Has Political Correctness Gone too Far?

[Ostroeuropa]

Secular Talk is pretty good, Sargon of Akkad, Amazing Atheist, but for the most part, it's worth going to places like reddit and seeing the publics commentary on news.
Often, the upvoted comments will have citations and such pointing out why the article is a pack of lies.

A lot of articles about SJW or feminist bullshit disable comments to prevent exactly this debunking.

*SNIP*

What are you talking about?

[Morr]

Gender studies more has to do with met analysis of other humanities. If you try to slice it up for each of the humanities it applies to, it sort of defeats the purpose of more unified theory.



That's not name calling. I'm saying SJW's are progress, which you support.

SJWs are regressive, not progressive.
Further, gender studies as it is currently constituted is extremely sexist and bigoted.

SJW's are traditionalists? What.

[Valystria]

Gender studies shouldn't exist as its own field. Gender can be a subfield of other fields. Gender psychology, gender sociology, etc.

Gender studies more has to do with met analysis of other humanities. If you try to slice it up for each of the humanities it applies to, it sort of defeats the purpose of more unified theory.

When all you can do is engage in name calling... it means you have nothing to make your case on.

That's not name calling. I'm saying SJW's are progress, which you support.

As if I can't see you're calling us ogres.

Pro gres.

You see, you accidentally added a space between 'o' and 'g'. And on top of that, you accidentally forgot an s.

Yeah, don't throw ad homs at posters. And once you're caught doing it, don't bother denying it. Apologize or don't. But don't deny it.

Gender studies more has to do with met analysis of other humanities. If you try to slice it up for each of the humanities it applies to, it sort of defeats the purpose of more unified theory.



That's not name calling. I'm saying SJW's are progress, which you support.

SJWs are regressive, not progressive.
Further, gender studies as it is currently constituted is extremely sexist and bigoted.

Its also got its own hugbox mindset completely cut off from the scientific rigor of longer-lived fields.

It's fine to have academic study into gender. But this is something sociology, psychology and anthropology can do.

[Valystria]

SJWs are regressive, not progressive.
Further, gender studies as it is currently constituted is extremely sexist and bigoted.

SJW's are traditionalists? What.

I don't see where Ostro said SJWs are traditionalists.

You seem to have inserted this traditionalist claim as a strawman. I can't really tell.

[Ostroeuropa]

SJWs are regressive, not progressive.
Further, gender studies as it is currently constituted is extremely sexist and bigoted.

SJW's are traditionalists? What.

You can make that argument. "Women are weak, feeble, emotionally incontinent, and need a mans help with everything because of their gender", as an example.

Neo-puritanism in the whole EMRAGERD SEX IMAGERY! Stuff, etc.

[Valystria]

SJW's are traditionalists? What.

Yeh pretty much. Women are weak, feeble, emotionally incontinent, and need a mans help with everything because of their gender, as an example.

Neo-puritanism in the whole EMRAGERD SEX IMAGERY! Stuff, etc.

It would more fitting to say it's traditionalism turned on its head.

SJWism isn't traditionalism per se, but it's a revival of traditionalist values with a new spin on it.

[Dragonia Re Xzua]

This.

It's sort of like how the gaming industry is in trouble. These massive institutions and such have built themselves up, and now technology has made them obsolete.

Independent Mass Journalism with nothing refusing to verify their accuracy.

FIFY.

Truthiness is the new cocaine. And no doubt something you'd rant about when The Other Side does it.

Right, because when two sides report the same story, the side that glorifies the story in a way that borders grotesque is praised and the side that actually covers the full story is fragged.

Seriously though, I'd recommend antidepressants to anyone who finds themselves unhealthily emotionally invested in posting. It's not okay making every post with shrilling emotional rhetoric as a standard posting style.

Ironic coming from you.

