Has Political Correctness Gone too Far?

[Taimid ag an Phobail]

When people threaten someone who said something politically incorrect, that's censorship.
Example: Play-Asia called feminists' case on Dead or Alive Extreme 3 "SJW nonsense". Several people threatened Play-Asia, with one saying they knew someone who could destroy Play-Asia. Criticism indeed.

If a main series DoA fighter was canned I might care, Extreme 3 doesn't need to exist.

I agree with you but...I still don't like people scaring a company into doing their will.

[Councilmembers]

"Political Correctness"

If political correctness means showing empathy to other people, eschewing terms such as "illegal alien" for "undocumented immigrant," using the pronouns that people prefer, not vulgarly insulting others based on disagreements, acknowledging the fact that other faiths exist, and attempting to use inclusive language -- I am proud to call myself politically correct.

The right often attacks us for it. But what would they say if public officials insulted all Christians and said we need to spy on "illegal church folk?" Surely there would be a backlash for lack of professionalism -- as there well should be. But Fox News pundits are OK for doing the same thing to Muslims? That is beyond bigoted. There is a heinous double-standard that exists in the realm of criticizing political correctness.

[Hirota]

If political correctness means showing empathy to other people,

You don't have to be PC to be empathic. Thats one of your conditions that simply does not hold true.

eschewing terms such as "illegal alien" for "undocumented immigrant," using the pronouns that people prefer,

Nothing too objectionable with any of this either, but again, don't have to be PC to do these. Two more conditions that simply do not hold true.

not vulgarly insulting others based on disagreements,

Implying that PC people are never obnoxious towards those who they disagree with. This is simply not true. Another condition that fails.

acknowledging the fact that other faiths exist,

Other faiths exist. You don't have to be PC to acknowledge this. Another of your conditions that holds no water.

and attempting to use inclusive language

And another.

-- I am proud to call myself politically correct.

Even though all these things are nothing to do with PC.

The right often attacks us for it.

I'm center left, and I'm attacking your post right now for being full of nonsense.

But what would they say if public officials insulted all Christians and said we need to spy on "illegal church folk?"

They have, repeatedly. And they continue to do so. You are right that they don't assume all christians are part of the KKK or some christian cult.

Surely there would be a backlash for lack of professionalism -- as there well should be.

Seriously, is any of your post correct?

But Fox News pundits are OK for doing the same thing to Muslims? That is beyond bigoted.

Advocating doing the same thing as they do actually do with christian fundamentalists? I see no problem with that. Advocating these actions to what is in the vast, vast majority simply peaceful Muslims? I absolutely agree there is a lot of scaremongering that has no basis in reality. But lets not pretend Islam is a religion of peace. It isn't. Neither is christianity for that matter. Both are used as justifications for nutjobs doing nutjob things.

There is a heinous double-standard that exists in the realm of criticizing political correctness.

Yup, PC can obviously do no wrong, the right are clearly all bigotted scumbags. I can see where the double-standard clearly lies - shame you fail so abysmally doing so.

[Keyboard Warriors]

If political correctness means showing empathy to other people,

You don't have to be PC to be empathic. Thats one of your conditions that simply does not hold true.

eschewing terms such as "illegal alien" for "undocumented immigrant," using the pronouns that people prefer,

Nothing too objectionable with any of this either, but again, don't have to be PC to do these. Two more conditions that simply do not hold true.

not vulgarly insulting others based on disagreements,

Implying that PC people are never obnoxious towards those who they disagree with. This is simply not true. Another condition that fails.

acknowledging the fact that other faiths exist,

Other faiths exist. You don't have to be PC to acknowledge this. Another of your conditions that holds no water.

and attempting to use inclusive language

And another.

-- I am proud to call myself politically correct.

Even though all these things are nothing to do with PC.

The right often attacks us for it.

I'm center left, and I'm attacking your post right now for being full of nonsense.

But what would they say if public officials insulted all Christians and said we need to spy on "illegal church folk?"

They have, repeatedly. And they continue to do so. You are right that they don't assume all christians are part of the KKK or some christian cult.

Surely there would be a backlash for lack of professionalism -- as there well should be.

Seriously, is any of your post correct?

But Fox News pundits are OK for doing the same thing to Muslims? That is beyond bigoted.

