If you say something like Knowed Out said, and you realize that what you said was mean and hurtful, and has no place in the workplace, then that is profesional decency standards.
When you complain, and say that you are just saying it as it is, and that it is just the PC police shutting you up, that is when it is PC.
I have one example from my life of the PC police causing me some discomfiture. I was a kid, around 7 or 8, and I liked to make jokes. One of my favorite jokes was Pollack jokes. I would come up with the stupidest, most incomprehensible things for people to do, and attribute those doings to pollocks. I was telling one of these jokes at a friend’s house, when his parents overheard, and took pretty severe offense, as they were, in fact, of polish descent.
I didn’t know that they would take offense, as I didn’t know what a pollack was at the time. I literally thought it was a Dr. Seuss creature, not a racial slur. I’m partly polish myself, in fact. They explained what the word meant, and I stopped making those jokes.
But by your own definition, that wasn’t “the PC police.” That was someone correctly and kindly pointing out why it was wrong and hurtful to say what you were saying. You don’t today say, “If it weren’t for the PC Police, I could still tell pollock jokes any time I damn please.” You don’t tell pollock jokes because you know it’s insulting and indecent.
Btw, I had a similar experience, except it was my mom who set me straight. She heard me telling a Polish joke, and said, “How would you feel if someone told that same joke but changed ‘pollock’ to ‘Jew’?” (We’re Jewish.) Now it sounds like something out of a lame kids’ book, but it floored me back in '74.
I should have put “PC police” in quotes in my post, as I agree. However, it was asking me to change my language in order to be more “polite” or decent. I could have argued about it, and it would be in that argument that I would make a charge of "PC"ness.
And that is my whole point, if I don’ care that it is insulting or indecent, then I instead complain that I am being shut up by PC police.
Let’s say I was making jokes about Loraxes, an actual Dr. Seuss creature, and someone told me that I should make such jokes, as they are hurtful and indecent, then in that case, I might even make the accusations of that being “PC too far.”
First edition PATHFINDER nerdery, you mean. (I mean, I’ve been playing since before the kids in Stranger Things, but that doesn’t mean I ever grew out of it).
If I can’t take the verbatim explanation of Scylla at face value, and I can’t, can you give cites for what abuses Warren has committed over her “Indianism”?
“Bullshit” has a certain value judgement to it that seems to exceed “submission of recipes” and taking DNA tests in public.
IOW what has she actually done on record? Take a test? Has she advantaged herself? How?
Who is the mover behind her being publically “indian” for your purposes as a media consumer? Was it Warren herself? What was the motive?
How is she hurting the Indian cause, or the nation, by what she has said and done?
The test seems to indicate she has a fairly common profile which includes native american heritage. Why is that the wrong thing to do? How has she acted out or misbehaved over this fact? IOW you say she is “doubling down”, but on what and how? Maybe she is just taking the test.
One legitimate reason to take such a test, in our current climate, might be to point out to trunp that we are a diverse country, and it is not always obvious or visible on the outside.
To call every action taken in the public arena corrupt is basically to jump on the orange bandwagon on the road to totalita.
That said, Trump’s campaign shows just how bigoted and hateful he is.
I have Native American ancestry but like Warren, I have been treated white and was never raised under the culture and honestly have no way of understanding it. I would never claim it outside of being a curious point or demonstrating that the reality is that; people are horny and life is complex.
This whole issue just shows how far this country has to go. Especially with equal rights but also with people’s really poor understanding of DNA and we need to improve math education.
This is what I took exception to when I first heard the story. I have created a number of recipes over the years, many of which I would be flattered if a chef were to spend the time to use his palette to determine and replicate my recipe. If he is sneaking into my kitchen to steal it, I’m not going to be flattered, I’m going to be pissed.
In any case, when the story was fresh, I tried to find any information on their sales, and how those sales were effected by the story. I doubt many ever even heard of it.
Now, working a food truck is hard work, and it is not guaranteed to make a profit, even if you are at full capacity with customers. There was nothing in those stories that showed me that they were not just victims of their own optimism and enthusiasm, and that they were not simply joining the very large group of failed restaurateurs.
