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

[dilloduck]

And you choose to judge people by the words they select to indentify something. If a person does not use the word that you think is appropriate you judge then as unworthy of conversation and end it.

Bingo. If you dont consider the possibility that you have something to learn its a safe bet you are unworthy of conversation and yes that would end it. How can you teach me anything if you think you know it all already?

I'm not going to stop a conversation simply because I don't agree with you.

You will if you pretend to know things you cant possibly know.

Wrong---It's always the offended person who shuts down converstation because their feelers got hurt.

Your actions caused the shutdown. They came prior to the person shutting down. Its simple cause and effect.

OWN YOUR OWN ACTIONS-----DUMP the victim shit.

 

[Asclepias]

Youre assuming youre correct in believing it is a banana. Your assumption you know whats correct actually tears down your credibility to the other person.

and vice versa

Thats true. So what you have to do is find agreement on what a banana is. You cant do that by pretending you are smarter.

or that you are somehow politically "correct".

Being politically correct goes a long way in finding agreement.

Maybe if you are speaking with someone who has the same illusions as you do

Nope. It works with people that have opposing views as well. Thats how people work things out and come to agreements.

 

[Asclepias]

Bingo. If you dont consider the possibility that you have something to learn its a safe bet you are unworthy of conversation and yes that would end it. How can you teach me anything if you think you know it all already?

I'm not going to stop a conversation simply because I don't agree with you.

You will if you pretend to know things you cant possibly know.

Wrong---It's always the offended person who shuts down converstation because their feelers got hurt.

Your actions caused the shutdown. They came prior to the person shutting down. Its simple cause and effect.

OWN YOUR OWN ACTIONS-----DUMP the victim shit.

You should take your advice. You decided to offend first.

 

[emilynghiem]

And you choose to judge people by the words they select to indentify something. If a person does not use the word that you think is appropriate you judge then as unworthy of conversation and end it.

Bingo. If you dont consider the possibility that you have something to learn its a safe bet you are unworthy of conversation and yes that would end it. How can you teach me anything if you think you know it all already?

I'm not going to stop a conversation simply because I don't agree with you.

You will if you pretend to know things you cant possibly know.

Wrong---It's always the offended person who shuts down converstation because their feelers got hurt.

Your actions caused the shutdown. They came prior to the person shutting down. Its simple cause and effect.

^ Where is the mutual responsibility by both partners for failing and shutting it down, Asclepias?
PC fails when one side assumes and blames the other person. You answer your own question again.

 

[dilloduck]

I'm not going to stop a conversation simply because I don't agree with you.

You will if you pretend to know things you cant possibly know.

Wrong---It's always the offended person who shuts down converstation because their feelers got hurt.

Your actions caused the shutdown. They came prior to the person shutting down. Its simple cause and effect.

OWN YOUR OWN ACTIONS-----DUMP the victim shit.

You should take your advice. You decided to offend first.

Where have I blamed someone else for my behavior ?

 

[Asclepias]

It is politically incorrect language and usually shuts down any conversation.
However if you note, person #1 started the conversation which would make them the one that needed to have an audience and offered the first non PC comments. There is never a guarantee that the person that responds cares to have a conversation at all after the first person started off the conversation in a failed state.

Maybe we should do an experiment then. At the start of each thread, the OP will say whether the thread is a CIVIL/ PC language thread or an open thread, anything goes. Just see what happens and compare the results.

Sounds good. What kind of topic should we do and where should we post it? Matter of fact who should post it? To make it fair it would need to be someone that is not identified with one side or the other.

Immigration/ illegal immigration or refugees. seems to be an issue these days but theres lots of others. Theres always race relations. I wonder also if the emmicons people use would also be considered non PC as well as posted images. I suppose so

So what are we doing exactly? Are we counting how many people from each side gets non PC?

^ See, Asclepias, if used divisively, it starts this sidetaking, finger pointing, fault counting business
of who can prove the other person made more mistakes. That isn't a mutual sharing process of growth,
but can too often turn into a witch hunt, with fear of judgment projected by one side onto others!

Would you ever recommend this method of communication, say, for marriage counseling?

To have ONE side make a list of how to say things, what you can and cannot use,
and then judge both people by whether they stick to that list.

You'd spend the whole time fighting over
who has the right to dictate what list or words to use, etc. etc.

