Thread: Is this PC mentality creating unstable people?

I am sure most of you are aware of this "political correctness" agenda happening right now. Even if you don't watch the news, you hear of people getting in trouble for making jokes, dressing differently, or simply not agreeing with the general PC thought on any given topic. It seems like the more these people push, the more unstable they become.

It seems like they walk around looking to get offended and they believe it is their right to not be offended ever. That is not a right and will never be a right because offense is subjective.

Do you think this PC movement is doing more harm than good? I know they want to keep peace and keep everyone happy but that is impossible to do and the more you push for it, the more angry it makes people on both sides of this thing.

What do you mean "agenda"? Sounds like you're projecting quite a bit of something, if I may be so bold.

Yeah, people can take things too far, and yeah you can't please everyone, and you shouldn't try to...but the "agenda" to which you refer isn't a big scary "liberal agenda, maaaaan" it's just us trying to be more accommodating to people.

"You hear people getting in trouble for making jokes, dressing differently..." What do you mean "getting in trouble"? You mean, people expressing their opinion about something? If you make a racist/sexist joke, you're free to do that in this country...but doesn't mean you're immune to criticism.

Is it "doing more harm than good"? No. No, it's not. Again, some people get too serious about it, but on the whole, it's we as a society being more conscientious about the things we say or do. A stand-up comedian is free to make ANY joke he/she wants to...but you don't get to go 'woe is me' afterwards if a person in the group you're making fun of takes to Twitter or wherever else and tears you a new one.

And as much as Fox, or Breibart, or a dad or uncle may wanna' tell you otherwise, YOU. DON'T. HAVE. TO. BE. POLITICALLY. CORRECT. You don't. Where they're confused is it's now not socially acceptable to say certain things about, say, black people, that WAS acceptable only a few decades ago. It's like burping in public. Someone tells someone 'hey, you're an adult, quit belching in front of me' and that person flips out 'you're stifling my freedom' are they saying it's "illegal" to burp? Are they getting "in trouble"? No, it's someone calling them out for being rude. It's like hey, burping guy/gal, you're an adult, be as rude as you want...but it might have repercussions.

Political correctness has of course been a thing for a number of decades now. It's just something people often try to avoid publicly acknowledging because they don't want to be burnt at the stake. By definition, political correctness is an attempt to enforce change (whether this change is positive or negative is subjective), and many people (particularly conservatives) don't like change, so of course this will create some instability.

More harm than good? I think so. I only need to glance across the pond to see how bad things are in the States. Though, Britain has also had a PC problem for a long time. My biggest problem with all of this is that many activists go about things in such a childish way. If they're not swarming streets, ruining people's days and jumping up and down like a big baby (or something equally weird) they're taking the fight to the internet and spouting vitriol on Twitter! Anybody is allowed an opinion, but just like how I loathe cult vegans I just can't stand those who believe others aren't allowed theirs.

Not too long ago the radical left had a bit of a tantrum about Donald Trump visiting the UK. As is often the case nowadays the government caved... to an extent. He isn't banned completely (because that would be ridiculous) but to appease the lefties they banned him from a borough of London. A far-right activist called Lauren Southern (as well as a few others I believe) has been completely banned from the UK. It's kind of hypocritical that those who demanded she be banned from the UK believe so strongly in free speech. (Except when it should be suppressed.) Though I am right-leaning I'm not a huge follower of what Southern does simply because activism in general doesn't interest me much.

I just think that banning her was rather stupid and as I said hypocritical. Imagine if we started banning leftists who expressed their views vehemently and ended up offending some groups of people. Of course, that wouldn't happen. Why do I always see these activists trying to promote equality in countries where things are generally fair? Compare it to parts of Asia. Same-sex behaviours? Death sentence. Women caught without a hijab? Jail with many people demanding execution. Remember to keep your eyes peeled for an impending acid attack. There's so much injustice in these countries, so why does the ratio of people trying to support change in those countries (mostly the Middle East) versus our own seem to be 1:1000? Clicking "Like" on a Facebook post doesn't count. I'm obviously not expecting feminists to hop on a plane to Iraq, but many of them just seem more concerned with change here in the west (where many women would give their right arm to live) than contribute to charities for women who face serious oppression. (Or LGBT people, and so forth.)

Anyhow, I digress. In short, yes, I think political correctness has been blown out of proportion, especially when we look at more serious matters. Free speech has become a running joke. Also, Lobo, I don't think saying something that might hurt a person can be compared with expelling nasty gases in another person's close vicinity.

