Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ram23

Political Correctness

Recommended Posts

Just now, ryanlammi said:

And this is supposedly the biggest issue facing America according to some people. How will the nation survive one city changing the legal language they use to refer to a subset of people?

Pay no attention to children being locked in cages or the fact that the president is a raving lunatic.  Evolving language is the real issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ryanlammi said:

Also, it's pretty wild that the article lists the city with the 37th highest violent crime rate in America as "crime-ridden".

 

It's not "crime-ridden," it's "less than proper behavior-ridden."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ram23 said:

This is a pretty good textbook-example of political correctness in action. A group of people, in this case a government board, want to change the way people think, so they change what words they're allowed to use through the banning of parlance. Meanwhile, the actual problem continues to snowball:

 

San Francisco board rebrands 'convicted felon' as 'justice-involved person,' sanitizes other crime lingo

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/san-francisco-board-adopts-new-language-for-criminals-turning-convicted-felon-into-justice-involved-person

 

Crime-ridden San Francisco has introduced new sanitized language for criminals, getting rid of words such as “offender” and “addict” while changing “convicted felon” to “justice-involved person.”

 

The Board of Supervisors adopted the changes last month even as the city reels from one of the highest crime rates in the country and staggering inequality exemplified by pervasive homelessness alongside Silicon Valley wealth.

 

The local officials say the new language will help change people’s views about those who commit crimes.

 

The president thinks he was literally chosen by god, something we used to lock people up and give them shock treatment for, and you're in histrionics over some word choices?  It makes me wonder how many Trump supporters need actual psychological evaluation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ryanlammi said:

And this is supposedly the biggest issue facing America according to some people. How will the nation survive one city changing the legal language they use to refer to a subset of people?

Also, it's pretty wild that the article lists the city with the 37th highest violent crime rate in America as "crime-ridden".

 

all cities are "crime-ridden"

Edited by GCrites80s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2018 at 3:56 PM, Gramarye said:

The Wilkinson rebuttal regarding the Mathematical Intelligencer says nothing about it simply being topic-inappropriate.  She says she criticized it on its own academic merits and sought to have a rebuttal printed alongside it--which, of course, would have involved the same subject matter.

 

The Farb rebuttal (and note that Wilkinson and Farb are married) with respect to the publication and mysterious vanishment of the paper at NYJM at least does deal with the issue that the paper might simply have been off-topic for a theoretical math journal.  But it was published by that same journal before they interfered and pressured the journal to remove it.

 

Of course, in part this is based on trust regarding what really happened and what was really said.  I find the allegations of the Federalist and Quillette regarding the behind-the-scenes talk being far more vitriolic and political to be instantly facially credible.  This is simply SOP for the PC police; it's the water in which they swim.  The self-serving and sanitary disclaimers of those two academics meant for public consumption are, exactly as Brutus already said, damage control.

https://www.portlandmercury.com/blogtown/2019/08/26/27039560/undercover-in-patriot-prayer-insights-from-a-vancouver-democrat-whos-been-working-against-the-far-right-group-from-the-inside

Another person he includes in the “grifter” category: Andy Ngo, a conservative writer who’s built a Twitter persona around filming fights between antifa and right-wing extremists (that, and trying to convince people that hate crime allegations raised by LGBTQ+ Portlanders are simply “hoaxes”).

Ngo tags along with Patriot Prayer during demonstrations, hoping to catch footage of an altercation. Ben says Ngo doesn’t film Patriot Prayer protesters discussing strategies or motives. He only turns his camera on when members of antifa enter the scene.

 

Ben captures someone telling a person on speakerphone, "There's going to be a huge fight," and gives them directions to Cider Riot.

Ngo doesn’t film any of the conversations, and smiles when the group cracks jokes.

“He overheard everything,” Ben recalls, “and said nothing.”