Instead, where mediation is facilitated correctly, the mediator does not inject or dictate for the two sides.
The mediator facilitates communication, and tries to clarify the points on BOTH sides,
what they want, and what they want to avoid. Then helps the two sides form an agreement
that includes ALL the points they HAVE to have, and then on the points they can't both have,
they agree to give and take equally. If they can't have the whole house painted all red or all blue,
they agree which rooms to paint red and which to paint blue. It isn't one side dominating the
process and telling the other one when you are or are not meeting the given standards.

Both sides work it out together. If they can't agree on language or points,
the moderator can help them to stick to the CONCEPTS they both want,
and work out the language of the contract AFTER they agree in spirit what they want to contain in it.

You don't start off by arguing over the words people use, and/or judging people over that.
You stick to content first, redevelop trust in the process to be MUTUAL,
then the language follows after that, and may still require assistance since people are not perfect.

I'm not trying to be a moderator. I'm trying to see what the point of making threads is going to be if there is no goal or point we are trying to make. In this example who are the people that break the protocol. This can go both ways.

 

[Asclepias]

Bingo. If you dont consider the possibility that you have something to learn its a safe bet you are unworthy of conversation and yes that would end it. How can you teach me anything if you think you know it all already?

I'm not going to stop a conversation simply because I don't agree with you.

You will if you pretend to know things you cant possibly know.

Wrong---It's always the offended person who shuts down converstation because their feelers got hurt.

Your actions caused the shutdown. They came prior to the person shutting down. Its simple cause and effect.

^ Where is the mutual responsibility by both partners for failing and shutting it down, Asclepias?
PC fails when one side assumes and blames the other person. You answer your own question again.

We were discussing cause not responsibility.

 

[Asclepias]

You will if you pretend to know things you cant possibly know.

Wrong---It's always the offended person who shuts down converstation because their feelers got hurt.

Your actions caused the shutdown. They came prior to the person shutting down. Its simple cause and effect.

OWN YOUR OWN ACTIONS-----DUMP the victim shit.

You should take your advice. You decided to offend first.

Where have I blamed someone else for my behavior ?

When you said dump the victim shit.

 

[emilynghiem]

and vice versa

Thats true. So what you have to do is find agreement on what a banana is. You cant do that by pretending you are smarter.

or that you are somehow politically "correct".

Being politically correct goes a long way in finding agreement.

Maybe if you are speaking with someone who has the same illusions as you do

Nope. It works with people that have opposing views as well. Thats how people work things out and come to agreements.

Asclepias and it fails when the people with opposing views each "blame the other" and deadlock.
You and dilloduck can both succeed if you both keep trying, and/or enlist the help of someone who
can untangle any knots or open up any deadends you run into.

But if you blame dilloduck, who gets defensive and thus blames you, back and forth, then you can both fail if you allow this to shut you down. That is why PC tends to fail, when it deadlocks if both sides are in it to "prove it is the other person's fault" instead of working out their flaws and biases together as a natural given, and nothing to be ashamed about much less to judge one another for having such biases on what we see and say.

 

[dilloduck]

Wrong---It's always the offended person who shuts down converstation because their feelers got hurt.

Your actions caused the shutdown. They came prior to the person shutting down. Its simple cause and effect.

OWN YOUR OWN ACTIONS-----DUMP the victim shit.

You should take your advice. You decided to offend first.

Where have I blamed someone else for my behavior ?

When you said dump the victim shit.

No one made me say that. Not you --not anyone. I am responsible for what I say and do. No one offends me to the point to where I shut them down or call them on the carpet

 

[Asclepias]

Thats true. So what you have to do is find agreement on what a banana is. You cant do that by pretending you are smarter.

or that you are somehow politically "correct".

Being politically correct goes a long way in finding agreement.

Maybe if you are speaking with someone who has the same illusions as you do

Nope. It works with people that have opposing views as well. Thats how people work things out and come to agreements.

Asclepias and it fails when the people with opposing views each "blame the other" and deadlock.
You and dilloduck can both succeed if you both keep trying, and/or enlist the help of someone who
can untangle any knots or open up any deadends you run into.

But if you blame dilloduck, who gets defensive and thus blames you, back and forth, then you can both fail if you allow this to shut you down. That is why PC tends to fail, when it deadlocks if both sides are in it to "prove it is the other person's fault" instead of working out their flaws and biases together as a natural given, and nothing to be ashamed about much less to judge one another for having such biases on what we see and say.

