Wow, it's so amazing to look at a forum and learn that I held an opinion I wasn't even aware of.Cold Shiny said:
Does Being Politically Incorrect Makes You A Bigot?
- Thread starter KissingSunlight
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yeah, protect free speech by destroying a mindset you disagree with. That's how it works.Madmatty said:
If your mindset is that you should be able to limit free speech, you lose the right to claim to use it when people rise up against you. It's kinda like slavery, if you think it is your right to deny others their rights as free people it is to protect, not damage human rights to take your right to own slaves away from you.erttheking said:
That's actually the dictionary definition. I would say if its not an adequate definition, you need to find another word. Maybe try 'acceptance'. I think there was a South Park about the difference between tolerance and acceptance. Tolerant Camps and a Museum of Acceptance. I'll try to find what episode it was...also someone got a hamster shoved up his ass if I remember correctly.evilthecat said:
Furthermore I would argue not being politically correct is not bigotry. Political correctness wants to change how you speak and how you view the world, whereas not being that doesn't want to do any of those things. Think of it this way: PC people take offense at the use of certain words. Non-PC don't. A non-PC person couldn't care less what words you use, because they don't really care what words they themselves use. You'll never find an non-PC person demanding, at the top of their lungs with eyes wide and face red, that we need to stop using the term 'Native American' and go back to 'Indian'. You'll never find that zeal, that utter hatred for those not of the same group, in a non-PC person compared to those who are PC. Because they really don't care, as long as no one is trying to silence them.
I myself am not PC, and I'm not intolerant of the PC culture. I can tolerate it just find. I just don't subscribe to it and won't let it influence me. And if someone who is PC finds that offensive and demands I change, that is intolerant. They are bigots. By definition.
Anti PC, sure. But those people are decidedly involved in the debate. I'm talking about Non-PC. People who are not PC, don't want to be PC, don't care about PC, but won't stop anyone from being PC or voicing their opinion.Gaymaster Nacelle said:
Strange as it sounds, there really are people who don't give a fuck and just want to be left alone. Really.
PC = you should be able to limit free speech? I'm getting told a lot of things about political correctness and, according to a certain poster higher up, how I apparently think. Kind of feels like people are making things up as they go on what it is and how it works.Dreiko said:
It's because it's a lot easier to parse supporting a president who frequently spouts racist nonsense if he's just "telling it like it is" and "sticking it to The Man."KissingSunlight said:
Oh yeah, no. Not at all what I meant to say. There are total shitheels on both sides of the pro/anti PC divide, absolutely. And both sides could be considered bigoted. Its just the non-PC people who wash their hands of the whole business I consider to not be bigots.Gaymaster Nacelle said:
This. I tend to find it's always the people that embrace this label are always super confrontational and shit. They're also people that claim they're "telling it like it is"Worgen said:
No. You can't tell it like it is, because you haven't a fucking clue how it is. No one fucking does, I really wish people in general would pull their head out of their ass and realize most of their opinions aren't based on sound judgement. You don't know shit, I don't know shit, no one knows anything. Shit is very complex and ain't nobody got time for that.
I don't think saying controversial things alone makes someone a racist or a bigot or a sexist or ableist or whatever the fuck. In my opinion those things require one thing: Hate in a person's heart nothing more and nothing less.
ya know, it's like the people that see a transgendered person and not want to use the preferred pronouns... which hey, I get the frustration beyond transphobia since I hop on Twitter and it's one thing to want to use They as your pronoun, but some people are flat out making up words. Someone wanted to be called "zhr" I am not making that up. How the fuck do you even pronounce that?
That bullshit aside though, I'm more than happy to just call a person whatever gender they want to be, use whatever pronoun (though granted I'll probably fuck it up)... Is that me being PC? I don't think it is. That's me just being polite and friendly. I don't feel like calling someone their preferred gender affects me in any way what so-ever and it's such a small thing to do that'll make a person feel welcome.
...That is unless the person is making up shit like "zhr" cause then, ya know, fuck off. You're making up shit. There is not even a fucking vowel in that word.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 16,478
- 5,077
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
I view political correctness like showering. You don't have to shower, but if you don't, people wont want to be around you. In someways I like when someone is open with their douchness. It lets me know that this is someone I can disdain. I would prefer to know right off the bat if someone isn't worth my time before I become friends with them.DudeistBelieve said:
I've had near identical conversations with people who think its okay to use 'literal' in a non-literal sense. I would simply say we're using the word incorrectly. Or, in 'bigots' way, not to the full extent. Someone who is intolerant of gays or blacks or whatever is certainly a bigot, but not the full scale of bigotry.Gaymaster Nacelle said:
If I can't stand people who like Starbucks, I'm a bigot. If someone actually liked Clone Wars, and I won't stand for them to even voice an opinion, I'm a bigot. The word 'bigot' has much more utility than simply getting pissy at gays who wanna' get married. Its just that's a very common form of bigotry, and so people, understandably but mistakenly, assumed that's the only form of bigotry around.
More or less. I know right away if I can be a friends with someone based on this same shit.Worgen said:
I still feel like it's just basic kindness for the most part though.