 

I read this piece last night about conservative grifter Andy Ngo who worked for quilette and fooled everyone into thinking he was a victim of an unprovoked attack which even drew attention from Ted Cruz to condemn antifa.  I then remembered discussing Quillette on this forum.  And interestingly it is believed that Quillette is facially credible.  Once again, it is the "libs" on this site seeing through the grift for what it is. 

 

 

Edited by freefourur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(In case the Facebook image link expires):

John Cleese on Snowflakes..... “Yes I've heard this word. I think sociopaths use it in an attempt to discredit the notion of empathy.”

 

 

69484302_10156487246862919_6802863305032


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BREAKING: Dean of students resigns after pictures of past tweets surface

 

https://cw.ua.edu/54140/top-stories/breaking-dean-of-students-allegedly-resigns-after-pictures-of-past-tweets-surface/

 

I expect the "muh political correctness must be stopped" people to remain silent on this. 

 

Remind me again how only conservative thought is punished on college campuses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Facebook spiked a legitimate fact check about abortion after Republicans complained

 

https://www.theverge.com/interface/2019/9/12/20861589/facebook-abortion-fact-check-science-feedback-lila-rose-hawley-cruz

 

File this one under leftist political correctness is out of control and muh social media is biased against conservatives.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/19/us/politics/anti-israel-bias-higher-education.html

 

U.S. Orders Duke and U.N.C. to Recast Tone in Mideast Studies

 

Quote

The Education Department has ordered Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to remake the Middle East studies program run jointly by the two schools after concluding that it was offering students a biased curriculum that, among other complaints, did not present enough “positive” imagery of Judaism and Christianity in the region.

 

In a rare instance of federal intervention in college course content, the department asserted that the universities’ Middle East program violated the standards of a federal program that awards funding to international studies and foreign language programs. The inquiry was part of a far-reaching investigation into the program by the department, which under Betsy DeVos, the education secretary, has become increasingly aggressive in going after perceived anti-Israel bias in higher education.

 

This is PC culture run amok.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/19/us/politics/anti-israel-bias-higher-education.html

 

U.S. Orders Duke and U.N.C. to Recast Tone in Mideast Studies

 

 

This is PC culture run amok.

 

actually it looks like a much-needed corrective to PC culture run amok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, eastvillagedon said:

 

actually it looks like a much-needed corrective to PC culture run amok

 

It's ok for the federal government to compel speech but it is dangerous for random students to do it.  Conservative logic in 2019.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2018 at 1:58 PM, Gramarye said:

 

How do affirmative action, minority- and women-owned business set-asides, etc., not openly discriminate against people who are not in the favored group?

 

 

Above is one of many comments from a conservative voice railing against how unfair it is that some people get special treatments. It seems that the mainstream conservative belief about who is getting screwed over in college admissions is colored with their own bias.  Because the reality is different. And all of us PC liberals have the correct view as usual.   

 

 

43 Percent of White Students Harvard Admits Are Legacies, Jocks, or the Kids of Donors and Faculty

 

https://slate.com/business/2019/09/harvard-admissions-affirmative-action-white-students-legacy-athletes-donors.html

 

I expect conservatives to speak out against this injustice.  Hahaha no I don't.  When white people benefit it's OK. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, freefourur said:

 

 

Above is one of many comments from a conservative voice railing against how unfair it is that some people get special treatments. It seems that the mainstream conservative belief about who is getting screwed over in college admissions is colored with their own bias.  Because the reality is different. And all of us PC liberals have the correct view as usual.   

 

 

43 Percent of White Students Harvard Admits Are Legacies, Jocks, or the Kids of Donors and Faculty

 

https://slate.com/business/2019/09/harvard-admissions-affirmative-action-white-students-legacy-athletes-donors.html

 

I expect conservatives to speak out against this injustice.  Hahaha no I don't.  When white people benefit it's OK. 

