Someone said something that I quite liked which was basically "People call it political correctness to make it a political issue instead of an issue about other people's safety and comfort."
I recall the use of the term in the 90's. I posit that "politically correct" never really had a valid meaning.
Other than trying turn inclusiveness into a negative.
Yeah, I remember it mainly being about public speakers and people in leadership roles avoiding things like racial slurs and open bigotry. Back then it was a phrase said on all sides either referring to being conscious about your communication so as not to offend people or being used sarcastically to make fun of the thin-skinned crybabies.
Then it disappeared for over a decade and suddenly showed up again during the LGBT civil rights push of the 21st century.
I don't even understand their use of "politically correct" anymore. They're just calling it that to make it sound hollow and insincere instead of what it is: inclusiveness and consideration of others.
The number of people who will go out and spout nearly-identical statements like "You did this to appease a small minority and driven away the majority" or whatever really betray the fact that most of the folks who fight the 'liberal brainwashing' are just parroting things they've been told by others.
That sort of statement also implies that they just don't think trans people matter.
Because if someone thinks they matter, they wouldn't be up in arms about a business making a decision that has no real impact on them.
I don't know that there was ever a time when the term "politically correct" was actually used by the people who supposedly push it as an agenda.
It's a term I have always seen pretty much used exclusively by people who feel put-upon by the concept and want to express how awful they feel it is or how not politically correct they are.
Like I don't think I've ever had someone ask me to actually be more "politically correct".
Be less of an asshole, maybe. Or be more considerate. Or check my privilege. Or think before I speak. Those things? Sure.
But the actual term, politically correct?
No I'm pretty sure that one belongs to people who want a label for a vague cultural concept that bothers them and they feel is impugning on their freedom. They're really the only people who use it in earnest, I think.
I dunno. I feel like I saw plenty of "we have to be more politically-correct" talk back then. It was cynical as hell but it wasn't anywhere near the common pejorative use as it has today.
In the early-to-mid 20th century, the phrase "politically correct" was associated with the dogmatic application of Stalinist doctrine, debated between Communist Party members and Socialists. This usage referred to the Communist party line, which provided for "correct" positions on many matters of politics. According to American educator Herbert Kohl, writing about debates in New York in the late 1940s and early 1950s,
The term "politically correct" was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in egalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.
—"Uncommon Differences", The Lion and the Unicorn Journal[1]
So yeah it's always meant "dogmatic adherence to a political position for its own sake, instead of the things that really matter" and was used seriously, then ironically and self-referentially by the left, then as essentially doublespeak by the right.
"You're just playing politics (of treating minorities like people) for no good reason (because minorities don't matter) instead of caring about what really matters (straight white cis men)!"
+2
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
In the early-to-mid 20th century, the phrase "politically correct" was associated with the dogmatic application of Stalinist doctrine, debated between Communist Party members and Socialists. This usage referred to the Communist party line, which provided for "correct" positions on many matters of politics. According to American educator Herbert Kohl, writing about debates in New York in the late 1940s and early 1950s,
The term "politically correct" was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in egalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.
—"Uncommon Differences", The Lion and the Unicorn Journal[1]
So yeah it's always meant "dogmatic adherence to a political position for its own sake, instead of the things that really matter" and was used seriously, then ironically and self-referentially by the left, then as essentially doublespeak by the right.
"You're just playing politics (of treating minorities like people) for no good reason (because minorities don't matter) instead of caring about what really matters (straight white cis men)!"
Makes me think of this guy talking about how Sanjay and Craig makes no sense because there's no reason for Sanjay to be Indian, and therefore it's "forced" in there because someone is "obsessed with diversity."
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
In the early-to-mid 20th century, the phrase "politically correct" was associated with the dogmatic application of Stalinist doctrine, debated between Communist Party members and Socialists. This usage referred to the Communist party line, which provided for "correct" positions on many matters of politics. According to American educator Herbert Kohl, writing about debates in New York in the late 1940s and early 1950s,
The term "politically correct" was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in egalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.
—"Uncommon Differences", The Lion and the Unicorn Journal[1]
So yeah it's always meant "dogmatic adherence to a political position for its own sake, instead of the things that really matter" and was used seriously, then ironically and self-referentially by the left, then as essentially doublespeak by the right.
"You're just playing politics (of treating minorities like people) for no good reason (because minorities don't matter) instead of caring about what really matters (straight white cis men)!"
Makes me think of this guy talking about how Sanjay and Craig makes no sense because there's no reason for Sanjay to be Indian, and therefore it's "forced" in there because someone is "obsessed with diversity."
Geez this guy
He's completely blind to the value of representation, and thinks that there is completely no difference to a minority kid if they see anyone like them in the media or it's just all white people. This is the point he keeps coming back to - all characters are seen the same way by the audience. He can't conceive that this might not be the case.
If there is a potential to create a negative portrayal of a minority person, and there is no positive value to making a minority character, then you should just make a default (white) character every single time.
