Has political correctness actually gone mad?

[Pogue Mahone]

This is where their hypocrisy falls down, however. According to a large, large majority of pro-choice advocators, men are entitled to have no say whatsoever on abortion because we don't have uteruses. Yet, according to the very same people, 'men' can get pregnant.

It's utter lunacy.

I think you’ll find nobody can get pregnant without a uterus.

 

[Garethw]

Why is this bad/stupid?

Because anatomically only women can get pregnant. The world has gone bloody mad!

 

[Cheesy]

It's completely daft but as always the anti-PC reaction ends up being as hysterical as what it is they're criticising.

 

[Halftrack]

It's completely daft but as always the anti-PC reaction ends up being as hysterical as what it is they're criticising.

I's like with the alt-right calling the left sensetive snowflakes, when they themselves get just as easily bent out of shape over nothing.

There are cases where PC goes too far, but this isn't one of them. If you see someone going "Hey, some FTM trans can also get pregnant, let's change the language to make sure this covers them as well" as an example of PC gone too far, get a fecking life. Seriously.

Christ on a fecking bike. "World's gone mad", "utter lunacy". Recompose yourselves, you hysterical knobs.

 

[crappycraperson]

Why is this bad/stupid?

I understand the whole problem with social construct of gender imposing certain values or lifestyle on people but biological separation of human species into 2 different sexes is a fact that can not be gotten rid of. Any societal restrictions around the same can be reformed or gotten rid of but the movement to completely stop any kind of classification between male and female from birth itself is non-sensical. Just taking the example of medical field, for various treatments and diagnoses it is important to know the current biological sex (and in all probability even the one they were born with) of the patient in question. If someone is pregnant, the doctor would consider the patient as female only, writing any other sex on paper is foolhardy at best and could lead to some silly mistake by non-attention paying medical attendant at worst.
When I first read and came on board with the whole trans-movement, I drew a distinction between biological sex and gender, mainly for people who are yet to fully transition. But I have been confused recently by the pushback against assignment of biological sex at birth itself by certain people. It is stupid, you can't reform role of genders in society by denying basic biology.

 

[Stacks]

Because anatomically only women can get pregnant. The world has gone bloody mad!

the thing is I saw some news headlines about a pregnant man but then realised it was a biological woman who decided to be labelled a man, hence paused her transition to become a woman in order to get pregnant

 

[2 man midfield]

the thing is I saw some news headlines about a pregnant man but then realised it was a biological woman who decided to be labelled a man, hence paused her transition to become a woman in order to get pregnant

I remember seeing that. I didn't realise how it was even news. 'Man has baby!' looks good as a headline I guess, but the story is for all intents and purposes: woman has baby.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I understand the whole problem with social construct of gender imposing certain values or lifestyle on people but biological separation of human species into 2 different sexes is a fact that can not be gotten rid of. Any societal restrictions around the same can be reformed or gotten rid of but the movement to completely stop any kind of classification between male and female from birth itself is non-sensical. Just taking the example of medical field, for various treatments and diagnoses it is important to know the current biological sex (and in all probability even the one they were born with) of the patient in question. If someone is pregnant, the doctor would consider the patient as female only, writing any other sex on paper is foolhardy at best and could lead to some silly mistake by non-attention paying medical attendant at worst.
When I first read and came on board with the whole trans-movement, I drew a distinction between biological sex and gender, mainly for people who are yet to fully transition. But I have been confused recently by the pushback against assignment of biological sex at birth itself by certain people. It is stupid, you can't reform role of genders in society by denying basic biology.

Yeah, I'm with you on that. Differentiating between sex and gender is fine but the idea that the sex of a child can be a social construct is absolutely fecking bonkers. As is usually the case, though, I wonder how big a movement this actually is? I'd say there's a good chance that this idea is only being pushed by a tiny minority who are being portrayed by the press/assorted right-wingers as 100% representative of everyone on the left who supports the trans movement.