 

 

 

I take issue with the "Jocks" line here. I went to HS with two kids who worked their a** off in every aspect of life, athletics and academics included - one came from a middle class family in Willoughby, the other from two low income parents on the west side of Cleveland. They were both white and went on to play sports at Harvard, and they both deserved it - their commitment to excellence was marrow deep. I'm sure a lot of other athletes at Harvard are similarly situated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, YABO713 said:

 

I take issue with the "Jocks" line here. I went to HS with two kids who worked their a** off in every aspect of life, athletics and academics included - one came from a middle class family in Willoughby, the other from two low income parents on the west side of Cleveland. They were both white and went on to play sports at Harvard, and they both deserved it - their commitment to excellence was marrow deep. I'm sure a lot of other athletes at Harvard are similarly situated. 

I am not saying they don't deserve it but the railing against affirmative action makes an assumption that minorities didn't also work their a** off.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, freefourur said:

I am not saying they don't deserve it but the railing against affirmative action makes an assumption that minorities didn't also work their a** off.  

 

Heard - then slate should call them "student athletes", not belittle them as jocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, they should have used a better term than jock.  You are correct on that.  There is nothing wrong with student athletes or colleges admitting students for reasons other that their grades or test scores.  The article and study it is based on is eye opening though and confirms many of the notions that the liberals on this board have been talking about. 

Edited by freefourur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, freefourur said:

Above is one of many comments from a conservative voice railing against how unfair it is that some people get special treatments. It seems that the mainstream conservative belief about who is getting screwed over in college admissions is colored with their own bias.  Because the reality is different. And all of us PC liberals have the correct view as usual.   

 

I expect conservatives to speak out against this injustice.  Hahaha no I don't.  When white people benefit it's OK. 

 

The persistent railing against "PC CULTURE" that is mainstream among conservatives is because of their backa**wards view of society and the way the world works.  They think that because a long-time oppressed group is now being given a fair chance at things like college admission, housing, jobs, equal pay, etc. that another group (in this case, the long-time dominant group, of which they are a member) must be "losing."  Their view on equality is that in order for minorities to be given a fair shot, white people must diminish their status, their power, etc.  Which, of course, is not true.  But when you're a member of the dominant group, you will concoct any narrative to fit your perceived reality and fears.  That's really how this whole outrage against "PC culture" started -> white people who didn't want to have to treat others fairly and equally.

Edited by DarkandStormy

Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything with them is "who won" or "who lost". And they always have to be on the side that "wins". But when you introduce a variable they can't control, such as whether or not they are a minority they have to make sure they don't "lose". A "rising tide lifts all boats" literally doesn't exist except when it comes to the lie of trickle-down economics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hesitate to post this here, because (a) The Atlantic recently went to a 3-free-articles-per-month model before you need to purchase a $50 annual subscription, so clicking this link will use up one of those articles for any readers, and (b) it's a long read.  That said, it got some buzz on multiple other sites, so some might find it worth one of their three free articles for the month:

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/10/when-the-culture-war-comes-for-the-kids/596668/

 

When the Culture War Comes for the Kids

Caught between a brutal meritocracy and a radical new progressivism, a parent tries to do right by his children while navigating New York City’s schools.

 

===============================

 

The article touched a nerve with Andrew Sullivan:

 

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/09/andrew-sullivan-when-the-ideologues-come-for-the-kids.html

 

When the Ideologues Come for the Kids

 

===============================

 

The buzz from the former two articles naturally prompted a perhaps-overly-gloating column from The Federalist:

 

https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/24/9-revelations-in-the-atlantics-essay-about-nycs-kafkaesque-schools/

 

9 Revelations In The Atlantic’s Essay About NYC’s Kafkaesque Schools

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, YABO713 said:

 

I take issue with the "Jocks" line here. I went to HS with two kids who worked their a** off in every aspect of life, athletics and academics included - one came from a middle class family in Willoughby, the other from two low income parents on the west side of Cleveland. They were both white and went on to play sports at Harvard, and they both deserved it - their commitment to excellence was marrow deep. I'm sure a lot of other athletes at Harvard are similarly situated. 

