Is there ever a 'solid reason' when it comes to picking sides in things you can't possibly know the truth about?
I was quite comfortable with my 'I went to Jersey and it was shit, so they're prolly all bigots' reasoning.
Has political correctness actually gone mad?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
I was quite comfortable with my 'I went to Jersey and it was shit, so they're prolly all bigots' reasoning.
Because I've met a lot of people over the years and for the most part people are half decent.
Then there's people on the other side who automatically assume the person who made the alleged insult was in the wrong.
I expect most of the time it's somewhere in the middle.
True enough, Joe, but my post was founded on an objective reading of some others and not my personal opinion on this matter.
What makes you think it wasnt? I agree that we cant know for certain, but theres nothing in the article to suggest that it was anyting particularly untoward and the relatively civil manner in which it was dealt with, alongside the fact that the staff member is still in their job apparently, makes me think the offence caused was accidental.
Maybe the BBC article doesnt present the full story, but from whats reported there it seems hard to believe it was anything worse.
I think trans issues have become really unhelpfully polarised, on the internet.
Most people don't care, because why would they, so the only views you hear (I'm exaggerating) are either from people who think all trans people can be accurately described by the stupid helicopter quote and people who are campaigning for trans rights who are paranoid that the world hates them because they've seen that helicopter quote and its like too many times.
Most people don't care, because why would they, so the only views you hear (I'm exaggerating) are either from people who think all trans people can be accurately described by the stupid helicopter quote and people who are campaigning for trans rights who are paranoid that the world hates them because they've seen that helicopter quote and its like too many times.
As it happens, I agree with you but the company's reaction wasn't my point; and even that can possibly be viewed as the typical modern-day response when bad, very public criticism is made.
It pains me to do this...
It is very popular on social media. I've seen it posted here a number of times.
Maybe DOTA's referencing Michael Owen's famous quote: "If there's one thing helicopters have taught me, it's that footballers don't understand how to hover."
That's better than referencing 'helicopter money' from Milton Friedman's famous 1969 essay on central bank policy, which sadly was the first thing that popped into my head.
Just been reading a comment piece on monetary policy that one of our columnists has filed
The company's reaction is the least important point.
I was referring to the fact that the woman in question was happy enough to work with the company, the tribunal was happy enough to go with a charge of 'non-malicious, non intentional' discrimination and no one appears to have lost their job over it.
All of those factors suggest, to me anyway, that there is little to suggest that the comments were particularly bad.
This is a legal term, I take it? I didn't get that, reading the article.
This is the line that makes me think it is:
'Condor, which sails between Poole, Portsmouth, France and the Channel Islands, admitted to a "non-intentional and non-malicious act of discrimination".'
It may not be, it may just be that the BBC are badly conflating the charge (i.e. discrimination) and the companies excuse, but presumably you can't admit to something you haven't been charged with?
I can entirely see where you're coming from but it didn't occur to me before reading your posts. I did assume it was just a quote from them but I find your take more believable.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36380247
Not really surprised that a study would find that at least 50% of the posts using the word slut or whore were by women. I can remember as far back as my school days it to be other young women calling each other those names as much as young men calling young women those names.
This piece mentioning a previous study by Dove, does not really surprise me either, except that I would probably not have guessed it being that high a percent.
Not really surprised that a study would find that at least 50% of the posts using the word slut or whore were by women. I can remember as far back as my school days it to be other young women calling each other those names as much as young men calling young women those names.
This piece mentioning a previous study by Dove, does not really surprise me either, except that I would probably not have guessed it being that high a percent.
I think it's an extremely tough issue because there are obviously people out there that are racist, sexist, etc. and down right offensive. However, the issue with "political correctness" is that it's tough to define what constitutes being offensive and hard to determine who gets to pick what is offensive and what is not.
I try to be a respectful person and most people that know me in real life would say I'm a genuinely nice person.. And even then I've offended people here and there. Nothing serious, but I've said things that people have found offensive. So far that reason, I think it's slightly problematic when people try to ban acts or speeches because it's really hard to determine what is genuinely offensive (some things are, obviously) and what people get overly worked up over.
But like @DiseaseOfTheAge explained further up the page I think a main issue with this, especially with the internet culture we have today, is that we end up hearing just the polar ends of the spectrum because they are really the only people who care enough to make a big stink about things. For instance, if there is a liberal piece of legislation proposed, the immediate reaction is the ultra conservative response- and vica-versa. When that happens it's hard to make progress at all without arguing like a bunch of babies.
I try to be a respectful person and most people that know me in real life would say I'm a genuinely nice person.. And even then I've offended people here and there. Nothing serious, but I've said things that people have found offensive. So far that reason, I think it's slightly problematic when people try to ban acts or speeches because it's really hard to determine what is genuinely offensive (some things are, obviously) and what people get overly worked up over.
But like @DiseaseOfTheAge explained further up the page I think a main issue with this, especially with the internet culture we have today, is that we end up hearing just the polar ends of the spectrum because they are really the only people who care enough to make a big stink about things. For instance, if there is a liberal piece of legislation proposed, the immediate reaction is the ultra conservative response- and vica-versa. When that happens it's hard to make progress at all without arguing like a bunch of babies.
New Disney film appears to have a lesbian fish couple in it. PC gone mad.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...eature-animation-studio-s-lesbian-couple.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...eature-animation-studio-s-lesbian-couple.html
That's being inclusive just for the sake of being inclusive. Definitely forcing it.New Disney film appears to have a lesbian fish couple in it. PC gone mad.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...eature-animation-studio-s-lesbian-couple.html
Beavis & Butthead were before their time with their 'Lesbian seagull' ditty.
New Disney film appears to have a lesbian fish couple in it. PC gone mad.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...eature-animation-studio-s-lesbian-couple.html
Don't see why thats pc gone mad really. There's lesbians in real life, why not have talking fish lesbians.
Thought it was humans? And only in it for about five seconds or something...
feck Disney.
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the 'lesbian couple' people are 'outraged' about a pair of humans who appear for about 2 seconds in a trailer and whose sexual orientation, and relationship status, is unknown?
That's my understanding.
I demand gay fish!
Preferably one voiced by Kanye West.
Preferably one voiced by Kanye West.
I thought they were fish.
That's not PC gone mad. It isn't even PC. It's just normal stuff.
You can't gay anything these days...
I think so, but sometimes, something is just so outrageously wrong that even the anti-PC folk can't side against it.
Like this...
Like this...
Reminds me of that dreadful Michelle Pfeiffer film.
Dangerous Minds? I actually don't mind that. It's a decent enough B/C-tier movie.
I hate it. The kids wouldn't accept her, then one day she comes in wearing jeans and a leather jacket and suddenly they think she is cool and they call become model pupils. Bit of a leap to buy in to that.
i'm a mothafeckin gay fish
said dory
said dory
To be fair, men like sluts and whores.
Welsh people say 'slag'. Just thought I'd let you all know. Cheers, bye.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...rds-showing-jennifer-lawrence-being-strangled
Fox has apologised for an X-men:
Apocalypse promo poster which shows the baddie attacking mystique. Can't imagine many people condone violence against women and hardly think this poster does. Another day, another infernal 'twitter storm'.
Fox has apologised for an X-men:
Apocalypse promo poster which shows the baddie attacking mystique. Can't imagine many people condone violence against women and hardly think this poster does. Another day, another infernal 'twitter storm'.
Equality would say men could attack anyone though, right?
Also, it's some sort of fictional monster attacking a blue-skinned humanoid who also has superpowers.
Turning this into a "violence against women" issue requires considerable mental acrobatics.