Advocating doing the same thing as they do actually do with christian fundamentalists? I see no problem with that. Advocating these actions to what is in the vast, vast majority simply peaceful Muslims? I absolutely agree there is a lot of scaremongering that has no basis in reality. But lets not pretend Islam is a religion of peace. It isn't. Neither is christianity for that matter. Both are used as justifications for nutjobs doing nutjob things.

There is a heinous double-standard that exists in the realm of criticizing political correctness.

Yup, PC can obviously do no wrong, the right are clearly all bigotted scumbags. I can see where the double-standard clearly lies - shame you fail so abysmally doing so.

All of his post is correct. Funnily enough, the term PC is treated exactly like the term "feminism" on NSG; a bogeyword which nobody wants to be associated with despite often believing (or claiming to believe) in the same collective set of values which the term refers too. And then you have people who profess to support the idea of PC being labelled "PC People", treated as one collective mindset where the actions of one individual are taken as a great indication of the mindset of the rest of the group (albeit, only if the actions are bad. good actions are completely ignored).

Seriously, you'd think people would just come to grips with the word.

[The Lone Alliance]

"Political Correctness"
If political correctness means showing empathy to other people,

It doesn't.

eschewing terms such as "illegal alien" for "undocumented immigrant,"

Both which are technically correct except the first term hurts feelings.

using the pronouns that people prefer,

What about ones people make up because the normal ones aren't special snowflake enough?

not vulgarly insulting others based on disagreements,

That's not political correctness either.

acknowledging the fact that other faiths exist,

I'd like to know what part of the western world has people who truly do not believe there are other faiths... or is this the "I don't say Merry Christmas because it might offend non-Christians?"

and attempting to use inclusive language

I'll have to admit your post history does support this statement.

-- I am proud to call myself politically correct.

Not sure if most of that is political correctness...

The right often attacks us for it.

The right mocks, insults, and disdains it, but I've yet to see the right demanding political correct speech be silenced.

But what would they say if public officials insulted all Christians and said we need to spy on "illegal church folk?" Surely there would be a backlash for lack of professionalism -- as there well should e.

Except stuff like that does happen. Some "News" profit from that sort of thing.

But Fox News pundits are OK for doing the same thing to Muslims?

Only case I could find is someone named Brian Kilmeade who's pretty much known for being an asshole... which apparently makes him popular...

So what are you suggesting? Are you saying Fox News should fire him for his comments?

To be fair CNN did eventually get rid of Piers Morgan but that was more to falling ratings from the fact that he was an asshole. But if Piers Morgan behavior had been good for ratings?
It is unlikely he would have had any consequences.

That is beyond bigoted.
There is a heinous double-standard that exists in the realm of criticizing political correctness.

[/quote] And then if you look on both sides you'll find both sides say there's a double standard. Strange.

[Gauthier]

You don't have to be PC to be empathic. Thats one of your conditions that simply does not hold true.

Nothing too objectionable with any of this either, but again, don't have to be PC to do these. Two more conditions that simply do not hold true.Implying that PC people are never obnoxious towards those who they disagree with. This is simply not true. Another condition that fails.

Other faiths exist. You don't have to be PC to acknowledge this. Another of your conditions that holds no water.And another.

Even though all these things are nothing to do with PC.

I'm center left, and I'm attacking your post right now for being full of nonsense.They have, repeatedly. And they continue to do so. You are right that they don't assume all christians are part of the KKK or some christian cult.Seriously, is any of your post correct? Advocating doing the same thing as they do actually do with christian fundamentalists? I see no problem with that. Advocating these actions to what is in the vast, vast majority simply peaceful Muslims? I absolutely agree there is a lot of scaremongering that has no basis in reality. But lets not pretend Islam is a religion of peace. It isn't. Neither is christianity for that matter. Both are used as justifications for nutjobs doing nutjob things.Yup, PC can obviously do no wrong, the right are clearly all bigotted scumbags. I can see where the double-standard clearly lies - shame you fail so abysmally doing so.

All of his post is correct. Funnily enough, the term PC is treated exactly like the term "feminism" on NSG; a bogeyword which nobody wants to be associated with despite often believing (or claiming to believe) in the same collective set of values which the term refers too. And then you have people who profess to support the idea of PC being labelled "PC People", treated as one collective mindset where the actions of one individual are taken as a great indication of the mindset of the rest of the group (albeit, only if the actions are bad. good actions are completely ignored).