Before I started over on NS I had that same off-the-wall emotional kneejerk reaction to everything, making every post as emotionally loaded as Gauthier's. Then I was given antidepressants and I've been a lot more mellow since then, focusing on actual content instead of just OH MY GOD YOU [INSERT BUZZWORD], OMG OMG [INSERT EMOTIONALLY LOADED SCENE HERE].

Seriously though, I'd recommend antidepressants to anyone who finds themselves unhealthily emotionally invested in posting. It's not okay making every post with shrilling emotional rhetoric as a standard posting style.

It's not a character attack when you do it. *nod nod*

It's not a river of fallacies when you do it. *nod*

[Valystria]

Seriously though, I'd recommend antidepressants to anyone who finds themselves unhealthily emotionally invested in posting. It's not okay making every post with shrilling emotional rhetoric as a standard posting style.

Ironic coming from you.

Do tell and how why that is.

[Morr]

*SNIP*

What are you talking about?

I literally cannot tell if you are being serious or not right now. I honestly can't. You're presenting as sincere the outlook that is presented ironically to make fun of fedora redditors..

[Morr]

SJW's are traditionalists? What.

You can make that argument. "Women are weak, feeble, emotionally incontinent, and need a mans help with everything because of their gender", as an example.

Neo-puritanism in the whole EMRAGERD SEX IMAGERY! Stuff, etc.

SJW's argue that there are a million genders, that religion is oppressive, that we need to cut back on teaching "dead white men" in school, etc. There is absolutely nothing traditionalist about them.

[Valystria]

Before I started over on NS I had that same off-the-wall emotional kneejerk reaction to everything, making every post as emotionally loaded as Gauthier's. Then I was given antidepressants and I've been a lot more mellow since then, focusing on actual content instead of just OH MY GOD YOU [INSERT BUZZWORD], OMG OMG [INSERT EMOTIONALLY LOADED SCENE HERE].

Seriously though, I'd recommend antidepressants to anyone who finds themselves unhealthily emotionally invested in posting. It's not okay making every post with shrilling emotional rhetoric as a standard posting style.

It's not a character attack when you do it. *nod nod*

I'm sorry you're unaware of what a character attack is. Here is the literature to educate yourself on the matter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

It was an elaboration on an argument presented by Dragonia and I stand by it.

I'm offering you advice on how to engage in debates in a more meaningful way. It's not through shrill emotional rhetoric. It's through focusing on the actual substance of the premise you're responding to.

[Ostroeuropa]

What are you talking about?

I literally cannot tell if you are being serious or not right now. I honestly can't. You're presenting as sincere the outlook that is presented ironically to make fun of fedora redditors..

So do you have an actual argument?

You can make that argument. "Women are weak, feeble, emotionally incontinent, and need a mans help with everything because of their gender", as an example.

Neo-puritanism in the whole EMRAGERD SEX IMAGERY! Stuff, etc.

SJW's argue that there are a million genders, that religion is oppressive, that we need to cut back on teaching "dead white men" in school, etc. There is absolutely nothing traditionalist about them.

I just told you what's traditionalist about them.

Further, the installation of a religious attitude to guide the state and authoritarian and repressive attitudes to heretics and heathens, the strict control of sex lives and the sex narrative, puritanism, the dismissal of other cultures/demographics and their accomplishments, etc.

It's traditionalism.

[Jumalariik]

I am not against the idea of Political Correctness as a way of challenging people who are bigoted, however, when it seeps into institutions and limits peoples rights to say things, so that they could be fired or jailed or expelled, there is a problem.

When people say the holocaust didn't happen, they should be called out for being an asshole, but they should not fear being fired, expelled or jailed for simply stating a controversial opinion. That's the bottom line, so PC as a way of being is fine, as long as it allowes people to say their views. At school, such rights do not exist, and as we know, that is the same with many colleges.

[Morr]

So do you have an actual argument?

I don't know where to begin. I just advise you to start hanging out more on 4chan's /lit/ (literature) and /his/ (history and humanities) boards (they're both worksafe).

I just told you what's traditionalist about them.