 

[crappycraperson]

Yeah, I'm with you on that. Differentiating between sex and gender is fine but the idea that the sex of a child can be a social construct is absolutely fecking bonkers. As is usually the case, though, I wonder how big a movement this actually is? I'd say there's a good chance that this idea is only being pushed by a tiny minority who are being portrayed by the press/assorted right-wingers as 100% representative of everyone on the left who supports the trans movement.

Yes, that's why I said certain people and not the whole movement. Only issue I saw is that when these odd reports (only in single digits) did come out, I saw some support for the same in LGBTQ community (at least on social media) and very little push back or questions over it. I understand that may be because the typical right wing sites were going to town over it and no one wants to join that crew but it remains to be seen if this becomes a routine or one off.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Yes, that's why I said certain people and not the whole movement. Only issue I saw is that when these odd reports (only in single digits) did come out, I saw some support for the same in LGBTQ community (at least on social media) and very little push back or questions over it. I understand that may be because the typical right wing sites were going to town over it and no one wants to join that crew but it remains to be seen if this becomes a routine or one off.

As well as assuming that the more fruit loops ideas only represent a tiny % of the LGBTQ community I'm also assuming that the sort of people who argue about this shit on social media provide a similarly skewed sample. I'm mainly assuming this for my own sanity. If Twitter really does represent a reasonable cross-section of society then we're all fecking doomed!

 

[PedroMendez]

The core problem of intersectionality is that it is extremely simplistic and stops looking at people as individuals. The used categories are broad aggregates, that say almost nothing about individual experience.
Additionally there is the tendency to accept anyone's experience as equally valid as long as it is in a certain range of acceptable opinions (e.g. Rachel dolezal stepped over one of their lines) regardless of its validity. The movement expects unquestioned solidarity (in their own pre-confined corridor of acceptable views), which makes opposing a few cringe tendencies difficult. Saying that xyz is not really an issue, turns one into an oppressor. Both aspects foster conformity and are at odds with individuality.

 

[Silva]

Additionally there is the tendency to accept anyone's experience as equally valid as long as it is in a certain range of acceptable opinions (e.g. Rachel dolezal stepped over one of their lines) regardless of its validity. The movement expects unquestioned solidarity (in their own pre-confined corridor of acceptable views), which makes opposing a few cringe tendencies difficult. Saying that xyz is not really an issue, turns one into an oppressor. Both aspects foster conformity and are at odds with individuality.

You're lumping different people together and assuming they're one uniform group that's in agreement with each other. Leading you to an opinion that only makes sense in a world that doesn't exist. Not everyone who says something you find daft agrees with each other. I can see why that might make it easier "hurr durr, they're so silly over there on their twitter", but you're just chatting shit.

 

[Silva]

As well as assuming that the more fruit loops ideas only represent a tiny % of the LGBTQ community I'm also assuming that the sort of people who argue about this shit on social media provide a similarly skewed sample. I'm mainly assuming this for my own sanity.

It's definitely a skewed sample. Think about non-political things for example, the people who might talk about car engines at length won't be representative of your average driver. The people who might talk at length about episodes of The Wire won't be representative of TV audiences (or even The Wire's own audience). And not only is it a skewed sample, more often than not it's a tiny sample in numbers - like, half a dozen people who have the context stripped off their tweets so breitbart can run a smarmy article about fascist SJWs.

Usually, by the point it reaches this thread, whatever the original message was has gone through 2 or 3 ideological filters and is unrecognisable to most of us.

 

[PedroMendez]

You're lumping different people together and assuming they're one uniform group that's in agreement with each other. Leading you to an opinion that only makes sense in a world that doesn't exist. Not everyone who says something you find daft agrees with each other. I can see why that might make it easier "hurr durr, they're so silly over there on their twitter", but you're just chatting shit.

I am not even sure what you are trying to say.

 

[Silva]

I am not even sure what you are trying to say.

It's not one uniform movement. There's no such thing as a uniform movement. Unless it's just one person on their own. Sure there's overlap, but there's overlap in the PC and anti-PC crowds too.

