No. We are having fun, and I appreciate the spirit of it, that he is willing to do so. That deserves respect.
I would never fucking to do that.
Piety correctness is perfect for religion.
Yeah, Chingon, stop being Pit Thread Correct. Jeez.
I think it’s interesting that, so far, no one has actually come up with 2 examples of PC affecting him/herself personally that would be worth raging at.
Good burn, but kind of limited outside of this forum.
It’s more of a sand in your underwear thing,
Yeah, it’s pretty much a one-off. I suppose you could use it at a deep pit with a rope hanging down (“Hey, you sure that string is strong enough?” “Stop being pit thread correct.” I’ll show myself out)
I don’t think it’s even sand in your underwear, but, listening to Bill Maher, Breitbart, and right wing news sources, you’d think it was much more than sand in the underwear. t’s the end of the Democratic Party (or, probably Democrat Party at Breitbart)! It’s tearing apart America! That’s probably what prompted this thread, I imagine.
Anyway, off to bed I go.
There are two sides to every story, and I can certainly sympathize with minorities who feel exploited by “appropriation.” But, Heavens! Is this country a melting pot or not?
Investment bankers are sucking billions of dollars out of the economy through mischief and frauds. The health insurance companies are making billions of dollars in excess profit, literally by finding new ways to send Grandma to the death camps. The GOP has passed a plan to transfer Trillions (with a T) from the poor to the rich over the next decade. And what do liberals protest? *** Two women selling burritos from a food cart??*** 
:smack:
I don’t particularly denounce such a silly boycott. As I say, I can understand both sides in the issue. But this is the hill liberals choose to die on?
Remember this sort of crap next time you ask yourself why so many Americans are willing to pull the R lever at election time.
As previously explained: no shit, sherlock. The term is inherently negative. It’s a snarl word.
As others have noted here – yes PC does go too far sometimes. However, the number of genuine stories is far outnumbered by the exaggerated and invented. It’s sad to me that some intellectuals like Stephen Fry have taken the bait and repeatedly speak out against political correctness while ignoring the elephant('s pile of shit) in the room.
Oh, but I do agree that the burrito business being shut down was wrong. To me, it is as bad as if I were to say black guys aren’t allowed to make pizza or something.
So… two women offered a fairly tasteless interview about their product to a local newspaper. This blew up with another local newspaper, then national outlets ran with it because it was fodder for the culture war, not because there was actually a story there. “A handful of wackos on the internet get mad at something” is not really news (even if that leads to death threats, sadly enough). Or at least, it shouldn’t be. Not unless you make it news. And it gets clicks, so people do make it news. “Crazy SJWs are killing America” is a narrative the right badly wants to push, so it gets pushed. As I detail elsewhere:
Note the bolded part.
So no, this isn’t a “hill liberals want to die on”. This is a tempest in a teapot involving maybe a few thousand random people across a few social media sites that various mainstream news outlets decided to turn into front page news because it was bound to get clicks in an era of anti-SJW outrage. And you fell for it, hook, line, and sinker. Please stop falling for it.
I once got publicly dressed down at a Christmas party by the wife of a colleague from work (who I had just met seconds previously), for saying “Happy Holidays”, which I’ve used interchangeably with “Merry Christmas” as long as I’ve been alive. That’s about it.
Well, there’s a faction at the museum where I volunteer that will hear nothing unfavorable about Trump, so rather than indulge in endless fact-checking that won’t be listened to anyway, I just keep it zipped.
So based on this thread: Nobody on this board has ever encountered a case of PC gone overboard.
Maybe all the talk about “PC culture” gone overboard is just more Whataboutism?
Most people think political correctness is a bad thing. The problem is, that’s the only thing people seem to agree on. They don’t agree on the definition of the term. The only additional information I can gather from saying something is PC is that it is to the left of the speaker’s position. It thus is just “bad thing that is to the left of my position.” So the only people who would not have a problem with it are people who are so far left that nothing fits, or, more likely, those trying to reclaim the term from its negative definition.
