"PC Bullshit"

[even_sven]

uggity ugh ugh ugh!

I promised myself not to reply to this thread, because this is an issue I feel strongly about. Too strongly, in fact, to keep my temper. This, however, is the pit…so UGH!

All of us unhabiting America are Americans. We all, however, are not JUST Americans. As much as you would like to smile and ignore the world around you…PEOPLE ARE DIFFERENT. America has a hell of a lot of cultural diversity. And it is just that, diversity. My friend objected to an Asian-American club on campus because he claimed they are divisive. But, there is an Asian-American culture (although it is not shared by ALL Asian-Americans) that should be allowed ot be acknolaged and understood. The people in the club shared a common experiece that most white people don’t share. For example, many of them celebrated Chinese New Year. They could talk about how they spent their holday and share their childhood memories. They could talk about how they feel when parts of their culture ore co-opted by fashion (i.e. “power beads”, which are take offs of prayer beads or the (I swear to God I saw it) glow in the dark buddahs they sell to wanna be hippies). There is a common experience that is somewhat unique to them that they want to acknowlage. What the hell is wrong with that.

I grew up poor, and the school I go to now has a lot of rich people in it. It was a shock to me, because alll I have ever known is poor neighborhoods, and I come here and people have new cars and vacation homes.I have been thinking of starting a “rap session” for people that grew up poor to talk about our childhoods, our jobs and financial aid, and maybe even comisterate that we can’t afford cars or decent houseing. Is that divisive? No. My experience as a poor peerson is different than that of the rich people that dominate this school. Yes, we are all “students”, but we came here different ways, and you cannot deny that.

[Ogre]

Well, I still think you’re missing the larger point. Crunchy Frog’s (and others’) implication was that “_______ - American” was something invented by nonwhites in the late 20th century to piss off white people and make them feel stupid. It wasn’t. It was invented by white immigrants and their children in the early part of the century to remain in touch with their ethnic history.

Fair enough. There’s no point in arguing past each other. Let us now reason as gentlemen. My only point is that I find the culturally-compulsory labeling of races/ethnic groups far more divisive than unifying. I think it serves to underscore differences and schisms more than common ground.

sven:

You can do what you like with your own time. I could care less what kind of support group people join. But the second that someone tries to make me feel guilty for saying “black” for “African-American,” or “white” for “European-American,” they’re going to get an ear full of vitriol. This was the original question.

Also, your points aren’t germane because no one ever questioned whether different people have different experiences. Of course they do. Certainly no one questioned another person’s right to celebrate those differences. That doesn’t for a second change the fact that a black person that was born in Montgomery, Alabama, and grew up in the house next to me is not African-American. That person is as American as I am. Plain old American. They’ve never had anything to do with Africa. They’ve never been to Africa. Their ancestors for five generations back have never been to Africa. Lest someone’s knee jerk and accuse me of being racist, let me hasten to add that this principle is precisely the same for any racial background.

[wring]

I’ve had this argument before, in person…
My feelings -

1. Words are powerful things, as we find out here where words are our only weapons of offense and defense

2. As I think it would be excessively rude of me to call some one “Fred” once they’ve introduced themselves as “Fredrick”, I also think it’s rude of me to refer to some one as “Hispanic” if they prefer the term 'Mexican American" .

3. Certain ** individuals** may make allowances for friends, but this does not change the basic “don’t be a jerk” rule - I may be allowed by “Frederick” to call him “Fred” in private, but this doesn’t mean that anyone else may do so without his permission.

Yes, you have an absolute right to refer to women as “chicks”, people of certain races as “black” or whatever, and the others have the corresponding right to believe you are insensative etc, based on your usage of offensive terms.

I don’t think any of us really want to return to the days of “girls” in the office being pinched and “boys” referring to those of certain ethnic backgrounds. Offensive jokes still do not belong in the work place. Rude characterizations don’t either. In private conversations, I don’t really care how you choose to act. I can always choose to not associate w/ya.

