Political Correctness; Hurting or Helping?

[Siddhartha]

Lord Trump criticized political correctness to explain his disparaging comments toward women, as if name calling is the opposite of being PC. Name calling is the opposite of being an adult. But his comment got a lot of applause, and I've seen some anti-PC stuff here. But if his recent "Megan Kelly blood remark" was really about women's issues, then he found true political incorrectness.

But I think the most hated form of political correctness is the phrase, "happy holidays," as if it's an intended insult toward Christians. But what do you say to someone who say isn't wearing a cross on their neck and could be celebrating Hanukkah, Mawlid an-Nabī, Uposatha, or...? Isn't "happy holidays" just easier and more inclusive? Why do people think it's anti-Christian?

And what is the alternative to political correctness? Do I start calling my partner "four eyes?" Does the n-word come back?

PC reflects adult respect in my eyes. Political incorrectness began in the schoolyard and that's where it should stay IMO.

I have noticed that usually it is white men and sometimes white women who have to the most trouble with "PC". Usually they complain the loudest about PC when they feel social pressure to not say/write racist, bigoted, and xenophobic statements.

So, is it helpful or harmful that bigots, xenophobe, and racists are discouraged?

 

[Sulaco]

Yes they kept to a code. They could have bombed Honolulu or possibly one of our west coast cities, but they didn't.

The "trainwreck of a thread" got tedious. I guess I really hit a nerve because the insults came flying (it's the Internet, eh?). When people have intelligent, adult things to say I can respond, otherwise isn't it just so much noise? I'm surprised I'm not on 'ignore' more often if I can affect someone's mood so. Or do people like "trainwrecks?" Or is it that some people are as thin-skinned as Trump?

🙄

Ok, "bradly", I'm going to give it to you straight.

You're not a victim. You're not ostracized and 'insulted' because your views are "politcally correct" and people are "thin skinned"

You're ostracized, mocked, and belittled because you make demonstrably falsifiable statements, you show absolutely no understanding or grasp of even basic history, you show even less inclination to remedy this and rejoin any supposed criticisms with facts or evidence to the contrary. And to top it off, the mark and seal of a true fool, none of that has any impact on your posting habits or continual baseless, easily refutable assertions.

I don't blame you or dislike you for being ignorant, bradly. Plenty of people are.
I dislike you and hold you accountable for continuously clinging to and espousing easily demonstrably erroneous nonsense, and use that to form your opinions, of which you feel the need to post and share daily.

That's what idiots do, bradly. That's what people who cannot be bothered to learn facts or history, understand context and do the barest minimum of research do to justify conclusions at which they've already arrived through ignorance.

You have made witheringly stupid remarks in this and other threads; remarks that are so demonstrably incorrect as to be almost embarrassing to read and believe another human being believes. You were already previously eviscerated for your "code of honor...didn't attack civilians" line, which was flat out INSULTINGLY STUPID. I simply don't have time at the moment to even begin to address this, as it's on par with the moon landing hoaxers or people who question the reality of gravity, and let's be honest with each other here, bradly: You wouldn't bother to read or understand anyway. That might get in the way of your feelings and emotion-based beliefs.

In sum, yes, you're an idiot, bradly. Not for the reasons you'd like: for being a persecuted, politically correct rogue and maverick. But for clinging to and voicing baseless, erroneous drivel and doubling-down on that stupidity when called on it.

That's what fools and idiots do, bradly. And for that reason, and none other, I and most others and comfortable giving you that most deserved title.

 

[sm625]

There is an episode of Bojack Horseman where everyone is praising this KGB spy who admits he is a spy and wants to hurt America, and they dont even care. They are more concerned with the politically incorrect way the spy was outed. It is an obvious over-the-top parody of how stupid people can be. Well, it hit the mark spot on. I see that level of stupidity all the time. People are that stupid on pretty much every political issue.

 

[TechBoyJK]

These boards are often too PC. Triggers here. Triggers there. Triggers everywhere! Don't hurt my fee fees!

 

[mizzou]

He's referencing this train wreck of a thread, where village idiot bradly1101 insisted that Japan "only attacked our military" and "kept to a code of warfare."

yikes lol

 

[Moonbeam]

Political correctness is.........queue in tape, blah blah blah.

 

[bradly1101]

You truly are a special kind of stupid. Technological and logistical constraints--not "a code of warfare"--limited Japanese attacks on the United States mainland and Hawaii. Japan still routinely targeted civilians in the United States and its territories:

• Thousands of balloons carrying anti-personnel and incendiary bombs were launched into the jet stream to indiscriminately bombard the US mainland.
• Firebombs were dropped in Oregon in an attempt to spark uncontrolled forest fires.
• Operation Cherry Blossoms at Night planned to spread plague in San Diego. Similar biological attacks in China killed half a million people.
• Hundreds of thousands of civilians were brutally and intentionally murdered during the Manila Massacre (since you're hopelessly ignorant, I'll point out that the Philippines--like Hawaii--was a US territory during the war).

