Backlash against Politically Correct

[fantome profane]

There is so much bull**** that has been part of being "politically correct", so much dishonesty and so much insincerity. And people have recognised truth for quite some time now. But what has been bothering me more and more lately is how much bull**** there is in politically incorrect speech.

I think somehow people have come to the conclusion that since there is so much dishonesty in politically correct speech, that anything that is politically incorrect must, by comparison, be true. Many people feel on some almost instinctual level people feel that if something is stated in a polite diplomatic way that it must be dishonest, and if something is rude it must be true.

And the irony is that this gut reaction that many people feel is being exploited by some to deceive them. The feeling that someone is finally "telling it like it is" is so appealing after so much sanitised pablum. But are they really "telling it like it is", or have they just found a different way to deceive?

I just want to implore people to keep looking for the bull****, whether it is the pleasant safe diplomatic bull**** of the politically correct, or the ugly hateful bigoted bull**** of the politically incorrect.

 

[Quintessence]

Many people feel on some almost instinctual level people feel that if something is stated in a polite diplomatic way that it must be dishonest, and if something is rude it must be true.

Who are these "many people?"

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

There is so much bull**** that has been part of being "politically correct", so much dishonesty and so much insincerity. And people have recognised truth for quite some time now. But what has been bothering me more and more lately is how much bull**** there is in politically incorrect speech.

I think somehow people have come to the conclusion that since there is so much dishonesty in politically correct speech, that anything that is politically incorrect must, by comparison, be true. Many people feel on some almost instinctual level people feel that if something is stated in a polite diplomatic way that it must be dishonest, and if something is rude it must be true.

And the irony is that this gut reaction that many people feel is being exploited by some to deceive them. The feeling that someone is finally "telling it like it is" is so appealing after so much sanitised pablum. But are they really "telling it like it is", or have they just found a different way to deceive?

I just want to implore people to keep looking for the bull****, whether it is the pleasant safe diplomatic bull**** of the politically correct, or the ugly hateful bigoted bull**** of the politically incorrect.

I feel like you are defining bull**** as "anything I disagree with", in which case how it is expressed is arbitrary.

 

[fantome profane]

I feel like you are defining bull**** as "anything I disagree with", in which case how it is expressed is arbitrary.

I am defining it as anything untrue. There is as much untruth in on the side of the politically incorrect as there is on the side of the politically correct. And I want people to look for the untruth in both forms of packaging.

 

[YmirGF]

I am defining it as anything untrue. There is as much untruth in on the side of the politically incorrect as there is on the side of the politically incorrect. And I want people to look for the untruth in both forms of packaging.

You mean people don't do this normally? Fools will always be taken in by a given narrative. Discerning that something is simply a narrative (and little more) is helpful.

 

[Revoltingest]

There is so much bull**** that has been part of being "politically correct", so much dishonesty and so much insincerity. And people have recognised truth for quite some time now. But what has been bothering me more and more lately is how much bull**** there is in politically incorrect speech.

I think somehow people have come to the conclusion that since there is so much dishonesty in politically correct speech, that anything that is politically incorrect must, by comparison, be true. Many people feel on some almost instinctual level people feel that if something is stated in a polite diplomatic way that it must be dishonest, and if something is rude it must be true.

And the irony is that this gut reaction that many people feel is being exploited by some to deceive them. The feeling that someone is finally "telling it like it is" is so appealing after so much sanitised pablum. But are they really "telling it like it is", or have they just found a different way to deceive?

I just want to implore people to keep looking for the bull****, whether it is the pleasant safe diplomatic bull**** of the politically correct, or the ugly hateful bigoted bull**** of the politically incorrect.

Cadging for frubals, eh?
Well, you got it.
I've nothing to add.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

I am defining it as anything untrue. There is as much untruth in on the side of the politically incorrect as there is on the side of the politically correct. And I want people to look for the untruth in both forms of packaging.

Truth. Now there is a slippery word.

Unless you are talking mathematics or hard logic it is in very short supply.

 

[fantome profane]

Truth. Now there is a slippery word.

Unless you are talking mathematics or hard logic it is in very short supply.

Don't get me going on the relativists, that is a completely different rant.

(and my doctor has me down to one rant per day.)

 

[Quagmire]

There is so much bull**** that has been part of being "politically correct", so much dishonesty and so much insincerity. And people have recognised truth for quite some time now. But what has been bothering me more and more lately is how much bull**** there is in politically incorrect speech.

I think somehow people have come to the conclusion that since there is so much dishonesty in politically correct speech, that anything that is politically incorrect must, by comparison, be true. Many people feel on some almost instinctual level people feel that if something is stated in a polite diplomatic way that it must be dishonest, and if something is rude it must be true.

