first place. Want to know who I am? PM me and I will gladly tell you many people know already.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/d23b6c9e84194b976a60b3818f252b8d/tumblr_mfcrlfCRDG1qzrhx3o1_1280.png
M Swanson
06-Feb-13, 13:16
Ooh! Er. What story did I put up a link for, Squidge? :confused
Ooh! Er. What story did I put up a link for, Squidge? :confusedaaaargh posting from an Iphone is the most irritating thing in the world. I can never get it to do paragraphs and always have to edit it and end up losing stuff. I have edited my post from my lurrrrrrrrrrrrrrvely laptop.
M Swanson
06-Feb-13, 13:21
Oh! Right. No problem Squidge! :)
Erm! No, thanks. I have no need to know your name, why do you think I should?
cptdodger
06-Feb-13, 14:24
I must apologise to everybody on this thread. I honestly just tried to answer a question on a scenario put by Gronnuck (I think). There is no way I would wish to offend anybody on here or anywhere else. The more I try to explain myself the worse I sound. Squidge, Phill I apologise, I should not have inferred that either of you thought I was being racist.
Thats ok cpt.... You havent offended me anyways. I just try to reply to the content altho I might have stepped away from that in response to a couple of digs hereabouts recently!
I must apologise to everybody on this thread. I honestly just tried to answer a question on a scenario put by Gronnuck (I think). There is no way I would wish to offend anybody on here or anywhere else. The more I try to explain myself the worse I sound. Squidge, Phill I apologise, I should not have inferred that either of you thought I was being racist.No need to apologise, you didn't come across as racist nor did you say anything that was racist.
I understand what you were implying, everyone should be treated equally.
The article in the link was written in such a way as to imply demands for special treatment from a minority group i.e. Political Correctness gone mad, and your initial reaction to this implication was understandable.
My point was that this thread & that article are the exact ways people use PC to create divisions and religious tensions and how it happens.
M Swanson
06-Feb-13, 17:38
Well, it looks like this thread has gone cold and unless there's a resurgence of interest, I'll conclude by making two points.
I was very interested in knowing how Scots felt about PC. I've a good idea about the English, but it's always better to have a wider understanding of how folks feel about something that intrudes so much in their lives. As I believe I've mentioned previously, I've lived in one of the largest, Cosmopolitan boroughs in London for many years and rubbed shoulders with all creeds and colour. I can tell you, that one of the greatest problems that PC has created is the stubborn refusal to consult ethnic minorities before imposing there edicts on us all. It's as much resented by minority groups as it is by the rest of us, in my experience. If you want to find the culprits for driving a wedge between folks, then look no further than those who have worked so hard to impose their PC will on ALL of us. None of us have had any say in the matter.
The second and more important point, is that in Britain, Europe and America, there is growing resistance and hostility to PC and if we're not careful, there's a very real threat that the far right will pick up on an opportunity to create mayhem, which doesn't bear thinking about. This cannot be allowed to happen.
So, thanks very much to the 16 of you who have voted in the Poll and those bravehearts who have been willing to post their comments. :cool:
Yeah but where's the harm done by it all? I can't see it sorry.
What are these edicts that you talk about that annoys people? I'd like a few examples to see if it's worth getting annoyed about.
The second and more important point, is that in Britain, Europe and America, there is growing resistance and hostility to PC and if we're not careful, there's a very real threat that the far right will pick up on an opportunity to create mayhem, which doesn't bear thinking about. This cannot be allowed to happen.
Then may I suggest you stop aiding and abetting the far right through reading the Daily Mail?
Yeah but where's the harm done by it all? I can't see it sorry.
What are these edicts that you talk about that annoys people? I'd like a few examples to see if it's worth getting annoyed about.
AS would I. I cannot think of any equality 'edict' that has negatively impinged on my life. None.
Well, it looks like this thread has gone cold and unless there's a resurgence of interest, I'll conclude by making two points.
