Debate Now Why Is Being "Politically Correct" A Bad Thing To Some People?

[Skull Pilot]

It is not Common Sense to expect people to Self Censor.

I don't expect anyone else to Self Censor in order to talk to me.

Yes, people who shut down debates by launching personal attacks are censoring because they are preventing public speech they do not like.

There are no rules requiring Self Censorship. That is not a reasonable expectation.

It is telling that you want for "productive discussion" to involve those you disagree with to have to self Censor, and for youto be the Judge of when they fail to do so well enough.

Actually it is common sense to expect people to self censor if they want to be listened to. Where did you get this idea that it wasnt common sense?

Please as per your op, prove your claim that Self Censorship is Common sense using common sense.

This shouldnt be difficult for you hopefully.

I want to communicate.
The person I want to communicate with says dont call me a dodo head.
I wont call that person a dodo head because I want to communicate with them.

Why would he say not to call him names if you didn;t first call him a dodo head

Maybe you've called him dodo head before? Maybe someone with the same argument has called him dodo head before?

No Not buying that rationalization

Why would he assume you would call him a name that someone else did in the past?

If I had an argument with a guy over let's say the draft and he called me an asshole why would i assume you would call me an asshole if we were discussing the draft from different sides of the argument?

 

[Asclepias]

There is a line.
The problem is it's different places for different people.
So there can be no steadfast rule.

But I understand why people get tired of being told things are not PC because some of them are dumb.

Which is why PC is a good thing. Each individual person can during the course of the conversation say "dont call me a dodo head".

Name calling should never be part of an intelligent discussion or debate.
Anything aimed directly at that person intentionally to be demeaning has no place in a civil conversation.

PC can be separate from that however.....

For example, I could say during a discussion "I felt I got gypped ...." which some may say is not PC toward Gypsies - but you know they did not mean it to be an insult to Gypsies

How do you know they knew it was not meant as an insult towards Gypsies? Isnt that an assumption on your part?

 

[Correll]

And neither does yours

Thats correct. My opinion is not fact just like the claim that people are using PC to avoid debate.

The PC tactic of calling someone racist, intolerant or bigoted when that person says something to offend the tender sensibilities of the PC crowd is avoidance of the discussion

Then don't say something racist, intolerant or bigoted. How much easier can it get?

As the person losing the argument gets to define what is supposedly "racist, intolerant or bigoted" and then launch the hissy fit/personal attacks, it is impossibly hard.

Who told you they were losing the argument and what makes you think there should be a loser? Your mindset is actually revealing a lot about your character. Both people should win at the end of the conversation.

People rarely derail threads when they are winning.

This is not about my mindset, it is about the way Political Correctness is used.

It is part and parcel of why it is perceived as a bad thing.

Because it is a bad thing.

 

[Ravi]

Thats correct. My opinion is not fact just like the claim that people are using PC to avoid debate.

The PC tactic of calling someone racist, intolerant or bigoted when that person says something to offend the tender sensibilities of the PC crowd is avoidance of the discussion

Then don't say something racist, intolerant or bigoted. How much easier can it get?

LEtting your tender feelings get in the way is no way to win an argument

Nor is being racist, bigoted, or intolerant.

What this really boils down to is that RWNJs want to call people names with impunity. Sorry, that's just not going to happen no matter how emotional you get about it.

So who are the ones shouting bigot, racist, homophobe etc?

It's the oh so sensitive intolerant in the name of tolerance PC crowd

I've not seen people shouting those things. To state that someone has made a racist or bigoted statement is not shouting, just pointing out a fact as they see it.

 

[Asclepias]

Actually it is common sense to expect people to self censor if they want to be listened to. Where did you get this idea that it wasnt common sense?

Please as per your op, prove your claim that Self Censorship is Common sense using common sense.

This shouldnt be difficult for you hopefully.

I want to communicate.
The person I want to communicate with says dont call me a dodo head.
I wont call that person a dodo head because I want to communicate with them.

Why would he say not to call him names if you didn;t first call him a dodo head

Maybe you've called him dodo head before? Maybe someone with the same argument has called him dodo head before?

No Not buying that rationalization

Why would he assume you would call him a name that someone else did in the past?

