Just looked at it, I think the prosthetics/make up to make his eyes slant probably push it into dodgy territory. You'd get away with it down the local pub but out in the public its hardly surprising people got offended, since everything is offensive now-a-days.
Has political correctness actually gone mad?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
Nope. Different category entirely to people “blacking up” because no historical equivalent to minstrels and black face etc.
So people on twitter and internet are upset/offended at Larry david making holocaust related jokes during SNL. Seems like they have never watched an episode of Curb.. I have seen tweets like "I am not a jew but I was offended..." .. just stop.
None of these kids actually believe the these people are truly white supremacists. "Racist", "white supremacist" etc have become slogans of the hard left and are used as a tactic in avoidance of having to quantify anything they say with substance or logic. I don't see it as outrage for the sake of outrage anymore, I see it as faux outrage for the sake of diminishing character and as such avoiding honest discourse.
Plus the episode he calls his wife Hitler, or one where survivor show contestant is mocked along with actual holocaust survivor, or this ..They should watch the Palestinian chicken episode
It makes it a bit of minefield if blackface is bad, but yellowface is ok tbh.
They should watch the Palestinian chicken episode
“I’m going to feck the jew out of you.”
https://www.villagevoice.com/2017/10/23/south-park-blinks/
The whole article is moderately lengthy but basically the writer is taking an issue with South Park not satirizing Donald Trump this season, along with its treatment of Hilary Clinton over the years. Although I'm not sure if the writer is merely bringing them up as examples of when South Park has satirized a political figure or has an issue with the satire itself.
It appears now that some corners are not only taking an issue with what people say but with what they don't say. Almost as if to say if you don't speak out against A then you are not one of our allies.
I'm not going to try to argue what the South Park creator's political leanings are but its just a bit much to try and force writers to take shots at Trump or anyone if they don't want to. There is a place for politics and messaging in a show and if the writers choose to go there great, if not then I don't see it as a problem.
EDIT:
Another along the same lines.
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywoo...1-premiere-recap-donald-trump-charlottesville
They are libertarians. They've said they hate both the left and the right, but they hate the left the most.
As for Trump: For whatever reason, they didn't want to use Trump (think they talked about fearing it would seem dated), so they sued Mr. Garrison as a Trump stand-in. So candidate Garrison/President Garrison is very much their take on Donald Trump.
This type of criticism is pretty much the reason freedom of speech exists. There is no call for cancellation.
“If you have like a little monkey and it’s running himself into the wall over and over and you’re like, ‘That’s funny, but how am I gonna make fun of the monkey running himself into the wall?’ I can discuss the monkey running himself into the wall, I can copy the monkey running into the wall, but nothing’s funnier than the monkey just running himself into the wall.”
Seems fair enough. Plus they also said they didn't want to go down the SNL route where people tune in to see what they're going to say about Trump, which is also fair enough.
Anyway, I'm sick of hearing about Trump generally, the fecker's existence seems to relentlessly invade upon my awareness multiple times each day. With that in mind, I can definitely see why people would opt out of making their show about him too.
Seems fair enough. Plus they also said they didn't want to go down the SNL route where people tune in to see what they're going to say about Trump, which is also fair enough.
Anyway, I'm sick of hearing about Trump generally, the fecker's existence seems to relentlessly invade upon my awareness multiple times each day. With that in mind, I can definitely see why people would opt out of making their show about him too.
That's all fine, and I don't care a single bit what SP is about. It's just that writing an article about the theme isn't PC gone mad. It's media criticism.
Silva's written a pretty good response to that already but I never said anything about demonising all men. I don't imagine women are fearful of all men either.
I'd imagine a woman would be rather less scared of a man in a work environment during the day surrounded by other people than they would be of a situation in which an unknown man was walking towards them on an unlit street.
What are the odds that that unknown man is going to do something to that woman? Probably perishingly low (indeed, probably lower than the chances that that 'friend' does something to them, considering how many sexual assaults are done by people the woman knows). Women will have these situations a huge number of times in their lives. I don't see why that means it is unusual for them to sometimes be fearful in that situation or for others to try to be mindful and keep their mind at ease.
I hate this mentality (not saying it is yours) that changing anything that you do to help or make things easier for others is some kind of abhorrent capitulation to PC or whatever. Its nonsense.
Anxious is perhaps too strong a phrase to use. Would I be more anxious of that situation than walking across a similar situation where a bunch of 7 year olds are playing in the park? Or a bunch of women standing around chatting? Yes I would be. That seems rather logical to me.
I know all too well what males can do with respect to violent crimes coming from the country (or continent, or indeed world) I come from.
