The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Versailles on the Potomac (and Hudson): The American Political Media

196979899101

Posts

  • knitdanknitdan Turtle on its back In the desert seaRegistered User regular
    I have to give them props for calling it "Just IN" though

    Why aren't you helping, Leon?
    Caulk Bite 6RedTide
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    Just IN - 'Credible'

  • frenetic_ferretfrenetic_ferret wildest weasel East Coast is Best CoastRegistered User regular
    John Chait once again proving he's not really a liberal.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/not-a-very-pc-thing-to-say.html

    l7qudl3uxpxz.jpg

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Yeah I was reading the jezebel take down of that article and its like god damn at what point will we admit that "Politically Correct" is just a bullshit term for "Things racist/sexist/assholes like to say that they don't want to get in trouble for." Its also not lost on me that a lot of people that are so mad about politically correct freak out the second you imply christianity is not the bees knees.

    Shameless Link whoring updated Fridays starting 1/26/17
    http://exterminatorsassistant.blogspot.com/
    AngelHedgieJakorianShadowen
  • frenetic_ferretfrenetic_ferret wildest weasel East Coast is Best CoastRegistered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah I was reading the jezebel take down of that article and its like god damn at what point will we admit that "Politically Correct" is just a bullshit term for "Things racist/sexist/assholes like to say that they don't want to get in trouble for." Its also not lost on me that a lot of people that are so mad about politically correct freak out the second you imply christianity is not the bees knees.

    He also glosses over that it's usually white males who appoint themselves the defenders of the downtrodden that are the most aggregious offenders when it comes to silencing. Which is problematic, because that's just another version of patriarchy and privilege, and a very nefarious one at that.

    l7qudl3uxpxz.jpg

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Chait is liberal... for Gen X white people. Which makes him centrist by any other metric.

    PwH4Ipj.jpg
    Shorty
  • Captain MarcusCaptain Marcus now arrives the hour of actionRegistered User regular
    John Chait once again proving he's not really a liberal.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/not-a-very-pc-thing-to-say.html

    The man was co-editor of The New Republic and defended the New Deal on the Colbert Report. Maybe he's not a radical, but he's a liberal and he doesn't deserve your Scotsman fallacies.

    And he's right about a lot of stuff in that article- the professor being targeted for correcting a Ph.D. student's capitalization turns into one of the dumbest circuses I've ever seen. The Miller-Young debacle, a professor assaulting students (one of them a minor!) and being defended for it, is disgusting and the editorial views of the Harvard Crimson are insane.

    Yes, "microaggressions" do exist, and trigger warnings are sometimes necessary, but these labels are put on far too many things thanks to academia and social media. For example, "racist" used to be a serious accusation before, oh, five years ago, but now I facetiously google "pb and j racist" and news stories pop up. Part of that is due to the Republican leadership fighting the (correct) charge of racism so it's in the news constantly, and part of it is a certain subsection of the left slapping labels onto things like a five-year-old with a new pack of stickers.

    And it's not even useful, that's the thing! Identity politics don't win elections! The majority of American citizens don't like Israel, support homosexual marriage, want to tax the rich, think global warming is a real danger and want renewable energy sources to power our future. These are all liberal ideas! All good liberal ideas, and every left-wing news and campus organization is instead concerned with identity politics where "perfect is the enemy of the good" so voters stay home. You even see it on here- witness the election threads when posters pop in to say "I'm not voting in this election; the candidates are all the same, man" and the Republicans sweep in by a large majority because they sure as hell don't care.

    I was expecting to lose the Senate last fall but I wish it had been due to something other than rank idiocy by our own side.

    ISIS delenda est
    programjunkiePanda4You
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    For example, "racist" used to be a serious accusation before, oh, five years ago, but now I facetiously google "pb and j racist" and news stories pop up. Part of that is due to the Republican leadership fighting the (correct) charge of racism so it's in the news constantly, and part of it is a certain subsection of the left slapping labels onto things like a five-year-old with a new pack of stickers.

    Actually basically all of it is due to the right constantly taking anyone talking about race in any way and lying about it.

    The "racist PB and J" was actually just an example of a discussion technique being taught to teachers in multicultural schools so that they can better relate with and teach their students. No one said that PB and J's were racist.

    http://portlandtribune.com/pt/9-news/114604-schools-beat-the-drum-for-equity

    I mean, maybe there are some "too PC" places out there. But damn if what Chait isn't enabling is for racists to say racist things.

    wbBv3fj.png
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    John Chait once again proving he's not really a liberal.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/not-a-very-pc-thing-to-say.html

    The man was co-editor of The New Republic and defended the New Deal on the Colbert Report. Maybe he's not a radical, but he's a liberal and he doesn't deserve your Scotsman fallacies.

    And he's right about a lot of stuff in that article- the professor being targeted for correcting a Ph.D. student's capitalization turns into one of the dumbest circuses I've ever seen. The Miller-Young debacle, a professor assaulting students (one of them a minor!) and being defended for it, is disgusting and the editorial views of the Harvard Crimson are insane.