And those are minor offenses compared to the atrocities committed in China, where Japan's "code of warfare" included the Three Alls Policy: kill all, burn all, loot all. Do you not feel ashamed about defending the intentional murder of millions of civilians?



I can't speak for anyone else, but I enjoy your posts. Every time I think you've reached the pinnacle of idiocy, you exceed my expectations and say something even dumber. I'll be interested to see what mindnumbingly stupid statement tops your ardent defense of one of the most brutal, genocidal regimes in history.

Or you could actually act like an intelligent adult and say, "I was wrong. I learned something new today. In the future, I won't form strong opinions about topics I don't understand." But then you couldn't pretend to be superior to everyone else because of your totally deep and edgy opinions that contradict mainstream thought, so I'm not holding my breath.

I ignored you over there now you 'thread-bleed' to attack me over here, mature. I never know how to respond to comments like that. Whenever I talk about my desire to see more background checks for prospective gun owners I have garnered similar comments. Do you think that changed my opinion? As they say, "For every opinion..." Just think of me as that. Don't you know not to engage people like that?

You know me as a liberal and this is from a scholar at a liberal think tank. When we put up sanctions against countries we always seem to end up in some kind of war, hot or cold. I just believe there was no excuse to fry tens of thousands of innocent Japanese. If another country or group doesn't like what we're doing, do they have a right to kill our civilians? What do we call that? I believe we set a horrible precedent and now fear reigns for countries who have or may get such monstrous technology.

...An Untenable Position
Roosevelt and his subordinates knew they were putting Japan in an untenable position and that the Japanese government might well try to escape the stranglehold by going to war. Having broken the Japanese diplomatic code, the Americans knew, among many other things, what Foreign Minister Teijiro Toyoda had communicated to Ambassador Kichisaburo Nomura on July 31: “Commercial and economic relations between Japan and third countries, led by England and the United States, are gradually becoming so horribly strained that we cannot endure it much longer. Consequently, our Empire, to save its very life, must take measures to secure the raw materials of the South Seas.”[3]

Because American cryptographers had also broken the Japanese naval code, the leaders in Washington knew as well that Japan’s “measures” would include an attack on Pearl Harbor.[4] Yet they withheld this critical information from the commanders in Hawaii, who might have headed off the attack or prepared themselves to defend against it. That Roosevelt and his chieftains did not ring the tocsin makes perfect sense: after all, the impending attack constituted precisely what they had been seeking for a long time. As Stimson confided to his diary after a meeting of the war cabinet on November 25, “The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.”[5] After the attack, Stimson confessed that “my first feeling was of relief ... that a crisis had come in a way which would unite all our people.[6]

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1930


Yeah, "the U.S. is always right" has led and will only lead to more hot water. We most often make the bed we end up lying in.

 

[cabri]

You know me as a liberal and this is from a scholar at a liberal think tank. When we put up sanctions against countries we always seem to end up in some kind of war, hot or cold. I just believe there was no excuse to fry tens of thousands of innocent Japanese. If another country or group doesn't like what we're doing, do they have a right to kill our civilians? What do we call that? I believe we set a horrible precedent and now fear reigns for countries who have or may get such monstrous technology.

So it would have been more moral to allow 100K Allied troops to be killed and 400K or more Japanese troops plus untold # of civilians in an attack on the Home Islands.

Please explain why even more Japanese deaths are justified? civilians werre ready to find for there land; not just the troops

 

[Smoblikat]

Lord Trump criticized political correctness to explain his disparaging comments toward women, as if name calling is the opposite of being PC. Name calling is the opposite of being an adult. But his comment got a lot of applause, and I've seen some anti-PC stuff here. But if his recent "Megan Kelly blood remark" was really about women's issues, then he found true political incorrectness.

But I think the most hated form of political correctness is the phrase, "happy holidays," as if it's an intended insult toward Christians. But what do you say to someone who say isn't wearing a cross on their neck and could be celebrating Hanukkah, Mawlid an-Nabī, Uposatha, or...? Isn't "happy holidays" just easier and more inclusive? Why do people think it's anti-Christian?

And what is the alternative to political correctness? Do I start calling my partner "four eyes?" Does the n-word come back?

PC reflects adult respect in my eyes. Political incorrectness began in the schoolyard and that's where it should stay IMO.

Being PC is all about hating on men, whites, christians, doing absolutely NOTHING that could ever possibly offend somebody in any shape, form or manner, and bubble wrapping every child because the world is too scary.

Also, I dont think saying happy holidays is wrong by itself, I think the reason some people and companies have for saying it is stupid though. Hence my point on not offending anybody ever......

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

In other words, politeness, consideration, and respect are all good things real Americans show other deserving real Americans. Political correctness is the expectation liberals have that those things be shown to those "other" people.