I was very interested in knowing how Scots felt about PC. I've a good idea about the English, but it's always better to have a wider understanding of how folks feel about something that intrudes so much in their lives. As I believe I've mentioned previously, I've lived in one of the largest, Cosmopolitan boroughs in London for many years and rubbed shoulders with all creeds and colour. I can tell you, that one of the greatest problems that PC has created is the stubborn refusal to consult ethnic minorities before imposing there edicts on us all. It's as much resented by minority groups as it is by the rest of us, in my experience. If you want to find the culprits for driving a wedge between folks, then look no further than those who have worked so hard to impose their PC will on ALL of us. None of us have had any say in the matter.
The second and more important point, is that in Britain, Europe and America, there is growing resistance and hostility to PC and if we're not careful, there's a very real threat that the far right will pick up on an opportunity to create mayhem, which doesn't bear thinking about. This cannot be allowed to happen.
So, thanks very much to the 16 of you who have voted in the Poll and those bravehearts who have been willing to post their comments. :cool:
LOL's (actual)
one of the greatest problems that PC has created is the stubborn refusal to consult ethnic minorities before imposing there edicts on us all. It's as much resented by minority groups as it is by the rest of us, in my experience.
Here lies the nub of the issue. People in positions of responsibility make pronouncements on issues concerning minority groups without properly consulting them. They come across as patronising them. A devious media doesn’t help by exploiting the issue to cause controversy, stir up xenophobia and sell newspapers. IMHO we are thankfully over the worse of any problems since people have grown wise to the distractions caused by the media. The worse offender is the Daily Mail which never misses an opportunity to create mischief and division.
Good god woman, suggesting they have 'staff'. How dare you!
They are servants as anyone with a modicum of education would know.
Yes they should throw the "staff" on the dole immediately. That'll teach the rich blastages. :eek:
but it's always better to have a wider understanding of how folks feel about something that intrudes so much in their lives. :cool:
Doesn't intrude on my life, I think it's you that has a problem.
nope ducati - but he could have offered the guy to come stay with him when he had his children to stay or not force him to move out of the flat where his children have a room to sleep in
nope ducati - but he could have offered the guy to come stay with him when he had his children to stay or not force him to move out of the flat where his children have a room to sleep in
What the hell are you talking about? :confused
Lol lol... I am talking about the bedroom tax and the lovely Lord Freud who lives in an 8 bedroomed place and also has a 4 bedroom property in London. Last week on a 5live phone in he told this bloke from Inverness that he didnt deserve a spare room because he is divorced and his three children only stay weekends and holidays. He went on to tell the man that he should move out of his two bedroomed flat and have his three children sleep on a sofa bed. Lord freud has 10 spare bedrooms, he could easily have put the bloke from Inverness up during the holidays. You cant however keep a spare bedroom for your children to stay in, for your carer to sleep in, for your children to have their own room, for foster children, for your wife if you are ill and need to sleep apart, for your disabled daughter to have her specially adapted room to herself and on and on it goes. Yet Lord Freud probably has never had to share a room in his life!
Here lies the nub of the issue. People in positions of responsibility make pronouncements on issues concerning minority groups without properly consulting them. They come across as patronising them. A devious media doesn’t help by exploiting the issue to cause controversy, stir up xenophobia and sell newspapers. IMHO we are thankfully over the worse of any problems since people have grown wise to the distractions caused by the media. The worse offender is the Daily Mail which never misses an opportunity to create mischief and division.
The problem, I think, is that they do "consult" but they only "consult" the pressure groups who do lobbying, and which tend not to represent the vast majority who have never even considered that joining pressure groups to acquire extra privilege was an imperative for them.....and the fact of that very limited level of consultation equates to legitimacy in the eyes of politicians. Pressure groups tend to consist of those relatively few who think they are "special" cases and the country should acknowledge their "specialness" and give them "special privileges", while the majority of that "special" demography are just happy enough to get along with getting along..and don't give a toss.
