Are you Politically Correct?

[Peuri]

Yeah that's definitely offensive to me. What if I want to marry multiple wives? Stupid monogonormativeness!

Sorry, forgot the trigger warnings. I'll blame Austin for the hetero/cis/whateverthatisyouwrotetherenormative example. The book was published in the 50s.

 

[Commodore]

No, I'm not politically correct. Nor do I make an effort to be.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

No, I'm not politically correct. Nor do I make an effort to be.

Careful son, watch you don't cut yourself on that edge there lad

 

[Commodore]

Careful son, watch you don't cut yourself on that edge there lad

I wasn't aware that speaking one's mind without caring how others will react is considered "edgy". I was always taught that's just how a free society operates.

EDIT: It's also a little weird that you always seem to respond to my posts pretty quickly. If I were a suspicious man, I'd say you are following me from thread to thread for some weird reason...

 

[Lexicus]

No, I'm not politically correct. Nor do I make an effort to be.

I guess except that time you threatened to snitch on us to the government because you were triggered by people saying stuff about Antifa *shrugs*

Isn't that the core of the problem? Our individualistic cultures have been striving for deconstruction of these shared values to maximize personal liberty, leading to the destruction of a coherent narrative for people to hang on to. The point of life seems to be pleasure. What a sad view of life. God is dead, the nation is dead. Wokeness definately is a sort of nationalism or religion that tries to create a new cultural in-group. The adopted language is part of identifying the in-people. I'm at pains because I want that united humanity, but the position it has for people like me, pale males, is a rather bleak because of some guy who kinda looked like me did something somewhere sometime. And that's why I have to jump extra hoops to signal that I won't do bad things to you. I though that sort of generalizing thinking was haram. Now it's not anymore.

Dude, this is....really bad. I am not exaggerating when I say you are getting close to danger (ie, demented far-right) territory here. I mean seriously, what is the "bleak position" for "pale males" like you and me? We get to control 65% of the resources instead of like 95%? *sobs*

And again, really, "some guy who kinda looked like me did something somewhere sometime"? Do you really have so little self-awareness that you don't perceive the basic inconsistency in insisting that you're not responsible for the misdeeds of your ancestors while insisting that the social order inherited from our ancestors remains intact? To quote Jacobim Mugatu, "I FEEL LIKE I'M TAKING CRAZY PILLS HERE" (talk about non-PC language...)

 

[Gorbles]

Isn't that the core of the problem? Our individualistic cultures have been striving for deconstruction of these shared values to maximize personal liberty, leading to the destruction of a coherent narrative for people to hang on to. The point of life seems to be pleasure. What a sad view of life. God is dead, the nation is dead. Wokeness definately is a sort of nationalism or religion that tries to create a new cultural in-group. The adopted language is part of identifying the in-people. I'm at pains because I want that united humanity, but the position it has for people like me, pale males, is a rather bleak because of some guy who kinda looked like me did something somewhere sometime. And that's why I have to jump extra hoops to signal that I won't do bad things to you. I though that sort of generalizing thinking was haram. Now it's not anymore.

Yes, no other person in the modern world has been unfairly singled out for something someone else or some other group, who visually looked liked them, did. Why is it only a problem now, now us white dudes are being singled out? That might be something to think on, instead of ascribing "wokeness" to be some kind of religion.

 

[Commodore]

I guess except that time you threatened to snitch on us to the government because you were triggered by people saying stuff about Antifa *shrugs*

It's not political correctness to report terrorists and their sympathizers to the government. That's just being a good citizen. The Global War on Terrorism is still going on you know.

 

[Lexicus]

That might be something to think on, instead of ascribing "wokeness" to be some kind of religion.

OTOH he is certainly right that "wokeness" functions like a religion. Since I moved past my douchey New Atheist phase I don't consider that a denigration (or at least not entirely), but the similarities are undeniable. IF you'd like to talk about it I can provide this article as a starting point:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/why-third-wave-anti-racism-dead-end/578764/

The secularism of this new therapeutic approach to racial progress may seem fundamentally dissimilar to the previous two phases. In fact, however, third-wave antiracism is a profoundly religious movement in everything but terminology. The idea that whites are permanently stained by their white privilege, gaining moral absolution only by eternally attesting to it, is the third wave’s version of original sin. The idea of a someday when America will “come to terms with race” is as vaguely specified a guidepost as Judgment Day. Explorations as to whether an opinion is “problematic” are equivalent to explorations of that which may be blasphemous. The social mauling of the person with “problematic” thoughts parallels the excommunication of the heretic. What is called “virtue signaling,” then, channels the impulse that might lead a Christian to an aggressive display of her faith in Jesus. There is even a certain Church Lady air to much of the patrolling on race these days, an almost performative joy in dog-piling on the transgressor, which under a religious analysis is perfectly predictable.