[Ogre]

wring,

I absolutely agree with you, in principle. However, I think it comes down to common courtesy, as I expressed before. Any time someone tries to tell me how to speak, I find it patronizing and unacceptable. I’ll make up my own mind, thank you.

[Myrr21]

Just to add a random (but relevant) fact:
Dan Savage (a la “Savage Love”) used to encourage inquiries adressing him as “Hey Faggot,”.

I may be wrong, but I think it only ended because so many people were too shy to use it, even though he encouraged it.

Which is not to say that the word isn’t offensive, but context is still a huge part of it.

[ren]

even sven et al,

you might be interested in a book by Todd Gitlin called “The Twilight of Common Dreams” about how the agenda of the left seems to have subverted itself. (A few years old, not sure it’s still in print) Originally, the assumption was that we were diverse, but the political message of the left was that we could bond together in our diversity to act as one. Now the assumption is that homogeneity in and of itself is repressive and everyone’s crying out for individual attention. Hence:

politically correct adj. Abbr. PC, p.c.

1. Of, relating to, or supporting a program of broad social, political, and educational change, especially to redress historical injustices in matters such as race, class, gender, and sexual orientation.
2. Being or perceived as being overconcerned with this program, often to the exclusion of other matters.

Emphasis mine. The relevant questions in determining what constitutes “overconcerned”:

• The obvious: When are we reacting to empty labels instead of actual treatment? Does it matter whether I call you “black” or “African American” or “person of color” if my treatment of you is not altered? When does the label actually affect treatment?

• More subtly: When is group identity more important than individual identity? At what price do we insist on special rights for our group at the exclusion of others? For instance, when does a program like Affirmative Action cross the line from redressing wrongs to perpetuating seperateness?

[single_files]

I work in a predominantly black neighborhood. When I hear the N word, I have to look up to see if the speaker is black or white before I know if it is acceptable. There’s something not quite right about that.

[Ogre]

How so, single files? There is a long history of people taking derogatory terms and turning them into acceptable appellations (“Yankees” is one.) If a black person uses it, it’s probably acceptable, unless the context is insulting. If a white person uses it, more than likely, it’s just insulting.

[Ogre]

Ummm…something I left out of my last post:

It’s all about the context, really (also known as “What ren said!”)

Me too!

Thanks, beagledave!

[wring]

*Originally posted by Ogre *
**wring,

I absolutely agree with you, in principle. However, I think it comes down to common courtesy, as I expressed before. Any time someone tries to tell me how to speak, I find it patronizing and unacceptable. I’ll make up my own mind, thank you. **

just so I understand:
are we quibbling over what constitutes “telling you how to speak” vs. “telling you a term you used offended the listener”???

** Satan** how about “folks” vs. “guys”? I personally wouldn’t have gotten in a tither at guys.

I agree that it can be a challenge to attempt to communicate with others (especially those who have different backgrounds than you) without insulting them, but I believe that it’s a worthwhile thing to do.

[mblackwell]

I agree with Satan. [sub]I’ve allways wanted to say that :)[/sub]

[tomndebb]

That doesn’t for a second change the fact that a black person that was born in Montgomery, Alabama, and grew up in the house next to me is not African-American. That person is as American as I am. Plain old American. They’ve never had anything to do with Africa. They’ve never been to Africa. Their ancestors for five generations back have never been to Africa.

I’m sorry, but it seems to me that you’ve set up a false dichotomy. There is nothing mutually exclusive about being “American” and being “hyphenated-American.” It is not an either-or choice.

When the IRS comes around or if they re-institute the draft, we’re all just “Americans.” I can pretty well assure you that if the Klan or the Aryan Brotherhood encounter your neighbor alone, his appeal that he is an “American” will fall on deaf ears or be hooted down.

