Gary Oldman calls out America, Hollywood for political correctness gone crazy

[irishScott]

Your example wasn't about bad jokes, it was about rape jokes, and there's nothing immature about objecting to them being told in your presence.

The difference being? (in your case) I'm honestly curious as to how you differentiate the two.

As I stated, the maturity of the objection depends on the reason for it. Someone getting offended when they have no rational reason to be offended is that person's problem, unless they intend to force the issue and make it my problem (in which case from my perspective they are the problem). That extends to every issue I can imagine.

 

[irishScott]

Oh and George Carlin has a great bit on rape jokes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwMukKqx-Os

 

[Veliko]

I'm not really sure what else there is to say to be honest.

Anyone struggling with the notion that there will be people who aren't comfortable with rape jokes being told in their vicinity really isn't qualified to talk about maturity.

 

[irishScott]

I'm not really sure what else there is to say to be honest.

Anyone struggling with the notion that there will be people who aren't comfortable with rape jokes being told in their vicinity really isn't qualified to talk about maturity.

I'm not struggling with anything. I'm just saying unless they have a rational reason to be uncomfortable, I have no responsibility in the matter.

 

[Veliko]

You quite clearly are struggling with it.

If someone objects to rape jokes being told in their presence how could it ever be irrational?

Give me an example of an irrational reason.

 

[norseamd]

You quite clearly are struggling with it.

If someone objects to rape jokes being told in their presence how could it ever be irrational?

Give me an example of an irrational reason.

Who is the one being politically correct here?

 

[Dannar26]

I want the right to scream and carry on like a child at the slightest provocation.

Fixed.

 

[irishScott]

You quite clearly are struggling with it.

If someone objects to rape jokes being told in their presence how could it ever be irrational?

Give me an example of an irrational reason.

What precisely am I struggling with? I fully acknowledge that I may encounter people who don't want to hear rape jokes. I'm just saying whether I care about their feelings on the issue is conditional.

As for your question OK... assuming we're talking a casual public setting:

1. That joke wasn't funny.
2. I don't like rape.
3. Rape isn't funny.
4. My great-grandmother whom I never knew was raped.
5. Rape starts with "R" and "R" reminds me of pirates, I don't like pirates.

I can spin off into infinity with this.

 

[Veliko]

And in a casual public setting how would you go about discerning whether the person's objection was rational or not?

Your attempts to find fault with someone who objects to rape jokes shows that you're struggling with why the issue of rape is offensive.

 

[mikeymikec]

Oldman's rant is full on retarded. Say stupid shit, catch blowback from the people you piss off. Nothing wrong with that. Gibson brought shit down on himself because he was being an ass.

I agree with G.O. insofar as that many people are hypocrites. I also agree that being "politically correct" so to cover up the hypocrisy is also wrong and probably hypocrisy in itself, but that's not necessarily what political correctness is about.

Does Mel Gibson honestly believe the stuff he came out with (I remember it was anti-Semitic, I don't remember the actual content)? On one hand I know from personal experience that people do really stupid things when drunk. I was told (by friends I trust) that during a night of drinking that I can't remember half of, I amused myself for a while by using my glass to push empty glasses off tables. I wouldn't ever do this when sober, and not because I believe that I should keep my "deep-seated desire to destroy glasses" hidden. I think it is therefore logical to assume that either Mel Gibson either believed the stuff he said once, or perhaps someone close to him (perhaps at some point in his life) said that sort of thing, and it's something in the back of his mind ready for him to blurt out when the mind's normal "is this a dumb fucking thing to say?" filter has been affected by enough alcohol, or, on the other hand I wonder whether people in situations like his say things that they believe because the PC filter in their brain has been affected by enough alcohol.

So overall with regard to Mel Gibson I would probably give him the benefit of the doubt until further evidence of his views is provided. I don't think it ended his career though, I think it just put the spotlight on someone whose career had been winding down for a long time and was attempting to still look relevant/interesting.

With regard to Gary Oldman, I don't think I'm a hypocrite and I would want someone to point out if they caught me being a hypocrite (or thought I might be acting in a hypocritical manner). I think it's a poor excuse and a relaxation of moral standards for humanity in general to say "this person said something horrendous but I'm sure we've all done something stupid once so it must be OK then".