Which dictionary?Silentpony said:
It's called "death camp of tolerance", season six. Like most of south park, it's entertaining but doesn't offer a particularly deep or interesting discussion of the topic and mostly serves as a mouthpiece for Matt and Trey's (often incoherent) opinions. The main problem with the argument as presented is that it hinges on a fairly arbitrary distinction between tolerant and intolerant language which is never explained. So ultimately it just comes back to some down to earth "common sense" idea of what is and is not an acceptable or "constructive" criticism, and most of the time in everyday life that's probably fine, but sometimes it's not going to be good enough.Silentpony said:
If political correctness wants to change how you speak or how you view the world, then the method of doing so is through speech. Specifically, through criticism of the pejorative or ideological meaning of "non-PC" terms. If you are going to criticize that form of criticism or say that it shouldn't happen, then you're engaged in an unacknowledged political project of trying to change how other people speak and view the world, by preventing them from making certain types of criticisms you find objectionable.Silentpony said:
The problem with language is that it isn't as immaterial as you're trying to pretend, it has real material impact on the world. Criticising people can make people feel bad or ashamed, it can persuade them to change their behaviour, but this isn't a special or particular feature of "PC" criticism, all criticism does that. It doesn't matter if you're criticising racist language or criticising what you see as a censorious PC agenda, you're still passing judgement and you're still trying to change how people think. Essentially, this is the problem we're all trying to resolve.. like that South Park episode, we're all throwing down our own arbitrary lines as to what is "acceptable" and "unacceptable", and they're not compatible with each other. There is no meta-ideological position from which those competing standards can be reconciled, so we just have to make do somehow, and, for me at least, that means accepting speech (public speech, anyway) as not magically divorced from power, but as a field of competition in which it's possible to lose and even suffer without that necessarily being a violation of the capacity to speak freely.
You will. It's not hard to find.Silentpony said:
Right. But that requires you to go through this argument of having to defend your position and your perceived rights, which by extension means criticising or attacking others for expressing their opinions. You've divided the world into two opposing sides and effectively labelled one as good and the other as evil. How are the people whose opinions you've designated evil meant to feel? Should they feel ashamed? Should they feel encouraged to abandon their positions and embrace yours? Should they restrain their speech around you in order to avoid the risk of you being influenced?Silentpony said:
When you say you can "tolerate" PC culture, what exactly do you tolerate? If someone was pointing out that they felt your use of language was inappropriate, would you criticise them for doing so? Would you want to criticise them for doing so but restrain yourself in the interests of being "tolerant" of their political correctness? If you did criticize them, would you hope that they would listen or be influenced to stop doing what they were doing? Would you be fine if they said, "well, that's all well and good but I'm not going to let myself be influenced by your opinion, so I'm just going to keep criticising you anyway regardless of whether you respond or otherwise." Would you still want to spend time with that person, or would you change your behaviour to avoid confrontation?
Again, this detached position where whatever you say doesn't matter is not something which can actually exist. People influence each other all the time, that's how language works.
This question is just weirdly phrased. For one, 'politically incorrect' is how people typically describe themselves whereas 'racist' is how people typically describe others. Very few people describe themselves as politically correct and nearly nobody calls themselves racists. In any case, communism is politically incorrect in America but it isn't bigoted. So no.KissingSunlight said:
In any case, whenever people describe themselves as politically incorrect, I expect some level of bigotry. Like I expect fire to be hot. It was hot the first fifty times I encountered it, so why should this time be different.
So since you claim that those who want to limit free speech lose their right to free speech, does that mean others can limit your right to free speech too, since you want to limit the free speech of others who want to limit free speech? Fighting hypocrisy with hypocrisy seems like a bad idea. Free speech starts with respecting that of others, even if their views are abhorrent to you. Your slavery example doesn't work, since owning others violates their rights, but calling for the abolition of freedom of speech does not itself violate freedom of speech or any other right anyone might have. There is a difference between saying you want to do something and doing it.Dreiko said:
Other way round perhaps.
Someone can deliberately choose to avoid being PC, which will generally mean using words or phrases condemned as being bigoted. That's going to suggest certain things to people.
Someone can deliberately choose to avoid being PC, which will generally mean using words or phrases condemned as being bigoted. That's going to suggest certain things to people.
Sorry. I really don't want to offend anyone, I just got back from reading Moviebob's massive, insane rant on his website and I needed some way to vent. The hate and misunderstanding in his words was, actually kind of astonishing.erttheking said:
Considering that the definition of "PC" that I've always known is "put some thought into your words and try not to be needlessly or ignorantly offensive", but that's only the 1% percent of the time that being "Politically Correct" wasn't a pejorative.
It's the nineties version of "SJW".
It's hilarious to see people who condem "PC culture" and "safe spaces" and said ideas making people "thin-skinned" while simultaneously getting mad about Clinton's decidedly un-PC "half of Trump's supporters are deplorable" remark.
It's the nineties version of "SJW".
It's hilarious to see people who condem "PC culture" and "safe spaces" and said ideas making people "thin-skinned" while simultaneously getting mad about Clinton's decidedly un-PC "half of Trump's supporters are deplorable" remark.
