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

[Correll]

"Try on this site. Try arguing that the collapse of the Black Family is the real problem causing black crime.

Libs don't argue with you. They call you a racist."



got a link? i know i've never had an exchange like that with you.

maybe you just haven't been addressing the topic without saying ignorant things...

maybe mac propped up some lame socks just so y'all could play victim to being called racist... wa wa

what happens on this forum has zilch to do with actual policies you make false claims about. true story.

WHy not address the examples in my cut and paste from Wikepedia where that was how the Public Debate on the issue played out instead of asking me waste time digging though the search functions?

Same mechanism (pc) and faster as it is already available for you to address.

Oh, wait, how silly of me.

By linking to ANY post of mine, no matter what, it gives you an excuse to make some more disparaging comments on my character.

Why don't we not.

You want to discuss the way PC is or as you claim IS NOT used in response to the Report I linked to, then just do it, and stop playing stupid games, lib.

You can make disparaging remarks about Moynihan.

 

[Correll]

you are drawing false conclusions from the information you read... sorry you can't see that.

In what way?

Are you denying that serious analysis of data showing a cause/effect from Illegitimacy and crime/poverty/drug use/ect was answered by "racist"?

And that that has been the debate and thus the policy of lack there of for the last 50 years?

 

[Correll]

"Try on this site. Try arguing that the collapse of the Black Family is the real problem causing black crime.

Libs don't argue with you. They call you a racist."



got a link? i know i've never had an exchange like that with you.

maybe you just haven't been addressing the topic without saying ignorant things...

maybe mac propped up some lame socks just so y'all could play victim to being called racist... wa wa

what happens on this forum has zilch to do with actual policies you make false claims about. true story.

I've not seen that either. I would ask questions, what caused the collapse of the black family? If you believe that the collapse of the black family is the root of "black" crime that would be an important point to explore.

Though I will admit that I wonder why so many on the right spend so much time trying to "improve" the black population and no time whatsoever attempting to improve the general population.

1. LOL!! As I have stated, included in my post was examples of that behavior in the public debate. YOu are welcome to address that, if you can.

2. Bullshit. The reasons for addressing the segment of the population with the worst problems should be obvious. Also, rarely is the suggested solutions limited TO the black community, as the damage caused by Illegitimacy is universal.

 

[Valerie]

In what way?

Are you denying that serious analysis of data showing a cause/effect from Illegitimacy and crime/poverty/drug use/ect was answered by "racist"?

And that that has been the debate and thus the policy of lack there of for the last 50 years?

you are acting as if liberals have not been involved with serious analysis in order to solve problems. issues and policies get parsed via legitimate debate, but ignorance gets called out as ignorant in the process. you have no interest in understanding why, you'd rather get defensive and demagogue while blaming a nebulous term for your own failure. you'd rather demonize liberals and pretend their 'rock solid support' from the black community is due to their being fooled, and further, as if the black community hasn't also been a part of this process of serious analysis to solve problems...

 

[Asclepias]

In what way?

Are you denying that serious analysis of data showing a cause/effect from Illegitimacy and crime/poverty/drug use/ect was answered by "racist"?

And that that has been the debate and thus the policy of lack there of for the last 50 years?

you are acting as if liberals have not been involved with serious analysis in order to solve problems. issues and policies get parsed via legitimate debate, but ignorance gets called out as ignorant in the process. you have no interest in understanding why, you'd rather get defensive and demagogue while blaming a nebulous term for your own failure. you'd rather demonize liberals and pretend their 'rock solid support' from the black community is due to their being fooled, and further, as if the black community hasn't also been a part of this process of serious analysis to solve problems...

I hate to burst your bubble but Coral lives in an alternate reality and further proves the point that definitions vary depending on the person you are speaking to. He has a unique inability to see reality and depends on believing in what supports his views despite anything to the contrary.

 

[320 Years of History]

PC means not being able to call black people ******* without being called out on it. Or women ***** or Jews hymies or Muslims terrorists, or Mexicans rapists, etc.

How about knuckle draggers?

Knock yourself out.

Odd how certain insults are accepted.

Are you certain that what you have observed and thought of as acceptance is not something else? Apathy perhaps? Understanding perhaps?

