Thread: Politically Correct?

Originally Posted by Cephus

Because one person is being offended. It's not two people using different words, it's one person getting pissed they're not both using their choice of words.

And it's another person using words without consideration for other people.

What I don't get is why some people get so offended about other people being offended.

If you don't like PC terminology, so be it, but why bother getting so offended about people being offended by non-PC terminology?

Originally Posted by Tucker Case

What I don't get is why some people get so offended about other people being offended.

If you don't like PC terminology, so be it, but why bother getting so offended about people being offended by non-PC terminology?

There's really no reason. Uber PC people and uber anti-PC people are pretty much the same person just with different causes. Both groups would rather people say exactly what they want them to say and nothing more. I personally think it's better to just let people say whatever and then avoid them if you don't like it.

Originally Posted by evanescence

The reaction is what makes the initial action of any consequence. If it weren't for people bitching and whining about being offended, the action wouldn't be important in and of itself.

Close, but no. The potential reactions are what we are thinking of. However, the action reaction is not important. In the example, I don't care if some one is offended or not by being referred to as Oriental, but for my personal philosophy, since I am not trying to offend, I will use the term Asian, which I know won't offend. I would actually consider some one who was offended by the term oriental to be overly sensitive. That does not mean it is right for me to call them that.

I think the root of the question is where the line is between commendable courtesy and condemnable political correctness?

Originally Posted by Redress

I think the root of the question is where the line is between commendable courtesy and condemnable political correctness?

When the truth gets lost in the attempt to be polite is the easiest line to draw. However, there are certainly times when I'm willing to sacrifice the truth for the sake of politeness or PC.

In the end, I think you just have to choose your battles. Sometimes, I just say the polite/PC thing when I don't want to argue. Other times, I don't mind the confrontation.

Originally Posted by Tucker Case

What I don't get is why some people get so offended about other people being offended.

If you don't like PC terminology, so be it, but why bother getting so offended about people being offended by non-PC terminology?

I don't think it's "offense" at people being offended so much as disbelieving awe at just how silly and stupid it can get.

Originally Posted by X Factor

I don't think it's "offense" at people being offended so much as disbelieving awe at just how silly and stupid it can get.

Wanting to be called African-American isn't really stupid or silly, though. I see people up in arms over that one all the time.

It's certainly not like that moron who got pissed off because another guy said something about black holes. That's silly and stupid. In fact, I'd use the non-PC term of "retard" to describe that moron in a heartbeat.

But that tard getting all up in arms over the term "black hole" is certainly not worth getting mad over. It's certainly laughable, though. Hell, you usually have to pay for that kind of funny ****, and that assclown was handing it out for free.

Originally Posted by Tucker Case

What I don't get is why some people get so offended about other people being offended.

If you don't like PC terminology, so be it, but why bother getting so offended about people being offended by non-PC terminology?

To me, it's more amusing than annoying. It only becomes annoying when it is enforced.

Originally Posted by Redress

Close, but no. The potential reactions are what we are thinking of. However, the action reaction is not important. In the example, I don't care if some one is offended or not by being referred to as Oriental, but for my personal philosophy, since I am not trying to offend, I will use the term Asian, which I know won't offend. I would actually consider some one who was offended by the term oriental to be overly sensitive. That does not mean it is right for me to call them that.

I think the root of the question is where the line is between commendable courtesy and condemnable political correctness?

Good question. And that is really just opinion. Ask 20 people, get 20 different answers.

Originally Posted by Tucker Case

Wanting to be called African-American isn't really stupid or silly, though. I see people up in arms over that one all the time.

Personally, I think it is. Why the hyphenation? Can we all not be just American? Don't people realize that dividing ourselves into groups such as race only furthers our problems as a species?

Originally Posted by Tucker Case

It's certainly not like that moron who got pissed off because another guy said something about black holes. That's silly and stupid. In fact, I'd use the non-PC term of "retard" to describe that moron in a heartbeat.

But that tard getting all up in arms over the term "black hole" is certainly not worth getting mad over. It's certainly laughable, though. Hell, you usually have to pay for that kind of funny ****, and that assclown was handing it out for free.

The term "retard" offends me.

lol

Originally Posted by evanescence

Personally, I think it is. Why the hyphenation? Can we all not be just American? Don't people realize that dividing ourselves into groups such as race only furthers our problems as a species?

Dividing ourselves into races does not further our problems. Attaching meanings to races causes problems. Otherwise, race is just a convenient way to describe people.

Originally Posted by Tucker Case

Wanting to be called African-American isn't really stupid or silly, though. I see people up in arms over that one all the time.

But is it accurate? Is it equal? Is it truly descriptive?

The term "African American" is intended to denote a black person, presumably of African descent. Does the term apply equally to the white guy who emigrated from Zimbabwe whose family had been living there for 150+ years prior to his emigration? No, it doesn't, but why not? That white guy from Zimbabwe is more "African American" than the black guy whose family has been here for 300 years. He has zero connection with Europe. How long does a person's family have to be in a place before they are simply identified as being from that place?

Note: The same points/question can apply to all other versions of "-American", just used this one to continue the point.