It's not political correctness to report terrorists and their sympathizers to the government. That's just being a good citizen. The Global War on Terrorism is still going on you know.

Do I detect a subtle note of self-mockery in this post? That's good, saves me the trouble.

 

[Narz]

The point of life seems to be pleasure. What a sad view of life.

Why is that sad?

 

[Cloud_Strife]

I wasn't aware that speaking one's mind without caring how others will react is considered "edgy". I was always taught that's just how a free society operates.

EDIT: It's also a little weird that you always seem to respond to my posts pretty quickly. If I were a suspicious man, I'd say you are following me from thread to thread for some weird reason...

...Are you okay?

Are you well?

Moderator Action: Stop trolling. This is your only warning. --LM

 

[Narz]

Since I moved past my douchey New Atheist phase

Are you an Old Atheist now or you've given God another try?

 

[Lexicus]

Are you an Old Atheist now or you've given God another try?

Nah, now I'm an igtheist, I respond to debates over the existence of god by returning an error message that the parameters are insufficiently defined

 

[Narz]

Hmm, interesting, TIL

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ignosticism[URL]https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ignosticism[/URL]

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Yes, we've had this argument before. Both Mary and I explained why we prefer not to be addressed as though we're male. The courteous thing to do would be to respect that instead of rolling your eyes in prose form and claiming it's something that nobody should have the right to object to. It does NOT denote both genders. Last time I checked, I'm female. I don't want to be addressed as though I'm not.

Oh you have the right to object, but I have the right not to care what you think. However, you will also notice that I try very hard not to use the term "you guys" on the forum, specifically because of my position on the forum and I know that it triggers you and Mary.

I hadn't heard that men can no longer say "girls' night out." But proclaiming that it's "stupid" for a woman to not want to be referred to as a girl is... just plain rude.

For someone who is a self professed writer, your reading comprehension is quite low. Did you actually read what I wrote? No. Or at least you didn't understand it properly. I was complaining about THE DOUBLE STANDARD of why it's perfectly OK for women to say one thing, but men cannot. THAT is stupid. I get that some women don't like being referred to as a girl. Personally, I don't care if it is applied to me. It's just a word. But that's just me. I don't really care how anyone else feels about it. I don't have time to worry about someone else's feelings unless I'm dealing with friends, or I'm at work.

That's something you have more scope to try to get changed than most of the rest of us do. At least on this forum. Open a thread and go for it.

Sorry. Not interested.

With some, you have very definitely succeeded. That is not meant as praise.

With some I didn't start it.

Apparently criticism is only supposed to work in one direction.

Nice little barb. Was that directed at me?

 

[Gorbles]

OTOH he is certainly right that "wokeness" functions like a religion. Since I moved past my douchey New Atheist phase I don't consider that a denigration (or at least not entirely), but the similarities are undeniable. IF you'd like to talk about it I can provide this article as a starting point:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/why-third-wave-anti-racism-dead-end/578764/

I'm a bit short on time now, but I disagree with the premise of the article. Any writer that uses "virtue signalling" unironically is normally to entrenched in the notion of political correctness as a real, "harmful" thing to untangle that themselves. If you're interested, I can take this to PM as it's a bit of a tangent.

 

[Akka]

And yet, you're approaching this with the same logic.

Let's check, what YOU say :

I don't miss any point, I just don't think you like the conclusions I'm drawing.

You have a preconceived notion of what you think I'm getting at, and you're hellbent on rather poor assumptions about a conservative catchphrase (this isn't me always being right, this is literally Google-able historical fact) that you believe is a real thing, and is more of a problem than the actual degradation of people that you're dismissing as "being offended by the way people speak".

You're jumping to these conclusions, to these character judgements, because you don't want to interrogate this any deeper.

you get to continue on believing political correctness is real. Because otherwise you might have to consider that it's not.

You just see me undermining the apparent truth of political correctness, and you don't like that. You can't see past that.

That's factually you directly telling me what I think. You're claiming to know my motives and my reasoning.
Your entire answer is basically an argument between yourself and a strawman. Should I applaud at the great feat of you being able to read the supposed intents of something you built yourself ?

What *I* answered to you was based on what you were saying, not what I said you were thinking. See the difference ?

