Has Political Correctness in the USA gone too far?

[Liriena]

Yes, so much so. These secular-progressives are trying to instill their PC doctrine in the US.

[citation needed]

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Yes, so much so. These secular-progressives are trying to instill their PC doctrine in the US.

[citation needed]

It'd make an excellent work of fiction:

"The invasion of the progressives" it'd be called

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Yes, so much so. These secular-progressives are trying to instill their PC doctrine in the US.

[citation needed]

Curses! He's on to us!

[Kelinfort]

Yes, so much so. These secular-progressives are trying to instill their PC doctrine in the US.

C'mon man, tell me what you're smoking. It sounds excellent.

[Murkwood]

Yes, so much so. These secular-progressives are trying to instill their PC doctrine in the US.

[citation needed]

Try reading Culture Warrior by Bill O'Reilly.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

[citation needed]

Try reading Culture Warrior by Bill O'Reilly.

And what are the citations of that book? Or is it just one man spouting.off uncited speculation and bullshit?

[Benuty]

[citation needed]

Try reading Culture Warrior by Bill O'Reilly.

It reads like Marquis de Sade so no.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

[citation needed]

Try reading Culture Warrior by Bill O'Reilly.

That's the same man who insists that the general shift from "Merry Christmas!" to "Happy Holidays!" among private retailers who wish to give a seasonal greeting to all of their customers regardless of religion or cultural background is a sign of a larger "War On Christmas". You should be embarrassed for using him as a source, when he's simply pandering to the fears of a shrinking base.

[Benuty]

Try reading Culture Warrior by Bill O'Reilly.

That's the same man who insists that the general shift from "Merry Christmas!" to "Happy Holidays!" among private retailers who wish to give a seasonal greeting to all of their customers regardless of religion or cultural background is a sign of a larger "War On Christmas". You should be embarrassed for using him as a source, when he's simply pandering to the fears of a shrinking base.

War on Christmas?

More like war on sacred pagan tradition .

[Liriena]

[citation needed]

Try reading Culture Warrior by Bill O'Reilly.

Sorry. My "to read" list is massive enough as it is (three books by Kij Johnson, the last three books of Stephen King's Dark Tower saga, three books from the A Song of Ice and Fire saga, an anthology of stories, poems and essays by Edgar Allan Poe, Alan Moore's Watchmen, Neil Gaiman's Sandman, and college books).

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Try reading Culture Warrior by Bill O'Reilly.

Sorry. My "to read" list is massive enough as it is (three books by Kij Johnson, the last three books of Stephen King's Dark Tower saga, three books from the A Song of Ice and Fire saga, an anthology of stories, poems and essays by Edgar Allan Poe, Alan Moore's Watchmen, Neil Gaiman's Sandman, and college books).

All of which will be a far more valuable use of your time, and all of which will be far less depressing than an O'Reilly rant. Yes, even Watchmen.

[Benuty]

Sorry. My "to read" list is massive enough as it is (three books by Kij Johnson, the last three books of Stephen King's Dark Tower saga, three books from the A Song of Ice and Fire saga, an anthology of stories, poems and essays by Edgar Allan Poe, Alan Moore's Watchmen, Neil Gaiman's Sandman, and college books).

All of which will be a far more valuable use of your time, and all of which will be far less depressing than an O'Reilly rant. Yes, even Watchmen.

Seriously?

You just had to insult them.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

All of which will be a far more valuable use of your time, and all of which will be far less depressing than an O'Reilly rant. Yes, even Watchmen.

Seriously?

You just had to insult them.

Insult who? Watchmen is a work of genius, but it is depressing.

[Benuty]

Seriously?

You just had to insult them.

Insult who? Watchmen is a work of genius, but it is depressing.

Of-course it is supposed to be in takes place in world on the verge of nuclear war. If that is not depressing I don't know what is .

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Insult who? Watchmen is a work of genius, but it is depressing.

Of-course it is supposed to be in takes place in world on the verge of nuclear war. If that is not depressing I don't know what is .

That's what I'm saying. When I say that it's depressing, one thing that I'm saying is that Moore effectively communicated something that he was obviously trying to communicate.

[Lankar Islands]

As someone who has lived in US... I really don't see a problem with PC.

Not saying the USA needs to be more politically correct. What I'm saying is they just need better judgement.

I mean come on. Political Correctness is not useful if one is paranoid of even the most trivial of consequences, it requires logical thinking and proper judgement. To say political correctness is going too far in the US is really asinine, as it's just that people are not using any modicum of judgement on when and where to be politically correct.

And being a bigot is soooo 1920s.

[Inzijard]

As someone who has lived in US... I really don't see a problem with PC.

Not saying the USA needs to be more politically correct. What I'm saying is they just need better judgement.

I mean come on. Political Correctness is not useful if one is paranoid of even the most trivial of consequences, it requires logical thinking and proper judgement. To say political correctness is going too far in the US is really asinine, as it's just that people are not using any modicum of judgement on when and where to be politically correct.

And being a bigot is soooo 1920s.

I agree, and by extension feel that, at least in my experience, racism is made a bigger problem by third parties than the ones involved. Make no mistake, I'm by no means prejudiced; I understand the value of humour and tact. I have black friends who make black jokes all the time, yet non-black people are offended because black people might be offended. Well, no, in this instance the parties involved were having a good time, and using discretion, so the only ones making an issue out of it were the ones with whom the statements were not concerned. It is only an issue insofar as those to whom the statements are concerned are genuinely offended.