Apathy/resignation:
It may be that one's use of such terms with regard to specific individuals provides a degree of understanding among folks who hear one use the terms, and with that understanding, they don't see the value in offering a rebuttal or outcry. The audience just thinks, "oh, well, at least now I know how s/he feels" and moves on. They take it as confirmation that, in spite of what one may think in this "PC" world, the "ism" communicated is indeed not extinct.

Understanding:
It may be that some listeners know the speakers of such terms personally and well enough to distinguish/determine that the terms were used to for descriptive literary/picturesque effect rather than to apply the derogatory meaning of the term to one or several individuals/groups. Were the same listeners to hear such utterances from folks whom they don't know well enough to know that the traditional meaning and intent of the slur, no such understanding would exist.

For example:

• It's all but certain that no black person, regardless of whether they use the "N-word," truly believes that blacks are inferior in any dimension because they are black.
• It's highly unlikely that a non-Muslim who has married a Muslim truly believes that Muslims, merely by being Muslim, are terrorists.
• A non-Jew person may hear another refer to folks as h*mies and merely opt out of speaking up to castigate the speaker, and instead just commit to not having further interactions with or providing further support to the speaker.

I believe that nobody really overlooks insults. It's just a matter of how they choose to react to them. In the instances wherein you've seen no immediate response to the slurs' utterance, I think you've mistaken the quietude of certain observers/objects as acceptance. That their silence can lead to the sort of misconception that I believe you have is why nobody who finds it wrong/offensive should sit idly by when they are party to (directly or indirectly) derogatory remarks.

 

[Asclepias]

PC means not being able to call black people ******* without being called out on it. Or women ***** or Jews hymies or Muslims terrorists, or Mexicans rapists, etc.

How about knuckle draggers?

Knock yourself out.

Odd how certain insults are accepted.

Are you certain that what you have observed and thought of as acceptance is not something else? Apathy perhaps? Understanding perhaps?

Apathy/resignation:
It may be that one's use of such terms with regard to specific individuals provides a degree of understanding among folks who hear one use the terms, and with that understanding, they don't see the value in offering a rebuttal or outcry. The audience just thinks, "oh, well, at least now I know how s/he feels" and moves on. They take it as confirmation that, in spite of what one may think in this "PC" world, the "ism" communicated is indeed not extinct.

Understanding:
It may be that some listeners know the speakers of such terms personally and well enough to distinguish/determine that the terms were used to for descriptive literary/picturesque effect rather than to apply the derogatory meaning of the term to one or several individuals/groups. Were the same listeners to hear such utterances from folks whom they don't know well enough to know that the traditional meaning and intent of the slur, no such understanding would exist.

For example:

• It's all but certain that no black person, regardless of whether they use the "N-word," truly believes that blacks are inferior in any dimension because they are black.
• It's highly unlikely that a non-Muslim who has married a Muslim truly believes that Muslims, merely by being Muslim, are terrorists.
• A non-Jew person may hear another refer to folks as h*mies and merely opt out of speaking up to castigate the speaker, and instead just commit to not having further interactions with or providing further support to the speaker.

I believe that nobody really overlooks insults. It's just a matter of how they choose to react to them. In the instances wherein you've seen no immediate response to the slurs' utterance, I think you've mistaken the quietude of certain observers/objects as acceptance. That their silence can lead to the sort of misconception that I believe you have is why nobody who finds it wrong/offensive should sit idly by when they are party to (directly or indirectly) derogatory remarks.

Now you have went and made sense.

I would point out that I know some Black people so traumatized by the racist rhetoric of people that believe PC is a hindrance do indeed think Black people are inferior. As a matter of fact I know quite a few of them. Same with some Native Americans as evidence by a few uncle Tontos that post on this very forum. That brings up a great point in that being non PC is actually more damaging. The rhetoric has the effect of slowly breaking down the defenses of some people much like brainwashing.

 

[Valerie]

Why are you quoting my posts if you have me on ignore?

and why does he imagine his silly 'proof' links shouldn't be completely ignored?

And they continue to ignore my long list of honest liberals who explain PC beautifully.

 

[dilloduck]

PC means not being able to call black people ******* without being called out on it. Or women ***** or Jews hymies or Muslims terrorists, or Mexicans rapists, etc.

How about knuckle draggers?

Knock yourself out.

Odd how certain insults are accepted.

Are you certain that what you have observed and thought of as acceptance is not something else? Apathy perhaps? Understanding perhaps?