Further, the installation of a religious attitude to guide the state and authoritarian and repressive attitudes to heretics and heathens, the strict control of sex lives and the sex narrative, puritanism, the dismissal of other cultures/demographics and their accomplishments, etc.

It's traditionalism.

So do you think the Virgin Mary is traditionally weak, feeble and emotionally incontinent?

[Dragonia Re Xzua]

Ironic coming from you.

Do tell and how why that is.

Well, having faulty sources being pointed out automatically equals Ad Hominem, crying "character attack" when using blogs as sources, derailing your own thread because someone had an opinion contrary to yours..... if I could actually list the number of examples of you using emotion in your posts, I'd get a warning from the mods for spamming.

[Ostroeuropa]

So do you have an actual argument?

I don't know where to begin. I just advise you to start hanging out more on 4chan's /lit/ (literature) and /his/ (history and humanities) boards (they're both worksafe).

I just told you what's traditionalist about them.

Further, the installation of a religious attitude to guide the state and authoritarian and repressive attitudes to heretics and heathens, the strict control of sex lives and the sex narrative, puritanism, the dismissal of other cultures/demographics and their accomplishments, etc.

It's traditionalism.

So do you think the Virgin Mary is traditionally weak, feeble and emotionally incontinent?

So you don't have an actual argument then.


No, their there is the puritanism and regard for sex as an unseemly thing, bound up the belief of womens inherently virtuous nature and such which pervades SJWism.

Do tell and how why that is.

Well, having faulty sources being pointed out automatically equals Ad Hominem, crying "character attack" when using blogs as sources, derailing your own thread because someone had an opinion contrary to yours..... if I could actually list the number of examples of you using emotion in your posts, I'd get a warning from the mods for spamming.

Any specific example though? One would do

[Dragonia Re Xzua]

SJWism.

That sounds like a perverse pseudo-religion. And appropriately so.

[Morr]

I don't know where to begin. I just advise you to start hanging out more on 4chan's /lit/ (literature) and /his/ (history and humanities) boards (they're both worksafe).



So do you think the Virgin Mary is traditionally weak, feeble and emotionally incontinent?

So you don't have an actual argument then.


No, their there is the puritanism and regard for sex as an unseemly thing, bound up the belief of womens inherently virtuous nature and such which pervades SJWism.

I could argue, but it's just that our worldviews are driven by polar opposite sentiments, so it would be pointless.

Puritanism is modernist.

[Ostroeuropa]

So you don't have an actual argument then.


No, their there is the puritanism and regard for sex as an unseemly thing, bound up the belief of womens inherently virtuous nature and such which pervades SJWism.

I could argue, but it's just that our worldviews are driven by polar opposite sentiments, so it would be pointless.

Puritanism is modernist.

I don't think you know what sentiments drive my ideology, tbh.

[Valystria]

I am not against the idea of Political Correctness as a way of challenging people who are bigoted, however, when it seeps into institutions and limits peoples rights to say things, so that they could be fired or jailed or expelled, there is a problem.

When people say the holocaust didn't happen, they should be called out for being an asshole, but they should not fear being fired, expelled or jailed for simply stating a controversial opinion. That's the bottom line, so PC as a way of being is fine, as long as it allowes people to say their views. At school, such rights do not exist, and as we know, that is the same with many colleges.

It shouldn't be used on Holocaust deniers. That's an utterly pointless use of PC.

What PC should be being used for is to suppress expressions of homophobia, transphobia, feminism, and religiousness.

Using PC on Holocaust deniers damages the credibility of PC. PC should be a force for social progress, not one of stomping out very specific historically inaccurate opinions while turning a blind eye to every other historically inaccurate opinion.

Do tell and how why that is.

Well, having faulty sources being pointed out automatically equals Ad Hominem, crying "character attack" when using blogs as sources, derailing your own thread because someone had an opinion contrary to yours..... if I could actually list the number of examples of you using emotion in your posts, I'd get a warning from the mods for spamming.