I agree with you Mantis.

Originally Posted by Mantis

Also, Lobo, I don't think saying something that might hurt a person can be compared with expelling nasty gases in another person's close vicinity.

Lol you know what? You're right: they can't be compared. A Jewish person who had grandparents in the holocaust hearing a joke about Jews being put in ovens is way, way, way worse, harmful, and more offensive than someone belching in their vicinity. (And yet, for the latter, were someone complaining about "their rights" after rudely belching in other people's faces and being frowned upon, we'd rightfully say "fuck off, what'd you expect?" but when it's a comedian or a CEO we go 'well gee, I just don't know, what about free speech?')

But I'm intrigued. "It's kind of hypocritical that those who demanded she be banned from the UK believe so strongly in free speech. (Except when it should be suppressed.)" So, when should it be suppressed? In this country anyways we don't allow someone to yell "FIRE!" in a crowded building when there isn't one, because that's endangering the public. Is it a "limit" on "free speech"? Yeah, it is, if you want to categorize it as such. That's the only way a rationale society can function.

I've never understood the "so much for the tolerant left" jab, because it's just so asinine: people on the far right want us to "tolerate" their belief that a certain group is RACIALLY, biologically/genetically superior to others? And that people who walk around chanting "blood and soil" while waving the same banner as the folks who, not that long ago, tried to eradicate a whole "race" or people, millions of human lives, we have to play the game of "Well, no, let's be fair, let's hear them out." Oh, and on top of all that, they act tough when they're in power, trying to kill off gays, gypsies, Jews, ANYONE who doesn't fit their mold, but when the rest of the world outnumbers them and says 'no' these ball-less fuckwads have the GALL to say 'hey man, I'm being oppressed, what happened to free speech?'

No. We've been down that road. That kind of bs feeds on paranoia, on economic duress (which the US and UK working classes have been going through big time), on scapegoating others, and as history shows, the results are deadly. The day the "PC agenda" leads to people being rounded up in camps and gassed, THEN we can have play "apples to apples." "Imagine if we banned Leftists--" If these hypothetical "Leftists" are advocating one group's superiority and saying we should "cleanse" a certain ethnicity, then I say yes, ban them from speaking at universities! Where people from EVERY nationality and creed should feel reasonably safe. Because one, fuck them, two, their appearance will probably LITERALLY incite riots. As it stands, though, I've yet to hear at a uni here--in my 7+ years in them--someone advocating for Stalinism--which is NOT the same as just communism or socialism, btw--because "Yeah, that guy had the right idea, kill MILLIONS of your own people and starve the rest." The "Leftist agenda" yeah, again, there are people/groups who take things too far, it's called society, ebb and flow...but thus far, from people I've met, friends and colleagues I've known for years, the "agenda" is "hey, can we just, you know, exist? And NOT be treated like we're abominations according to your God? Or mentally inferior? Oh, and NOT give public platforms to the maybe-next Hitler?" GASP, how terrifying AND discriminatory against those poor far-right extremists.

"Compare it to parts of Asia. Same-sex behaviours? Death sentence. Women caught without a hijab? Jail with many people demanding execution. Remember to keep your eyes peeled for an impending acid attack. There's so much injustice in these countries, so why does the ratio of people trying to support change in those countries (mostly the Middle East) versus our own seem to be 1:1000? Clicking "Like" on a Facebook post doesn't count. I'm obviously not expecting feminists to hop on a plane to Iraq, but many of them just seem more concerned with change here in the west (where many women would give their right arm to live) than contribute to charities for women who face serious oppression. (Or LGBT people, and so forth.)"

So, in short, because it's "worse" in other countries, we in our OWN countries shouldn't be politically active because...why, again? Like you said, "I don't expect feminists to hop on a plane" yeah, what can citizens HERE (US, UK) do about OTHER COUNTRIES? Unless you're a world leader...seriously. Here, in the US, you can vote, you can support/oppose candidates/platforms (and the only way we can KEEP it that way is to be politically active, so we DON'T end up like a Middle-Eastern theocracy where 'gay? Death!' or 'not this religion? Camp!'). There ARE people--I talked to several while in law school, individual lawyers going into international law--who GO to these countries, TRY to educate, to work with these cultures...but at the end of the day, there's so little that can be done when you're up against laws of another sovereign nation.