    Yes, "microaggressions" do exist, and trigger warnings are sometimes necessary, but these labels are put on far too many things thanks to academia and social media. For example, "racist" used to be a serious accusation before, oh, five years ago, but now I facetiously google "pb and j racist" and news stories pop up. Part of that is due to the Republican leadership fighting the (correct) charge of racism so it's in the news constantly, and part of it is a certain subsection of the left slapping labels onto things like a five-year-old with a new pack of stickers.

    And it's not even useful, that's the thing! Identity politics don't win elections! The majority of American citizens don't like Israel, support homosexual marriage, want to tax the rich, think global warming is a real danger and want renewable energy sources to power our future. These are all liberal ideas! All good liberal ideas, and every left-wing news and campus organization is instead concerned with identity politics where "perfect is the enemy of the good" so voters stay home. You even see it on here- witness the election threads when posters pop in to say "I'm not voting in this election; the candidates are all the same, man" and the Republicans sweep in by a large majority because they sure as hell don't care.

    I was expecting to lose the Senate last fall but I wish it had been due to something other than rank idiocy by our own side.

    First, I'd recommend you read Coates' takedown of The New Republic before you start trying to use his editorship as a defense of his "bona fides".

    Second, considering that we currently live in a society where people are routinely targeted for personal harassment and attack for daring to state a public opinion on something as innocuous as video games while female, you'll pardon me if I think your arguments against "identity politics" don't pass the smell test. The reason that what you call "identity politics" exists in the first place is because the only way that minority groups can even get their concerns heard is by grouping together so that they can amplify their voice. But you instead want them to just be "good little soldiers" and line up behind the liberal ideas you think are important. So you'll pardon me if I find that their response of "fuck that shit" is an expected and appropriate action.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    CptKemzikWraith260ShadowenMan in the MistsApogee
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    Alright but come on, not doing The Vagina Monologues because it doesn't include women without vaginas is ridiculous

    m9UgadV.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
    Gnome-Interruptus
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited January 2015
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Alright but come on, not doing The Vagina Monologues because it doesn't include women without vaginas is ridiculous

    Not as much as you'd think - from what I understand, Ensler has some TERF(trans-exclusionary radical feminism) leanings. So I could see why that would be an issue.

    Edit: There's a big fight in feminism at the moment with regards to the TERF movement, which has sort of become the old shame of feminism. Basically, TERFs are feminists who embrace some elements of gender essentialism, stating that physical sex is linked to conceptualization of gender. As such, they reject the idea of transgendered individuals, refusing to see them as the gender they see themselves as. In the past, this could get glossed over, since there were other aspects of feminism that they did align with, but as awareness of transgender issues has been on the rise, it's become harder and harder to overlook this one position that they hold.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Alright but come on, not doing The Vagina Monologues because it doesn't include women without vaginas is ridiculous

    Not as much as you'd think - from what I understand, Ensler has some TERF(trans-exclusionary radical feminism) leanings. So I could see why that would be an issue.

    Edit: There's a big fight in feminism at the moment with regards to the TERF movement, which has sort of become the old shame of feminism. Basically, TERFs are feminists who embrace some elements of gender essentialism, stating that physical sex is linked to conceptualization of gender. As such, they reject the idea of transgendered individuals, refusing to see them as the gender they see themselves as. In the past, this could get glossed over, since there were other aspects of feminism that they did align with, but as awareness of transgender issues has been on the rise, it's become harder and harder to overlook this one position that they hold.

    You know one of these days we'll be just like the humans in The Culture.

    "I don't feel like having a penis is fun anymore. Time to get some boobies and a vag!"

    Seriously I wonder how many people would suddenly not care so much if we could suddenly just switch out sex organs with a pill.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Trace wrote: »
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Alright but come on, not doing The Vagina Monologues because it doesn't include women without vaginas is ridiculous

    Not as much as you'd think - from what I understand, Ensler has some TERF(trans-exclusionary radical feminism) leanings. So I could see why that would be an issue.

    Edit: There's a big fight in feminism at the moment with regards to the TERF movement, which has sort of become the old shame of feminism. Basically, TERFs are feminists who embrace some elements of gender essentialism, stating that physical sex is linked to conceptualization of gender. As such, they reject the idea of transgendered individuals, refusing to see them as the gender they see themselves as. In the past, this could get glossed over, since there were other aspects of feminism that they did align with, but as awareness of transgender issues has been on the rise, it's become harder and harder to overlook this one position that they hold.

    You know one of these days we'll be just like the humans in The Culture.

    "I don't feel like having a penis is fun anymore. Time to get some boobies and a vag!"

    Seriously I wonder how many people would suddenly not care so much if we could suddenly just switch out sex organs with a pill.

    Fewer than you'd think, I'd bet. I'd bet that you'd see new schisms pop up around the shifting of biological sex if it was made simple to do so. Look at the sorts of hoops people have to go through to transition today.