Therefore, anyone who is trying to make minority characters must have ulterior motives! It can't be anything but a cynical marketing plot.
There’s no reason for it. It becomes, “Look, we’ve got an Indian character now on our show, our network, as opposed to not doing that.”
sanjay and craig is terrible example but I do get feelings from other things where it's trying to feel superficially inclusive by including a Strong Female Character or something but it's actually hollow and she doesn't do anything
that's the closest thing to actual PC to me, where it feels like someone doesn't care about diversity except as carefully calculated euphemism to increase market appeal
Is it cool to like target now? Weren't they, within the last few years, still donating tons and tons of money to anti-gay organizations? I'm fuzzy on it all.
+1
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
Is it cool to like target now? Weren't they, within the last few years, still donating tons and tons of money to anti-gay organizations? I'm fuzzy on it all.
Looked it up, and what I'm getting from this is that the company was accused of "indirectly funding anti-gay republican politicians", via sloppy journalism.
In the early-to-mid 20th century, the phrase "politically correct" was associated with the dogmatic application of Stalinist doctrine, debated between Communist Party members and Socialists. This usage referred to the Communist party line, which provided for "correct" positions on many matters of politics. According to American educator Herbert Kohl, writing about debates in New York in the late 1940s and early 1950s,
The term "politically correct" was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in egalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.
—"Uncommon Differences", The Lion and the Unicorn Journal[1]
So yeah it's always meant "dogmatic adherence to a political position for its own sake, instead of the things that really matter" and was used seriously, then ironically and self-referentially by the left, then as essentially doublespeak by the right.
"You're just playing politics (of treating minorities like people) for no good reason (because minorities don't matter) instead of caring about what really matters (straight white cis men)!"
This doesn't make sense
You're treating communists and socialists as different things.
Is it cool to like target now? Weren't they, within the last few years, still donating tons and tons of money to anti-gay organizations? I'm fuzzy on it all.
Looked it up, and what I'm getting from this is that the company was accused of "indirectly funding anti-gay republican politicians", via sloppy journalism.
No, they absolutely were donating money to an anti-lgbt politician but only because he would have given businesses tax cuts. Their very large percentage of lgbt employees found out and there were protests at the corporate offices.
+2
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
sanjay and craig is terrible example but I do get feelings from other things where it's trying to feel superficially inclusive by including a Strong Female Character or something but it's actually hollow and she doesn't do anything
that's the closest thing to actual PC to me, where it feels like someone doesn't care about diversity except as carefully calculated euphemism to increase market appeal
Well, the guy also implies that Clarissa Explains it All wasn't really popular, people just think it was because there are a lot of women writing blogs and because Melissa Joan Hart went on to star in Sabrina the Teenage Witch. (For the record, I loved Clarissa and never watched an episode of Sabrina. Of course I'm a woman and thus my opinion doesn't count).
Oh, he also bemoans the struggles of the white man in publishing (I am not joking).
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
sanjay and craig is terrible example but I do get feelings from other things where it's trying to feel superficially inclusive by including a Strong Female Character or something but it's actually hollow and she doesn't do anything
that's the closest thing to actual PC to me, where it feels like someone doesn't care about diversity except as carefully calculated euphemism to increase market appeal
Well, the guy also implies that Clarissa Explains it All wasn't really popular, people just think it was because there are a lot of women writing blogs and because Melissa Joan Hart went on to star in Sabrina the Teenage Witch. (For the record, I loved Clarissa and never watched an episode of Sabrina. Of course I'm a woman and thus my opinion doesn't count).
Oh, he also bemoans the struggles of the white man in publishing (I am not joking).
The classic, "I didn't care about it, therefore no one did" approach. A view so myopic, he can only see his own eyelids clearly.
+6
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
He wrote that the state is not restricting her religious activities or asking her to condone same-sex unions when signing off on marriage forms, and her convictions have no bearing on a “purely legal” task. Bunning granted a preliminary injunction against Davis.
“She may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County jail,” Bunning wrote. “She is even free to believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman, as many Americans do. However, her religious convictions cannot excuse her from performing the duties that she took an oath to perform as Rowan County clerk.”
So it's nice that this type of bullshit challenge is going the way it should, I mean the people representing the woman say they're gonna appeal but it's her money to waste I guess
She refused to issue licenses again this morning. I'm sure it'll be fine. Federal judges are usually cool with their orders being ignored, right?
They give you a free vacation where they take care of everything. You don't have to decide where to go, what to wear, when to eat. All of it is just taken care of for you by professionals.
Yeah I don't think she'll go to jail. She'll likely just lose her job. :P
Also I've seen ads for Pretty Little Liars and it's one of those things I like to tell myself no one actually watches.
Flat out ignoring a court order should get her contempt of court, which can be a fine and jail time. And that can go on indefinitely until compliance.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
Is it cool to like target now? Weren't they, within the last few years, still donating tons and tons of money to anti-gay organizations? I'm fuzzy on it all.