 

[shortylickens]

That's not a joke. And suing is how things get changed.

Then why is there still suing?

 

[Fritzo]

I've actually made the same argument as him several times. The media is basically telling us what we should be offended about, and if they don't get a big enough reaction, they keep harping on it until they do.

 

[irishScott]

And in a casual public setting how would you go about discerning whether the person's objection was rational or not?

Your attempts to find fault with someone who objects to rape jokes shows that you're struggling with why the issue of rape is offensive.

I think you're taking my posts the wrong way. I've spent the last few posts explaining my thought process on the matter to you, I'm not developing this system in real-time or anything; and you've yet to point out any flaws I didn't consider years ago. There is no "struggle", merely regurgitation. You clearly want to interpret my actions as "struggling", probably an unintended bias of your distaste for my views on rape joke etiquette.

As I previously stated, I'm not going to waste time and effort attempting to preemptively accommodate the sensibilities of everyone in any given room (still talking casual public setting). If someone has a problem with something I'm saying and would like me to stop, they can approach me and give me a quick reason, I will then weigh said reason against the current situation and my own beliefs and decide whether I should stop or not. I have just as much a right to a public area as they do.

I find fault with anyone who takes irrational offense at something, be it rape jokes, black people, or trees. Being needlessly offended is a rather glaring "fault" to me, as it simply serves to make one stressed and pissed off towards no productive end.

 

[Veliko]

So if someone asked you to stop telling rape or racist jokes, instead of just politely agreeing to their request you would instead demand a reason why.

As I said, you're struggling with the concept of this and the whole "anyone who takes irrational offense" schtick is just a fictional bogeyman that you've created that serves as a justification for acting like a dick.

 

[irishScott]

So if someone asked you to stop telling rape or racist jokes, instead of just politely agreeing to their request you would instead demand a reason why.

As I said, you're struggling with the concept of this and the whole "anyone who takes irrational offense" schtick is just a fictional bogeyman that you've created that serves as a justification for acting like a dick.

Depends entirely on the situation. In most cases I would probably stop to prevent a positive situation from turning negative for anyone involved, I don't look for fights or enemies. Likewise I'd also stop if I sensed sincere emotional trauma in the request, as I'd assume the request was rational. But if it seemed like shallow, petulant anger or someone on a power trip, then yeah I might very well demand a reason or else tell them to fuck off; much as I would a Greenpeace member who asked me to stop eating my non-organic french fries.

Going back to the thread topic, none of those motivations qualify as "political correctness", which would demand that I entirely avoid certain subjects in the off chance that I'd offend somebody. I prefer to take the opposite approach, I'll say whatever the hell I want until I encounter a decent reason not to. It's much more relaxing.

You want to keep insisting that I'm "struggling" with whatever, I can't stop you. You want to call me a dick based on a philosophical discussion on an internet forum, can't stop you there either. Certainly doesn't feel like I'm struggling and my girlfriend, friends and acquaintances would disagree with my being a "dick", but whatever you say.

 

[darkewaffle]

I don't think he's off-base. But he could have said it in a more politically correct manner and I would have been much more comfortable with it

 

[norseamd]

Depends entirely on the situation. In most cases I would probably stop to prevent a positive situation from turning negative for anyone involved, I don't look for fights or enemies. Likewise I'd also stop if I sensed sincere emotional trauma in the request, as I'd assume the request was rational. But if it seemed like shallow, petulant anger or someone on a power trip, then yeah I might very well demand a reason or else tell them to fuck off. Much as I would a Greenpeace member who asked me to stop eating my hamburger.

Going back to the thread topic, none of those motivations qualify as "political correctness", which would demand that I entirely avoid certain subjects in the off chance that I'd offend somebody. I prefer to take the opposite approach, I'll say whatever the hell I want until I encounter a decent reason not to. It's much more relaxing.