    In short, humans are fundamentally very odd critters.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    CorehealerCaulk Bite 6CptKemzikSpaffyShadowenshrykeMan in the MistsApogee
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    Trace wrote: »
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Alright but come on, not doing The Vagina Monologues because it doesn't include women without vaginas is ridiculous

    Not as much as you'd think - from what I understand, Ensler has some TERF(trans-exclusionary radical feminism) leanings. So I could see why that would be an issue.

    Edit: There's a big fight in feminism at the moment with regards to the TERF movement, which has sort of become the old shame of feminism. Basically, TERFs are feminists who embrace some elements of gender essentialism, stating that physical sex is linked to conceptualization of gender. As such, they reject the idea of transgendered individuals, refusing to see them as the gender they see themselves as. In the past, this could get glossed over, since there were other aspects of feminism that they did align with, but as awareness of transgender issues has been on the rise, it's become harder and harder to overlook this one position that they hold.

    You know one of these days we'll be just like the humans in The Culture.

    "I don't feel like having a penis is fun anymore. Time to get some boobies and a vag!"

    Seriously I wonder how many people would suddenly not care so much if we could suddenly just switch out sex organs with a pill.

    Suddenly? Like tomorrow?

    Our generation would find it generally unsettling and would probably partake in very limited fashion while not really admitting to it.

    The next generation would probably embrace it despite it baffling our generation and our sense of identity so bound up in our genetalia.

    The generation after that would think it's fucking weird that some people couldn't change their sex at will.

    Caulk Bite 6destroyah87programjunkieShadowenMartini_PhilosopherRchanenQuidShortyCaptain MarcusMillMan in the MistsSquigieCorehealerSurfpossumHacksawApogeeLord_Asmodeus
  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    chait pointed out some important shit but did so like a clueless asshole, and used a lot of silly anecdotal evidence that isn't really worth addressing

    the jezebel response was exactly as bad--she also raised a few important points but complained about how chait was a smug condescending jackass immediately after having spent half her response smugly condescending and also deploying a bunch of male-gendered insults for no fucking reason, and she decided that that actual, real assaults that had taken place using PC as justification just didn't matter at all

    here is really the only important takeaway from Chait (IMO, if it needs to be said):

    The phenomenon of intellectual and real physical bullying in academia by way of political correctness is very troubling.

    and from Tolentino:

    Get a fucking grip because people sniping at each other over twitter and facebook doesn't mean that LIBERALISM IS UNDER ASSAULT or w/e Chait is even trying to say.

    we gonna be alright
    JuliusCptKemzikPanda4YouHacksaw
  • Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah I was reading the jezebel take down of that article and its like god damn at what point will we admit that "Politically Correct" is just a bullshit term for "Things racist/sexist/assholes like to say that they don't want to get in trouble for." Its also not lost on me that a lot of people that are so mad about politically correct freak out the second you imply christianity is not the bees knees.

    This one? Come on Preacher, that take down is laughable tripe. The entire basis of it's criticism is the constant reminder that Chait is a white male, and therefore any point he makes is worthless. It's 10 times farther up it's own ass than Chait could ever hope to be.

    Chait's right. There is a real problem going on in progressive circles on the internet, valid criticism is being slowly eroded away by dog piling, equivocating, and discrediting the person making the criticism. Suddenly everyone is so hypersensitive that you can't even have a conversation on a topic without someone coming along play the concern troll over some innocuous problem in your comment.

  • programjunkieprogramjunkie Registered User regular
    John Chait once again proving he's not really a liberal.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/not-a-very-pc-thing-to-say.html

    The man was co-editor of The New Republic and defended the New Deal on the Colbert Report. Maybe he's not a radical, but he's a liberal and he doesn't deserve your Scotsman fallacies.

    And he's right about a lot of stuff in that article- the professor being targeted for correcting a Ph.D. student's capitalization turns into one of the dumbest circuses I've ever seen. The Miller-Young debacle, a professor assaulting students (one of them a minor!) and being defended for it, is disgusting and the editorial views of the Harvard Crimson are insane.

    Yes, "microaggressions" do exist, and trigger warnings are sometimes necessary, but these labels are put on far too many things thanks to academia and social media. For example, "racist" used to be a serious accusation before, oh, five years ago, but now I facetiously google "pb and j racist" and news stories pop up. Part of that is due to the Republican leadership fighting the (correct) charge of racism so it's in the news constantly, and part of it is a certain subsection of the left slapping labels onto things like a five-year-old with a new pack of stickers.

    And it's not even useful, that's the thing! Identity politics don't win elections! The majority of American citizens don't like Israel, support homosexual marriage, want to tax the rich, think global warming is a real danger and want renewable energy sources to power our future. These are all liberal ideas! All good liberal ideas, and every left-wing news and campus organization is instead concerned with identity politics where "perfect is the enemy of the good" so voters stay home. You even see it on here- witness the election threads when posters pop in to say "I'm not voting in this election; the candidates are all the same, man" and the Republicans sweep in by a large majority because they sure as hell don't care.

