# Let's talk political correctness. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 2, 2007, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577 "2007-12-02T19:47:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Shawn1767](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ee7513/32.png) [@Shawn1767](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shawn1767)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/101 "2007-12-06T03:27:00Z")
Gorilla Man said > [@](#): > > Firstly, we’ve got to assume that this is an accurate quote from George Carlin. Secondly, I don’t think he’s a qualified doctor and so isn’t in a position to diagnose PTSD. Thirdly, the reverse logic you are suggesting is ridiculous. (Smoking causes cancer, yes? So do we call all cancer sufferers ‘smokers’?) I own the book that he said it in. I believe it’s a compilation of routines he’s done live. Carlin’s point was that he was basically getting fed up with having to expand the names of things he was already used to and felt that there were terms for already. From two syllables to multi-syllable phrases. How is what I am saying reverse logic? I am saying that you can call people who have shell shock as having “PTSD”, people who have been through trauma as “PTSD” but not that kids have shell shock because they’ve never been near an exploding shell. Your example is not like my example at all. People who exhibit a certain cluster of symptoms based on a traumatic event are said to have PTSD. Whether it’s caused by exploding shells, child abuse or molestation or natural disaster. All I am saying is that it’s ridiculous to say that they have “shell shock” when the more descriptive and accurate term would be that they exhibit PTSD. How is that reverse logic? I guess you’d say that they all have “shell shock” and that would make more sense and not be ridiculous? Athelas said: > [@](#): > > Because it’s annoying to keep track of, and externally imposed. In effect, it’s a mild imposition of one group’s morality on everything else. > > Imagine that a group of Brits decided that us Merkins should drive on the left side of the road. Sure, it’s not actually hard, per se, to accomodate their request, but it’s an annoying imposition, and who the hell are they to tell us how to drive? So, what you are suggesting is that you alone should have ultimate authority on what people should be called? Seriously? Otherwise it’s an imposition on you? Interesting. Your analogy is not parallel. Who the hell are they to tell us how we should drive? Who the hell are you to tell them what they should be called? Oh, sorry, that would be putting their morality on you I suppose. I guess you’d better let them know what they are called. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/102 "2007-12-06T05:22:21Z")
[QUOTE=brazil84] Why not explain your points? [/quote] Because I think it will be a waste of effort. But OK. Your insistence that nothing more than an increase in volume among certain kids–the only claim made in your citation, with no indication that they are refusing to pay attention to the instructor or that they are being disruptive–is some sort of breakdown of discipline reminds me of the caricatured teacher in the “Brick in the Wall” video. Your declaration that the recognition that differing cultures led to a breakdown in communication simply had to be an example of “blame” reminds me of Humpty Dumpty’s conversation with Alice: > [@](#): > > ‘There’s glory for you!’ > ‘I don’t know what you mean by “glory”,’ Alice said. > Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ‘Of course you don’t–till I tell you. > I meant “there’s a nice knock-down argument for you”!’ > ‘But “glory” doesn’t mean “a nice knock-down argument”,’ Alice objected. > ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means > just what I choose it to mean–neither more or less.’ > ‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean different > things.’ > ‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master–that’s all.’ Nothing I presented indicated that anyone needed to be blamed for anything, yet you insisted that it had to be a matter of “blame.” > [@brazil84](#): > > Lol. You can call it “blame,” or something more politically correct. But it is what it is. Even here you insert a spurious reference to the silly accustion of “PC” where it was not needed. * * * In general, I agree that there is plenty of ideologically driven wooly-headed thinking. My specific problem with cries of “PC” are that, since the term has only two meanings–that of Right-wing ideologues blasting wooly-headed thinking on the Left and that of some truly ignorant people confusing the universal trend to euphemism as a political movement–actual cries of “PC” make an implicit assumption that only the Left engages in wooly-headed thinking. If one encounters bad choices, regardless of its place on the political spectrum, it makes more sense to attack foolishness for its lack of wisdom. Engaging in name-calling, hurling “PC” around, is simply a way to implicitly pretend that all the foolishness is on one side of the political ledger and such name-calling gets in the way of actually examining issues for genuine problems or genuine solutions. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/103 "2007-12-06T06:01:10Z")