If I had an argument with a guy over let's say the draft and he called me an asshole why would i assume you would call me an asshole if we were discussing the draft from different sides of the argument?

What you buy has nothing to do with my point.

I just gave you the reasons. If you dont accept them then thats your issue.

Because I have experienced someone calling me an asshole when discussing the same issue?

 

[Skull Pilot]

And neither does yours

Thats correct. My opinion is not fact just like the claim that people are using PC to avoid debate.

The PC tactic of calling someone racist, intolerant or bigoted when that person says something to offend the tender sensibilities of the PC crowd is avoidance of the discussion

Then don't say something racist, intolerant or bigoted. How much easier can it get?

And you know as well as I do that one does not have to necessarily say something bigoted to be shouted down as a bigot by the PC crowd one merely has to say something the PC crowd disagrees with because they actually believe tolerance equals acceptance

How about an example?

Person 1: I don't believe in gay marriage
PC Person: Then you're a homophobe

Person 1 said nothing disparaging about gay people at all

 

[Correll]

There is a line.
The problem is it's different places for different people.
So there can be no steadfast rule.

But I understand why people get tired of being told things are not PC because some of them are dumb.

Which is why PC is a good thing. Each individual person can during the course of the conversation say "dont call me a dodo head".

Name calling should never be part of an intelligent discussion or debate.
Anything aimed directly at that person intentionally to be demeaning has no place in a civil conversation.

PC can be separate from that however.....

For example, I could say during a discussion "I felt I got gypped ...." which some may say is not PC toward Gypsies - but you know they did not mean it to be an insult to Gypsies

How do you know they knew it was not meant as an insult towards Gypsies? Isnt that an assumption on your part?

Because if they say something about it, she would explain it as such.

And the explanation would not make a bit of difference.

And why would it? It serves the purpose of the "offendee" to marginalize Bonzi.

 

[Asclepias]

Thats correct. My opinion is not fact just like the claim that people are using PC to avoid debate.

The PC tactic of calling someone racist, intolerant or bigoted when that person says something to offend the tender sensibilities of the PC crowd is avoidance of the discussion

Then don't say something racist, intolerant or bigoted. How much easier can it get?

As the person losing the argument gets to define what is supposedly "racist, intolerant or bigoted" and then launch the hissy fit/personal attacks, it is impossibly hard.

Who told you they were losing the argument and what makes you think there should be a loser? Your mindset is actually revealing a lot about your character. Both people should win at the end of the conversation.

People rarely derail threads when they are winning.

This is not about my mindset, it is about the way Political Correctness is used.

It is part and parcel of why it is perceived as a bad thing.

Because it is a bad thing.

Who told you someone was derailing a thread?

You never addressed the point that both people should win instead of someone losing.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Please as per your op, prove your claim that Self Censorship is Common sense using common sense.

This shouldnt be difficult for you hopefully.

I want to communicate.
The person I want to communicate with says dont call me a dodo head.
I wont call that person a dodo head because I want to communicate with them.

Why would he say not to call him names if you didn;t first call him a dodo head

Maybe you've called him dodo head before? Maybe someone with the same argument has called him dodo head before?

No Not buying that rationalization

Why would he assume you would call him a name that someone else did in the past?

If I had an argument with a guy over let's say the draft and he called me an asshole why would i assume you would call me an asshole if we were discussing the draft from different sides of the argument?

What you buy has nothing to do with my point.

I just gave you the reasons. If you dont accept them then thats your issue.

Because I have experienced someone calling me an asshole when discussing the same issue?

So you assume everyone will call you an asshole every time you discuss the same issue and you feel the need to preemptively say, "I'm going to talk about this but don't call me an asshole"?

 

[Correll]

There is a line.
The problem is it's different places for different people.
So there can be no steadfast rule.

But I understand why people get tired of being told things are not PC because some of them are dumb.

Which is why PC is a good thing. Each individual person can during the course of the conversation say "dont call me a dodo head".

No, they can't.

PC only works for some people.

 

[Ravi]

Thats correct. My opinion is not fact just like the claim that people are using PC to avoid debate.