Blame is always something you can pinpoint regardless of agreement. If we are talking and you say something I didnt like you actually caused the shutdown. There is no ambiguity in that. Your actions ultimately were responsible for stopping the conversation.

 

[dilloduck]

Thats true. So what you have to do is find agreement on what a banana is. You cant do that by pretending you are smarter.

or that you are somehow politically "correct".

Being politically correct goes a long way in finding agreement.

Maybe if you are speaking with someone who has the same illusions as you do

Nope. It works with people that have opposing views as well. Thats how people work things out and come to agreements.

Asclepias and it fails when the people with opposing views each "blame the other" and deadlock.
You and dilloduck can both succeed if you both keep trying, and/or enlist the help of someone who
can untangle any knots or open up any deadends you run into.

But if you blame dilloduck, who gets defensive and thus blames you, back and forth, then you can both fail if you allow this to shut you down. That is why PC tends to fail, when it deadlocks if both sides are in it to "prove it is the other person's fault" instead of working out their flaws and biases together as a natural given, and nothing to be ashamed about much less to judge one another for having such biases on what we see and say.

Please Emily--- show me where I have blamed anyone for my behavior.

 

[Asclepias]

Your actions caused the shutdown. They came prior to the person shutting down. Its simple cause and effect.

OWN YOUR OWN ACTIONS-----DUMP the victim shit.

You should take your advice. You decided to offend first.

Where have I blamed someone else for my behavior ?

When you said dump the victim shit.

No one made me say that. Not you --not anyone. I am responsible for what I say and do. No one offends me to the point to where I shut them down or call them on the carpet

I know no one made you say that. You just decided to say it. Your behavior your blame.

 

[dilloduck]

or that you are somehow politically "correct".

Being politically correct goes a long way in finding agreement.

Maybe if you are speaking with someone who has the same illusions as you do

Nope. It works with people that have opposing views as well. Thats how people work things out and come to agreements.

Asclepias and it fails when the people with opposing views each "blame the other" and deadlock.
You and dilloduck can both succeed if you both keep trying, and/or enlist the help of someone who
can untangle any knots or open up any deadends you run into.

But if you blame dilloduck, who gets defensive and thus blames you, back and forth, then you can both fail if you allow this to shut you down. That is why PC tends to fail, when it deadlocks if both sides are in it to "prove it is the other person's fault" instead of working out their flaws and biases together as a natural given, and nothing to be ashamed about much less to judge one another for having such biases on what we see and say.

Blame is always something you can pinpoint regardless of agreement. If we are talking and you say something I didnt like you actually caused the shutdown. There is no ambiguity in that. Your actions ultimately were responsible for stopping the conversation.

wrong---you have a choice after I say something that you find offensive. OWN IT

 

[emilynghiem]

I'm not going to stop a conversation simply because I don't agree with you.

You will if you pretend to know things you cant possibly know.

Wrong---It's always the offended person who shuts down converstation because their feelers got hurt.

Your actions caused the shutdown. They came prior to the person shutting down. Its simple cause and effect.

^ Where is the mutual responsibility by both partners for failing and shutting it down, Asclepias?
PC fails when one side assumes and blames the other person. You answer your own question again.

We were discussing cause not responsibility.

Regardless what causes racism, for example,
if both sides take responsibility for healing racial injury or insult, that is what allows communication to be safe and sustainable.

We can argue day and night what causes racism, cancer, climate changes, or each other to have the beliefs and opinions we have.

We don't have to agree on CAUSE to accept mutual RESPONSIBILITY for how we respond that
either works or doesn't work for ourselves equally as for the other person. Your responsibility counts equal as dilloduck, but I did not see that acknowledged in your post that appeared to say it was only DD response causing the shutdown. I see the mutual conflict as risking or threatening the shutdown if BOTH people don't work on their side. I can try to help both of you open things up and keep them going so that you finish your points. I don't think that is either your fault or dilloduck, but it is a mutual responsibility to see this fixed.
Mine included. If I am a witness, and I allow you to run each other into the ground, I'm responsible as well.

 

[emilynghiem]

OWN YOUR OWN ACTIONS-----DUMP the victim shit.

You should take your advice. You decided to offend first.

Where have I blamed someone else for my behavior ?

When you said dump the victim shit.