> [@](#): > > **athelas** : Because it’s annoying to keep track of, and externally imposed. In effect, it’s a mild imposition of one group’s morality on everything else. Which side of the road you drive on is not a moral issue. And that decision can’t very well be left up to the individual. Poor example. Is it really all that annoying to keep track of current usage? The basics change every few decades. I’m trying to think of the most recent shift and nothing comes to mind since a general move from _Oriental_ to _Asian_. But it isn’t a _moral_ issue. And the custom certainly isn’t universal. There is also a tendency to say “people who are handicapped” instead of “handicapped people.” And that includes whatever specific handicap a person might have. For example, style books of some of the publishing companies now say “people who are blind” rather than “blind people.” It’s a matter of style, I think, rather than political correctness. People have always had the choice of being unmannerly in free societies. That hasn’t changed. > [@](#): > > **brazil84** : In essence he seems to be claiming that white teachers are culturally ignorant. Look again at what he said. He says that that _may_ be the cause. I agree with you that the notion that the white teachers are ignorant of some of the traditional African-American religious services is silly. The science of genetics is now bringing into question the concept of breakdown according to race anyway. How can there be a gap if there is no race? **Sarafeena** , you mentioned that some that you knew in college referred to themselves as “leftists.” I have used that term here at the SD to describe myself from time to to time. I’ve also used _liberal_ and _Democrat_. The terms really shouldn’t be used interchangeably. Not all Democrats are liberals. Not all liberals are leftists. I would suggest that because of its history in 20th Century America, the _connotation_ of the word “leftist” has more to suggest of Socialism and Communism than simply being “a member of the left.” You won’t find that in the definition, but it is part of what it suggests – at least for my generation. That’s why a “leftist agenda” for me would be socialism. I’ve honestly never seen an actual agenda – or list – except in a campaign ad. And I worked in politics quite a bit when I was younger. Everybody knows about talking points and platforms at the conventions. They don’t seem to mean a whole lot in the long run. I don’t think either party has an actual “list” that all members of the party circulated among themselves. Nixon had an actual Enemies List. It included Paul Newman. That pissed me off. When I suggested the use of “Movement” and “Extreme” for the right, I was speaking only of how a propagandist would best choose words, but I failed to mention my main point. Sorry about the confusion. “Movement” would suggest a little of the Facist theme. “Agenda” is a Communist tie in and that’s why it’s so good to use against liberals. We have had traditional kinds of propaganda used against us by the current administration constantly. That’s why so many Americans have supported the war. If anything is “politically incorrect,” it’s old-fashioned [propaganda](http://www.propagandacritic.com/articles/ct.wg.name.html). Is it even taught in schools how to recognize these techniques these days? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/104 "2007-12-06T06:25:45Z")
[QUOTE=athelas] Because it’s annoying to keep track of, and externally imposed. In effect, it’s a mild imposition of one group’s morality on everything else. [/quote] Wait, a group saying, “Don’t use term X, we don’t like be referred to that way,” is an external imposition, but you saying, “If I say something isn’t offensive to you, then you don’t get to be offended by it,” _isn’t_ an external imposition? > [@](#): > > Imagine that a group of Brits decided that us Merkins should drive on the left side of the road. Sure, it’s not actually _hard_, per se, to accomodate their request, but it’s an annoying imposition, and who the hell are they to tell us how to drive? Actually, that would be incredibly hard, requiring millions and millions of dollars in replacing road signage, repainting streets, and in some cases completely rebuilding our highway infrastructure, to say nothing of the enormous spike in accidents caused by people whose driving reflexes have been conditioned to drive on the right. Whereas, calling people by the term they prefer to be called by takes a miniscule amount of effort to remember a handful of terms, and won’t cost you a cent or put your life in any sort of jeopardy. Incidentally, you really suck at analogies. