Has political correctness actually gone mad?

When the whole "movement" began the idea was for people to consider what words/phrases they were using and what their effect on others might be. It has instead turned into an idea that we all should be offended and outraged over pretty much anything anyone says be it taken out of context, just something silly/stupid someone says, not just when someone is actually being a bigot.

And of course the idea that anyone offending has to be harshly punished, has not helped.
 
SteveJ said:
Where are all these masses of people whose lives have (supposedly) been marred by the 'plague of political correctness', Feminism etc etc? Have to say, none of these things have made any negative difference whatsoever to my life, yet all the time I read of people complaining about PC & the like.
Click to expand...
My neither, but Littlejohn has made a career out of the fact plenty of people do get riled up daft things.

This is an odd one.
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-sty...daughter-perform-naked-pass-article-1.2217602
 
SteveJ said:
Where are all these masses of people whose lives have (supposedly) been marred by the 'plague of political correctness', Feminism etc etc? Have to say, none of these things have made any negative difference whatsoever to my life, yet all the time I read of people complaining about PC & the like.
Click to expand...

That's the crux isn't it. As silly as things like "jazz hands clapping" is, it doesn't actually affect anyone negatively. And rarely, if ever, is "being unPC" a crime, or subject to anything more than a bit of annoyed criticism from people who don't feel that way... You know, the same kind of annoyed criticism as saying "PC has gone maaad!"
 
SteveJ said:
Where are all these masses of people whose lives have (supposedly) been marred by the 'plague of political correctness', Feminism etc etc? Have to say, none of these things have made any negative difference whatsoever to my life, yet all the time I read of people complaining about PC & the like.
Click to expand...

There are a number of girls in Rotherham who might not have had their lives ruined. Jack Straw spoke out about this and was shouted down by the PC brigade.
 
evra said:
There are a number of girls in Rotherham who might not have had their lives ruined. Jack Straw spoke out about this and was shouted down by the PC brigade.
Click to expand...

I was referring to web users, mostly men, who frequently complain about PC.
 
The only place I've ever really seen examples of that insane PCness is on the internet, where it's very easy be outraged without actually putting in any effort or thought. On a day to day level I'd say most people are totally unaffected by extreme political correctness so it's probably grand.
 
Mockney said:
That's the crux isn't it. As silly as things like "jazz hands clapping" is, it doesn't actually affect anyone negatively. And rarely, if ever, is "being unPC" a crime, or subject to anything more than a bit of annoyed criticism from people who don't feel that way... You know, the same kind of annoyed criticism as saying "PC has gone maaad!"
Click to expand...

If I was in an auditorium full of people and did something worthy of applause I'd feel very let down when the jazz hands came out. The whole point of applause is the din it creates. Other people's anxiety shouldn't result in curbing our normal activities to suit them, that's where Pogue's examples support a PC gone mad narrative. Likewise the idea of studying censored Greek myths because the content might upset someone who had a bad experience completely unrelated to Greek mythology. If a Minotaur sexually assaulted you on your holiday in Crete, fair enough but otherwise, in both of these examples, people need to deal.
 
Most political correctness is just what used to be called politeness - it was never really on to go around calling people fat or stupid.
 
sullydnl said:
The only place I've ever really seen examples of that insane PCness is on the internet, where it's very easy be outraged without actually putting in any effort or thought. On a day to day level I'd say most people are totally unaffected by extreme political correctness so it's probably grand.
Click to expand...

The internet gives an amplified voice to people who get offended at anything. Outside of that, it's primarily academia where the furore exists. In real life, there's very little of it. The constant talk of micro-aggressions, macro-aggressions, privilege, triggers, etc. is limited to a fairly small group of people, fortunately, who obsess about it.
 
It's absolutely gone too far. People are ao easily upset these days and then expect their softness to dictate how others act/talk. There should be more focus on intent of people's actions rather than just taking them at face value, or worse, imparting one's own interpretations on them. Some student at my law school actually got upset and threw a fit over the professor and a student using the word "retard" in class... Well, the opinion they were discussing from the 1800s used that word and had to do with some mentally retarded folks. Was the professor and atudent supposed to use a synonym that wouldnt offend the girl instead of quoting the judges who authored the opinion?