I find this to be especially the case among youths, who often cover up everything potentially objectionable that comes out of their mouth with "not to be racist," or something of the sort. If you think it will cause an issue, don't say it in the first place. If you don't think it will cause an issue, then perhaps all parties understand the benign nature of the humour in that context. There is no reason to be offended on someone else's behalf if they are not offended themselves, because it simply creates an issue where one would otherwise not exist. So, again, discretion is key.

[Lankar Islands]

As someone who has lived in US... I really don't see a problem with PC.

Not saying the USA needs to be more politically correct. What I'm saying is they just need better judgement.

I mean come on. Political Correctness is not useful if one is paranoid of even the most trivial of consequences, it requires logical thinking and proper judgement. To say political correctness is going too far in the US is really asinine, as it's just that people are not using any modicum of judgement on when and where to be politically correct.

And being a bigot is soooo 1920s.

I agree, and by extension feel that, at least in my experience, racism is made a bigger problem by third parties than the ones involved. Make no mistake, I'm by no means prejudiced; I understand the value of humour and tact. I have black friends who make black jokes all the time, yet non-black people are offended because black people might be offended. Well, no, in this instance the parties involved were having a good time, and using discretion, so the only ones making an issue out of it were the ones with whom the statements were not concerned. It is only an issue insofar as those to whom the statements are concerned are genuinely offended.

I find this to be especially the case among youths, who often cover up everything potentially objectionable that comes out of their mouth with "not to be racist," or something of the sort. If you think it will cause an issue, don't say it in the first place. If you don't think it will cause an issue, then perhaps all parties understand the benign nature of the humour in that context. There is no reason to be offended on someone else's behalf if they are not offended themselves, because it simply creates an issue where one would otherwise not exist. So, again, discretion is key.

I think it's a small lack of mutual understanding between all parties. Like, to be able to politically correct... 'correctly' one should have some understanding of the situation, and why certain things are blatantly offensive and why certain concepts exist, et cetera, et cetera.

[Lalaki]

I think that moderate political correctness is essential.

When we are discussing modern policy, we have a choice to be respectful and humble in our arguments, or to be blunt and potentially hurtful. A big problem I notice is that people can use very strong/inappropriate language when expressing their opinion, and complain that their free speech rights are being questioned when told to tone down the argument.

Let's take immigration as an example. Why is it so hard to use the term "undocumented immigrants" instead of "illegal immigrants" in discussion? The same exact group of people are being referred to, but the first term is more appropriate and isn't offensive. Yes, it is your right to use the latter term. But is it bad to consider the feelings of other people? This isn't about being right, or the first amendment. It is about showing empathy and concern for others. If you can get your point across in a nicer and just as effective way, you should do that.

Is it bad to say "I respectfully disagree with country X's foreign policy" instead of "The bully country X is the monster of the world?" The former term can earn one more credibility, without hurting the residents of country X. And it gets the same opinion across.

Political correctness can go too far when people are afraid to express their opinions. But to show sensitivity is not a bad thing.

[Dyakovo]

If your opinions make you an asshole, why shouldn't you be called an asshole? Offending your delicate sensibilities isn't a good enough reason, btw.

Uhh because it's rude and childish "delicate sensibilities" okay man just because i don't like being called an arsehole for speaking my perfectly acceptable opinions i'm delicate? Yea sure totally man totally.

If your opinions were actually "perfectly acceptable" you wouldn't be being labeled an asshole.

[Inzijard]

Uhh because it's rude and childish "delicate sensibilities" okay man just because i don't like being called an arsehole for speaking my perfectly acceptable opinions i'm delicate? Yea sure totally man totally.

If your opinions were actually "perfectly acceptable" you wouldn't be being labeled an asshole.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and flies like a duck, it's probably a beaver.

You're welcome to your own opinions, certainly, but beware the double-edged sword: people are just as permitted to brand you with an objectionable title as you are to say objectionable things.

[Mavorpen]

Uhh because it's rude and childish "delicate sensibilities" okay man just because i don't like being called an arsehole for speaking my perfectly acceptable opinions i'm delicate? Yea sure totally man totally.

If your opinions were actually "perfectly acceptable" you wouldn't be being labeled an asshole.

At this point, the position of the people who have argued "yes" with respect with the thread title seems to be that, well, they're mad that they're losing debates.

I mean, if you think something isn't bad or that it's acceptable, you should make the arguments that these are true. Instead, whining that you're being censored by the PC police just seems like the outcry of individuals who know they've lost the debates and are angry at being called out on it.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

If your opinions were actually "perfectly acceptable" you wouldn't be being labeled an asshole.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and flies like a duck, it's probably a beaver.

You're welcome to your own opinions, certainly, but beware the double-edged sword: people are just as permitted to brand you with an objectionable title as you are to say objectionable things.

Indeed, and that's the way it should be.

As long as there's no harm done from either party, you are free to criticize one another as much as you like.

[Dyakovo]

If your opinions were actually "perfectly acceptable" you wouldn't be being labeled an asshole.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and flies like a duck, it's probably a beaver platypus.

You're welcome to your own opinions, certainly, but beware the double-edged sword: people are just as permitted to brand you with an objectionable title as you are to say objectionable things.

ftfy

[Norjagen]

When fear of being politically incorrect (and the ensuing personal attacks) prevents a country's leaders from properly acknowledging, addressing and solving that country's problems, it's gone too far.