Again, nobody said this is a perfect world. Nobody said let's hold hands and sing kumbaya. For that matter, I didn't say you or I or anyone else shouldn't feel guilty because we can't feel another person's pain and suffering. What I said was people can (and should) try to understand why people feel the things they do and even on occasion, try to do things to make people feel more comfortable. Why that is such a bad thing I don't really know.
Carrying on from my example, it doesn't impact my life in any negative way to cross that street or to not shout things at random women on the street.
I've obviously not been keeping up properly with the thread but I glanced at your post above. It goes without saying that people (including, whether you agree with them or not, BLM) are complaining about a little bit more than just 'being offended'. You shouldn't presume to take the views of a shrill minority and attribute them to everyone in America who perceives a problem with the way blacks over there are treated.
It also goes without saying that the logical extension of your argument is that we should pretty much literally never complain in the here and now because our species has literally never had it so good. So you lost your house and you're homeless? Who cares? 300 hundred years ago, you would have been living in a slum with a life expectancy of 25. Worried about being killed in the Syrian civil war? 800 years ago, a foreign nomadic tribe may have invaded and completely wiped out your entire civilisation. A black youth killed without appropriate reason by a policeman? 80 years ago, that black man would have been sitting on the back of a bus on the way to picking cotton and would have been killed by a lynch mob rather than a single bullet.
What relevance does it have to say how bad things were before unless the point is that we can never complain or improve things anymore?
I'm not sure if this is the correct thread (maybe it's not and a new, specific one should be created such is the widespread practice of such articles) but here it goes anyway:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alannabenn...017-reputation?utm_term=.plBJbA6kO#.ieD3jOVW2
Taylor Swift being attacked here for not only being "aggressively white" (whatever the feck that means) and pure conjecture that she's a figurehead for white supremacists (what a giant leap that is), but also attacked for her "political silence", which is an absolute abhorrent thing to attack somebody with who is not in the political game. (That's one of my main concerns with the direction the New Left is taking, that everything must be politicised and it's just an incredibly exhausting endeavour. You can't watch a movie, a television show, a sports show, pop music, open a newspaper etc. without being hit square in the face with some ridiculous politically-correct social justice cause, and with the added bonus of demonising those who don't join the cause. It's approaching breaking-point now.)
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alannabenn...017-reputation?utm_term=.plBJbA6kO#.ieD3jOVW2
Taylor Swift being attacked here for not only being "aggressively white" (whatever the feck that means) and pure conjecture that she's a figurehead for white supremacists (what a giant leap that is), but also attacked for her "political silence", which is an absolute abhorrent thing to attack somebody with who is not in the political game. (That's one of my main concerns with the direction the New Left is taking, that everything must be politicised and it's just an incredibly exhausting endeavour. You can't watch a movie, a television show, a sports show, pop music, open a newspaper etc. without being hit square in the face with some ridiculous politically-correct social justice cause, and with the added bonus of demonising those who don't join the cause. It's approaching breaking-point now.)
What do you mean by "the New Left"? The same article you take your accusations from states that 'The Nazi connection is not one Swift has ever courted, at least not in any active, provable, or logically tangible way.'
Where or what is this Breaking Point you speak of, how will we recognise it when it arrives?
That article is a mess. "Aggressive whiteness" is a vulgar term to use
This is incredibly hilarious, mostly because you're acting as if this is something that's exclusive to the "new" left. You can't give a strong woman, gay, lesbian, trans or racial minority a prominent role in a piece of popular media without it being decried POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE TOO FAR by the "other side". But I guess it was the left who politicized it in the first place by including them in an attempt to force their agenda upon the rest of the world.
No, it's the politicisation of everything which grates. I am all for giving minorities the representation they deserve and unequivocally support LGBTQ+ rights (for what it's worth, I have a future brother-in-law who was born a girl but now identifies as a male) but I don't see the sense in shoving politics down people's throats at every juncture, nor attacking people for not disclosing their political persuasion. (Hint: I think there's a clue there why people chose not to disclose that type of information.)
It's definitely a new mindset, this whole 'either you agree with what we say or you're against us by default' mentality. It's obviously a niche thing but does seem to be growing, and that's the worrying part.
It is annoying when political activists try to shame prominent people in popular culture because they aren't overtly supporting or fighting for their cause. You had the same thing with Black Lives Matter and ASAP Rocky where he was harangued for not wanting to join their 'bandwagon'. People should be free to do what they want to do, within the constraint of general respect for others.
That's exactly how I see it, @2 Man Midfield and @Classical Mechanic.