The PC tactic of calling someone racist, intolerant or bigoted when that person says something to offend the tender sensibilities of the PC crowd is avoidance of the discussion

Then don't say something racist, intolerant or bigoted. How much easier can it get?

And you know as well as I do that one does not have to necessarily say something bigoted to be shouted down as a bigot by the PC crowd one merely has to say something the PC crowd disagrees with because they actually believe tolerance equals acceptance

How about an example?

Person 1: I don't believe in gay marriage
PC Person: Then you're a homophobe

Person 1 said nothing disparaging about gay people at all

Chances are stating that you "don't believe in gay marriage" does make you a homophobe since it is none of your business whatsoever.

 

[Asclepias]

There is a line.
The problem is it's different places for different people.
So there can be no steadfast rule.

But I understand why people get tired of being told things are not PC because some of them are dumb.

Which is why PC is a good thing. Each individual person can during the course of the conversation say "dont call me a dodo head".

Name calling should never be part of an intelligent discussion or debate.
Anything aimed directly at that person intentionally to be demeaning has no place in a civil conversation.

PC can be separate from that however.....

For example, I could say during a discussion "I felt I got gypped ...." which some may say is not PC toward Gypsies - but you know they did not mean it to be an insult to Gypsies

How do you know they knew it was not meant as an insult towards Gypsies? Isnt that an assumption on your part?

Because if they say something about it, she would explain it as such.

And the explanation would not make a bit of difference.

And why would it? It serves the purpose of the "offendee" to marginalize Bonzi.

That doesnt make sense. She said they knew before she ever explained it wasnt an insult

You have no proof it wouldnt make a difference which again is you pretending you can read minds.

Bonzi may have marginalized herself by assuming someone would be ok with her using the term not knowing it was offensive to the person.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The PC tactic of calling someone racist, intolerant or bigoted when that person says something to offend the tender sensibilities of the PC crowd is avoidance of the discussion

Then don't say something racist, intolerant or bigoted. How much easier can it get?

And you know as well as I do that one does not have to necessarily say something bigoted to be shouted down as a bigot by the PC crowd one merely has to say something the PC crowd disagrees with because they actually believe tolerance equals acceptance

How about an example?

Person 1: I don't believe in gay marriage
PC Person: Then you're a homophobe

Person 1 said nothing disparaging about gay people at all

Chances are stating that you "don't believe in gay marriage" does make you a homophobe since it is none of your business whatsoever.

No it does not mean anything of the sort being phobic is to have an irrational fear nothing in that statement indicates an irrational fear

The fact is you calling anyone who says that a homophobe is nothing but a PC tactic to avoid the argument

 

[Asclepias]

There is a line.
The problem is it's different places for different people.
So there can be no steadfast rule.

But I understand why people get tired of being told things are not PC because some of them are dumb.

Which is why PC is a good thing. Each individual person can during the course of the conversation say "dont call me a dodo head".

No, they can't.

PC only works for some people.

This is why I can never take you seriously.

 

[Ravi]

Then don't say something racist, intolerant or bigoted. How much easier can it get?

And you know as well as I do that one does not have to necessarily say something bigoted to be shouted down as a bigot by the PC crowd one merely has to say something the PC crowd disagrees with because they actually believe tolerance equals acceptance

How about an example?

Person 1: I don't believe in gay marriage
PC Person: Then you're a homophobe

Person 1 said nothing disparaging about gay people at all

Chances are stating that you "don't believe in gay marriage" does make you a homophobe since it is none of your business whatsoever.

No it does not mean anything of the sort

The fact is you calling anyone who says that a homophobe is nothing but a PC tactic to avoid the argument

What argument? Someone made a statement in your example, they didn't present an argument.

 

[Yarddog]

I've seen many times on this board the term "politically correct" being used in derogatory manner. It baffles me to be honest. What is it that would make being politically correct something to frown upon as opposed to a tool to further communication?

Rules:

1. No off topic comments. Please address the question.
2. Be able to prove your position using common sense. No links

The problem is who gets to decide what is politically correct. In many cases Political correctness dumbs people down. How many times have I heard from some leaders, " we need to talk about race" as a matter of fact Eric Holder called us cowards on race.
While in reality, these people are most likely the same ones promoting PC. They want to talk about race but they want to control the conversation, - tell us what is ok to say and what is not - and oh yeah - Who is a racist, which of course would be all white people , because they are white.