So, even though this is the case that anti-PC police like to point out, I haven’t seen anything that leads me to believe that PCness had anything at all with their decision to close down.
It might be said that getting enraged by someone calling themselves native american in social, or “non-first-responder” situations, which had no consequence to oneself, or society, as being in favor of “Political Correction” against that person.
OK I read this. It’s problematic. I hate feeling like democracy is at stake when people on the left have a problem.
It feels like we’re on a ratchet that only gives one way. “Sexual assault? OK what’s your party affiliation? OK you’re good. Next! Claimed to be an indian? Whats your party? Um, you know that was wrong right?”
The Democrat party has a serious problem with rewarding cronyism, and Warren should not be the candidate.
While some sexism did play with Hillary Clinton loosing, anyone who spent any time in the more rural areas would have known that trying to push that “royal” family was a mistake. The same is true of Warren, she will more likely cause a loss than a win.
This latest effort should be a wake-up call for Democrats.
If that is representative of “cronyism” in the dems I can’t see how exactly.
We already know how much sexism and racism played in the election. It was dispositive, and the “economics” theory rationalization, that was the only “PC” way for the media to describe the 2016 result, was revealed to be false. It was a failure of the mainstream media. Yes, there is a good example of PC causing harm.
Thanks for reminding me that we need to be focused on electoral college reform though. The most good for the most is my motto. I don’t trust rural america any more than royal america.
So, i’ve Tried to think about this seriously, because it does seem like we are having trouble actually defining the term “Politically correct.”
I believe this might be a good definition:
“Political correctness is attempting to hold people to the standards of beliefs or a belief system on others who are not obligated to share them.”
How’s that?
I realize this is the Pit and people are projecting and venting, but there are people in my life who have used the word and I know that are not seeking an excuse to be an asshole.
In a conference my daughter’s 1st grade teacher said, “it may not be politically correct, but I am so glad your daughter shows such an interest in science”.
I think for many decent people bringing up the term is simply an admission what they are about to say may rankle somehow. Perhaps that is over sensitivity, perhaps that is the consequence of so much ‘raising Awareness’. And perhaps it’s not a bad thing in the end and the silly moments that happen currently will pass.
Does your definition fit any of these? Or most of these? I don’t think it really applies to any of them. Almost all of these cases are a group trying to hold themselves to a certain standard. Many of them are silly, but some just make sense. How about this?
Nope, definition doesn’t work there either - the tory MP is complaining that Starbucks made an internal decision that doesn’t explicitly cater to his worldview, and he’s calling that political correctness - if anything, your definition refers to his response; almost every single case of someone complaining about the “war on christmas” (a classic anti-PC canard) fits your definition quite well.
I would simply argue that this is not remotely common usage. In fact, I find it quite worrying, because it means the speaker thinks there are people in society who think that it’s wrong to be happy that a girl is into science. Even if they think “political correctness” means “basic politeness” (which is the reclaimed meaning), it still means they think there’s something that society deems rude about saying you are happy a girl is into science.
I mean, who would take offense at that? Would it be people who think women can be just as good at science than men? Surely not. So it would mean that the misogynist were the ones who insist on political correctness. And that does not fit any definition in use.
Speaking of definition, since we are talking about them, let’s just pull from other sources rather than keep saying what it seems to mean to us. First off, Google:
“political correctness: the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.”
Wikpiedia: “The term political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly abbreviated PC) is used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society.Since the late 1980s, the term has come to refer to avoiding language or behavior that can be seen as excluding, marginalizing, or insulting groups of people considered disadvantaged or discriminated against, especially groups defined by sex or race. In public discourse and the media, it is generally used as a pejorative, implying that these policies are excessive.”
Britanica: “Political correctness (PC), term used to refer to language that seems intended to give the least amount of offense, especially when describing groups identified by external markers such as race, gender, culture, or sexual orientation. The concept has been discussed, disputed, criticized, and satirized by commentators from across the political spectrum. The term has often been used derisively to ridicule the notion that altering language usage can change the public’s perceptions and beliefs as well as influence outcomes.”