What about that poor scientist who was attacked by all those feminists when he wore a shirt with some girls in bikinis on it. Apparently that guy was a prime example of how terribly misogynistic the scientific community is and he was a terrible person. The poor bugger ended up crying his way through an apology after a bunch of feminists dragged his name through the mud. The guy was clearly a harmless nerd who didn't expect a bunch of pissed off women to try and make a mountain out of a molehill and make an example out of him.
 
evra said:
I think it's way out of hand, at its worst it stops us confronting very serious issues. The best example I can think of is the awful situation in Rotherham.
Click to expand...
Great example, if at any point even a shoddy claim of racism is pointed towards something, the issue gets overshadowed by a fear of not being labelled a racist even if that means refusing to confront an issue.
 
ATXRedDevil said:
What about that poor scientist who was attacked by all those feminists when he wore a shirt with some girls in bikinis on it. Apparently that guy was a prime example of how terribly misogynistic the scientific community is and he was a terrible person. The poor bugger ended up crying his way through an apology after a bunch of feminists dragged his name through the mud. The guy was clearly a harmless nerd who didn't expect a bunch of pissed off women to try and make a mountain out of a molehill and make an example out of him.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That was ridiculous. The power of Twitter to really feck someone over for something utterly insignificant. That's a real victim, right there.

Jon Ronson just wrote a book about online public shaming and how it wrecks peoples lives. A lot of the really nasty stuff is originally kicked off by a sense of political correctness. Another good example would be that woman who cracked a lame joke about not getting AIDS in Africa because she's white, before boarding a flight home. She was absolutely destroyed by the consequences of the backlash online. Took her years to recover.
 
Last edited:
Pogue Mahone said:
The phrase alluded to in the title always used to wind me up. Political correctness is a good thing and comes as a result of a decades long struggle for equality. Who cares if we sometimes err on the side of being too cautious about causing offence?

Reading articles like this, though, makes me wonder if it really has gone a bit too far. Especially with social media empowering loony tunes crusades by anyone, anywhere, who takes offence at anything.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

It's not.

Wiki says "In modern usage, the terms PC, politically correct, and political correctness are generally pejorative descriptors..." It certainly is a joke that has been abused as a phrase more than any advantages it delivers, imo.

- Use 'visually impaired' instead of blind. Doesn't blind literally mean the same thing? How is a longer explanation of a word better than the word itself?
- 'Differently abled' instead of disabled is another. What different ability?
- Other words like replacing 'fireman' with 'firefighter'. Yes, it has man in it, but how is that an example of discriminations? It's just a noun which has absolutely nothing discriminatory in it. And by renaming it, has women empowerment significantly improved?

Even insults like "Are you retarded? Can't you still do this right?" is as simple as asking someone "Are you blind? Do you not see where you are going" or "Are you deaf? Did you not hear what I just said" It's is a comment on a person not using his senses or intelligence, not a slur against disabled persons in general!

George Carlin said:
“Political correctness is America's newest form of intolerance, and it is especially pernicious because it comes disguised as tolerance. It presents itself as fairness, yet attempts to restrict and control people's language with strict codes and rigid rules. I'm not sure that's the way to fight discrimination. I'm not sure silencing people or forcing them to alter their speech is the best method for solving problems that go much deeper than speech.”
Click to expand...

Yes, I believe it has gone mad as a majority. It does have some credibility, but overall the misuse outweighs genuine uses.

Edit: The Carlin quote was for the subject. Nothing specific to America.
 
People actually love being offended. They should do some studies into it. They probably have.
I think some of it is feeling a part of something. People also love to feel included in a tight knit 'community' and fight what they kid themselves into thinking is a worthy cause together.
The recent surge of feminism-gone-nuts is a good example of that, and probably does more harm than good.
Another weird example is fat models. It's gone so far that you're meant to feel ashamed if you don't agree with it/like it.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
It's not.