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 11:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/105 "2007-12-06T11:01:22Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] Your insistence that nothing more than an increase in volume among certain kids–the only claim made in your citation, with no indication that they are refusing to pay attention to the instructor or that they are being disruptive–is some sort of breakdown of discipline reminds me of the caricatured teacher in the “Brick in the Wall” video. [/quote] But that’s not what I’m saying. You are attacking a strawman here. What’s the point of responding to an argument that I didn’t make? > [@](#): > > Your declaration that the recognition that differing cultures led to a breakdown in communication In general or in some specific instance? > [@](#): > > In general, I agree that there is plenty of ideologically driven wooly-headed thinking. My specific problem with cries of “PC” are that, since the term has only two meanings–that of Right-wing ideologues blasting wooly-headed thinking on the Left and that of some truly ignorant people confusing the universal trend to euphemism as a political movement–actual cries of “PC” make an implicit assumption that only the Left engages in wooly-headed thinking. Haha. I mean what I say – nothing more and nothing less. I never stated that the Right does not engage in “wooly-headed thinking.” This thread is about political correctness. Are people on the Right infected by some version of political correctness? Perhaps. One example is that the Right likes to formulate public policy on the Randian assumption that all people are freely able to negotiate and contract with others. So they oppose minimum wage increases and consumer protection laws. But still, it’s not quite the same. What if a university president stated that Congress should consider raising the minimum wage and strengthening consumer protection laws in order to help unsophisticated people in the lower class? It’s unlikely that he or she would be crucified for it. The fact is that we’re allowed to freely debate this issue. Maybe a better example is creationism. Is it required teaching in some parts of the country? Would a school superintendant in one of those areas get fired if he or she publicly questioned creationism? > [@](#): > > Engaging in name-calling, hurling “PC” around, is simply a way to implicitly pretend that all the foolishness is on one side of the political ledger and such name-calling gets in the way of actually examining issues for genuine problems or genuine solutions. I disagree and I don’t mind stating that there is a lot of foolishness on the Right. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/106 "2007-12-06T11:11:51Z")
[QUOTE=Zoe] Look again at what he said. He says that that _may_ be the cause. [/quote] Here’s what he said (at least according to Nanette Asimov): > [@](#): > > O’Connell now believes that widespread cultural ignorance within the California school system **is** responsible for the poor academic performance of many black and Latino students in school. > > He offered the example of black children who learn at church that it’s good to clap, speak loudly and be a bit raucous. But doing the same thing at school, where 72 percent of teachers are white and may be unfamiliar with such customs, will get them in trouble, he said. (bolding added) He said “is” not “may be” > [@](#): > > I agree with you that the notion that the white teachers are ignorant of some of the traditional African-American religious services is silly. Thanks. That’s not exactly what I said, but basically I think that that white teachers are probably not as ignorant as O’Connell seems to be suggesting and that even if they were 100% non-ignorant, it wouldn’t have much effect on the achievement gap. > [@](#): > > The science of genetics is now bringing into question the concept of breakdown according to race anyway. How can there be a gap if there is no race? Maybe someone needs to tell O’Connell to cancel next year’s achievement gap summit? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 11:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/107 "2007-12-06T11:54:57Z")
[QUOTE=brazil84] I would imagine that most teachers who regularly teach students from some particular group already have a pretty good idea about these things and wouldn’t benefit much – if at all – from being more culturally sensitive. [/quote] One thing I’ll grant you, you’ve got quite the imagination! > [@](#): > > What’s silly (and a result of PC) is to suggest or claim that the achievement gap can be explained by cultural insensitivity. Is it “PC” to suggest that cultural insensitivity may in some measure contribute to the achievement gap? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/108 "2007-12-06T13:02:45Z")