And the irony is that this gut reaction that many people feel is being exploited by some to deceive them. The feeling that someone is finally "telling it like it is" is so appealing after so much sanitised pablum. But are they really "telling it like it is", or have they just found a different way to deceive?

I just want to implore people to keep looking for the bull****, whether it is the pleasant safe diplomatic bull**** of the politically correct, or the ugly hateful bigoted bull**** of the politically incorrect.

I think it's just that so many people have had to bite their tongues for so long that they've lost their sense of taste.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The way people use the concept, "political correctness" just seems to be a another term for civility in speech. The backlash against it is a break down in civil behavior, then. People just want to be nasty to each other and play the martyr when they're called out on it or banned from sites like Facebook, Twitter or forums.

 

[suncowiam]

I personally think PC hurts communication. We just need to be frank and straight forward. Both sides shouldn't get so offended as it's still only words.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I personally think PC hurts communication. We just need to be frank and straight forward. Both sides shouldn't get so offended as it's still only words.

You're Vietnamese. So if someone starts calling you a "gook" and such, you wouldn't be offended or feel demeaned by it?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

You're Vietnamese. So if someone starts calling you a "gook" and such, you wouldn't be offended or feel demeaned by it?

I think intention plays a big part in this. How subjectively offensive I am depends on the crowd I'm around. So with people i dont know well i expect and hope tgey tell me where their boundaries are. And I have limits on self-censorship but it's a pretty high limit as it is easier for me to modify my speech than their comfort zones. None the less, I swear a little. And if swearing a little makes someone too uncomfortable then they'll probably end up modifying their location before I modify my habit.

I'd someone was offended because you, say, said God damn it, and told you so, would your first inclination be to apologize and modify the behavior or be defensive? Because for me it would depend on if I was actually trying to be blasphemous or just using common vernacular, and how respectfully they approached me about it.

 

[suncowiam]

You're Vietnamese. So if someone starts calling you a "gook" and such, you wouldn't be offended or feel demeaned by it?

It's actually guoc which actually stands for sh*t. Well, that's my definition of PC. One can still be respectful and still not PC. Unless I'm wrong concerning that definition?

That's like calling someone sh*t which is rude in and out of PC.

Being PC is like not referring to my home nation as a communist 3rd world nation in the 80s when it really was a communist 3rd world nation.

Or referring to females as physically weaker than men when they are physically weaker than men in general.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's actually guoc which actually stands for sh*t.

Around here, it is "gook," and it is a derogative term against those who are Vietnamese. I could go on with comparable words, but I don't feel it's necessary as all you have to do is use your imagination.

 

[suncowiam]

Around here, it is "gook," and it is a derogative term against those who are Vietnamese. I could go on with comparable words, but I don't feel it's necessary as all you have to do is use your imagination.

I think youre missing my point.

But I see from modern dictionaries that this word has grown into its own to encapsulate more Asians. Whatever. It is what it is.

 

[Subhankar Zac]

As a former liberal I agree.

They have issues with the swastika symbol because in their context it's Nazism, but they are fine with the sign of cross that are symbols of crusades, inquisions and colonialism?

They are so into giving holidays to Muslim students but not a word on hundreds of Hindu, Sikh, Taoist, pagan, buddhist, Vaishnava, etc festivals.

Hillary even after supporting the Iraq invasion is the nominee of the Democratic party where people say that they actually care about people.

America warns Uganda on anti gay laws but maintains close ties with the Saudi.

Black folks can call each other the N word but if someone says so, it's racist?

Coloring ones face in black or blue is racist?

Screw political correctness for hypocrites!

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

As a former liberal I agree.

They have issues with the swastika symbol because in their context it's Nazism, but they are fine with the sign of cross that are symbols of crusades, inquisions and colonialism?

They are so into giving holidays to Muslim students but not a word on hundreds of Hindu, Sikh, Taoist, pagan, buddhist, Vaishnava, etc festivals.

Hillary even after supporting the Iraq invasion is the nominee of the Democratic party where people say that they actually care about people.

America warns Uganda on anti gay laws but maintains close ties with the Saudi.

Black folks can call each other the N word but if someone says so, it's racist?

Coloring ones face in black or blue is racist?

Screw political correctness for hypocrites!

This is just ranting without substance. Try again. Or don't.

 

[Subhankar Zac]

This is just ranting without substance. Try again. Or don't.

For the sake of liberalism of the western version, simply berating evidences to the contrary as weak is really pathetic.
And unless you're living under a rock, try not to downplay the obvious.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

For the sake of liberalism of the western version, simply berating evidences to the contrary as weak is really pathetic.
And unless you're living under a rock, try not to downplay the obvious.

What evidence? Evidence that you don't know what you're talking about? I see plenty of that.