Wiki says "In modern usage, the terms PC, politically correct, and political correctness are generally pejorative descriptors..." It certainly is a joke that has been abused as a phrase more than any advantages it delivers, imo.

- Use 'visually impaired' instead of blind. Doesn't blind literally mean the same thing? How is a longer explanation of a word better than the word itself?
Click to expand...

Visual impairment is a spectrum, "legally blind" people can have a certain amount of vision or none at all. I'd argue that visual impairment properly describes this, whereas blind blind just seems to suggest "can't see a thing".
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
- 'Differently abled' instead of disabled is another. What different ability?
Click to expand...
"Differently abled" is an odd one alright, and it could sound patronising imo. Although when referring to things (like toilets or entrances), I do prefer "accessible" to "disabled". And if someone was to ask me to refer to them as differently abled, it'd be no skin off my nose.
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
- Other words like replacing 'fireman' with 'firefighter'. Yes, it has man in it, but how is that an example of discriminations? It's just a noun which has absolutely nothing discriminatory in it. And by renaming it, has women empowerment significantly improved?
Click to expand...
I can't speak for feminists (they hate that! boom boom), but I imagine that gender-neutralising terms like chairman is just seen as a way to slowly address assumptions and stereotypes.

Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Even insults like "Are you retarded? Can't you still do this right?" is as simple as asking someone "Are you blind? Do you not see where you are going" or "Are you deaf? Did you not hear what I just said" It's is a comment on a person not using his senses or intelligence, not a slur against disabled persons in general!
Click to expand...

Think about it, if you know what is meant by the pejorative term "retard", i.e. an insulting term towards the mentally disabled, then you're comparing another person to them as a deliberate insult. Hardly the most complimentary thing, is it?
 
Last edited:
What about "the Jews" or " the Gays". Its obvious people should be careful with their words but often aren't. As soon as anyone uses those it puts my back up.

Fireman vs firefighter? Who cares. Firefighter might be preferred and more accurate, but is anyone going to get told off for it?

It costs nothing to chose words carefully.
 
I don't know about "gone mad" but it's certainly gone profitable. Find some identity politics to lay claim to and then make a living publishing straw man articles in "Comment is Free".
 
Fireman etc. seems like they've just took action against it for the sake of it considering it also has half of the word 'woman' in it. No problems with calling them firefighters though. It's a better word anyway.
 
MoskvaRed said:
I don't know about "gone mad" but it's certainly gone profitable. Find some identity politics to lay claim to and then make a living publishing straw man articles in "Comment is Free".
Click to expand...
They don't get paid for CIF, that's why it's so prolific and so shite
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Agreed. That was ridiculous. The power of Twitter to really feck someone over for something utterly insignificant. That's a real victim, right there.

Jon Ronson just wrote a book about online public shaming and how it wrecks peoples lives. A lot of the really nasty stuff is originally kicked off by a sense of political correctness. Another good example would be that woman who cracked a lame joke about not getting AIDS in Africa because she's white, before boarding a flight home. She was absolutely destroyed by the consequences of the backlash online. Took her years to recover.
Click to expand...
I'll have to check out that book when I get a chance.

As for the AIDs tweet, I'm one of the most anti-PC people you'll ever talk to but I'm also a firm advocate of personal responsibility and common sense. IIRC that woman was a corporate PR executive for very large international corporation. What she tweeted was just downright irresponsible and idiotic (even if not seriously meant to hurt those affected by AIDS), especially considering her job title. I have no problems with her being fired over that if for no other reason than it clearly displayed a level of judgment far below what is necessary to be an effective corporate PR executive. Whether right or wrong, she should have had enough awareness to realize that tweeting that to the public domain was a terrible idea and obviously going to upset a ton of people. If she made that joke privately to friends and it got out then I would sympathize.
 
VeevaVee said:
Fireman etc. seems like they've just took action against it for the sake of it considering it also has half of the word 'woman' in it. No problems with calling them firefighters though. It's a better word anyway.
Click to expand...