Each of us encounters different situations in life that cast us into different roles. Generally, having names for ourselves when we are in those roles allows us to identify with others who are in the same situation. Why are you so vehement that no one be allowed to identify themselves with a term that they have not first cleared with you? (Sounds like reverse PC to me. )

For a variety of reasons, when the subject of race in the U.S. comes up, I use the term “balck” to refer to those people of darker skin whose ancestors were, by and large, imported from Africa as slaves. Since I have thought through the issue, I will not tolerate being told by some person that is not black that I must use the term African-American. On the other hand, if I encounter a black person who mentions that they prefer the term African-American, I will use that in their presence. It doesn’t hurt me, any.

The only time the matter even comes up is when a person’s class or ethnic background is the subject of a conversation. I don’t go around talking about my “American” friends or neighbors or co-workers. (And I don’t refer to my white or black co-workers, either.) Since the only time the term is an issue is when the subjectis being discussed, I’m not at all certain what your objection is.

In Alabama where the vast majority of inhabitants have been there for five and six generations (and most of them came from the same basic stock in the British Isles or Africa), ethnic perceptions may have been diluted to nothing–aside from any black/white issues). In the rust belt, where large numbers of people are one to three generations from the old country and many of them keep alive their culture with music, holiday traditions, religious events, and other ways of passing the time, most people are aware of ethnic heritages. None of them are less American, they simply have an added aspect to their culture. (Lord knows, I’ve run into enough 'Bamans and Crackers who made a point about being “S’uthren.” I have never felt that they were less American.)

[Ogre]

wring:

That’s sort of what we’re quibbling about. See, I’d rather hear from your “listener” whether something I said offended them. I’m not going to change my speech patterns just because a figure in cultural authority (media etc.) tells me to. If, however, as tomndebb says, the person tells me that they’d rather be referred to as something else, I’ll change out of common courtesy, as I pointed out before.

[Coldfire]

First of all, this is a fascinating thread. It is also completely alien to me, and perhaps other Europeans as well. Therefore, I cannot be judgmental about any opinion in this thread.

Having said that: I was having this discussion a few weeks ago with a (black) taxi driver in Amsterdam. He was from Surinam, one of our former colonies. He found the label “African American” absolutely absurd. Elaborating, he added: “I’m black. You’re white. They’re fucking colours, that’s all. Anything more you try to make of it will only result in needless bullshit. I can honour my cultural heritage, and still be black. If people wanna know, I’ll tell them I’m from Surinam originally, but I’m a Dutchman now.”

I fully agree with him. I mean, he’s of African descent (slave transports from Africa to the New World), was born in South America, and moved to Europe when he was 17. HOW should we call HIM in PC-speak? An African-South-American Dutchman?
I suppose us Dutch are just too pragmatic and straightforward for PC. No offense, but there will very likely be a time when this is the case in the US as well - all the discrimination problems in your country are just a lot more recent than over here, hence the sensitivity.

Just my point of view, and as said, not judging anyone here.

[wring]

*Originally posted by Ogre *
**wring:

That’s sort of what we’re quibbling about. See, I’d rather hear from your “listener” whether something I said offended them. I’m not going to change my speech patterns just because a figure in cultural authority (media etc.) tells me to. If, however, as tomndebb says, the person tells me that they’d rather be referred to as something else, I’ll change out of common courtesy, as I pointed out before. **

ok, got it now.

OTOH. I think it CAN get to an absurd degree as in : one evening, during the news, our local (MI) newscaster, reported about Nelson Mandela’s election in South Africa “for the first time, an African American was elected…” we called her to suggest that perhaps, Mr. Mandela was NOT in fact, an “African American”…

[Harris]

I’m white so if I’m mistaken feel free to slap me back in line but do any black people out there find the term “African-American” to be just a little condescending? I think I probably would. Also, I personally am for PC up to a point. The line should be drawn when terms which aren’t deemed offensive anyway are put into question by PC zealots. If someone is short I’ll say they are short, I will not say they are diminiutive or vertically challenged or anything like that, simply because there is no fucking point. If someone is overweight, I will not call them big boned or husky or well covered because they all mean exactly the same thing.
Also, before someone makes this point for me I would not call someone a kike, that is because kike is an insult. I would refer to that person as Jewish. I don’t see anything wrong with that. If I am asked to describe a black man I would describe him as black, not African American, same with Italian American or European American or whatever. It’s when political correctness forces its way over simple common sense that I have a problem with it.