The whole "well, it's worse in other places" angle as fuel for "well, feminists here should just shut up" amounts to bupkis imo. Heck, I could flip that around: people complaining about annoying feminists, "well hey, there are countries with WAY worse problems like famine, dictatorships...why don't you complain about THAT instead?" (See how deflective that is?)

In short, I got preachy, I know, but I'd rather deal with boorish, quote/unquote annoying feminists whining about "they" than goddamn Nazis, whom my grandfather along with so many others sacrificed parts of his body to stomp that shit into the dirt where it belongs. I hear in the news 'Oh, another neo-Nazi got banned at a uni?' Good. Fuck 'em. They can go start a blog or a podcast with Alex Jones. (Not saying specifically this Lauren Southern is a neo-Nazi, I mean in general, cuz that's LITERALLY happened over here, is happening now...so disclaimer, I don't know the extent of her stances/platforms wherever she's from.)

EDIT: Not a diatribe against someone moderately on the right...it's just...it's CRAZY in the US right now, literal Nazism is making a comeback, they dupe stupid people with these sorts of rhetorical questions (I'm all for debate about economics, freedom of religion, etc. it's just these fuckers abuse these discursive tactics which taint the waters for everyone else), and it's just fuckin' nuts, "PC" and "Leftist" NOW, in the US, is literally "Hey, uhh, I'm for marriage equality, and people not being discriminated against based on religion, sexual identification/orientation, or race" which, not that long ago, was moderate.

If you ask me, it's the other way around.

The PC mentality is upheld and perpetuated by unstable people. They are the kind who have sequestered their thoughts into one frame of reference, and will perform any measure of mental gymnastics to convince themselves of consistency when there is none, and likewise for any hope of equitable introspection.

Truth is treason in the empire of lies.


And another thing: I think this is intentional. Not by the useful idiots, but by the higher echelons of global power. They want to secure their dominion and expand it as far as they can. What better way to accomplish this than to plunge the world into darkness, insanity, and despair?





Yuri Bezmenov explains information warfare from the Soviet perspective, but this is a strategy which has much broader scope than the Cold War, and I believe it is being conducted by multinational entities. The ultimate goal, in its simplest form, is to weaken Good Men so that Evil prospers.

Originally Posted by LtSurge

If you ask me, it's the other way around.

The PC mentality is upheld and perpetuated by unstable people. They are the kind who have sequestered their thoughts into one frame of reference, and will perform any measure of mental gymnastics to convince themselves of consistency when there is none, and likewise for any hope of equitable introspection.

Truth is treason in the empire of lies.


And another thing: I think this is intentional. Not by the useful idiots, but by the higher echelons of global power. They want to secure their dominion and expand it as far as they can. What better way to accomplish this than to plunge the world into darkness, insanity, and despair?





Yuri Bezmenov explains information warfare from the Soviet perspective, but this is a strategy which has much broader scope than the Cold War, and I believe it is being conducted by multinational entities. The ultimate goal, in its simplest form, is to weaken Good Men so that Evil prospers.

I don't like to go to far down the tin hat road but there are a lot of things that don't seem to add up. I have said it for years that it seems the way things work politically is in a way to keep people divided. If you have a country filled with people fighting each other, they are less likely to notice a lot of greed and evil being done by the ones running the place. They are also less likely to team up to get real change for the country. So yeah, I get what you are saying.

Originally Posted by KorinKitty

I don't like to go to far down the tin hat road but there are a lot of things that don't seem to add up. I have said it for years that it seems the way things work politically is in a way to keep people divided. If you have a country filled with people fighting each other, they are less likely to notice a lot of greed and evil being done by the ones running the place. They are also less likely to team up to get real change for the country. So yeah, I get what you are saying.

Aye, it is classic Divide and Conquer.

Skepticism is rational. I have seen enough evidence, though, to make at least 95% commitment that what I am saying is factual. In the grand theater, it just makes too much sense.

If it isn't whole truth, it's pretty darn close.

I'd have to agree that PC culture is stifling debate. Political Correctness is something I detest, frankly, because it stifles debate, creativity, and personal freedom of speech, which are three things that I care deeply about. It doesn't matter if person A deems something too taboo or off-limits for person B to discuss. To discuss it is still person B's right, and no-one can take that right away from person B, no matter how egregious or repulsive his speech is.

I think someone got burned. Gonna need a doctor