Has political correctness actually gone mad?

I've tried a few times in the past to learn about feminist arguments and get around the things I don't get/don't agree with. What I've noticed is that plenty of feminists have gotten tired of explaining things to people outside of their circle. I've seen a few arguments where people would be told to go 'educate' themselves rather than derail the conversation and there are very few places where feminists actually get into calm discussions with people who disagree with them (though that's partially because they get so much abuse online).


This is true of many groups holding unpopular positions, I wonder if it's inevitable given the internet.
 
This is true of many groups holding unpopular positions, I wonder if it's inevitable given the internet.

Probably. Like I said, the alternative is even worse. People just get stuck in their own echo chambers.
This forum kind of avoids that as it's not catering to any specific political group or demographic. The only echo chamber effects around here are about transfers, players or managers. :wenger:
 
I'm more amazed that so many people still seem so wilfully ignorant of the fact that a private corporation like Twitter's right to ban people who abuse their platform, has absolutely nothing to do with "free speech" whatsoever.

Now, if people are being arrested...??

They are. Under the Communications Act 2003

People are being arrested for Offensive or Malicious Communications in the UK
 
Probably talking about America Mockney there. Sadly, it's not just UK in Europe.

Wikileaks joined the discussion...

B2oIexq.jpg


 
:lol::lol::lol::lol:

That's the biggest pile of shit I've ever read!

The article is a load of shite but it's stuff I've heard before (particularly the headdress/Henna/Sari).

The first comment on the Facebook page was 'THANK YOU' :boring:
 
Absolutely. The Freedom of Speech argument carries no water here. Unfortunately, the decision to gag anybody on such a popular platform does come across as unnecessarily censorious. Like I said, it's the ammunition it gives these cnuts that bothers me most of all.
the real mistake that twitter made was not applying their rules fairly across the board. leslie jones also constantly made hateful comments about white people and other provocative tweets like this (provocation being reportedly the very same reason twitter banned milo for):



this incident just makes twitter look bad while making milo look like a martyr and also like you said, gives him more ammo to slam the left for being hypocrites, thought policing, et al. it was a very poor move from twitter.
 
the real mistake that twitter made was not applying their rules fairly across the board. leslie jones also constantly made hateful comments about white people and other provocative tweets like this (provocation being reportedly the very same reason twitter banned milo for):



this incident just makes twitter look bad while making milo look like a martyr and also like you said, gives him more ammo to slam the left for being hypocrites, thought policing, et al. it was a very poor move from twitter.

Yeah that tweet is especially problematic. "Get her", that's incitement.

Cheers for the link @Pogue Mahone, enjoyed that. My feminist friend doesn't like Laurie Penny at all, I'm not sure why.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...t-and-a-university-erupts/?tid=pm_local_pop_b

In the emotional hours after five police officers were shot and killed during a Black Lives Matter protest in Dallas last month, Rohini Sethi vented on Facebook.

“Forget #BlackLivesMatter;” wrote Sethi, the vice president of the Student Government Association at the University of Houston. “More like AllLivesMatter.”
...
In the ensuing days, minority student organizations would call for her to resign or be ousted from office. A hashtag was born: #RemoveRohini.
...
On Wednesday, in a crowded Student Government Association meeting, student leaders gave Smith temporary power to sanction Sethi. Smith complied with their request that he suspend her. Sethi also offered to take a three-day cultural sensitivity workshop, Smith said.

I'd love to know what happens at 'cultural sensitivity' workshops. How could it take 3 days to tell someone they don't feel guilty enough and shouldn't talk about it?
 
So 90% of that university is white. Could you argue that collectively losing their shit over an alleged slight to the BLM movement is a form of cultural appropriation? :angel:
Could just be increased cultural awareness of social issues among young people (which I think is a good thing). However, the cultural awareness workshop is a pile of shit. As is the ever popular Twiter lynch mob.
 
So 90% of that university is white. Could you argue that collectively losing their shit over an alleged slight to the BLM movement is a form of cultural appropriation? :angel:

I try not to think about it. Then I start to wonder if men calling themselves feminists, women joining previously male only sports clubs or everyone transgender is appropriation and my head hurts.

I just stick to silence (irl) and remember that, as a straight white guy, I can't get it. Ignorance is bliss.
 
https://t.co/612stcozTd?ssr=true

This is a very good read on "yer man"

@Adebesi

I remember clicking on that link last Saturday night when I was very intoxicated. I missed most of the Milo hype, but I happened to know who Roosh V was and since I'm from the Netherlands, Geert Wilders is obviously a familiair name. It was very good and surreal read indeed, thanks for posting that link. I remember thinking it felt like reading a movie script or something, very nicely written by miss Penny.
 
Apparently. Maybe they'll go for the Leg O'Mutton park over the river for us next.