Seriously, you'd think people would just come to grips with the word.

PC, Feminism, SJW. The Unholy Trinity according to NSG. Because being a chauvinist douchebag out to be celebrated and guarantee you a criticism censorship free audience.

[Mavorpen]

PC, Feminism, SJW. The Unholy Trinity according to NSG. Because being a chauvinist douchebag out to be celebrated and guarantee you a criticism censorship free audience.

It's actually pretty funny being called a SJW on a social media site and just responding with a nonchalant "k." Usually they get upset for some reason. Oh, who am I kidding, the reason is obvious: they just say it to get under your skin and distract from the central point at hand.

[Deanson]

As far as third-wave feminism type stuff where people get silenced literally for having differing opinions, then absolutely. Simply because someone may disagree with you on an issue is no justification whatsoever for dismissing their argument as invalid and hiding it entirely. Just look at the recent feminist UN speech where they discussed how it was necessary to silence people solely because they voiced disagreement on their content, it's ridiculous. As far as in what you can say in public without legal action currently? I'd say it's just fine. Obviously if you go out and start screaming racial slurs in your backyard at specific people one may call it harassment, but if you just say it in passing conversation you wouldn't get arrested for it and that's how it should be frankly, though other people may not look at you highly as a person. I can't imagine a scenario that isn't a witch-hunt type of situation where just saying something that is extremely offensive should ever wind you up in a jail cell or otherwise state-sponsored punishment.

[Valkalan]

If someone said that the sky was red on a bright sunny day when the sky is clearly blue, would anyone be offended? I doubt it. Such a statement is patently absurd. At the heart of the mainstream culture is only the most profound insecurity. In the face of a "politically incorrect" statement there can be only two possibilities. The first, the statement is wrong and there should be nothing to fear. And in the case of the second possibility in which the statement is correct, the civilized solution is to admit your fault rather than interfere with the freedom of speech.

[Newzie]

PC, Feminism, SJW. The Unholy Trinity according to NSG. Because being a chauvinist douchebag out to be celebrated and guarantee you a criticism censorship free audience.

It's actually pretty funny being called a SJW on a social media site and just responding with a nonchalant "k." Usually they get upset for some reason. Oh, who am I kidding, the reason is obvious: they just say it to get under your skin and distract from the central point at hand.

don't they see the irony of treating a term like "social justice" with derision

[Jamzmania]

Political correctness is about controlling language and, ultimately, controlling speech. You can't say this or that because, "Oh, well we don't want to offend anyone do we? And if you do say these things, you are a bad person because you say things that are offensive!" At first, it is people wanting to sound cool and nonoffensive. Then it becomes self-censorship as people are afraid of saying something that might be deemed offensive by someone somewhere. Eventually it becomes very real censorship as people are punished in one way or another for not abiding by the politically correct norm. This is the progression of political correctness.

[Keyboard Warriors]

Political correctness is about controlling language and, ultimately, controlling speech. You can't say this or that because, "Oh, well we don't want to offend anyone do we? And if you do say these things, you are a bad person because you say things that are offensive!" At first, it is people wanting to sound cool and nonoffensive. Then it becomes self-censorship as people are afraid of saying something that might be deemed offensive by someone somewhere. Eventually it becomes very real censorship as people are punished in one way or another for not abiding by the politically correct norm. This is the progression of political correctness.

Political correctness is a buzzword created by the right wing, which is used when they're complaining about how somebody told them that they weren't being very nice. Are you actually complaining that people don't like you being offensive? Seriously, what the fuck? Aren't you getting exactly the reaction you want when they tell you that you're an intolerant asshole?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Political correctness is about controlling language and, ultimately, controlling speech. You can't say this or that because, "Oh, well we don't want to offend anyone do we? And if you do say these things, you are a bad person because you say things that are offensive!" At first, it is people wanting to sound cool and nonoffensive. Then it becomes self-censorship as people are afraid of saying something that might be deemed offensive by someone somewhere. Eventually it becomes very real censorship as people are punished in one way or another for not abiding by the politically correct norm. This is the progression of political correctness.