 

[crappycraperson]

The core problem of intersectionality is that it is extremely simplistic and stops looking at people as individuals. The used categories are broad aggregates, that say almost nothing about individual experience.
Additionally there is the tendency to accept anyone's experience as equally valid as long as it is in a certain range of acceptable opinions (e.g. Rachel dolezal stepped over one of their lines) regardless of its validity. The movement expects unquestioned solidarity (in their own pre-confined corridor of acceptable views), which makes opposing a few cringe tendencies difficult. Saying that xyz is not really an issue, turns one into an oppressor. Both aspects foster conformity and are at odds with individuality.

You're lumping different people together and assuming they're one uniform group that's in agreement with each other. Leading you to an opinion that only makes sense in a world that doesn't exist. Not everyone who says something you find daft agrees with each other. I can see why that might make it easier "hurr durr, they're so silly over there on their twitter", but you're just chatting shit.

I think I sort of agree with Pedro's point which I believe apply to almost any "group" out there, organized in some way or another. There is a tendency to enforce party line with regards to every argument or policy. That is prevalent even amongst leftie groups. Your point is valid that there is no way that all people or even majority feel this way but the fact this is propagated by folks who shout the loudest in either social media or real life is a problem. Something that is very pertinent to the original topic of discussion for this thread is that a good number of people do feel afraid to express themselves openly in liberal circles because there is tendency by a noisy few to label everyone who disagrees with any protest or prevalent opinion as being not woke enough. Examples of the same from real world are present in this thread itself.
Of course, this kind of reactionary name shouting is much worse on the right where you are labelled anti-national or anti anything patriotic at a drop of a hat. That is my only personal concern with the so called PC culture, that in a way the liberal folks are mirroring the conservatives when it comes to stifling personal opinion. There is no equivalency between the two given actions of the right are almost always lead to worse consequences in real life but it is still something left should cop criticism for.

 

[Silva]

Something that is very pertinent to the original topic of discussion for this thread is that a good number of people do feel afraid to express themselves openly in liberal circles because there is tendency by a noisy few to label everyone who disagrees with any protest or prevalent opinion as being not woke enough. Examples of the same from real world are present in this thread itself.

The most recent article of this nature posted a few pages ago had the student doing most of the shouting at her university essentially getting flipped off by the next set of students. So I'm not sure how afraid they really are.

 

[PedroMendez]

It's not one uniform movement. There's no such thing as a uniform movement. Unless it's just one person on their own. Sure there's overlap, but there's overlap in the PC and anti-PC crowds too.

Your statement is obviously true. I still don't understand what it has to do with my argument. Either my writing skills lack clarity (which is entirely possible) or you are just projecting something into my post, that I never intended to say.

 

[Silva]

The movement expects unquestioned solidarity

Your statement is obviously true. I still don't understand what it has to do with my argument. Either my writing skills lack clarity (which is entirely possible) or you are just projecting something into my post, that I never intended to say.

I was mostly taking exception with that. The movement, whatever that is, doesn't expect that. Maybe a few dozen people might but they disagree with each other too. At the moment the only thing people agree with is that a vague notion of "the other side" are bad and to be hated, that's the broad brush of our time (to paraphrase dan carlin).

 

[Shamwow]

Won't be topped, the world is fecked.

What's wrong with this and furthermore why is this the reason the world is fecked when we have global warming, constant war somewhere on the planet and Donald Trump as the world's most powerful human being?

It seems quite an important distinction to make in a treaty and what harm is it causing?

 

[crappycraperson]

The most recent article of this nature posted a few pages ago had the student doing most of the shouting at her university essentially getting flipped off by the next set of students. So I'm not sure how afraid they really are.

In the same example, the person who raised one question faced the kind of social ostracisation that eventually forced him to leave the university. Even you are statement is completely correct since the protestors were not getting shouted back with any rebuttal of their argument that humanities course promotes white supremacy since it is euro centric but the extreme means of their protest which involved active interruption of the classes.

 

[Wibble]

Yeah, I'm with you on that. Differentiating between sex and gender is fine but the idea that the sex of a child can be a social construct is absolutely fecking bonkers. As is usually the case, though, I wonder how big a movement this actually is? I'd say there's a good chance that this idea is only being pushed by a tiny minority who are being portrayed by the press/assorted right-wingers as 100% representative of everyone on the left who supports the trans movement.