Apathy/resignation:
It may be that one's use of such terms with regard to specific individuals provides a degree of understanding among folks who hear one use the terms, and with that understanding, they don't see the value in offering a rebuttal or outcry. The audience just thinks, "oh, well, at least now I know how s/he feels" and moves on. They take it as confirmation that, in spite of what one may think in this "PC" world, the "ism" communicated is indeed not extinct.

Understanding:
It may be that some listeners know the speakers of such terms personally and well enough to distinguish/determine that the terms were used to for descriptive literary/picturesque effect rather than to apply the derogatory meaning of the term to one or several individuals/groups. Were the same listeners to hear such utterances from folks whom they don't know well enough to know that the traditional meaning and intent of the slur, no such understanding would exist.

For example:

• It's all but certain that no black person, regardless of whether they use the "N-word," truly believes that blacks are inferior in any dimension because they are black.
• It's highly unlikely that a non-Muslim who has married a Muslim truly believes that Muslims, merely by being Muslim, are terrorists.
• A non-Jew person may hear another refer to folks as h*mies and merely opt out of speaking up to castigate the speaker, and instead just commit to not having further interactions with or providing further support to the speaker.

I believe that nobody really overlooks insults. It's just a matter of how they choose to react to them. In the instances wherein you've seen no immediate response to the slurs' utterance, I think you've mistaken the quietude of certain observers/objects as acceptance. That their silence can lead to the sort of misconception that I believe you have is why nobody who finds it wrong/offensive should sit idly by when they are party to (directly or indirectly) derogatory remarks.

Now you have went and made sense.

I would point out that I know some Black people so traumatized by the racist rhetoric of people that believe PC is a hindrance do indeed think Black people are inferior. As a matter of fact I know quite a few of them. Same with some Native Americans as evidence by a few uncle Tontos that post on this very forum. That brings up a great point in that being non PC is actually more damaging. The rhetoric has the effect of slowly breaking down the defenses of some people much like brainwashing.

Poor victims of words. Now you made me cry. Get them to a safe zone in Missouri before they are micro-agressed.

 

[Valerie]

what is micro-agressed?

 

[Asclepias]

How about knuckle draggers?

Knock yourself out.

Odd how certain insults are accepted.

Are you certain that what you have observed and thought of as acceptance is not something else? Apathy perhaps? Understanding perhaps?

Apathy/resignation:
It may be that one's use of such terms with regard to specific individuals provides a degree of understanding among folks who hear one use the terms, and with that understanding, they don't see the value in offering a rebuttal or outcry. The audience just thinks, "oh, well, at least now I know how s/he feels" and moves on. They take it as confirmation that, in spite of what one may think in this "PC" world, the "ism" communicated is indeed not extinct.

Understanding:
It may be that some listeners know the speakers of such terms personally and well enough to distinguish/determine that the terms were used to for descriptive literary/picturesque effect rather than to apply the derogatory meaning of the term to one or several individuals/groups. Were the same listeners to hear such utterances from folks whom they don't know well enough to know that the traditional meaning and intent of the slur, no such understanding would exist.

For example:

• It's all but certain that no black person, regardless of whether they use the "N-word," truly believes that blacks are inferior in any dimension because they are black.
• It's highly unlikely that a non-Muslim who has married a Muslim truly believes that Muslims, merely by being Muslim, are terrorists.
• A non-Jew person may hear another refer to folks as h*mies and merely opt out of speaking up to castigate the speaker, and instead just commit to not having further interactions with or providing further support to the speaker.

I believe that nobody really overlooks insults. It's just a matter of how they choose to react to them. In the instances wherein you've seen no immediate response to the slurs' utterance, I think you've mistaken the quietude of certain observers/objects as acceptance. That their silence can lead to the sort of misconception that I believe you have is why nobody who finds it wrong/offensive should sit idly by when they are party to (directly or indirectly) derogatory remarks.

Now you have went and made sense.

I would point out that I know some Black people so traumatized by the racist rhetoric of people that believe PC is a hindrance do indeed think Black people are inferior. As a matter of fact I know quite a few of them. Same with some Native Americans as evidence by a few uncle Tontos that post on this very forum. That brings up a great point in that being non PC is actually more damaging. The rhetoric has the effect of slowly breaking down the defenses of some people much like brainwashing.

Poor victims of words. Now you made me cry. Get them to a safe zone in Missouri before they are micro-agressed.

