Political Correcntess: Good or Bad?

[emprworm]

I hate it!!!!!

I think it is an abomination to society and an abandonment of reason all in an effort to appeal to the lowest common denominator of irrational hypersensitivity.

There are actually places in the US where it has gotten so out of control that people want to rename "manhole" to "utility access cover" and change the spelling of "women" to "womyn"

you want to know how bad it is? Go to goolge and type "womyn" and see how many hits you get. Unbelievable.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=womyn

thats just the tip of the "political correctness" iceberg. And this thread is to let it all fly. Pro's. Con's. Examples (whether in support, or against)

[Anathema]

Haha, that's rich. That's really happening in the US? How dumb.

[quoudam72]

Since I am the insparation for this thread "political correctness" is sometimes taken to far. The only thing is Emprwrom about the spelling of women to "womyn" if you notice very closely is that those are gay women's group or lesbian if you perfer and I thought as much from experence with the spelled term. Just with the nature of the group you can expect as much with anything pertaining to men in general that is their thinking but that is not the focus of the subject. I still think there is a right way and a wrong way to present political matters so that cross cultural communication is not lost. What I mean by right way is to drop the nonsense example; in the "Columbian going through Civil war" thread you said "Miguel" when it could have been better just to say "Columbian terrorist" it had nothing to do with being politically correct but with tact. Here lies the main problem with some people and political correctness they have a problem with being intelligent. If you take the time to indentify the terrorist based on their location(s) instead of just their ethnic background I think you show a better understanding of the subject.

[Edric O]

Here's an idea: Why don't we ban all forms of inter-human communication? That way no one will ever get offended by anything. :D

On the serious side, I think political correctness was originally a good idea, a few decades ago. But now it's blown WAY out of proportion, to utterly insane levels. I don't hate it, but it is getting quite annoying and it hampers sensible communication.

[quoudam72]

Is there really a middle ground for sterotyping? I do not think there really is a middle ground because for all the could be good can be really bad.

[emprworm]

Since I am the insparation for this thread "political correctness" is sometimes taken to far. The only thing is Emprwrom about the spelling of women to "womyn" if you notice very closely is that those are gay women's group or lesbian if you perfer and I thought as much from experence with the spelled term. Just with the nature of the group you can expect as much with anything pertaining to men in general that is their thinking but that is not the focus of the subject. I still think there is a right way and a wrong way to present political matters so that cross cultural communication is not lost. What I mean by right way is to drop the nonsense example; in the "Columbian going through Civil war" thread you said "Miguel" when it could have been better just to say "Columbian terrorist" it had nothing to do with being politically correct but with tact. Here lies the main problem with some people and political correctness they have a problem with being intelligent. If you take the time to indentify the terrorist based on their location(s) instead of just their ethnic background I think you show a better understanding of the subject.

*sigh*

more on this Miguel stuff. Fine, I'll say "columbian terrorist" if that will appease your political correct inklings. Fine.

But it would be fully irrational to think that the majority names of the 18,000 FARC members in Columbia would be anything other than names indigenious to columbia. The chances of seeing a name in there like "Murniyani" are probably zero. Of course, if you travel to Indonesia, suddenly you will see that name all over the place. I see no problem...no problem at all assuming that certain names are common to Columbia that are not common to ZImbabwe. To assume a name common to Zimbabwe is common to Columbia just to be "politically correct" is a greivous error in logic....in my opinion.

When I hear the name "Vladimir" what do I think? Do I think Nigeria? Do I think China? LOL! DO I think Canada? I think Russian. And there is nothing wrong with that. It is a stereotypical, yet fully logical conclusion. And if you do not think Russian, you are going to be wrong much more than I am.

[quoudam72]

Emp you do not understand. Your facts are very well correct but what you fail to see is that you made it personal. You have lost a sense of credit and respect. Respect is important when entertaining an audience and you offended part of the audience by giving the terrorist a name your pointing your finger at all of them (sort of in certain ways) and not at the terrorist. How is that going to help your audience when they see you as seeing them as with the enemy you speak against?

[nemafakei]

'Political correctness' as it is known should be avoided.

'Political incorrectness', also should be.

That is to say, don't go overboard trying to be inoffensive in any possible detail, but take care not to use obviously prejudicial terms.

eg:

There's nothing wrong with saying 'short people'; forcibly using phrases like 'the vertically challenged members of society' is just stupid.

[slaphapy]

, I think political correctness was originally a good idea, a few decades ago. But now it's blown WAY out of proportion, to utterly insane levels. I don't hate it, but it is getting quite annoying and it hampers sensible communication.

i couldn't have said it better ;D

[emprworm]

Emp you do not understand. Your facts are very well correct but what you fail to see is that you made it personal. You have lost a sense of credit and respect. Respect is important when entertaining an audience and you offended part of the audience by giving the terrorist a name your pointing your finger at all of them (sort of in certain ways) and not at the terrorist. How is that going to help your audience when they see you as seeing them as with the enemy you speak against?

well you raise a good point about audience and respect. but as everyone knows, i already lost that here long ago. lol

i made it personal? How did I make it personal? WHy can't I make a hypothetical sentence with a realistic construct? How is that bad? I make a hypothetical, but a realistic one. Whats the problem?

If a suicide bomber attacks a Jewish deli in Israel, is it reasonalbe or unreasonable to assume it is an arab male? I say it is reasonable. Sure, it COULD be a 73 year old white Danish woman, but chances are it will be a male....arab....with an arab name. He could have any name....maybe he is "ackmad"....maybe he is "Doowdhri".....perhaps he is "Shamat"....why in the world, I mean just why in the world would someone take that personal?