Its a much better word. These people bloody well fight fires for a living!
 
Dave89 said:
Visual impairment is a spectrum, "legally blind" people can have a certain amount of vision or none at all. I'd argue that visual impairment properly describes this, whereas blind blind just seems to suggest "can't see a thing".

"Differently abled" is an odd one alright, and it could sound patronising imo. Although when referring to things (like toilets or entrances), I do prefer "accessible" to "disabled". And if someone was to ask me to refer to them as differently abled, it'd be no skin off my nose.

I can't speak for feminists (they hate that! boom boom), but I imagine that gender-neutralising terms like chairman is just seen as a way to slowly address assumptions and stereotypes.



Think about it, if you know what is meant by the pejorative term "retard", i.e. an insulting term towards the mentally disabled, then you're comparing another person to them as a deliberate insult. Hardly the most complimentary thing, is it?
Click to expand...

No one calls a colour blind guy, blind. And calling a person who cannot totally see, blind is no way derogatory.

Using the title 'chairman' as a excuse for not recruiting females is just lame, not segregation. What stereotype are you breaking here? If you call for a policeman and a policewoman turns up, so what? This is precisely what I'm talking about. Making a big thing outta stuff, that no one cares about. If someone says, it needs to be changed because a fire-fighter is a better representation than a fireman, I agree with it. I don't get why this change is because of 'political correctness'.

As for the last, I see no difference between calling a person a retard as to calling them blind or deaf (see my examples). Saying "Are you blind" is not a slur to blind persons all over. Same applies here.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
As for the last, I see no difference between calling a person a retard as to calling them blind or deaf (see my examples). Saying "Are you blind" is not a slur to blind persons all over. Same applies here.
Click to expand...
You cannot be serious, can you? 'Blind' doesn't just mean you're a shit footballer it also carries a charge of lack of awareness etc etc.
 
One of the silliest PC moments was back in 1999 when an aid to Washington DC's mayor was fired for using the word "niggardly" in a meeting. He was rehired thanks to the ridicule heaped on the Mayors office for caving into complaints without actually looking into the words actual definition. Just to be clear this is just one case I am talking about
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
No one calls a colour blind guy, blind. And calling a person who cannot totally see, blind is no way derogatory.

Using the title 'chairman' as a excuse for not recruiting females is just lame, not segregation. What stereotype are you breaking here? If you call for a policeman and a policewoman turns up, so what? This is precisely what I'm talking about. Making a big thing outta stuff, that no one cares about. If someone says, it needs to be changed because a fire-fighter is a better representation than a fireman, I agree with it. I don't get why this change is because of 'political correctness'.

As for the last, I see no difference between calling a person a retard as to calling them blind or deaf (see my examples). Saying "Are you blind" is not a slur to blind persons all over. Same applies here.
Click to expand...
Regarding your first point, I don't think blind is offensive, visually impaired is just clearer in my opinion when it comes to describing the whole range of blindness. It might be more awkward than saying "he's blind", but it's easier than "well, he's sort of blind, he can make out shapes kinda well in one eye, and not so well in the other..."

As for the chairman/chairperson point, I am assuming here that the logic is if we get used to chairperson, we'll move away from the innate bias that there has to be a man in the chair. I'm not saying it's right, just explaining their logic.

And for your last post, "are you blind" doesn't equate to "are you retarded" because calling someone you think actually fits the description of blindness is not particularly offensive (as I said above it's just perhaps not accurate), whereas calling someone a retard who actually is mentally disabled is incredibly offensive. So, by definition, comparing someome to the inoffensive term is less offensive than comparing them to the offensive term.
 
JustAFan said:
One of the silliest PC moments was back in 1999 when an aid to Washington DC's mayor was fired for using the word "niggardly" in a meeting. He was rehired thanks to the ridicule heaped on the Mayors office for caving into complaints without actually looking into the words actual definition. Just to be clear this is just one case I am talking about
Click to expand...

What a niggardly act from the mayor.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Agreed. That was ridiculous. The power of Twitter to really feck someone over for something utterly insignificant. That's a real victim, right there.