[QUOTE=Shawn1767] People who exhibit a certain cluster of symptoms based on a traumatic event are said to have PTSD. [/QUOTE] Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is a specific recognised medical condition. Using the term accurately outside of medicine is merely being accurate, not being politically correct. However, using the term to describe people who have not been diagnosed (whether or not some of them may actually have suffered PTSD) is inappropriate, and the medically-outdated but still meaningful non-medical ‘shell shock’ is better. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/109 "2007-12-06T14:52:19Z")
[QUOTE=brazil84] But that’s not what I’m saying. You are attacking a strawman here. What’s the point of responding to an argument that I didn’t make? [/QUOTE] Which I why I made the Pink Floyd and Lewis Carroll references to disengage. You are often quite careful to say nothing while implying much. This allows you a bit of (im)plausible deniability. You quoted a point that referred to black and Latino kids clapping and being louder in a class, then made a big deal about discipline and further insisted I state whether I saw acceptance of that louder behavior (with no indication of actual disruption) as a sign of a “relaxation” of discipline and when I responded with an explicit set of conditions, you claimed that we obviously saw discipline differently while providing no explanation of the differences. You passed up multiple opportunities to set forth an actual outline of how you would perceive discipline and now you want to pout that my reading of your implied statements is a strawman. As I already predicted, the effort was a waste of my time. [Quote=brazil84] In general or in some specific instance? [/quote] Both. In the larger context of your specific statements regarding the kids avoiding eye contact during discipline which is the specific context of the discussion to which these points were made trailing back up the thread. Your habit of submitting single line pseudo-Socratic questioning frequently leads to this sort of impasse in threads, where after a while, even you cannot remember what point is being made to which question. It does nothing to promote the discussion and you are just playing games. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/110 "2007-12-06T15:11:08Z")
[QUOTE=Zoe] **Sarafeena** , you mentioned that some that you knew in college referred to themselves as “leftists.” I have used that term here at the SD to describe myself from time to to time. I’ve also used _liberal_ and _Democrat_. The terms really shouldn’t be used interchangeably. Not all Democrats are liberals. Not all liberals are leftists. I would suggest that because of its history in 20th Century America, the _connotation_ of the word “leftist” has more to suggest of Socialism and Communism than simply being “a member of the left.” You won’t find that in the definition, but it is part of what it suggests – at least for my generation. That’s why a “leftist agenda” for me would be socialism. [/QUOTE] These folks WERE socialists. My closest friend was one of this crowd, and she describes herself as a socialist to this day. > [@](#): > > I’ve honestly never seen an actual agenda – or list – except in a campaign ad. And I worked in politics quite a bit when I was younger. Everybody knows about talking points and platforms at the conventions. They don’t seem to mean a whole lot in the long run. I don’t think either party has an actual “list” that all members of the party circulated among themselves. I have never seen such a list, either, and I don’t believe that I ever said that I had. But everyone knew which causes and sides of issues were the “right” ones to support…it was made very clear by action and words. > [@](#): > > Nixon had an actual Enemies List. It included Paul Newman. That pissed me off. > > When I suggested the use of “Movement” and “Extreme” for the right, I was speaking only of how a propagandist would best choose words, but I failed to mention my main point. Sorry about the confusion. “Movement” would suggest a little of the Facist theme. “Agenda” is a Communist tie in and that’s why it’s so good to use against liberals. > > We have had traditional kinds of propaganda used against us by the current administration constantly. That’s why so many Americans have supported the war. Forgive me, but I think you are being a little pedantic in your use of these words. I am not a “propagandist,” and so I am choosing words in a way that best describes what I am trying to say. Which is that, when you look at all the causes that someone on the left (or someone on the right) supports, they generally all support a general view of how the world should be, that the members of that group are trying to work towards. That, in my mind, is described properly with the use of the word “agenda.” It’s not meant to be anything sinister or even necessarily negative. ---