Why are you crying? I thought you believed in being non PC?

 

[Asclepias]

what is micro-agressed?

Basically its the small symbols and words supporting racism that people of color deal with daily. Taken in a single instance one would think them insignificant. Taken over a lifetime and its a wonder people of color are able to hold it together.

"The term “microaggression” was used by Columbia professor Derald Sue to refer to “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color.”"

 

[dilloduck]

It's all but certain that no black person, regardless of whether they use the "N-word," truly believes that blacks are inferior in any dimension because they are black.

Surely you jest.

 

[Correll]

In what way?

Are you denying that serious analysis of data showing a cause/effect from Illegitimacy and crime/poverty/drug use/ect was answered by "racist"?

And that that has been the debate and thus the policy of lack there of for the last 50 years?

you are acting as if liberals have not been involved with serious analysis in order to solve problems. issues and policies get parsed via legitimate debate, but ignorance gets called out as ignorant in the process. you have no interest in understanding why, you'd rather get defensive and demagogue while blaming a nebulous term for your own failure. you'd rather demonize liberals and pretend their 'rock solid support' from the black community is due to their being fooled, and further, as if the black community hasn't also been a part of this process of serious analysis to solve problems...

What is "the serious analysis" counter argument the liberals have provided to counter the Moynihan Report and "solve the problem".

YOur continued strawman with the black support is noted.

 

[320 Years of History]

[PC] rhetoric has the effect of slowly breaking down the defenses of some people much like brainwashing.

Well, per the study I provided, the brainwashing effect is something manifest only in extreme cases. Extreme cases are not, however, the norm.

 

[dilloduck]

what is micro-agressed?

The latest silly buzzword of the oppressed.

 

[320 Years of History]

It's all but certain that no black person, regardless of whether they use the "N-word," truly believes that blacks are inferior in any dimension because they are black.

Surely you jest.

Actually, no, I don't, and unless you are being semantic about it, which unless you are you are, I don't see why you'd think I am kidding. The fact is that I did write "no" rather than something like "most" or "nearly all," so sure "no black person" may not be accurate because it requires 100% compliance. It may be that there are some very small number of blacks who think blacks on the whole are inferior because they are black, but I very seriously doubt that there are enough black folks who feel that way to cite them as representative of the race.

 

[320 Years of History]

Was I being unPC? Oh my.

No, actually you were employing PC exactly as described by Mac and myself.

Note how you still did not actually address either Mac's point, or mine.

There wasn't a point to address aside from his hypersensitivity, which I addressed with my statement, "you are easily put on the defensive."

There was nothing in his post you replied to that implied he was offended. He was simply and accurately describing standard lib use of PC.


And you changed the subject from Poltical Correctness to Mac and his alleged personal flaws.

Does that sound familiar?

BTW, my definition of PC indicates that you still will refuse to address what Mac had to say about PC and again continue your focus on Mac and/or myself and our alleged personal flaws.

Because that is what PC is and that is what libs do.

Yep, it's who they are, and they don't stop, even when it's pointed out.

That's how zealots behave.
.

Why are you quoting my posts if you have me on ignore?

Off Topic:
He may not have done so deliberately. Your post is part of Correll's post, so it got "picked up" when he quoted Correll. Then again, maybe he's no longer ignoring you?

 

[Valerie]

what is micro-agressed?

The latest silly buzzword of the oppressed.

why are you so offended when people assert they would like to be treated with dignity?




Microaggression is a term which some use to refer to unintended discrimination.

Psychiatrist and Harvard University professor Chester M. Pierce coined the word microaggression in 1970

The term “microaggression” was used by Columbia professor Derald Sue to refer to “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color.”

 

[dilloduck]

It's all but certain that no black person, regardless of whether they use the "N-word," truly believes that blacks are inferior in any dimension because they are black.

Surely you jest.

Actually, no, I don't, and unless you are being semantic about it, which unless you are you are, I don't see why you'd think I am kidding. The fact is that I did write "no" rather than something like "most" or "nearly all," so sure "no black person" may not be accurate because it requires 100% compliance. It may be that there are some very small number of blacks who think blacks on the whole are inferior because they are black, but I very seriously doubt that there are enough black folks who feel that way to cite them as representative of the race.

Then it's time for them to ignore the N word and move on and quit acting like it cuts them to the quick.