 

Why does being able to play literal games make one qualified for a college scholarship?  It's one thing if we're talking about people living in poverty and have little other options to get into school beyond athletic scholarships, but it just seems wrong to me that so much money goes to athletes rather than those with real academic excellence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

The persistent railing against "PC CULTURE" that is mainstream among conservatives is because of their backa**wards view of society and the way the world works.  They think that because a long-time oppressed group is now being given a fair chance at things like college admission, housing, jobs, equal pay, etc. that another group (in this case, the long-time dominant group, of which they are a member) must be "losing."  Their view on equality is that in order for minorities to be given a fair shot, white people must diminish their status, their power, etc.  Which, of course, is not true.  But when you're a member of the dominant group, you will concoct any narrative to fit your perceived reality and fears.  That's really how this whole outrage against "PC culture" started -> white people who didn't want to have to treat others fairly and equally.

 

This wouldn't be an issue if everyone were given a "fair chance." That is not the case. No ones race should ever entitle them to preferential treatment in any capacity.  Regarding college admissions, specifically, there are some potentially significant cases working there way through the courts today because of this concern  Harvard is currently embroiled in the most newsworthy of the bunch:

 

https://www.educationdive.com/news/higher-ed-lawsuits-tracker/561371/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

No ones race should ever entitle them to preferential treatment in any capacity.

 

This sentence would be taken seriously if you ever argued such on this forum.  Sadly, you never have.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Latinx" is annoying me. In English it sounds like a third category. Why not just "Latin" which is perfectly good English and no more jarring in Spanish than Latinx is.

 

Spanish is an inherently sexist language (los padres = parents, for example); and the x aberration isn't changing it.


There's nothing wrong with optimism, as long as you don't get your hopes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to avoid sexism, but we don't need to be imperialistic about it. Let the people who speak the language decide whether they want to de-gender their language or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

It's good to avoid sexism, but we don't need to be imperialistic about it. Let the people who speak the language decide whether they want to de-gender their language or not.

 

The term isn't used in Spanish; native Spanish speakers consider it 'cultural appropriation' - humorously, I believe. It's chiefly used in US English.


There's nothing wrong with optimism, as long as you don't get your hopes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dougal said:

 

The term isn't used in Spanish; native Spanish speakers consider it 'cultural appropriation' - humorously, I believe. It's chiefly used in US English.

 

That's not true. There definitely is a movement in Latin America to move away from gender-specific words.  Latin American culture has big problems with sexism in general, and there is absolutely a growing fight against it, including in language.  I've never heard anyone say it's "cultural appropriation", and that would seem to misuse that term altogether. 

English has done the same thing- we moved away from words like steward/stewardess to say flight attendant, waiter/waitress to server, etc. I don't recall the outrage about it, but I suppose there was some in conservative circles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They could use 'Latine' which is not gender-specific; the -e ending is often used for other adjectives. 

 

The 'cultural appropriation' comment came from the only citation I could find on the topic; in the specific context the speaker seemed to be mocking both Latinx and cultural appropriation - perhaps not a good choice on my part.


There's nothing wrong with optimism, as long as you don't get your hopes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I'm ever going to actually say it, but out of curiosity - do you say it like "La-tinx" or "Latin-X?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dougal said:

"Latinx" is annoying me. In English it sounds like a third category. Why not just "Latin" which is perfectly good English and no more jarring in Spanish than Latinx is.

 

Spanish is an inherently sexist language (los padres = parents, for example); and the x aberration isn't changing it.

 

Not to mention that pretty much every single noun and most of the associated adjectives are male or female.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dougal said:

"Latinx" is annoying me. In English it sounds like a third category. Why not just "Latin" which is perfectly good English and no more jarring in Spanish than Latinx is.

 

Spanish is an inherently sexist language (los padres = parents, for example); and the x aberration isn't changing it.

 

Fair question, are you Latin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

Fair question, are you Latin?

 

From Rome? I kidd, not trying to stir the pot. Well, maybe a little 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

Fair question, are you Latin?

No.


There's nothing wrong with optimism, as long as you don't get your hopes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...