Looked it up, and what I'm getting from this is that the company was accused of "indirectly funding anti-gay republican politicians", via sloppy journalism.
No, they absolutely were donating money to an anti-lgbt politician but only because he would have given businesses tax cuts. Their very large percentage of lgbt employees found out and there were protests at the corporate offices.
Why give your money to the government when you can give it to me instead?
Well, all of these statements seem pretty accurate, tbh. Skeletons definitely do hate our Constitution and GrumbleGert, and love anime.
0
Options
StraightziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered Userregular
My personal favorite of those (by which I mean the one I have installed) is the millenials to snake people one
It has a bunch of extra stuff too I think, because I keep seeing news article on Facebook about the society of the serpent doing things and I am pretty sure I am not friends with that many cultists
Posts
Tumblr | Twitter PSN: misterdapper Av by Satellite_09
It's done all the time.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Other than trying turn inclusiveness into a negative.
Yeah, I remember it mainly being about public speakers and people in leadership roles avoiding things like racial slurs and open bigotry. Back then it was a phrase said on all sides either referring to being conscious about your communication so as not to offend people or being used sarcastically to make fun of the thin-skinned crybabies.
Then it disappeared for over a decade and suddenly showed up again during the LGBT civil rights push of the 21st century.
Actually from the real Target account
Timely.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
They are not actually selling Troll dolls again
That sort of statement also implies that they just don't think trans people matter.
Because if someone thinks they matter, they wouldn't be up in arms about a business making a decision that has no real impact on them.
It's a term I have always seen pretty much used exclusively by people who feel put-upon by the concept and want to express how awful they feel it is or how not politically correct they are.
Like I don't think I've ever had someone ask me to actually be more "politically correct".
Be less of an asshole, maybe. Or be more considerate. Or check my privilege. Or think before I speak. Those things? Sure.
But the actual term, politically correct?
No I'm pretty sure that one belongs to people who want a label for a vague cultural concept that bothers them and they feel is impugning on their freedom. They're really the only people who use it in earnest, I think.
What kind of pc bullshit is this? I can't even tell which troll is the boy and which the girl! They've lost my business.
The girl troll has giant eyelashes, wears a dress, and doesn't have a toy.
So yeah it's always meant "dogmatic adherence to a political position for its own sake, instead of the things that really matter" and was used seriously, then ironically and self-referentially by the left, then as essentially doublespeak by the right.
"You're just playing politics (of treating minorities like people) for no good reason (because minorities don't matter) instead of caring about what really matters (straight white cis men)!"
Makes me think of this guy talking about how Sanjay and Craig makes no sense because there's no reason for Sanjay to be Indian, and therefore it's "forced" in there because someone is "obsessed with diversity."
Geez this guy
He's completely blind to the value of representation, and thinks that there is completely no difference to a minority kid if they see anyone like them in the media or it's just all white people. This is the point he keeps coming back to - all characters are seen the same way by the audience. He can't conceive that this might not be the case.
If there is a potential to create a negative portrayal of a minority person, and there is no positive value to making a minority character, then you should just make a default (white) character every single time.
Therefore, anyone who is trying to make minority characters must have ulterior motives! It can't be anything but a cynical marketing plot.
that's the closest thing to actual PC to me, where it feels like someone doesn't care about diversity except as carefully calculated euphemism to increase market appeal
Looked it up, and what I'm getting from this is that the company was accused of "indirectly funding anti-gay republican politicians", via sloppy journalism.
This doesn't make sense
You're treating communists and socialists as different things.
Do you not know how politics works in Murika?
No, they absolutely were donating money to an anti-lgbt politician but only because he would have given businesses tax cuts. Their very large percentage of lgbt employees found out and there were protests at the corporate offices.
Well, the guy also implies that Clarissa Explains it All wasn't really popular, people just think it was because there are a lot of women writing blogs and because Melissa Joan Hart went on to star in Sabrina the Teenage Witch. (For the record, I loved Clarissa and never watched an episode of Sabrina. Of course I'm a woman and thus my opinion doesn't count).
Oh, he also bemoans the struggles of the white man in publishing (I am not joking).
The classic, "I didn't care about it, therefore no one did" approach. A view so myopic, he can only see his own eyelids clearly.
Flat out ignoring a court order should get her contempt of court, which can be a fine and jail time. And that can go on indefinitely until compliance.
Why give your money to the government when you can give it to me instead?
Murika.
chincy chincy
let me tell you about your thetans
They're possibly used by Scientology for something, but they're not a Scientology thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-gram
he knows the true way and light of the power of zordon
I just realized its conceivable that it sounds like I end the podcast with a prayer
Whoops
I 100% thought that was intentional.
Witch reminded me of the "SJW to Skeleton" add on.
Steam: YOU FACE JARAXXUS| Twitch.tv: CainLoveless
It has a bunch of extra stuff too I think, because I keep seeing news article on Facebook about the society of the serpent doing things and I am pretty sure I am not friends with that many cultists
speak for yourself please
#notallskelingtonsaremeaty