**Author:** ![pizzabrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e9c0ed/32.png) [@pizzabrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pizzabrat)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/111 "2007-12-06T16:53:59Z")
[QUOTE=Hypnagogic Jerk] What if, say, we get _credible_ studies that show that, all other factors left constant, blacks in America are less likely to succeed academically than whites? What do you think should happen then? I’m trying to get an idea of where you’re trying to go with all this. [/QUOTE] I love how this question comes so naturally to those without an ax to grind, an that **brazil84** becomes disjointed by it, because he has no answer (“I dunno - vitamins n’ shit… We got drugs that make people taller, right?” Uh…no…). **athelas** linked to a popular portal for a internet hate-group that’s tries to put modern scientific airs on old-fashioned anti-black racism (and it’s ridiculously constrained to anti-black sentiment). They claim that there’s plenty of scientific evidence for natural black stupidity that’s “covered up” by the media, and is banned and censored. There’s nothing being banned, or censored, of course (or else would they be able to share their documents so easily?), they’re just disappointed that enough people neither share their enthusiasm for the study of black stupidity, nor agree with their forced interpretations. So who was talking about an “achievement gap” anyway? Why is this even a concept? When did black people ask for a report card? Of what consequence is an “achievement gap” to anyone, including individual black people? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/112 "2007-12-06T22:58:51Z")
[QUOTE=pizzabrat] So who was talking about an “achievement gap” anyway? Why is this even a concept? When did black people ask for a report card? Of what consequence is an “achievement gap” to anyone, including individual black people? [/QUOTE] It’s of consequence to members of a pattern-forming species whose members are prone to overgeneralize from patterns. I had a wonderful teacher tell me after a long day in a local school, “sometimes it’s really hard not to be a bigot.” She was exagerrating and voicing a fear about herself in the extremes of frustration. She teaches at a school in a highly segregated town, in which the majority of poor students are the majority of black students, in which it’s very hard to find black students who are academically on par with white students. When you see this every day, even though you wear yourself ragged doing your best to treat students equitably and without regard to race, then yeah, you do start to wonder what’s causing it. When you see the kids themselves noticing it and forming scary conclusions based on what they see, then yeah, the achievement gap becomes a serious concern. If a population isn’t succeeding because of some unchangeable characteristic, then you shouldn’t waste time trying to change it. But if there’s something going on that’s keeping that population from success, something that can be changed, why on earth would you ignore it? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![pizzabrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e9c0ed/32.png) [@pizzabrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pizzabrat)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2007, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/113 "2007-12-07T00:09:28Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] If a population isn’t succeeding because of some unchangeable characteristic, then you shouldn’t waste time trying to change it. But if there’s something going on that’s keeping that population from success, something that can be changed, why on earth would you ignore it? [/QUOTE] Because it’s none of your business, or anyone’s business actually. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2007, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/114 "2007-12-07T00:20:48Z")
[QUOTE=pizzabrat] Because it’s none of your business, or anyone’s business actually. [/QUOTE] If kids aren’t doing well at school, I kind of think it’s the business of a teacher to figure out why. You don’t agree? ---
**Author:** ![pizzabrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e9c0ed/32.png) [@pizzabrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pizzabrat)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2007, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/115 "2007-12-07T00:32:42Z")
[QUOTE=Miller] If kids aren’t doing well at school, I kind of think it’s the business of a teacher to figure out why. You don’t agree? [/QUOTE] Specific kids or an aggregate group that includes even those who are doing well? ---