I would have no problem with it being used to mean “something that is incorrect but is politically advantageous to say.” That appears to be its first use, by Socialists against Communists who would ignore reality and stick with the party line. Problem is, that would apply much more to people on the right in the US. It would apply to Trump’s lies. And those have definitely negatively affected me and much of the world. Problem is, that’s not how it is used.
While the term has left-wing origins, its current meaning actually derives from right wingers opposing the inclusion of what they saw as “liberal ideas” into education. Unfortunately, rather than actually presenting arguments against such inclusion, or having a healthy debate about the additional ideas, they just labeled the concept and mocked it. Rather than give reasons why one should not believe certain things, they instead just claimed the other side was forcing people to believe them, and it was “not politically correct” to argue against it.
From there, of course, it spread beyond academia. It becomes a popular rallying cry for conservatives. While some may have actually believed that there were some leftist ideas that stifled discussion, that’s not why it took off. It took off because it allows one to neatly sidestep actually arguing against a position. Instead of refuting those left positions you disagree with, just allege the left is refusing to allow you to have a conversation on the topic.
Of course such will be picked up by racists and other bigots. The reason they feel like they can’t push their bigotry is not that most people think it is wrong. It is that the evil PC police are limiting their freedom of speech. What’s more, they can call upon the original idea inherent in the words, and argue that everyone else also thinks that what they are saying is correct, but is just lying for political gain.
Going even further, soon any social justice related issue would be called political correctness by some. And then just anything on the left. Since it was a right wing rallying cry, all of this got lumped into one. Any use it may have had to describe an attempt to limit discussion is gone.
Ironically, PC is now used for the inverse. Rather than pushing to allow people to discuss the issue in full with nuance, it is now used as a thought terminating cliche. See, for example, the post above mine when I started this post. They mostly seem to think the PC stuff is overblown. But even they fall for it.
It wasn’t a woman not being able to make burritos. The accusation was that she would sneakily watch other burrito makers and learn their recipes, and then used those recipes to start her own restaurant, without permission of the original cooks. That’s what was labeled “cultural appropriation.”
Maybe you disagree. Maybe you think just watching a cook and trying to mimic them is fine. But that wasn’t the debate. The anti-PC argument was that white people should be allowed to make burritos. Newsflash: they already are, all the time. That was not the issue.
I find this is nearly always the case in any claim of political correctness, to the point that I think the term itself is useless. If you want to talk about stifling ideas, talk about that. You want to talk about things you think that those to the left of you got wrong? Talk about that.
But PC is effectively a snarl word, a thought terminating cliche. It is, ironically given its origins, an attempt to shut down debate.
I fell for it? What I did was what you did — identify that this is how the right-wing divides good-spirited Americans from each other.
Fight against this. Why not try to mount a campaign of solidarity with the white -skinned burrito women? Get Hispanics to carry signs “We love these burritos whatever Orange Stinko says!” Wouldn’t that have some effect? If the right-wing stories are really lies?
And who, exactly, would hear about that? For fuck’s sake, we still have people shouting about how, if Muslims really were against terrorism, the moderates would speak up - even though there are big, high-profile stands of solidarity from Muslim communities after every terror attack. People can’t even get the message then; you think whatever is the proportional response to this would get through?
And of course, there’s still the issue of it being kinda problematic. Not “death threats and national news” problematic, not even as problematic as any number of things any number of national republican politicians have done (which is kind of my point - why is this even news?!), but still not a good thing.
And speaking of “hills to die on”, you really want to stage a counter-protest for two ladies running a burrito cart who faced mild pushback? Seriously?
The solution here is to stop fucking falling for it, not go full retarded in the other direction and start throwing massive protests and gofundme campaigns for “victims of political correctness”. The right already does enough of that whenever a pizza place gets bad publicity for being bigoted shitheads.
No. The burrito woman is yet another instance of the right rewriting the situation. WHY THE HELL WON’T PEOPLE READ UP ON THIS SHIT?
Here’s a freaking Fox News story on it. You’d think they’d hide the issue. But it’s still there.