    I was expecting to lose the Senate last fall but I wish it had been due to something other than rank idiocy by our own side.

    Yeah. This sort of "first world problems" left is poisoning leftism from within. To the extent they are useless, they fail to achieve legitimate leftist goals and divide our efforts, allowing crazy fucks who think Jesus is coming back tomorrow so pollution doesn't matter to actually make national policy. And to the extent they achieve any of their goals, the idea that someone is racist for asking for correct usage of the English language is just as insane and dangerous as the Jesus-As-Cthulhu cultists.

    If you don't want to use proper capitalization, write in Arabic (or any other language where that is the case). And, as a bonus, unless you're studying classical Arabic alone, you'll certainly come across articles about kids being blown up by bombs, or international water usage rights and desertification, or any number of actual problems that actually matter in the world.

    There's so much focus on bullshit. If you want to help people, focus on fundamentals like housing, economic opportunity, equal legal rights, medicine, etc. Once we're at the point where the biggest problems in society are a disagreement over proper capitalization, well, hell, we've won. Until then, these people need to get some fucking perspective.

    Wicked Demiurge in most games. Solacus is my main in GW2.
    Captain Marcus
  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    I was talking about this with my girlfriend and she pointed out that the Tolentino piece was probably rushed out just so they could get a response online before people stopped giving a shit, which is why it kind of sucks

    and she's probably right

    I'm really hoping Lindy West or someone takes the time to write a better response

    we gonna be alright
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    I like that the top comment kind of proves his entire article
    The un-ironic use of phrases like "political correctness" or "White Guilt" are tell-tale signs of a person's inherent racist tendencies. The author of that article is either one of those "too stupid to see I'm racist" racists or one of those "too cowardly to admit it" racists.

    Also: "Can a white male liberal critique the country's current political-correctness craze (which, by the way, hurts liberals most)?"

    Yes he's definitely a racist because he disagrees with you

    m9UgadV.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    edited January 2015
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah I was reading the jezebel take down of that article and its like god damn at what point will we admit that "Politically Correct" is just a bullshit term for "Things racist/sexist/assholes like to say that they don't want to get in trouble for." Its also not lost on me that a lot of people that are so mad about politically correct freak out the second you imply christianity is not the bees knees.

    This one? Come on Preacher, that take down is laughable tripe. The entire basis of it's criticism is the constant reminder that Chait is a white male, and therefore any point he makes is worthless. It's 10 times farther up it's own ass than Chait could ever hope to be.

    Chait's right. There is a real problem going on in progressive circles on the internet, valid criticism is being slowly eroded away by dog piling, equivocating, and discrediting the person making the criticism. Suddenly everyone is so hypersensitive that you can't even have a conversation on a topic without someone coming along play the concern troll over some innocuous problem in your comment.

    The context here is that Chait spent his entire career punching down on any critique to the left of Bill Clinton, as well as providing intellectual cover for a host of highly racist discussions (Are black people genetically inferior to whites? Opinions differ!). He was very comfortable being "the left" in the era of print magazines and TV talk shows that excluded leftist ideas. He's a lot less comfortable in the era of open discussion facilitated by the Interent, where his position as acceptable court leftist has been diminished and his bonafides roundly mocked.

    Basically, he's angry that other people are doing to him what he's done to others his entire career. And the fact that he does it in that hilarious "Serious Person Discusses the Issues" style favored by his clique just makes him more open to mockery, which he does not like.

    Phillishere on
    ShortyAngelHedgieShadowenCptKemzikshryke
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular

    I mean, the DNC is usually kinda spineless, but it is an excellent response.

    torchlight-sig-80.jpg
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    m9UgadV.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
    Doodmann
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    40 seconds in blood started coming out of my ears

    Apogee
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    I just let it wash over me.

    Like a waterfall, but more distressing.

  • Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    Ha ha ha, she doesn't even care anymore.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2015
    The only good thing about Chait is he hates Michael Rosenberg as much as I do, but I have mgoblog for that. Well, also his pointless, unnecessary, and totally cheap shots at Ohio.

    enlightenedbum on
    PwH4Ipj.jpg
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2015
    Andrew Sullivan is retiring from blogging, for better or worse. I stopped reading him a few years ago.

    enlightenedbum on
    PwH4Ipj.jpg
  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular
    edited January 2015
    Apparently her teleprompter broke or something? So she was going entirely off the cuff?

    Which, I have sympathy for. Holy shit do I have sympathy for that.

    But on the other hand, how many times has she mocked Obama as being a teleprompter in a suit?

    Shadowen on
    jungleroomxShadowfireN1tSt4lkerApogee
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah I was reading the jezebel take down of that article and its like god damn at what point will we admit that "Politically Correct" is just a bullshit term for "Things racist/sexist/assholes like to say that they don't want to get in trouble for." Its also not lost on me that a lot of people that are so mad about politically correct freak out the second you imply christianity is not the bees knees.