**Author:** ![Shawn1767](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ee7513/32.png) [@Shawn1767](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shawn1767)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2007, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/116 "2007-12-07T00:53:28Z")
Gorilla Man said: > [@](#): > > However, using the term to describe people who have not been diagnosed (whether or not some of them may actually have suffered PTSD) is inappropriate, and the medically-outdated but still meaningful non-medical ‘shell shock’ is better. I understand not using the term PTSD for those not diagnosed with PTSD. But why would I say that a kid has “shell shock?” What is meaningful about saying a kid who was abused has shell shock? I would probably say something like “this child needs to be evaluated to see if he has PTSD.” And in real life, I don’t go throwing the term out here and there. I only know a few kids who had PTSD, but it was George Carlin’s bit that made me think that maybe some things people label as being “PC” were just attempts at being more accurate. Let’s look at something I have had trouble with: Indian vs. Native American. Now, again, George Carlin comes in and says that they weren’t called “Indians” because the explorers thought they were in India and called them that, but that they called them “people of God” which somehow comes from “in deos” or some such. Regardless, either account does NOT take into account what the people already living here actually called themselves. So regardless, they didn’t ask to be called Indians, it was imposed on them. Why not call them by their traditional tribal names instead? Because I side with trying to be more accurate, I have a problem with the term Native American. Since the word “native” means “born in” that would mean that anyone who had been born in America would technically be “Native American.” Just like I am a native New Orleanian. So, when possible, I opt to call them by what they call themselves. Di Ne’ for instance. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2007, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/117 "2007-12-07T01:55:24Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] Is it “PC” to suggest that cultural insensitivity may in some measure contribute to the achievement gap? [/quote] It would depend on the context. Certainly I would characterize O’Connell’s statement as being informed by PC. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2007, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/118 "2007-12-07T02:06:53Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] You are often quite careful to say nothing while implying much. This allows you a bit of (im)plausible deniability. [/quote] Whatever. Your posts seem like you are arguing with some demon in your mind rather than arguing with me. > [@](#): > > You passed up multiple opportunities to set forth an actual outline That would be way off point. There’s no need to debate what is and isn’t disruptive behavior in a classroom. The point is that each teacher has a standard of what is disruptive and what isn’t. If a teacher begins to tolerate behavior that he or she did not tolerate before, this is a relaxation of discipline. By my definition, anyway. > [@](#): > > Both. Again, it seems like you are arguing with somebody else. I’m just not saying what you seem to think I’m saying. > [@](#): > > It does nothing to promote the discussion and you are just playing games. I suspect it’s you who are playing games, in your own mind. But you’re gonna have to push a lot harder to get me into a meta-debate. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2007, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/119 "2007-12-07T02:20:25Z")
[QUOTE=pizzabrat] I love how this question comes so naturally to those without an ax to grind, an that **brazil84** becomes disjointed by it, because he has no answer (“I dunno - vitamins n’ shit… We got drugs that make people taller, right?” Uh…no…). [/quote] Lol. That’s quite a paraphrase. By the way, if you want to learn something, check out this article: [http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/science/27HORM.html?ex=1197090000&en=5afadd07c6ca4f07&ei=5070](http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/science/27HORM.html?ex=1197090000&en=5afadd07c6ca4f07&ei=5070) > [@](#): > > July 27, 2003 > A Hormone to Help Youths Grow Is Approved by F.D.A. > By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS > WASHINGTON, July 26 (AP) Children who are healthy but abnormally short > will be able to have injections of growth hormone in hope of gaining one to > three more inches of height, the Food and Drug Administration said Friday, > deciding an emotionally charged issue. > The drug, Humatrope, is not for normal children yearning for a few extra > inches, the agency cautioned. It is for the shortest 1.2 percent. Uhhh . . . . yes. ---
**Author:** ![pizzabrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e9c0ed/32.png) [@pizzabrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pizzabrat)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2007, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577/120 "2007-12-07T02:27:48Z")
[QUOTE=brazil84] Uhhh . . . . yes. [/QUOTE] Oh. Well then, alright. Now did the scientists who developed a treatment for especially short children need to frame their study by race before doing so? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-talk-political-correctness/428577.md?page=7)