You're conflating "shrilling emotional rhetoric" with usage of emotions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

As for saying character attack towards someone attacking the character of a blog source, it's a valid criticism of the refutation when the content of the source is valid on its own merits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

It's an argument from authority to say "Your source is dismissed on the grounds of being a blog or Fox News or X or Y". Content is to be measured by its own validity, and not of the alleged character of the source.

The alleged derailment you speak of was indirectly relevant to the thread.

Although I appreciate the effort you've taken into explaining your position against me, none of the claims you've cited are valid.

[Morr]

I could argue, but it's just that our worldviews are driven by polar opposite sentiments, so it would be pointless.

Puritanism is modernist.

I don't think you know what sentiments drive my ideology, tbh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ressentiment

[Jumalariik]

I am not against the idea of Political Correctness as a way of challenging people who are bigoted, however, when it seeps into institutions and limits peoples rights to say things, so that they could be fired or jailed or expelled, there is a problem.

When people say the holocaust didn't happen, they should be called out for being an asshole, but they should not fear being fired, expelled or jailed for simply stating a controversial opinion. That's the bottom line, so PC as a way of being is fine, as long as it allowes people to say their views. At school, such rights do not exist, and as we know, that is the same with many colleges.

It shouldn't be used on Holocaust deniers. That's an utterly pointless use of PC.

What PC should be being used for is to suppress expressions of homophobia, transphobia, feminism, and religiousness.

Using PC on Holocaust deniers damages the credibility of PC. PC should be a force for social progress, not one of stomping out very specific historically inaccurate opinions while turning a blind eye to every other historically inaccurate opinion.

Well, having faulty sources being pointed out automatically equals Ad Hominem, crying "character attack" when using blogs as sources, derailing your own thread because someone had an opinion contrary to yours..... if I could actually list the number of examples of you using emotion in your posts, I'd get a warning from the mods for spamming.

You're conflating "shrilling emotional rhetoric" with usage of emotions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

As for saying character attack towards someone attacking the character of a blog source, it's a valid criticism of the refutation when the content of the source is valid on its own merits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

It's an argument from authority to say "Your source is dismissed on the grounds of being a blog or Fox News or X or Y". Content is to be measured by its own validity, and not of the alleged character of the source.

The alleged derailment you speak of was indirectly relevant to the thread.

Although I appreciate the effort you've taken into explaining your position against me, none of the claims you've cited are valid.

So, PC should be used to shut down my right to worship. Honestly, you're talking sense, that is what is going on at the moment it seems like.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

And free meal tickets for journalists and dying news media outlets who make a living perpetuating the outrage counter-outrage counter-counter-outrage cycle. Similar to how people do the same thing for 'Millennial'.

Two classes of people who are rapidly becoming useless to society develop a symbiotic relationship.
Gender studies graduates and journalists.

To be blunt, you don't really get to play the sanctimony card since you've bought the SJW/PC not-controversy harder than just about anyone else on this forum.

[Ostroeuropa]

I don't think you know what sentiments drive my ideology, tbh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ressentiment

That's what I figured you'd say. You're wrong, by the way.

Ambition, Hysterical species-ism, love of the struggle and bittersweet stories, satisfaction and contentment with things being copacetic, accomplishment, and good will toward others.

On the more negative side perhaps, predatory sadism, humiliation, malice, and herostratianism.

Depends on my mood on a specific day. I believe what I believe because of the former. But sometimes I enjoy it because of the latter. I'm at least aware of it and my flaws.

[Morr]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ressentiment

That's what I figured you'd say. You're wrong, by the way.

Ambition, Hysterical species-ism, love of the struggle and bittersweet stories, satisfaction and contentment with things being copacetic, accomplishment, and good will toward others.

On the more negative side perhaps, predatory sadism, humiliation, malice, and herostratianism.

Depends on my mood on a specific day. I believe what I believe because of the former. But sometimes I enjoy it because of the latter.

I don't think you have any goodwill toward SJW's, I think you hate them.

Come to Jesus, bruh.