    This one? Come on Preacher, that take down is laughable tripe. The entire basis of it's criticism is the constant reminder that Chait is a white male, and therefore any point he makes is worthless. It's 10 times farther up it's own ass than Chait could ever hope to be.

    Chait's right. There is a real problem going on in progressive circles on the internet, valid criticism is being slowly eroded away by dog piling, equivocating, and discrediting the person making the criticism. Suddenly everyone is so hypersensitive that you can't even have a conversation on a topic without someone coming along play the concern troll over some innocuous problem in your comment.

    The context here is that Chait spent his entire career punching down on any critique to the left of Bill Clinton, as well as providing intellectual cover for a host of highly racist discussions (Are black people genetically inferior to whites? Opinions differ!). He was very comfortable being "the left" in the era of print magazines and TV talk shows that excluded leftist ideas. He's a lot less comfortable in the era of open discussion facilitated by the Interent, where his position as acceptable court leftist has been diminished and his bonafides roundly mocked.

    Basically, he's angry that other people are doing to him what he's done to others his entire career. And the fact that he does it in that hilarious "Serious Person Discusses the Issues" style favored by his clique just makes him more open to mockery, which he does not like.

    It's worth reading Alex Pareene's takedown of Chait, because he really gets to the heart of the matter:
    Chait, like many liberal commentators with his background, is used to writing off left-wing critics and reserving his real writerly firepower for (frequently deserving) right-wingers. That was, for years, how things worked at the center-left opinion journalism shops, because it was simply assumed that no one important—no one who really matters—took the opinions of people to the left of the center-left opinion shop seriously. That was a safe and largely correct assumption. But the destruction of the magazine industry and the growth of the open-forum internet have amplified formerly marginal voices. Now, in other words, writers of color can be just as condescending and dismissive of Chait as he always was toward the left. And he hates it.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    CptKemzikshryke
  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    charges of hypocrisy leveled at prominent conservatives are basically meaningless

    hypocrisy is their constant state of being and everything they say is a lie

    we gonna be alright
    Hacksawskyknyt
  • ButtcleftButtcleft Registered User regular
    edited January 2015
    My general opinion in political correctness basically boils down to
    twypVcx.jpg

    Not saying people shouldnt be treated with decency and respect, but political correctness is bullshit and gives unwarranted power to people who make careers from being perpetually offended.

    Buttcleft on
    that's it, I'm shutting this entire forum down, everyone thank buttcleft
    KrieghundApogee
  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    edited January 2015
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    My general opinion in political correctness basically boils down to
    twypVcx.jpg

    Not saying people shouldnt be treated with decency and respect, but political correctness is bullshit and gives unwarranted power to people who make careers from being perpetually offended.

    "Political correctness" is a right-wing term coined to express the frustration of conservatives that they no longer get to call minorities all their favorite slurs, even when they try very hard to find new euphemisms for them. Most of the stories about the evils of political correctness are just more Fox New-style bullshit if you dig a little bit deeper.

    Is there truth to the idea that conservatives get silenced in academia? Yup. I've seen it. The trouble is, they often get silenced not by their professors, who bend over backwards not to offend conservatives, but by their fellow students, who are educated enough to shut down any attempt to do mainstream conservative bullshitting in a classroom real quick.

    It's one of the troubles with creating a political ideology that is, at its heart, about contempt for other people. When you get into venues when those other people have an equal voice, it does not go very well for you.

    As for the Fry quote, the British tend to be quite critical of the American silencing of discriminatory speech. They also really like their freedom to mock anything Scottish, Irish and Welsh as inferior. As recent events in Scotland show, the Scottish, Irish, and Welsh are a lot less fond of this freedom. That's not even getting into the issues they have with "Pakis" and other darker minorities. I've seen enough of this in person to be very skeptical of wisdom about race relations from across the Pond.

    Also too, Fry has very strong feelings on antisemitism and homophobia - speech against two groups to which he belongs. It's only political correctness when people get upset at speech that doesn't effect him.

    Phillishere on
    AngelHedgieShadowenPhoenix-DCptKemzikWraith260ArdolAistanshrykeShadowfireGnome-InterruptusBertezBertezJusticeforPlutoMartini_PhilosopherJakorian
  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    My general opinion in political correctness basically boils down to
    twypVcx.jpg

    Not saying people shouldnt be treated with decency and respect, but political correctness is bullshit and gives unwarranted power to people who make careers from being perpetually offended.

    "Political correctness" is a right-wing term coined to express the frustration of conservatives that they no longer get to call minorities all their favorite slurs, even when they try very hard to find new euphemisms for them. Most of the stories about the evils of political correctness are just more Fox New-style bullshit if you dig a little bit deeper.

    Is there truth to the idea that conservatives get silenced in academia? Yup. I've seen it. The trouble is, they often get silenced not by their professors, who bend over backwards not to offend conservatives, but by their fellow students, who are educated enough to shut down any attempt to do mainstream conservative bullshitting in a classroom real quick.