You want to keep insisting that I'm "struggling" with whatever, I can't stop you. You want to call me a dick based on a philosophical discussion on an internet forum, can't stop you there either. Certainly doesn't feel like I'm struggling and my girlfriend, friends and acquaintances would disagree with my being a "dick", but whatever you say.

Concerning some unrelated issue do you have any good online military resources or websites?

And if you do have any do you think you could share them in the atot online resources thread around here somewhere?

Thankyou

 

[Veliko]

Depends entirely on the situation. In most cases I would probably stop to prevent a positive situation from turning negative for anyone involved, I don't look for fights or enemies. Likewise I'd also stop if I sensed sincere emotional trauma in the request, as I'd assume the request was rational. But if it seemed like shallow, petulant anger or someone on a power trip, then yeah I might very well demand a reason or else tell them to fuck off; much as I would a Greenpeace member who asked me to stop eating my non-organic french fries.

Going back to the thread topic, none of those motivations qualify as "political correctness", which would demand that I entirely avoid certain subjects in the off chance that I'd offend somebody. I prefer to take the opposite approach, I'll say whatever the hell I want until I encounter a decent reason not to. It's much more relaxing.

In other words you act like a dick and anyone who objects is being politically correct.

 

[irishScott]

Concerning some unrelated issue do you have any good online military resources or websites?

And if you do have any do you think you could share them in the atot online resources thread around here somewhere?

Thankyou

Uh, sorry but I think you have me confused with someone else. I've never been in the military and the best sites I know of for such information is wikipedia and some military dedicated forums.

 

[TheSlamma]

This isn't anything new, as others have talked about this was George Carlins deal and I agree with it. Shell Shocked is now PTSD, it's not handicapped it's handicapable, etc.

I don't know what to even say anymore. I think the way it works is once 100 Million Americans have all agreed on a term they toss it out and say it's not PC and make a new word or term up and that goes into that same cycle.

Retarded is now a bad word, 20 years ago there was nothing wrong with that word, so to me context is the only important thing. When is "impaired" going to become non-PC compliant, mark my words it's on it's way.


Eventually I think we'll all have to pretend no one is different, even if it's a difference that we should be proud of or is unique.

 

[irishScott]

In other words you act like a dick and anyone who objects is being politically correct.

I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion after I've given pretty extensive lists of objections I'd accept...

People objecting because they feel "people shouldn't talk about X" are being politically correct. There's a whole host of other possible motivations.

 

[Veliko]

The fact you even have a list of acceptable objections proves my point.

 

[irishScott]

The fact you even have a list of acceptable objections proves my point.

What is your point again? You've made several.

Obviously the list is hardly exhaustive and every situation is unique, I just gave some prospective reasons/responses I'd accept.

To re-state my original argument, I don't consider myself responsible if someone is irrationally making him/herself uncomfortable. I may cease my "offensive" behavior anyway depending on the situation, but I wouldn't consider myself responsible for their discomfort. If they have a rational reason to be offended by my behavior, that's a different story.

 

[norseamd]

What is your point again? You've made several.

Obviously the list is hardly exhaustive and every situation is unique, I just gave some prospective reasons/responses I'd accept.

To re-state my original argument, I don't consider myself responsible if someone is irrationally making him/herself uncomfortable. I may cease my "offensive" behavior anyway depending on the situation, but I wouldn't consider myself responsible for their discomfort. If they have a rational reason to be offended by my behavior, that's a different story.

i thought you were neutral in politics except for support for strong national security and defense?

 

[norseamd]

This isn't anything new, as others have talked about this was George Carlins deal and I agree with it. Shell Shocked is now PTSD, it's not handicapped it's handicapable, etc.

I don't know what to even say anymore. I think the way it works is once 100 Million Americans have all agreed on a term they toss it out and say it's not PC and make a new word or term up and that goes into that same cycle.

Retarded is now a bad word, 20 years ago there was nothing wrong with that word, so to me context is the only important thing. When is "impaired" going to become non-PC compliant, mark my words it's on it's way.


Eventually I think we'll all have to pretend no one is different, even if it's a difference that we should be proud of or is unique.

There is nothing wrong with referring to shell shock as PTSD. In fact it is the correct term because there is more than just war that can cause the condition.