So what if you are told you are an asshole?! Have people who are complaining about political correctness as "well, I can't say whatever the fuck I want because of those damn PC liberal assholes telling me I am an asshole" not seen the irony behind their own shit?

You want to offend people? You can. I can't recall how many times I have used racial slurs to make a point in NSG against racists, or sexist language to make a point to sexists. Does that make me an asshole?! Yes. But does that make me complain about political correctness? No. Because I know that political correctness is usually said as a shield for people to complain about being called a prick when they act like a prick. I have no sympathy for that kind of people, because I am an asshole and I don't try to cower behind bitching about PC to be one, neither do I complain about being called an asshole. I know I am an asshole, and I won't apologize for it.

The question is: why do you feel that you need to if you want to be a massive prick?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Political correctness is about controlling language and, ultimately, controlling speech. You can't say this or that because, "Oh, well we don't want to offend anyone do we? And if you do say these things, you are a bad person because you say things that are offensive!" At first, it is people wanting to sound cool and nonoffensive. Then it becomes self-censorship as people are afraid of saying something that might be deemed offensive by someone somewhere. Eventually it becomes very real censorship as people are punished in one way or another for not abiding by the politically correct norm. This is the progression of political correctness.

Political correctness is a buzzword created by the right wing, which is used when they're complaining about how somebody told them that they weren't being very nice. Are you actually complaining that people don't like you being offensive? Seriously, what the fuck? Aren't you getting exactly the reaction you want when they tell you that you're an intolerant asshole?

It's funny, because it's ironic.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You can think that political correctness isn't needed and talk whatever the fuck you want.

I do it all the time.

However, I don't try to justify my being an asshole as "PC gone too far". That's just me being an asshole.

Now, if you complain about being called an asshole when you are indeed an asshole, then perhaps your claims of "grow a tough skin" should be reflective of your position instead of theirs?

Just a gentle reminder to people here. I am not going to keep typing my position from scratch.

[Gauthier]

Political correctness is a buzzword created by the right wing, which is used when they're complaining about how somebody told them that they weren't being very nice. Are you actually complaining that people don't like you being offensive? Seriously, what the fuck? Aren't you getting exactly the reaction you want when they tell you that you're an intolerant asshole?

It's funny, because it's ironic.

The irony being that anyone complaining about PC being overly sensitive and censoring anything they don't like are being overly sensitive about being called out on their offensive statements and want to censor the criticisms.

[Hirota]

All of his post is correct.

Nope, it isn't.

Funnily enough, the term PC is treated exactly like the term "feminism" on NSG

You mean as a term that should be open to criticism? Absolutely. Lets not patronise and mollycoddle either feminism or PC. Instead of whining about being criticised, have an argument that stands up to scrutiny.

a bogeyword which nobody wants to be associated with despite often believing (or claiming to believe) in the same collective set of values which the term refers too.

This is fallacious reasoning. Being x therefore y simply does not stand up to scrutiny.

Oh, who am I kidding, the reason is obvious: they just say it to get under your skin and distract from the central point at hand.

Sounds like you are talking about 95% of Gauthiers posting history.
Don't know why you were called an SJW and what it was in response to (and it doesn't really matter), but I agree in principle that them getting annoyed at you for not caring what you call them is plain dumb.

don't they see the irony of treating a term like "social justice" with derision

Social Justice, in its idea, is absolutely commendable to most people as it's strongly anchored in egalitarian principles. Equal rights and opportunities are not anything that are opposable by most people. Social Justice "Warriors", however - and note that the term Warrior is really to be implied as a "Keyboard Warrior" - are "internet activists" who deal in outrage as a currency. It's not entirely the same as politicial correctness, but there is an overlap.

Political correctness is a buzzword created by the right wing

This is untrue, although it did reach mainstream usage for those purposes.

[Republic of Coldwater]

Of course. While we should not be being offensive for the sake of being offensive, people are too easily offended, from the Washington Redskins to a Yale professor opposing the school's policy on Halloween costumes, society, most notably millennials are overly sensitive.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Of course. While we should not be being offensive for the sake of being offensive, people are too easily offended, from the Washington Redskins to a Yale professor opposing the school's policy on Halloween costumes, society, most notably millennials are overly sensitive.

Everyone says that yet there is no evidence that this is the case.