    It's one of the troubles with creating a political ideology that is, at its heart, about contempt for other people. When you get into venues when those other people have an equal voice, it does not go very well for you.

    As for the Fry quote, the British tend to be quite critical of the American silencing of discriminatory speech. They also really like their freedom to mock anything Scottish, Irish and Welsh as inferior. As recent events in Scotland show, the Scottish, Irish, and Welsh are a lot less fond of this freedom. That's not even getting into the issues they have with "Pakis" and other darker minorities. I've seen enough of this in person to be very skeptical of wisdom about race relations from across the Pond.

    Also too, Fry has very strong feelings on antisemitism and homophobia - speech against two groups to which he belongs. It's only political correctness when people get upset at speech that doesn't effect him.

    one of the examples Chait gave was of a professor shoving a protester and stealing their sign

    we gonna be alright
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Alright but come on, not doing The Vagina Monologues because it doesn't include women without vaginas is ridiculous

    Not as much as you'd think - from what I understand, Ensler has some TERF(trans-exclusionary radical feminism) leanings. So I could see why that would be an issue.

    Edit: There's a big fight in feminism at the moment with regards to the TERF movement, which has sort of become the old shame of feminism. Basically, TERFs are feminists who embrace some elements of gender essentialism, stating that physical sex is linked to conceptualization of gender. As such, they reject the idea of transgendered individuals, refusing to see them as the gender they see themselves as. In the past, this could get glossed over, since there were other aspects of feminism that they did align with, but as awareness of transgender issues has been on the rise, it's become harder and harder to overlook this one position that they hold.

    Source on this? Because I know there's a trans only version of that play.

  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    Shorty wrote: »
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    My general opinion in political correctness basically boils down to
    twypVcx.jpg

    Not saying people shouldnt be treated with decency and respect, but political correctness is bullshit and gives unwarranted power to people who make careers from being perpetually offended.

    "Political correctness" is a right-wing term coined to express the frustration of conservatives that they no longer get to call minorities all their favorite slurs, even when they try very hard to find new euphemisms for them. Most of the stories about the evils of political correctness are just more Fox New-style bullshit if you dig a little bit deeper.

    Is there truth to the idea that conservatives get silenced in academia? Yup. I've seen it. The trouble is, they often get silenced not by their professors, who bend over backwards not to offend conservatives, but by their fellow students, who are educated enough to shut down any attempt to do mainstream conservative bullshitting in a classroom real quick.

    It's one of the troubles with creating a political ideology that is, at its heart, about contempt for other people. When you get into venues when those other people have an equal voice, it does not go very well for you.

    As for the Fry quote, the British tend to be quite critical of the American silencing of discriminatory speech. They also really like their freedom to mock anything Scottish, Irish and Welsh as inferior. As recent events in Scotland show, the Scottish, Irish, and Welsh are a lot less fond of this freedom. That's not even getting into the issues they have with "Pakis" and other darker minorities. I've seen enough of this in person to be very skeptical of wisdom about race relations from across the Pond.

    Also too, Fry has very strong feelings on antisemitism and homophobia - speech against two groups to which he belongs. It's only political correctness when people get upset at speech that doesn't effect him.

    one of the examples Chait gave was of a professor shoving a protester and stealing their sign

    You mean the one where she wasn't acting in any official capacity at all and ?
    These ideas have more than theoretical power. Last March at University of California–Santa Barbara, in, ironically, a “free-speech zone,” a 16-year-old anti-abortion protester named Thrin Short and her 21-year-old sister Joan displayed a sign arrayed with graphic images of aborted fetuses. They caught the attention of Mireille Miller-Young, a professor of feminist studies. Miller-Young, angered by the sign, demanded that they take it down. When they refused, Miller-Young snatched the sign, took it back to her office to destroy it, and shoved one of the Short sisters on the way.

    Speaking to police after the altercation, Miller-Young told them that the images of the fetuses had “triggered” her and violated her “personal right to go to work and not be in harm.” A Facebook group called “UCSB Microaggressions” declared themselves “in solidarity” with Miller-Young and urged the campus “to provide as much support as possible.”

    By the prevailing standards of the American criminal-justice system, Miller-Young had engaged in vandalism, battery, and robbery. By the logic of the p.c. movement, she was the victim of a trigger and had acted in the righteous cause of social justice. Her colleagues across the country wrote letters to the sentencing judge pleading for leniency. Jennifer Morgan, an NYU professor, blamed the anti-­abortion protesters for instigating the confrontation through their exercise of free speech. “Miller-Young’s actions should be mitigated both by her history as an educator as well as by her conviction that the [anti-abortion] images were an assault on her students,” Morgan wrote. Again, the mere expression of opposing ideas, in the form of a poster, is presented as a threatening act.

    I believe Phillisphere was refering to professors silencing students in the classroom or through their work. Not by being people in public who act rashly, and also happen to be a professor.