No one made me say that. Not you --not anyone. I am responsible for what I say and do. No one offends me to the point to where I shut them down or call them on the carpet

I know no one made you say that. You just decided to say it. Your behavior your blame.

Asclepias why this blame attitude, that sounds one way,
Where is the acceptance of mutual responsibility here?

What if PC were promoted as mutual responsibility instead of one sided projection of blame.
Don't you think that would make a difference?

 

[Asclepias]

Being politically correct goes a long way in finding agreement.

Maybe if you are speaking with someone who has the same illusions as you do

Nope. It works with people that have opposing views as well. Thats how people work things out and come to agreements.

Asclepias and it fails when the people with opposing views each "blame the other" and deadlock.
You and dilloduck can both succeed if you both keep trying, and/or enlist the help of someone who
can untangle any knots or open up any deadends you run into.

But if you blame dilloduck, who gets defensive and thus blames you, back and forth, then you can both fail if you allow this to shut you down. That is why PC tends to fail, when it deadlocks if both sides are in it to "prove it is the other person's fault" instead of working out their flaws and biases together as a natural given, and nothing to be ashamed about much less to judge one another for having such biases on what we see and say.

Blame is always something you can pinpoint regardless of agreement. If we are talking and you say something I didnt like you actually caused the shutdown. There is no ambiguity in that. Your actions ultimately were responsible for stopping the conversation.

wrong---you have a choice after I say something that you find offensive. OWN IT

We arent talking about choices. We are talking about causes. You would cause the shut down. We know because prior to your comment we would be talking and afterwards we wouldnt be.

 

[Asclepias]

You should take your advice. You decided to offend first.

Where have I blamed someone else for my behavior ?

When you said dump the victim shit.

No one made me say that. Not you --not anyone. I am responsible for what I say and do. No one offends me to the point to where I shut them down or call them on the carpet

I know no one made you say that. You just decided to say it. Your behavior your blame.

Asclepias why this blame attitude, that sounds one way,
Where is the acceptance of mutual responsibility here?

What if PC were promoted as mutual responsibility instead of one sided projection of blame.
Don't you think that would make a difference?

There is no mutual responsibility in the causes of the shutdown. Someone is at fault and we can point to the event pretty easily. The cause is what first broke the protocol of conversation.

 

[emilynghiem]

We arent talking about choices. We are talking about causes. You would cause the shut down. We know because prior to your comment we would be talking and afterwards we wouldnt be.

BAMMPP. Sorry, This sentence makes my "unpc" alarm go off, Asclepias
The conflict between you can cause both of you to go off on each other and cause the shutdown.
It takes two people to express a conflict,
and it is nobody's fault you do not see or say things the same way.
There is no need or sense in blaming one side if things eventually break down later.

The root conflict between you and dilloduck is not fair to blame on either of you.
If you both keep working to address it, you will overcome this conflict,
and will avert a shutdown. You are both adept people and I support you in
finishing this through and not shutting down. Blaming it on dilloduck gets the buzzer from me.
Out of bounds, foul shot, not a fair hit.

 

[dilloduck]

Maybe if you are speaking with someone who has the same illusions as you do

Nope. It works with people that have opposing views as well. Thats how people work things out and come to agreements.

Asclepias and it fails when the people with opposing views each "blame the other" and deadlock.
You and dilloduck can both succeed if you both keep trying, and/or enlist the help of someone who
can untangle any knots or open up any deadends you run into.

But if you blame dilloduck, who gets defensive and thus blames you, back and forth, then you can both fail if you allow this to shut you down. That is why PC tends to fail, when it deadlocks if both sides are in it to "prove it is the other person's fault" instead of working out their flaws and biases together as a natural given, and nothing to be ashamed about much less to judge one another for having such biases on what we see and say.

Blame is always something you can pinpoint regardless of agreement. If we are talking and you say something I didnt like you actually caused the shutdown. There is no ambiguity in that. Your actions ultimately were responsible for stopping the conversation.

wrong---you have a choice after I say something that you find offensive. OWN IT

We arent talking about choices. We are talking about causes. You would cause the shut down. We know because prior to your comment we would be talking and afterwards we wouldnt be.

I understand that you sense that are a victim of offensive words and believe you have no choices other than to hurt and lash out or simply stop the conversation. I disagree with that. Would you like to try to defend your stance of helplessness ?