[even_sven]

*Originally posted by ren *
**even sven et al,

you might be interested in a book by Todd Gitlin called “The Twilight of Common Dreams” about how the agenda of the left seems to have subverted itself. (A few years old, not sure it’s still in print) Originally, the assumption was that we were diverse, but the political message of the left was that we could bond together in our diversity to act as one. Now the assumption is that homogeneity in and of itself is repressive and everyone’s crying out for individual attention
**

There is a difference between the political and the cultural. We can bond together politically for the forces of good. That does not, however, mean we need to give up or deny our individual cultures (As JohnnyLA and others in this thread seem to think). Of course, I do not agree with outright seperatism, but I believe that a variety individual communities can co-exist.

And so no, it is not a bad thing to recognize the variety of cultures and experiences that make up America. And I don’t think it’s a bad thing for communities to give themselves a name that they believe represents them, and expect others to use that name. And a need for names sometimes does exist. To simply say “We are all Americans” is to deny the fact that some people have identities in addition to their American identity. And it is hurtful to be denied a name (as anyone with an unnamed illness can attest to). Labels is a bad word when we define a person by a label (e.g. “He’s Asian so he acts like this”), but labels can be useful for understanding and building group identity.

And never underestimate the power of words. Battles are being fought across America over the word “marriage”. People are nameing their kids “Junior” in fewer and fewer numbers. Prune manufactuers recently changed their product’s name to “dried plum”, saying that “prune” had bad connotations and hurt marketing. The very act of using a word is an act in it’s own right. And, in the spiret of living in a functional society, that act ought to have a little bit of thought behind it.

[Johnny_L.A]

That does not, however, mean we need to give up or deny our individual cultures (As JohnnyLA and others in this thread seem to think).

I don’t think I said that. I was speaking of race, not culture. That is, it shouldn’t matter if you’re Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid, Australoid or Amerind. My (predominately English) cultural group might have different customs or traditions from, say, an Italian cultural group; yet we’re considered the same “race”. Why do we have to use “PC language”, as opposed, as Coldfire points out, to common-sense language? Is there something wrong with being “black”? I have a pen. A German might have a Kugelschreiber. A Frenchman might have a plume. They’re still pens. PC language seems to me to be an effort to not make people feel bad about themselves. “He’s not handicapped! He’s differently abled!” “He’s not black. He’s African-American!” “He’s not fat. He’s weight-challenged!” The implication is that we have to be careful not to draw attention to a person’s… well, state of being. Why? If there is nothing wrong with it (for example, being black), why be upset if someone notices?

I’m a “humanist”. I don’t believe in “races”. To me, there is only one race. If I ever get married, my bride might be white or black or Japanese or Chinese or Mexican or Guatamalan or Italian or French or whatever. She might be blind or confined to a wheelchair. She might be completely sound of body. Different cultures have different attributes, and that’s a good thing. But when different cultures meet, both of them have to come to an understanding with each other. Being overly sensitive is divisive.

[Helen_s_Eidolon]

Ummm…
While all the discussion about colours and ethnicity has been interesting, it wasn’t exactly what this thread was started out for, but whatever.

I agree, call a spade a spade. If someone is black, call them so. AS LONG AS IT DOESN’T OFFEND THEM. (<-- key point)

[Ogre]

LaurAnge,

I hope the ethnic slur in your last post was completely unintentional. I believe it was. You did know that “spade” is a derogatory term for “black,” right? Anybody else ever heard this, or am I the only one?