    Oh, and she got 3 years probation for it too http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/19/ucsbs-mireille-miller-young-sentenced-to-three-years-probation-for-stealing-from-and-attacking-pro-lifers/

    steam_sig.png
  • CptKemzikCptKemzik Registered User regular
    Chait is a contemptuous and whiny ass, whose best journalistic contribution may be his profile on the state of Delaware from a decade or so back, which (surprise!) is a contemptuous rant against the state's history as a corporate shell company haven among other sordid things.

    That "P.C." piece literally reads like he's grasping for straws to stay relevant and, in spite of that, states several worthwhile points that are still unnecessarily amplified (as has already been stated upthread).

    Thank god political discourse has developed to a point where we don't need jackoffs like him to speak for "the left." Also Alex Pareene's 'hack list" piece from a couple of years ago is still fantastic.

    ShadowenShorty
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    edited January 2015
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Ha ha ha, she doesn't even care anymore.

    Here's the thing about Sarah Palin. She never cared.

    Well, I take that back, I'd say she probably cared for like, a day or two, after becoming McCains VP pick. But as soon as she got on national television and saw that she could garner a following of rabid idiots that would throw money at her for standing in front of a microphone and just rambling on about any old bullshit she instantly decided that con artist was her true calling and I have to give her credit for it, she's strung enough people along that she's still at it after 7 years.

    If you can remember back to the 2012 election, she had a cross country bus tour that was a whole "maybe I am, maybe I'm not running for President who knows, but give me money anyway" deal, and then surprise! She didn't run, because she had no intention to.

    BUT. People fucking left their day jobs to work for her, to campaign for her, because they thought she was going to really run, because they wanted her to run, because they are so goddamn stupid, that they thought President Palin would be a good thing and she's going to keep milking those people for everything they're worth until there's literally none of them left.

    I caught a segment of Real Time with Bill Maher over the weekend where he was throwing up republican book covers, and then revealing fictitious original titles that the book didn't go with, and Sarah Palins book was just "Thanks for the money, sucker." Which just sums her up perfectly.

    Viskod on
    Artereis wrote: »
    It's not your fault, Viskod. 1 out of every 10 people just happens to be a monster.
    SyphonBlueWraith260ShortyMartini_PhilosopherPanda4You
  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    Veevee wrote: »
    Shorty wrote: »
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    My general opinion in political correctness basically boils down to
    twypVcx.jpg

    Not saying people shouldnt be treated with decency and respect, but political correctness is bullshit and gives unwarranted power to people who make careers from being perpetually offended.

    "Political correctness" is a right-wing term coined to express the frustration of conservatives that they no longer get to call minorities all their favorite slurs, even when they try very hard to find new euphemisms for them. Most of the stories about the evils of political correctness are just more Fox New-style bullshit if you dig a little bit deeper.

    Is there truth to the idea that conservatives get silenced in academia? Yup. I've seen it. The trouble is, they often get silenced not by their professors, who bend over backwards not to offend conservatives, but by their fellow students, who are educated enough to shut down any attempt to do mainstream conservative bullshitting in a classroom real quick.

    It's one of the troubles with creating a political ideology that is, at its heart, about contempt for other people. When you get into venues when those other people have an equal voice, it does not go very well for you.

    As for the Fry quote, the British tend to be quite critical of the American silencing of discriminatory speech. They also really like their freedom to mock anything Scottish, Irish and Welsh as inferior. As recent events in Scotland show, the Scottish, Irish, and Welsh are a lot less fond of this freedom. That's not even getting into the issues they have with "Pakis" and other darker minorities. I've seen enough of this in person to be very skeptical of wisdom about race relations from across the Pond.

    Also too, Fry has very strong feelings on antisemitism and homophobia - speech against two groups to which he belongs. It's only political correctness when people get upset at speech that doesn't effect him.

    one of the examples Chait gave was of a professor shoving a protester and stealing their sign

    You mean the one where she wasn't acting in any official capacity at all and ?
    These ideas have more than theoretical power. Last March at University of California–Santa Barbara, in, ironically, a “free-speech zone,” a 16-year-old anti-abortion protester named Thrin Short and her 21-year-old sister Joan displayed a sign arrayed with graphic images of aborted fetuses. They caught the attention of Mireille Miller-Young, a professor of feminist studies. Miller-Young, angered by the sign, demanded that they take it down. When they refused, Miller-Young snatched the sign, took it back to her office to destroy it, and shoved one of the Short sisters on the way.

    Speaking to police after the altercation, Miller-Young told them that the images of the fetuses had “triggered” her and violated her “personal right to go to work and not be in harm.” A Facebook group called “UCSB Microaggressions” declared themselves “in solidarity” with Miller-Young and urged the campus “to provide as much support as possible.”

    By the prevailing standards of the American criminal-justice system, Miller-Young had engaged in vandalism, battery, and robbery. By the logic of the p.c. movement, she was the victim of a trigger and had acted in the righteous cause of social justice. Her colleagues across the country wrote letters to the sentencing judge pleading for leniency. Jennifer Morgan, an NYU professor, blamed the anti-­abortion protesters for instigating the confrontation through their exercise of free speech. “Miller-Young’s actions should be mitigated both by her history as an educator as well as by her conviction that the [anti-abortion] images were an assault on her students,” Morgan wrote. Again, the mere expression of opposing ideas, in the form of a poster, is presented as a threatening act.