Jon Ronson just wrote a book about online public shaming and how it wrecks peoples lives. A lot of the really nasty stuff is originally kicked off by a sense of political correctness. Another good example would be that woman who cracked a lame joke about not getting AIDS in Africa because she's white, before boarding a flight home. She was absolutely destroyed by the consequences of the backlash online. Took her years to recover.
Click to expand...

In Baltimore last month, there was a newspaper that was trying to claim that a woman in Baltimore was A) drunk, B) instigating trouble with the mob, and C) trying to steal a man's handbag (same guy had a stolen bottle of vodka with a pourer on it) and proceeded to publicly lie about her actions and defame her. When people pointed out the ridiculousness of their claims and presented video and photographic evidence to the contrary, the "reporters" blocked and verbally denigrated them as racists. Their intent was to purposefully misrepresent the truth in order to back their narrative for the riots, which was basically that it wasn't the fault of the rioters. The best was when one of them said that they didn't lie, just misrepresented the truth. Their retraction was laughable and apology was even worse.
 
peterstorey said:
You cannot be serious, can you? 'Blind' doesn't just mean you're a shit footballer it also carries a charge of lack of awareness etc etc.
Click to expand...
Dave89 said:
whereas calling someone a retard who actually is mentally disabled is incredibly offensive.
Click to expand...

I'm curious. Why do you think so? How is a physical handicap better than a mental handicap? Does that equate to calling people stupid/idiot/crazy or a lunatic maybe?
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
I'm curious. Why do you think so? How is a physical handicap better than a mental handicap? Does that equate to calling people stupid/idiot/crazy or a lunatic maybe?
Click to expand...
Well people are trying not to be as cluntish as they were years ago in the UK. Mad, bad and dangerous to know
 
Growing up I remember my dad and his mates. Proper manly working class fellas, skins as thick as you like and would say what they liked, and in return would be offended at nothing as long as you stick to the loose moral code of 'what's right's, right'. You respect your elders, you look after your family and it's always your round. Other than that most things are good game. One of my dads mates was 'P*ki Ste'. A real good bloke of Asian decent who used to call himself that if anyone asked his name. Now, the younger generation of their sons carry on the same. One of my best mates, who I'm going to be best man for at his wedding is a black lad and I 'd always said 'half-cast' when talking about mixed race people and I'd said it in his company many times. My aunty used to always date black fella's and my 'uncle' growing up was a Rastafarian guy with long dread locks, she used to also refer to him as that. Now apparently that's offensive to say.

I fecking hate political correctness and everything that comes with it. You can be morally sound without being a politically correct soppy cnut who gets offended at everything. I'll say what I like and in return you can say to me what you like. I don't go out to cause offense, but I won't watch what I say because a bunch of 21st century metrosexuals might get offended by it either.

Some here wouldn't want to be in the pub with me and my mates (of all different colours, ages and genders) at weekend, there'd be so many precious little ears hurting, I'm sure.
 
Last edited:
My favorite has always been people that get offended when you describe someone as black when trying to point them out in the crowd. In a room full of people, and there is only one person with dark skin it is far easier to say 'yeh he is the black guy over there' instead of trying to come up with some other description about their cloths which likely isn't going to be unique to that person. Yet apparently to some people people that is wrong.
 
I was about 20 when i learned that describing myself as halfcaste was offensive. To myself.

Now I can't say that apparently. About myself.
 
It amuses me when people rush to take offense on behalf of other groups.

Also, I think faux outrage at insignificant comments and acts detract from main, substantial issues that need to be tackled in our society. How many people have been turned away from feminism (which at it's core is a very honorable movement) because of the morons who overreact at every perceived slight?

The Stephen Fry quote is excellent in theory; however society today demands you adhere to new sensitivities or get burned. Plus it doesn't take much out of me to avoid saying certain things or do things in a way that avoids hurting people. So I guess I'm saying that while political correctness makes for a good bitching session on the Caf, overall it's harmless, and potentially beneficial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.