"John Smith, the Caucasion American walks into a house and shoots people".

Would I find that statement offensive? Oh goodness no. But I guess that some people would. I am not saying that it wouldn't offend someone, sure it could. But I think that is being overly sensitive and too politically correct. ""John Smith, the Caucasion American walks into a house and shoots people"- big deal. John Smith is an American name. That sentence actually sounds more realistic than saying "Abdulla Almehairbi Mogazi the Caucasion American walks into a house and shoots people" Lol. That sounds utterly absurd.

So you tell me, which hypothetical sentence sounds realistic, and which one sounds just plain stupid:

"John Smith, the Caucasion American walks into a house and shoots people".

"Abdulla Almehairbi Mogazi the Caucasion American walks into a house and shoots people"

My only crime is that I make a realistic hypothetical statement instead of a rediculous one. But why should that be bad? Indeed, I think it should not. It is simply realistic...thats all.

If people get personally offended at a hypothetical sentence then I am sorry, but I still think they are being overly sensitive.

[quoudam72]

Your lack of sensitivity to your subject matter will render your sometimes insightful intelligent political commentary useless. The audience will see not your intelligence but your object lack of a true understanding of the individuals involved in your chosen subject(s).

"If you step on the toes of those you want to lead how then do you expect them to walk comfortably with you."

[emprworm]

quandom, there are thousands of latino names. how in the world could I have possibly imagined that I would have chosen Zamboe's real name? It was a freak accident. I don't see how you can label me as insensitive. Had I KNOWN his real name and then chose it, yea, that would be kinda lame. But I do not see it as insensitive for choosing a Latino name since it is highly unlikely that the majority of FARC would have russian or chinese names. It is highly likely the majority of them have names that are common to Columbia (which may or may not be Latino names....I do not know if Columbian names are majority latino names or not. I could be wrong there)

[quoudam72]

::) Emp if you would read my responses instead of trying to just reply and bombard the conversation with big words and alot of useless facts that don't get straight to the point you would have seen that in essence I have already told you these things that you have discovered about the subject that we speak about.

"Man who pisses into the wind finds it hard to make friends"

This is the internet where we see what you type. We read what you type so your intelligence is under a more observational scrunity. You are without a face your character is measured by your words.

[emprworm]

::) Emp if you would read my responses instead of trying to just reply and bombard the conversation with big words and alot of useless facts that don't get straight to the point you would have seen that in essence I have already told you these things that you have discovered about the subject that we speak about.

"Man who pisses into the wind finds it hard to make friends"

This is the internet where we see what you type. We read what you type so your intelligence is under a more observational scrunity. You are without a face your character is measured by your words.

i read everything you said, QUandom. GO back and read the very first sentence in reply #9.

[DukeLeto]

Political correctness is just stupid. Plain and simple. IE: The NAACP wants to have "white people" change to "pigmantally challenged persons." ;D

[quoudam72]

@Emprworm

Respect is important when entertaining an audience and you offended part of the audience by giving the terrorist a name your pointing your finger at all of them (sort of in certain ways) and not at the terrorist.

Then enough is said and no more will be said by me (on this subject).

[emprworm]

@Emprworm

Respect is important when entertaining an audience and you offended part of the audience by giving the terrorist a name your pointing your finger at all of them (sort of in certain ways) and not at the terrorist.

Then enough is said and no more will be said by me (on this subject).

uhhh....well i don't really know what you're trying to say there, but o well. Terrorists have names. Hows the name Joseph sound? Joseph kills 30 million people. Now would that offend someone named Joseph? Well maybe, but thats his problem. Because Joseph really DID kill 30 million people (hint: he was from Russia)

[Acriku]

I think giving the terrorist the full name would be sufficient, and less likely to offend anybody, like Muhammed Sharif. Whoever that is.

[emprworm]

I think giving the terrorist the full name would be sufficient, and less likely to offend anybody, like Muhammed Sharif. Whoever that is.

fair enough. i can go along with that.

[Caid Ivik]

@Emprworm

Respect is important when entertaining an audience and you offended part of the audience by giving the terrorist a name your pointing your finger at all of them (sort of in certain ways) and not at the terrorist.

Then enough is said and no more will be said by me (on this subject).

uhhh....well i don't really know what you're trying to say there, but o well. Terrorists have names. Hows the name Joseph sound? Joseph kills 30 million people. Now would that offend someone named Joseph? Well maybe, but thats his problem. Because Joseph really DID kill 30 million people (hint: he was from Russia)

Only 30?

Don't forget that it was also one Joseph, who cared for Jesus. Or one my favourite priest is also Joseph. Also his true name was Josif.

[Anathema]

(hint: he was from Russia)

Er, no, he was from Georgia. (or at least I believe that's what it's called in english)

[Edric O]

Joseph killed 30 million, Adolf killed 50 million... and George is trying hard to catch up. ;D

[TMA_1]

lol ahhh, I was hoping edric would break the ice with an anti bush statement. thanks edric.hehe ;) :)

[The_Sadukar]

Joseph killed 30 million, Adolf killed 50 million... and George is trying hard to catch up. ;D

go get'em, Edric, flame the yankees (on offence intendt)

[Edric O]

What anti-Bush statement? What yankees?

All I said was "George". George could be from any country in the world. Why are you using such degrading stereotypes? ;D