I suppose it depends on the definition of sex vs gender being used to some degree.

If a child feels trapped in a body of the wrong sex and even more where they are intersex or something of that nature, but the biological sex is hugely enforced by the parents and society, I can see it is possible for sex to be a social construction, partly or wholly.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I suppose it depends on the definition of sex vs gender being used to some degree.

If a child feels trapped in a body of the wrong sex and even more where they are intersex or something of that nature, but the biological sex is hugely enforced by the parents and society, I can see it is possible for sex to be a social construction, partly or wholly.

Gender can absolutely be social construct i.e. does an individual feel male or female. Sex is what it is. Male, female, hermaphrodite, whatever. It’s a scientific categorisation based on the state of a person’s genitals. At least it should be. But this is apparently being challenged by some of the more extreme elements of the LGBT movement.

EDIT: I’m basically agreeing with your first sentence and my understanding of the current state of play re sex vs gender

 

[lem8sh]

What's wrong with this and furthermore why is this the reason the world is fecked when we have global warming, constant war somewhere on the planet and Donald Trump as the world's most powerful human being?

It seems quite an important distinction to make in a treaty and what harm is it causing?

Its pc at an astonishing level.

 

[Shamwow]

Its pc at an astonishing level.

Why? What's wrong with it?

 

[Adebesi]

Gender can absolutely be social construct i.e. does an individual feel male or female. Sex is what it is. Male, female, hermaphrodite, whatever. It’s a scientific categorisation based on the state of a person’s genitals. At least it should be. But this is apparently being challenged by some of the more extreme elements of the LGBT movement.

EDIT: I’m basically agreeing with your first sentence and my understanding of the current state of play re sex vs gender

After this process is complete, we'll just need to invest a new word with no "negative connotations" for someone born with a willy or a vagina. It may be using the tried and tested words "male" and "female" will no longer be appropriate - but we will need a word for it, so we know who is biologically able to carry children.

 

[Synco]

The core problem of intersectionality is that it is extremely simplistic and stops looking at people as individuals. The used categories are broad aggregates, that say almost nothing about individual experience.
Additionally there is the tendency to accept anyone's experience as equally valid as long as it is in a certain range of acceptable opinions (e.g. Rachel dolezal stepped over one of their lines) regardless of its validity. The movement expects unquestioned solidarity (in their own pre-confined corridor of acceptable views), which makes opposing a few cringe tendencies difficult. Saying that xyz is not really an issue, turns one into an oppressor. Both aspects foster conformity and are at odds with individuality.

Perhaps you already know, but there's a broad (and sometimes heated) discussion going on among German-speaking LGBT and left circles about these particular queer concepts, most recently fueled by the publication of this book:
http://www.querverlag.de/books/beissreflexe.html
It made some waves, and as far as I can tell, it mirrors a good chunk of the criticism you have. I haven't read it, but friends who have told me it is certainly taking no prisoners, although they found some contributions better than others.

In any case, the quite remarkable success of this book and spin-off discussion events shows it adressed a significant demand for critical discussion among (not only) the queer/LGBT spectrum on these concepts and practises. The debate around it (and its target audience) involves a wider spectrum and has spread out into the general left and mainstream public.

 

[jojojo]

On the face of it, the pregnant woman/person is one of those silly sounding slogans that makes the serious issue behind it sound daft. It can have a negative effect on the general understanding of the very issue it's attempting to address. So, yeah, it made me cringe at first read.

But, if you look at in terms of challenging an assumption in a very visible way, the knock-on effects could be more useful. Medicine is one of those areas where birth sex is relevant, even at the level of what drugs should be prescribed for unrelated medical conditions. Women are routinely asked if they are/could be pregnant before x-rays are done, even at the dentists who won't necessarily have access to detailed medical histories. The forms and databases being used in a maternity unit might only offer Mrs, Miss, Ms as titles. Little things, but perhaps adding up to better treatment of individuals.