I wouldn't even say it's a niche, I'd say that it's more prevalent than we would like to think, and it doesn't apply just to, say, USA politics, it's happening basically everywhere, even in such a microcosm as Polish politics. I absolutely detest the current mainstream 'anti-establishment' formed by old govt & friends here, including all of the 'celebrities' who now apparently have a political nous and voice their opinion about everything (they are literally the biggest cancer of the world) so I'm nearly always ascribed to being pro-current government, whereas I'm absolutely not and I did not vote for them, including our current president (whom I sort of actually like).
What happens in the USA is an absolute shambles though, the whole 'feck Trump' prior to elections campaign and all that, Christ, it was Trump everywhere even if you tried steering clear of American politics. Funnily enough, imo, if there was a 'feck Obama' campaign, I have absolutely no doubt it would quickly be simplified to people being racist and a faux outrage because labelling somebody as a -ist or -phobic is, nowadays, the easiest way to shut somebody's mouth.
@Kostur, sorry if it's not the thread for such a discussion, but aren't there large demonstrations taking place in Poland lately?
Sort of, apart from yesterday's annual Independence Day, yeah, there are. Politics in Poland are incredibly complicated and I wouldn't pay much attention to those demonstrations as, keeping in mind that I pretty much dislike the ruling party, they are mostly fuelled by ex-communists and scum that has been destroying our country for years now and who couldn't be weeded out from the public life.
There always has been that mentality. Look at the one that accompanies Remembrance Sunday - a failure to wear a poppy in advance, and in every context, becomes an act of disrespect and even treason. Yet, go back ten years, and football teams for example were not under that pressure. United were one of the last teams to change policy on it, and did so under pressure from groups like the Daily Mail. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...chester-United-Why-wont-wear-poppy-pride.html
Social media accelerates campaigns and adds to their weight. It's not the mentality that's changing, it's the ability of campaigners to push an issue higher into public consciousness, however temporary. Things that were optional become the new defaults. It's the nature of societal change. It's just quicker these days and, at times, more superficial. It can even trivialise the underlying issue, replacing critical thinking or practical action with a slogan, and antagonising people instead of encouraging understanding.
Good post, I agree.
'Swiftian history'The whole poppy thing sadly makes me feel uncomfortable these days. I used to have a regular subscription to the British Legion out of sympathy for all the conscripts from my grandads generation that we’re living in abject poverty. Now that generation is all but died out I feel less connection to the work they do and send my regular charitable donations to other causes. The whole poppy shaming business just puts me off getting involved with the cause as it feels more like an obligation than a choice. The use of the poppy as a political weapon just makes me feel sad.
Members of the public 'slam' two X Factor judges for wearing poppy on their right, not left.
Royal Legion says there is 'no right way'.
Poppy rage.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/13/threats-boycott-tesco-muslim-family-christmas-ad
Tesco under pressure after using brown actors to advertise their goods. PC hasn't gone far enough.
Tesco under pressure after using brown actors to advertise their goods. PC hasn't gone far enough.
I wonder how many of these outraged folk who say they will boycott Tesco actually do? Maybe they walk past it one or two times and think 'that'll teach' them, before not being arsed walking further or sick of paying more at the corner shop, so go back.
Disgusting, next there'll be brown people working and shopping at Tesco. When will this madness end?
My neighbours are Muslim and they have a habit of buying Christmas presents for my kids. Damn their culturally inappropriate generosity.
That isn't political correctness gone mad. That's 'ignorant people lie about supermarket boycott'.
Wow. What a load of rubbish. I guess you haven't noticed that our Constitution practically became nonexistent since the Constitutional court has been forcibly taken over (illegal legislation) and subsequently been neutralized (new president and vice-p. are former intelligence agents). And that was just the beginning of dismantling of trias politica principle in Poland. If it isn't a good enough reason to protest commonly and loudly in a democratic country, then I don't know what would have to happen to justify it.
Who are those ex-communists because those easy to point out are actually dissentients from before our political transformation in 1989? I've never voted on the former ruling party and they've had their not small faults, but what is happening right now is on a completely different level. Parallel to differences between catching cold and getting tuberculosis. Btw since last elections we don't have any left wing party represented in parliament. Each one of them should be described as right wing representative. The funny part though is that most of these ex-communist you complain about are filling the seats of the current ruling party, a party that by declaration is supposed to be on crusade against everything connected to former system.
I'm not even going to pretend I'm remotely interested in discussing with the 'school of thought' you seem to represent, sorry, enjoy going to your black marches, KOD demonstrations and other trash.
IIRC I've already had a discussion of this sort with you when the G20 kicked off and Antifa were running riots in Hamburg. It's not not worth neither mine nor yours time.
Ffs, create your own Polish Politics thread!
Halal Turkey for Christmas!