The only moment I made assumption about what one would think was when I pointed the usual tactics of throwing "bigots" and other "ism/phobia" by the crowd of PC supporters. Yeah, I made assumptions. That's with years of experience seeing the same guys repeating the same discourse and throwing the same accusation at anyone and anything disagreeing with them, which make me somewhat convinced about the modus operanti and how it works. I might be wrong, but when it looks like a duck, quack like a duck and walk like a duck, I call it a duck.
Or, as you seem to like : I call a spade a spade.

And to stave off the inevitable, yes, I have thought a lot about the notion of political correctness even if it weren't a made-up phrase to demonise liberals and more left-wing folk. I've even said how claims of bigotry can be weaponised. But you don't see that nuance, you don't respond to me when I talk about this in those shades of gray.
You challenge me for not recognising you talking about facts and feelings, when that was the first thing I responded to you about.

Your entire answer (as I understood it) is focused on saying "yeah, sometimes calling someone a bigot is unwarranted, but sometimes it's not a derogatory term but an actual, factual descriptor, and its only dismissed because the guy receiving it is in denial about it".
I don't really see how it does answer that PC substituting politically-driven words while ignoring facts, or trying to redefine reality for everyone, is irksome.

 

[Peuri]

Dude, this is....really bad. I am not exaggerating when I say you are getting close to danger (ie, demented far-right) territory here. I mean seriously, what is the "bleak position" for "pale males" like you and me? We get to control 65% of the resources instead of like 95%? *sobs*

And again, really, "some guy who kinda looked like me did something somewhere sometime"? Do you really have so little self-awareness that you don't perceive the basic inconsistency in insisting that you're not responsible for the misdeeds of your ancestors while insisting that the social order inherited from our ancestors remains intact? To quote Jacobim Mugatu, "I FEEL LIKE I'M TAKING CRAZY PILLS HERE" (talk about non-PC language...)

The position I used to hold, that I thought was the moral position to hold was that there is no "we". The fact that you and I share some superficial characteristic in our melanine content is irrelevant. It doesn't make you and me an us. It doesn't help me at all that Zuckerberg has the net wealth of a small country's yearly GDP just because we have a superficial likeness, and I don't care at all what you as a similiar looking dude have, because race is not real. And because it is not real, we should stop thinking in terms of race. Now the racialized thinking that I thought we were trying to get rid of is back. And it's everywhere. I don't know about you, but I feel the judgement because of my colour and my sex online from the woke people, how ever they mean it. It's not so prevalent here where I live, but it's here and there. I'm exhausted and find it hard to really care about much of anything anymore.

To what extent exactly have I benefitted from colonialism? When this country gained independence in 1917, it was basically a undeveloped nation, despite our beige skin. The closest thing my ancestors came to colonialism was selling tar to the English. Ok, that's a bit too simplistic. We (here again using the unreal "we") "colonized" Lapland at the behest of the king of Sweden. But then again Sami people have been integrated into Finnish peasant society since the iron age, so who colonized what? The "Finns" that I live with are mostly descendants of Sami people that became agriculturalists around the 18th century, and subsuquently adopted Finnish. It's not all about colonialism. It's also institutional development and trust in society. It's not all the other white guy's fault.

Anyway, I'm not even saying that the developing world should't be helped, or that racism shouldn't be combatted, just that the way it's done today isn't helping. It's alienating people racialized as white.

 

[Peuri]

Yes, no other person in the modern world has been unfairly singled out for something someone else or some other group, who visually looked liked them, did. Why is it only a problem now, now us white dudes are being singled out? That might be something to think on, instead of ascribing "wokeness" to be some kind of religion.

This message assumes that I didn't previously care about combatting negative stereotypes about, say the Roma, who have a bad reputation in my country. How did you divine this knowledge from my brain?

Why is that sad?

You are a slave to your nature if you follow pleasure.

Nah, now I'm an igtheist, I respond to debates over the existence of god by returning an error message that the parameters are insufficiently defined

Ok, now there is a "we", although I've been using the term ignostic.

 

[red_elk]

We get to control 65% of the resources instead of like 95%? *sobs*

I think you are confusing us with a few dozens of US and European billionaires.
Otherwise, where can I get my share of 95% resources "we" control?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You are a slave to your nature if you follow pleasure.

You're a "slave to your nature" if you do just about anything that involves continuing to exist. Unless you know something about human brain function for certain that the rest of us don't .

Optimizing for pleasure actually isn't trivial. You have both own and others' pleasure to consider, and both short and long term considerations. Even if I could guarantee the greatest pleasure imaginable for the next 5 minutes, I wouldn't trade the rest of my life for it. Unless I knew a nuke was flying towards my building or something I guess. These measures can get a little noisy.