 

[Halftrack]

Its pc at an astonishing level.

It isn't, though, is it? It's an incredibly tiny change that will have no negative effect on anyone.

 

[berbatrick]

@Pogue Mahone
About the internet thing - it is definitely true that it is an amplification of marginal voices, and mostly in a bad way. I have to keep reminding myself of that when I see anything related to Bernie online, and most of the comments are about him are from Democrats saying he is a traitor and racist/sexist. Then I remember polling that consistently shows that this represents ~8% of the party, but it's probably >50% online.

@PedroMendez @crappycraperson
About that suspended TA - you're right, but I do remember there was some context to that which she was referring to (I had first seen it on reddit), can't find the link now though.

 

[PedroMendez]

Perhaps you already know, but there's a broad (and sometimes heated) discussion going on among German-speaking LGBT and left circles about these particular queer concepts, most recently fueled by the publication of this book:
http://www.querverlag.de/books/beissreflexe.html
It made some waves, and as far as I can tell, it mirrors a good chunk of the criticism you have. I haven't read it, but friends who have told me it is certainly taking no prisoners, although they found some contributions better than others.

In any case, the quite remarkable success of this book and spin-off discussion events shows it adressed a significant demand for critical discussion among (not only) the queer/LGBT spectrum on these concepts and practises. The debate around it (and its target audience) involves a wider spectrum and has spread out into the general left and mainstream public.

I didn't read the book but followed loosely the exchanges between Alice schwarzer(German high profile "old school" feminist), few other commentators and Butler in Emma and Zeit. Schwarzer has a history of being critical towards some of the recent developments. She comes from a very different background/tradition, that is not really compatible with many developments in modern American intersectionality.
Butler's rebuttal wasn't at all surprising: *mimimi, you are racist* and other typical content-free smear. Judith butler isn't some twitter troll, but one of the most accomplished "academics" of the field. The only goal of her statements were to shut-down debate and personal attacks to discredit those who disagree.
Yet this kind of behaviour is not surprising or out of character. Many high profile advocates for this ideology engage in this and low profile followers adapt accordingly.
This strategy of shutting down opposing viewpoints, purity tests and tribal solidarity is common for blind ideologues. Usually we know this behaviour from the right (nationalists, (neo)conservatives, religious folk), but that's exactly what's happening currently on the left. In the USA a process of radicalisation is progressing and it just begun.

The debate on Germany is imo (subjectively) a lot more toned down and moderate (probably due to different importance of "race", a lack of religious zealots and the achievements of the progressive movement during the last 40 years, but all of that is just speculation).

Of course not everyone agrees with the very tribal and extreme views of parts of this movements. Yet they are way too prominent to just ignore them. So yes, I applaud anyone who has enough common sense to push back against this and hopefully more are going to do so. Yet I expect a lot more lunacy in the us before things get better again.

 

[Silva]

I didn't read the book but followed loosely the exchanges between Alice schwarzer(German high profile "old school" feminist), few other commentators and Butler in Emma and Zeit. Schwarzer has a history of being critical towards some of the recent developments. She comes from a very different background/tradition, that is not really compatible with many developments in modern American intersectionality.
Butler's rebuttal wasn't at all surprising: *mimimi, you are racist* and other typical content-free smear. Judith butler isn't some twitter troll, but one of the most accomplished "academics" of the field. The only goal of her statements were to shut-down debate and personal attacks to discredit those who disagree.
Yet this kind of behaviour is not surprising or out of character. Many high profile advocates for this ideology engage in this and low profile followers adapt accordingly.
This strategy of shutting down opposing viewpoints, purity tests and tribal solidarity is common for blind ideologues. Usually we know this behaviour from the right (nationalists, (neo)conservatives, religious folk), but that's exactly what's happening currently on the left. In the USA a process of radicalisation is progressing and it just begun.

The debate on Germany is imo (subjectively) a lot more toned down and moderate (probably due to different importance of "race", a lack of religious zealots and the achievements of the progressive movement during the last 40 years, but all of that is just speculation).