Kali Wilgus and Liz “LC” Connelly, the two white women who started Kooks earlier this year, have been accused of stealing their techniques from the “tortilla ladies” of Puerto Nuevo, Mexico — because Connelly told Willamette Week that they gathered their recipes and tortilla-making processes during a holiday road-trip to the Baja California village.
“I picked the brains of every tortilla lady there in the worst broken Spanish ever, and they showed me a little of what they did,” she told the site. "They told us the basic ingredients, and we saw them moving and stretching the dough similar to how pizza makers do before rolling it out with rolling pins.”
In the profile, which first ran May 16, Connelly also claimed that, when the Mexican cooks wouldn’t give up their trade secrets, she and Wilgus “were peeking into the windows of every kitchen, totally fascinated by how easy they made it look.”
That is what people objected to. Not making burritos. Not making burritos in a Mexican style and adding California style to it. They objected to her having sneakily stealing cooking secrets, piece by piece, from the various locals in Mexico.
Before she said all this, no one had a problem with her shop. But when she admitted how she learned to make her food, people called it cultural appropriation. Which, as I’ve said many times, means stealing something from another culture without permission.
I do not support that. It’s no different than if someone took my mom’s cookie recipe and started selling them without her permission. You don’t do that.
Had she gone to them and said “I’d like to learn how to make my own shop back in the US,” and they gladly helped her out, then I would not have a problem with it. But she didn’t. She stole.
And I say this as someone who has actually asked the local Mexican-run restaurant how they do things and they’ve told me, because they were happy to share. It’s not a high bar.
Even as broadly defined as PC is today, that has nothing at all to do with it. If your definition is correct, then any expression of anger that is not constructive (i.e. most of it) qualifies as PC. Some poster is an asshole and I pit them for it, and they don’t read the thread: not constructive. So I’d be being PC.
What he did was just snark. And it was in response to your snark.
It’s borderline. It’s bad optics to openly admit you stole the recipe, but it’s not at all unusual. Most foods thought of as just “American” were strongly associated with one ethnicity at some time, but they spread through the culture, and that’s fine (also: where does it end? Do we have to trace all recipes back to their absolute origin)?
If I taste a burrito and can tell they put, I dunno, chopped capers in it, I am not going to ask permission to do the same, nor would I see it wrong to start a business making said burritos.
Sneaking around peering through windows is jerkish behaviour, and enough to create a lot of bad feeling towards their business. Fine if the business dies for that reason.
But in principle, can X race steal Y race’s recipe and start a business? Sure.
In many cases, people complaining about “political correctness” mean “rhetorical tactics which I consider unfair or dishonest”. Not surprisingly, it’s usually in reference to acts by people they don’t agree with.
In response for the OP’s request for examples: I don’t know that it’s worth “raging at”, but what galls me are inconsistencies of the aforementioned nature. E.g., someone spends years making ridiculous, over-the-top assertions about the POTUS, calling him a traitor, a terrorist, a war criminal. And then, when the guy they voted for gets into the White House, declares that it’s unpatriotic - even treasonous - to speak ill of the president. The rules change when my guy gets elected.
Parochial Correctness? That would carry the additional connotation of red-state sensibilities.
Absolutely, modern debate and discourse seems to be chock-full of such “thought-terminating cliches” from both right and left.
Any nuanced discussion can be avoided as long as something can be labelled with a handy, ill-defined pejorative. “racist” “sexist” “snowflake” “SJW” “anti-Semitic” “homophobic” “islamaphobic” “misogynistic” etc. then debate is no longer useful and in some cases not even possible.
The principle behind it is easy to fathom. Thinking careful about grey areas is hard and uncomfortable. It may lead you into awkward, conflicting places.
Far simpler to just stick a rhetorical yellow star on a point of view and have done with it, problem solved.
Plus there is a ready-made mob out there in the social media sphere who will lazily and thoughtlessly jump in to support/condemn whatever position you take/decry. You can feel vindicated about absolutely anything at the drop of a hat. No actual argument required, no work to be done at all.