What there is evidence is that every generation bemoans the next, so that isn't new.

[Gauthier]

Oh, who am I kidding, the reason is obvious: they just say it to get under your skin and distract from the central point at hand.

Sounds like you are talking about 95% of Gauthiers posting history.

There is this option called 'Ignore' if you're such a fan.

[Hirota]

Of course. While we should not be being offensive for the sake of being offensive, people are too easily offended, from the Washington Redskins to a Yale professor opposing the school's policy on Halloween costumes, society, most notably millennials are overly sensitive.

Everyone says that yet there is no evidence that this is the case.

Look at the example Coldwater cited of Yale university. A perfectly rational and reasonable email calling upon students to reflect and contemplate led to calls for resignations. The atlantic article does an excellent job of demonstrating the difference between how these two professors sought to respect students by engaging in respectful and thoughtful debate, whilst those students were calling for their jobs because the professors sought to debate.

It would be like you calling for me to be perma-banned because I have the temerity to question one of your posts, and then magnified to the point where not only would you want me banned from here, but you'd want me fired from the my job where I wrote this hypothetical response. Obviously the actions of a large number (Hundreds signed an open letter calling for the professors resignation according to the article) of students in one University can not be taken to be truly representative of all millenials, and of course some of the complaints by Yale students (if shown to be true, but apparently have been deemed groundless) are perfectly reasonable grounds for protest and calls for reform.

This isn't neccessarily about students being more or less sensitive than preceeding generations (and I think the jury is out on that right now), but rather the tactics employed to express their outrage. Calling for resignations for professors who simply question the prevailing narrative amongst students, for example.

There is this option called 'Ignore' if you're such a fan.

I prefer the option where I call out the tripe you post as the bullshit it is, but thanks for the reminder that such an option exists.

[Royal Hindustan]

If you want to control your speech, then that's your duty, not mine. Don't want to say "illegal alien"? Don't say it, but can't stop me from saying it. You want to control your own thoughts, fine do it. Can't control my thoughts.

[Wallenburg]

If you want to control your speech, then that's your duty, not mine. Don't want to say "illegal alien"? Don't say it, but can't stop me from saying it. You want to control your own thoughts, fine do it. Can't control my thoughts.

And you can't keep people from criticizing your choice of words, either.

[Alvecia]

Everyone says that yet there is no evidence that this is the case.

Look at the example Coldwater cited of Yale university. A perfectly rational and reasonable email calling upon students to reflect and contemplate led to calls for resignations. The atlantic article does an excellent job of demonstrating the difference between how these two professors sought to respect students by engaging in respectful and thoughtful debate, whilst those students were calling for their jobs because the professors sought to debate.

It would be like you calling for me to be perma-banned because I have the temerity to question one of your posts, and then magnified to the point where not only would you want me banned from here, but you'd want me fired from the my job where I wrote this hypothetical response.

What would your solution be? To prevent the students from calling for his resignation?
Sure the students are out of line, but what can you really do other than try to educate them, that won't violate what you are trying to protect?

[Hirota]

What would your solution be? To prevent the students from calling for his resignation?
Sure the students are out of line, but what can you really do other than try to educate them, that won't violate what you are trying to protect?

As I understand it, the students were calling for his and his wife's resignation. Her resignation for writing the email, and his resignation for defending her.

Given the tone of the email, and his defence (which can be partially seen in the video in the Atlantic article I linked) I don't believe the students have any genuine interest in being educated or engaging in dialogue in good faith. They simply want to be agreed with and leave little room for opposing opinions.

What would my solution be? As a brit, I'm not particularly privvy to the process that a US university is ran, so it's pretty difficult to propose solutions. Stronger leadership inside the University would be a good start, but I believe that it's almost too late for these students to be told no. It's something their parents should have tried doing long before they left home.

And you can't keep people from criticizing your choice of words, either.

Fortunately NSG is generally tolerant of giving differing opinions at least the opportunity of being expressed. As long as you don't seek to be obnoxious for the sake of being obnoxious, as long as you can provide at least a reasonable justification and explanation for why you believe what you believe, then it's allowed to be granted a platform. I like it, we don't have an echo chamber, I've had to revise my opinions on a number of things where what I believed was wrong (and I've been persuaded by posts and people on here with what I found to be rational and reasonable arguments).