Of course not everyone agrees with the very tribal and extreme views of parts of this movements. Yet they are way too prominent to just ignore them. So yes, I applaud anyone who has enough common sense to push back against this and hopefully more are going to do so. Yet I expect a lot more lunacy in the us before things get better again.

Butler doesn't write about intersectionality. I'm not sure why she'd be the person to debate it.

 

[Wibble]

Gender can absolutely be social construct i.e. does an individual feel male or female. Sex is what it is. Male, female, hermaphrodite, whatever. It’s a scientific categorisation based on the state of a person’s genitals. At least it should be. But this is apparently being challenged by some of the more extreme elements of the LGBT movement.

EDIT: I’m basically agreeing with your first sentence and my understanding of the current state of play re sex vs gender

Intersex isn't make or female but somewhere inbetween so I'm thinking that where there isn't a binary male or female biological sex (which is the definition) I can see where a social construct will enforce an incorrect binary sex on someone. That is all I was thinking. Thinking out loud to test my thinking possibly.

 

[Claymore]

All this PC stuff in the media is not about making people feel better, its all about shutting down our voices and getting us to have less power. People have to understand that big business, rich families, governments and MP's all have people placed in the media, papers and tv to put their message in. Its not the free roaming journalism you all think it is.

The more PC the western world becomes the less we can say and do, then its lockdown. Apparently now we have free speech zones in the certain areas, lol, like WTF?

I'm all for not trying not to offend people who want to be white, people who want to be gay, people who are from a different religion etc etc but its getting silly now. The media are jumping down everyones throat for the tiniest little thing, and as this is a football forum, many of the stories in football, IE David Moyes slap comment just shoes you how its going. Look at the uproad over that.

You can say or do as you wish, but you can't say it without consequences now. Some tv channel, newspare or some mug on twitter causing a voting frenzy will be all over you like flies to a poo if you say anything even remotely against the mainstream media view or what most of the sheep think. There is no differing view anymore now, just what the masses think and believe and we all have to go along with that. Like fashion, politics, finance, business, its all driver from the top, no working class person ever dreamed up all this stuff. Its all planned.

 

[Synco]

The debate on Germany is imo (subjectively) a lot more toned down and moderate (probably due to different importance of "race", a lack of religious zealots and the achievements of the progressive movement during the last 40 years, but all of that is just speculation).

I don't think the debates/infights are more toned down as such, they just have very little mainstream relevance compared to the US. As far as I can tell, these conflicts mostly happen on a smaller scale, outside of the public spotlight.

Concerning the phenomenon in general, I already stated that I'm as wary of much of the popular animosity towards it as I am of the phenomenon itself. More actually, when taking the real power structures into account.

 

[DOTA]

All this PC stuff in the media is not about making people feel better, its all about shutting down our voices and getting us to have less power. People have to understand that big business, rich families, governments and MP's all have people placed in the media, papers and tv to put their message in. Its not the free roaming journalism you all think it is.

The more PC the western world becomes the less we can say and do, then its lockdown. Apparently now we have free speech zones in the certain areas, lol, like WTF?

I'm all for not trying not to offend people who want to be white, people who want to be gay, people who are from a different religion etc etc but its getting silly now. The media are jumping down everyones throat for the tiniest little thing, and as this is a football forum, many of the stories in football, IE David Moyes slap comment just shoes you how its going. Look at the uproad over that.

You can say or do as you wish, but you can't say it without consequences now. Some tv channel, newspare or some mug on twitter causing a voting frenzy will be all over you like flies to a poo if you say anything even remotely against the mainstream media view or what most of the sheep think. There is no differing view anymore now, just what the masses think and believe and we all have to go along with that. Like fashion, politics, finance, business, its all driver from the top, no working class person ever dreamed up all this stuff. Its all planned.

We're on to you.

 

[Halftrack]

We're on to you.

I have notified the commissariat.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

This thread will be getting a lot of bumps in the run up to Halloween won’t it?

 

[2 man midfield]

They bring it on themselves half the time. Why apologise for that?

 

[sullydnl]

People shouldn't apologise just because other people are stupid.