I, personally, think lobbying should be completely outlawed in a country which has the e-petition system. Imo, lobbying is simply a way of giving the opinions of relatively few much more weight than that opinion warrants, and the lobbyists a ridiculous income for representing a minority view...and I'm not convinced that lobbyists wouldn't do more good in the great scheme of understanding the realities of life and the economies of countries, if they had to spend some time on benefits and could see what difference their being jobless would make to the social cohesion within the UK.
Lol lol... I am talking about the bedroom tax and the lovely Lord Freud who lives in an 8 bedroomed place and also has a 4 bedroom property in London. Last week on a 5live phone in he told this bloke from Inverness that he didnt deserve a spare room because he is divorced and his three children only stay weekends and holidays. He went on to tell the man that he should move out of his two bedroomed flat and have his three children sleep on a sofa bed. Lord freud has 10 spare bedrooms, he could easily have put the bloke from Inverness up during the holidays. You cant however keep a spare bedroom for your children to stay in, for your carer to sleep in, for your children to have their own room, for foster children, for your wife if you are ill and need to sleep apart, for your disabled daughter to have her specially adapted room to herself and on and on it goes. Yet Lord Freud probably has never had to share a room in his life!
OK I don't know why you quoted me. But you can have as many bedrooms as you like, you just can't claim housing benefit on those you are not using. In private rented accomodation you never have been able to. It's not a tax, it is a reduction in how much tax everyone else is paying for your accomodation.
If you buy your own house, you get what you can afford, not what you are 'entitled to'
That might work Ducati, if there was sufficient social housing but there isnt. So you have two bedrooms but you are charged for a spare room despite the fact that you cannot be moved into a one bedroomed property. So you have two bedrooms and have a disabled daughter for whom you are their carer. That child needs their own room ... that has been agreed by occupational health and modifications made but because you have another daughter and they are not sharing you are charged a bedroom tax. So you have shared custody of your children after your marriage ends but you are charged a bedroom tax because you arent allowed to have a spare room for yhem to stay in. So you are a foster carer but you arent entitled to a spare room for your foster child.
Remember, most people receiving housing benefit are actually IN work but need to rent because they cant afford to buy because prices are unaffordable for those in lower paid work. They need housing benefits because rents are so high that if there was no housing benefit they would be homeless.
I dont have an issue with anyone spending their hard earned money on however big a house they want but you know, there is something distasteful and out if touch about a wealthy man sitting telling someone that because they Cant get a foot on the housing ladder they dont DESERVE a spare room for their children. It smacks a bit of 'Let them eat cake' and is yet another wsy to cause hardship and pain whilst high earners will receive a tax cut of £100 000 this April. Lord Freud must be laughing all the way to the bank.
M Swanson
07-Feb-13, 09:18
Doesn't intrude on my life, I think it's you that has a problem.
LOL. Well, I'm pleased to read that Ducati. :cool: Mind you, I'm just one of millions whose life is affected by PC. It's everywhere. It often dictates government policy, which shapes our lives. Guess it hasn't reached Wick yet! Tin helmet on D. :D
Meant to say, if anyone's interested in reading the realities of PC, then I can recommend a book called, 'The Retreat of Reason,' by Anthony Browne. Everything you'd like to know is in there. :cool:
LOL. Well, I'm pleased to read that Ducati. :cool: Mind you, I'm just one of millions whose life is affected by PC. It's everywhere. It often dictates government policy, which shapes our lives. Guess it hasn't reached Wick yet! Tin helmet on D. :D
Meant to say, if anyone's interested in reading the realities of PC, then I can recommend a book called, 'The Retreat of Reason,' by Anthony Browne. Everything you'd like to know is in there. :cool:
Please give us clear examples of how political correctness has negatively impacted your life.
You've expressed your opinion but if you want it to be taken seriously I suggest you explain why the poll is flawed and what you would offer in its stead.
Thanks Gronnuck but other posts have reflected my thoughts much more politely than I could have about the OP's reason for posting the poll. In order to avoid serious thread drift I stepped away from the PC (personal computer) the other night and this is my last post on this thread.
Please give us clear examples of how political correctness has negatively impacted your life.
The silence is deafening.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.