Really should not be shocked at anything that annoys PETA. They got upset at a commercial where an obviously plush toy gerbil was being fired out of a cannon. It seems even being mean to a plush toy is some sort of animal cruelty.
 
I'm not one for conspiracy theories but I would not be surprised to find out that for years PETA had been funded by all sorts of people who wanted to make the animal rights movement look completely ridiculous.
 
I'm not one for conspiracy theories but I would not be surprised to find out that for years PETA had been funded by all sorts of people who wanted to make the animal rights movement look completely ridiculous.

No, Ingrid Newkirk and others around her genuinely believe no publicity is bad publicity. They will stay in the news no matter what. They also do some decent undercover work and outreach and so do save many animal lives but they are such an easy target to hate, PETA may even be a net harm to the whole movement.

http://www.michaelspecter.com/2003/04/the-extremist/

Nutritionally, peta has a point. Yet alcohol abuse has become such a serious problem on college campuses that the ad enraged thousands of people. "It's an irresponsible, recycled publicity stunt that literally puts cows before kids. It's appalling," Wendy Hamilton, the president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said. "For Christ's sake, lighten up,'' Newkirk replied, when I asked her about the campaign. "We simply said that milk is so pathetic that there are even more nutrients in beer. madd should be happy–they got more press than they ever could have hoped for. We didn't know they would come after us, but I am glad they did. We are always disappointed when people don't come after us.''
...
Naked women also play a central role in peta's demonstrations and advertisements, and if a political organization can be said to have a muse, then the actress Pamela Anderson is peta's. In March, she appeared on a gigantic new billboard in Times Square, wearing three strategically placed lettuce leaves. ("People enjoy sex,'' Newkirk explained. "It's a big part of human nature. So we appeal to that as often as we can. And who could ask for anyone better than Pam? People drool when they look at her. Why wouldn't we use that? We need all the drooling we can get.")
...
Newkirk loved the notoriety, and still does; jousting with the media thrills her. "We are complete press sluts,'' she told me. "It is our obligation. We would be worthless if we were just polite and didn't make any waves." On several occasions during our interviews, she asked if I was looking for any particular kind of quote or theme. I didn't understand what she meant, so she explained: "Well, you know, that Reuters reporter was so thrilled when I told him my position on hoof-and-mouth disease. Don't you need something like that, too?" (Two years ago, when an epidemic of hoof-and-mouth disease terrified Europe and forced farmers to kill millions of animals, Newkirk made no effort to hide her delight. "I openly hope that it comes here,'' she said. "It wouldn't be any more hideous for the animals–they are all bound for a ghastly death anyway….It will bring economic harm only for those who profit from giving people heart attacks and giving animals a concentration-camp-like existence.")
...
That raises the question of whether peta's shock tactics and abrasiveness might be so unsavory that they offend many of the very people the group wishes to attract. One day, I put that question to the *********** Peter Singer, whose book "Animal Liberation" (1975) is often credited with inspiring the modern animal-rights movement; Newkirk told me that it persuaded her to start peta. "Publicity is a tactic that has worked well for them,'' Singer said. "Ingrid constantly risks offense, but she seems to feel it does more good than harm." In fact, Newkirk seems openly to court the anger even of people who share her views. "I know feminists hate the naked displays," she told me. "I lose members every time I do it. But my job isn't to hold on to members, as much as I'd like to–it's to get people who just don't give a damn about this issue to look twice.'' The truth is that extremism and outrage provide the fundamental fuel for many special-interest groups. Nobody ever stopped hunting because the National Rifle Association supports assault weapons; many of those who oppose abortion are appalled that people in their movement commit acts of violence, yet they are not appalled enough to support abortion. The same is true with peta, and Newkirk knows it; a vegan isn't going to start eating meat or wearing fur simply because she disapproves of a naked calendar.

Edit: her will
While the final decision as to the use of my body remains with peta, I make the following suggested directions:

a. That the "meat" of my body, or a portion thereof, be used for a human barbecue, to remind the world that the meat of a corpse is all flesh, regardless of whether it comes from a human being or another animal and that fleshfoods are not needed;

b. That my skin, or a portion thereof, be removed and made into leather products, such as purses, to remind the world that human skin and the skin of other animals is the same and that neither is "fabric" or needed;

c. That my feet be removed and umbrella stands or other ornamentation be made from them, as a reminder of the depravity of killing innocent animals, such as elephants, in order that we might use their body parts for household items and decorations;

d. That my eyes be removed, mounted and delivered to the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency as a reminder that peta will continue to be watching the agency until it stops poisoning and torturing animals in useless and cruel experiments;

e. That my pointing finger be delivered to Kenneth Feld [the owner of Ringling Brothers] or to a circus museum, to stand as the "Greatest Accusation on Earth" on behalf of the countless animals who have been deprived of all that is natural and pleasant to them, abused and forced into involuntary servitude for the sake of cheap entertainment.