That is political correctness. Remember that book Huckle Berry Finn by Mark Twain? I read that book several times when I was a kid, and I can tell you he was ahead of his time, he cleverly Put Down racism throughout the book and showed the injustice of it in a real way. YET because of PC this book is not allowed in public schools because the N word was used. Doesn't matter to these Idiots about the context of how the word was used , JUST the fact that it was- and written by a White guy for that matter.

They don't give kids credit that they could be educated and understand things like context. PC in this case wants to push a one sided view point.

 

[Asclepias]

Thats correct. My opinion is not fact just like the claim that people are using PC to avoid debate.

The PC tactic of calling someone racist, intolerant or bigoted when that person says something to offend the tender sensibilities of the PC crowd is avoidance of the discussion

Then don't say something racist, intolerant or bigoted. How much easier can it get?

And you know as well as I do that one does not have to necessarily say something bigoted to be shouted down as a bigot by the PC crowd one merely has to say something the PC crowd disagrees with because they actually believe tolerance equals acceptance

How about an example?

Person 1: I don't believe in gay marriage
PC Person: Then you're a homophobe

Person 1 said nothing disparaging about gay people at all

Sounds like PC person needs to be educated. At this point person 1 should either ask why they were a homophobe or cut to the chase and explain their reasons for not believing in gay marriage.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And you know as well as I do that one does not have to necessarily say something bigoted to be shouted down as a bigot by the PC crowd one merely has to say something the PC crowd disagrees with because they actually believe tolerance equals acceptance

How about an example?

Person 1: I don't believe in gay marriage
PC Person: Then you're a homophobe

Person 1 said nothing disparaging about gay people at all

Chances are stating that you "don't believe in gay marriage" does make you a homophobe since it is none of your business whatsoever.

No it does not mean anything of the sort

The fact is you calling anyone who says that a homophobe is nothing but a PC tactic to avoid the argument

What argument? Someone made a statement in your example, they didn't present an argument.

If someone says that and you call him a homophobe and walk out in a huff then you missed the opportunity to continue the discussion IOW you avoided it

 

[Correll]

No, they are not.

People who refuse to be PC are refusing to self censor.

People who launch personal attacks are censoring others, by ending debates they were losing.

My intellect has nothing to do with this process.

Refusing to self censor is a failure. Specifically a failure to communicate because if you dont self censor no one is going to listen or be influenced by your opinion.

People who launch personal attacks are not censoring anyone. They are just launching personal attacks and yes ending conversation. If you want to debate then you have to follow the rules. If you want to keep talking you are free to do so hence you are not being censored. Its just that no one is listening to you.

It is not Common Sense to expect people to Self Censor.

I don't expect anyone else to Self Censor in order to talk to me.

Yes, people who shut down debates by launching personal attacks are censoring because they are preventing public speech they do not like.

There are no rules requiring Self Censorship. That is not a reasonable expectation.

It is telling that you want for "productive discussion" to involve those you disagree with to have to self Censor, and for youto be the Judge of when they fail to do so well enough.

Actually it is common sense to expect people to self censor if they want to be listened to. Where did you get this idea that it wasnt common sense?

Please as per your op, prove your claim that Self Censorship is Common sense using common sense.

This shouldnt be difficult for you hopefully.

I want to communicate.
The person I want to communicate with says dont call me a dodo head.
I wont call that person a dodo head because I want to communicate with them.

You never get a list. The list is anything the "offendee" chooses to be offended by.

 

[Valerie]

If I reference a PC taboo subject in the course of making a point, that is not bullying.

Some "offendee" who spends days viciously slandering someone because that person made a point the "offendee" could not answer honestly, is bullying.

and what of those YOU viciously slander as if lives have been 'destroyed' by this nebulous boogeyman?

if only the evil PC could learn how to have 'normal discourse' like you?? wha?

everyone thinks they have a point, you just need to hide behind 'PC' whenever you try to make yours...

and the reason why is pretty obvious!