    I believe Phillisphere was refering to professors silencing students in the classroom or through their work. Not by being people in public who act rashly, and also happen to be a professor.

    Oh, and she got 3 years probation for it too http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/19/ucsbs-mireille-miller-young-sentenced-to-three-years-probation-for-stealing-from-and-attacking-pro-lifers/

    yeah but that wasn't something Chait said was happening so the fact that it's not happening isn't a valid criticism of the essay

    we gonna be alright
  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    edited January 2015
    Veevee wrote: »
    Shorty wrote: »
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    My general opinion in political correctness basically boils down to
    twypVcx.jpg

    Not saying people shouldnt be treated with decency and respect, but political correctness is bullshit and gives unwarranted power to people who make careers from being perpetually offended.

    "Political correctness" is a right-wing term coined to express the frustration of conservatives that they no longer get to call minorities all their favorite slurs, even when they try very hard to find new euphemisms for them. Most of the stories about the evils of political correctness are just more Fox New-style bullshit if you dig a little bit deeper.

    Is there truth to the idea that conservatives get silenced in academia? Yup. I've seen it. The trouble is, they often get silenced not by their professors, who bend over backwards not to offend conservatives, but by their fellow students, who are educated enough to shut down any attempt to do mainstream conservative bullshitting in a classroom real quick.

    It's one of the troubles with creating a political ideology that is, at its heart, about contempt for other people. When you get into venues when those other people have an equal voice, it does not go very well for you.

    As for the Fry quote, the British tend to be quite critical of the American silencing of discriminatory speech. They also really like their freedom to mock anything Scottish, Irish and Welsh as inferior. As recent events in Scotland show, the Scottish, Irish, and Welsh are a lot less fond of this freedom. That's not even getting into the issues they have with "Pakis" and other darker minorities. I've seen enough of this in person to be very skeptical of wisdom about race relations from across the Pond.

    Also too, Fry has very strong feelings on antisemitism and homophobia - speech against two groups to which he belongs. It's only political correctness when people get upset at speech that doesn't effect him.

    one of the examples Chait gave was of a professor shoving a protester and stealing their sign

    You mean the one where she wasn't acting in any official capacity at all and ?
    These ideas have more than theoretical power. Last March at University of California–Santa Barbara, in, ironically, a “free-speech zone,” a 16-year-old anti-abortion protester named Thrin Short and her 21-year-old sister Joan displayed a sign arrayed with graphic images of aborted fetuses. They caught the attention of Mireille Miller-Young, a professor of feminist studies. Miller-Young, angered by the sign, demanded that they take it down. When they refused, Miller-Young snatched the sign, took it back to her office to destroy it, and shoved one of the Short sisters on the way.

    Speaking to police after the altercation, Miller-Young told them that the images of the fetuses had “triggered” her and violated her “personal right to go to work and not be in harm.” A Facebook group called “UCSB Microaggressions” declared themselves “in solidarity” with Miller-Young and urged the campus “to provide as much support as possible.”

    By the prevailing standards of the American criminal-justice system, Miller-Young had engaged in vandalism, battery, and robbery. By the logic of the p.c. movement, she was the victim of a trigger and had acted in the righteous cause of social justice. Her colleagues across the country wrote letters to the sentencing judge pleading for leniency. Jennifer Morgan, an NYU professor, blamed the anti-­abortion protesters for instigating the confrontation through their exercise of free speech. “Miller-Young’s actions should be mitigated both by her history as an educator as well as by her conviction that the [anti-abortion] images were an assault on her students,” Morgan wrote. Again, the mere expression of opposing ideas, in the form of a poster, is presented as a threatening act.

    I believe Phillisphere was refering to professors silencing students in the classroom or through their work. Not by being people in public who act rashly, and also happen to be a professor.

    Oh, and she got 3 years probation for it too http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/19/ucsbs-mireille-miller-young-sentenced-to-three-years-probation-for-stealing-from-and-attacking-pro-lifers/

    Her university also did not support her, which is good on them. The broader picture is that pretty much every university in the land allows a wide variety of speakers and protestors on campus in similar free speech zones. This guy was a fixture on my campus during the spring semester, moving southward when it got colder to places like UNC.

    There is literally no subject in which you can't find a random example to make a point. I'm sure there are videos of racist black cops beating the shit out of rednecks, but that doesn't diminish the fact that police departments have systemic issues in how they treat minorities. Blurring these type of random examples into some kind of trend, when all of the other evidence points to a different conclusion, is the heart of propaganda.

    Chait's issue, as others have mentioned, is that he used to be the official establishment representative of the left. In an era when actual members of the left can stand up and say, "He doesn't speak for me", his authority is diminished and reputation lessened.

    Phillishere on
This discussion has been closed.