Oh, I have no doubt!
The term has migrated/been diluted to mean any expressed opinion that will probably draw a protest from those to whom it is presented, because it is outside what is commonly accepted in that circle. “I know it’s un-PC to say so, but I don’t see what’s so great about microbrews.”
It would be very unique for that to not happen to a word or phrase.
I worked for the Census in 2010. There is a question for ‘race’ but it was important to let the respondent choose for themself. You weren’t even supposed to prompt them.
They had many terms for “black people” like black, negro, African American, we were to let them decide what they wanted to be called.
I thought the question was weird because it also seemed to confuse race with nationality. Korean, German, Japanese, Russian, are not ‘races’. (at least I don’t think so)
I seem to recall a substantial minority – although I agree not a majority – taking the position that niggardly should be avoided even though it had nothing to do with race.
But I’m not going to tally the number of posts.
My larger point was: you. You asserted, or seemed to assert, that there was no case in which an issue dismissed as “PC” was really dismissible; what was derided as merely “PC” was actually always a genuine issue of legitimate offense.
When the niggardly example was given, you announced it was not a True Scotsman.
Do you remember any clever answers?
Nobody asked for a tally-I just asked for a link so that I could see for myself what you might mean by “many”. I do so hope that post #58 has put your fears to rest. I acknowledge that there are cases that go overboard, but I wonder how common they really are.
I did no such thing. I did not say it didn’t qualify as “political correctness”-I said that the Mayor realized a mistake had been made and tried to correct it.
Mistakes were made. Ok, that’s not political correctness, but it’s one of my favorite euphemisms. 
Which is kinda the same thing-- trying to shape the perception of the listener by using verbiage that puts a different spin on the situation or issue.
O.K.-The Mayor made a mistake and tried to repair the damage. I assure you I wasn’t trying to spin anything-it was just an imprecise choice of words written in a hurry.
And what aspect of political life, or political reality, led to that “mistake” being made?
PC. Political correctness.
This is, then, an example of the very thing you’re denying exists: political correctness without a saving grace of “real” offensiveness. Yes?
Where are you getting this absurd impression that I am denying that political correctness exists? I’ve admitted that it does more than once in this thread, so what the hell are you on about?
Rather than myopically focus in on this one case, in which in no way whatsoever do I deny that it is political correctness, I would like to know if cases like these are a rarity/aberration of the norm, or do they represent what most refer to as “political correctness” in today’s society.
Humbly awaiting your attempt to somehow turn what I’ve said here into another claim that I deny the existence of political correctness. :rolleyes:
I thought I missed something when Bricker said that. I actually went back and reread all of the posts lol. Really though, what the hell is he talking about?
As for the aide who used the word niggardly, I think he must be lacking in the areas of tact and common sense. Sure the word “niggardly” doesn’t inherently discriminate against black people, but he might as well have said we got Jewed. I bet a lot of people wouldn’t even recognize the word “niggardly” if they heard it in a sentence. Who says “niggardly” anyways? I mean he could have just said stingy or inadequate or something. This begs the question: Who is the ignorant party here? The aide, or the people accusing him of being politically incorrect.
The idiots who did not recognize a perfectly cromulent English word and associated it with a wholly different word based solely on a similar sound and a ton of ignorance.
This claim is simply going to open up this thread to re-hash the old thread, (or multiple old threads), on the same topic. If you really think that there was any reason for the word to be avoided prior to the incident in D.C., please open a new thread to discuss it rather than causing a hijack of this thread.
[ /Moderating ]
Yes, but shouldn’t someone working so close to a mayor be aware of what the idiots of the public might think of a word. PR! Hello! Sry. I had to respond.
I’m certainly not trying to get this topic off track, but the link to these other threads was requested previously. I’ll see if I can find them by searching.
I’m surprised no one has brought up the argument over the term “black hole” being used in a meeting, or the NAACP members who insisted they heard “black whores” instead of “black holes” in the audio of a greeting card.
I’m sure these were both popular Fox News stories and they do sound made up, but from what I can tell some people really were trying to create controversy over these incidents.
I never heard about this one-cite, please?
Thank you. I have to say that it sounded like “black hole” to me.
Rolleyes right back atcha. I have no dog in this fight, but in your very first post, you state, “I can’t see wanting to treat others as we would ourselves as being a “political” matter.” and then innocently ask, “What am I missing here?”
Now you are saying, after being presented with examples, “Where are you getting this absurd impression that I am denying that political correctness exists?”
I guess I don’t understand the debate.
Is it a rarity/aberration of the norm? I don’t think so. There are certainly intellectual elites who take great pleasure in pointing out what they believe are racist or offensive terms or descriptions of others, when reasonable people can certainly disagree over whether or not the statement/term in question is racist. There are hundreds of examples out there. In my own life, I’ve been corrected (by whites) for using the term “Black”, and told that in their presence the preferred term is AA, because they (the whites) find Black offensive.
Sure, it’s anecdotal, but again, there are hundreds of raging debates out there on the net wherein certain articles gleefully point out racism or perceived racism where none exists, or where it is questionable if it was the intent of the speaker. Again, reasonable people often disagree and the question isn’t definitively settled because some intellectual claims offense. Naively characterizing these incidents as one side simply not having “common courtesy” (or whatever) is a bit simplistic and precious.