 

[PokerGuy]

In other words, politeness, consideration, and respect are all good things real Americans show other deserving real Americans. Political correctness is the expectation liberals have that those things be shown to those "other" people.

No, political correctness is the expectation that everyone else agree 100% with the liberal view on what is defined as polite, considerate and respectful, and that any other viewpoint should be stomped into the ground.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Where's the option for "It makes no difference whatsoever"?

 

[Moonbeam]

No, political correctness is the expectation that everyone else agree 100% with the liberal view on what is defined as polite, considerate and respectful, and that any other viewpoint should be stomped into the ground.

A sure sign you hate yourself is the paranoid projection of it on to others imagining they are out to stomp you in the ground. For me to stomp you into the ground, I would first have to excavate you from six feet under where you buried your brain. The stomping is long over. It took place in your childhood.

 

[Ichinisan]

But I think the most hated form of political correctness is the phrase, "happy holidays," as if it's an intended insult toward Christians. But what do you say to someone who say isn't wearing a cross on their neck and could be celebrating Hanukkah, Mawlid an-Nabī, Uposatha, or...? Isn't "happy holidays" just easier and more inclusive? Why do people think it's anti-Christian?

The correct answer is to simply not be offended when someone says "Merry Christmas!" and you're not a Christian. Understand that some people are Christian and this holiday gained popularity as a Christian holiday.

"Happy Chinese New Year!"
"WHAT?! I'm not Chinese! I'm offended!"

PC reflects adult respect in my eyes. Political incorrectness began in the schoolyard and that's where it should stay IMO.

Not sure if it's true, but I just saw a headline from a TV station saying Target was getting rid of gender-labeled boys/girls/men/women sections due to customer complaints.

 

[Venix]

I ignored you over there now you 'thread-bleed' to attack me over here, mature. I never know how to respond to comments like that. Whenever I talk about my desire to see more background checks for prospective gun owners I have garnered similar comments. Do you think that changed my opinion? As they say, "For every opinion..." Just think of me as that. Don't you know not to engage people like that?

You know me as a liberal and this is from a scholar at a liberal think tank. When we put up sanctions against countries we always seem to end up in some kind of war, hot or cold. I just believe there was no excuse to fry tens of thousands of innocent Japanese. If another country or group doesn't like what we're doing, do they have a right to kill our civilians? What do we call that? I believe we set a horrible precedent and now fear reigns for countries who have or may get such monstrous technology.




http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1930


Yeah, "the U.S. is always right" has led and will only lead to more hot water. We most often make the bed we end up lying in.

The topic of discussion is your disgustingly ignorant claim that Japan "only attacked our military" and "kept to a code of warfare." Not one sentence of your rambling nonsense even approaches that subject.

Either address the mountains of evidence proving that Japan intentionally targeted civilians and routinely committed war crimes, or rescind your ridiculous statement.

 

[hal2kilo]

A sure sign you hate yourself is the paranoid projection of it on to others imagining they are out to stomp you in the ground. For me to stomp you into the ground, I would first have to excavate you from six feet under where you buried your brain. The stomping is long over. It took place in your childhood.

Must be a sad world to live in always being a victim of the all powerful liberals.

 

[Ackmed]

PC is stupid. Everyone is offended, no matter if its the truth. We're raising softies. You get an award for 7th place on field day or just for finishing no matter what spot. That's bullshit. Not everyone is a winner.

 

[cubby1223]

I ignored you over there now you 'thread-bleed' to attack me over here, mature. I never know how to respond to comments like that. Whenever I talk about my desire to see more background checks for prospective gun owners I have garnered similar comments. Do you think that changed my opinion? As they say, "For every opinion..." Just think of me as that. Don't you know not to engage people like that?

You know me as a liberal and this is from a scholar at a liberal think tank. When we put up sanctions against countries we always seem to end up in some kind of war, hot or cold. I just believe there was no excuse to fry tens of thousands of innocent Japanese. If another country or group doesn't like what we're doing, do they have a right to kill our civilians? What do we call that? I believe we set a horrible precedent and now fear reigns for countries who have or may get such monstrous technology.

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1930


Yeah, "the U.S. is always right" has led and will only lead to more hot water. We most often make the bed we end up lying in.

It does ties into the discussion here about political correctness, and it's why I brought it over.

You are making broad judgments on right versus wrong, and not just simple right versus wrong like it's wrong to drive 10 over the speed limit, you are making very serious judgments. Your level of knowledge of the situation and the context is very minimal. You desire to be politically correct, and are judging others to be bad, evil people, even though you only have knowledge of a very, very small fraction of the situation. Learn about World War II. If you have cable tv service, many channels have series devoted to different aspects of the war. Learning is very easy.

It directly answers the question of the thread, political correctness is hurting, not helping, in this example.


BTW, since WWII, Japan & Germany have been two of the most peaceful nations in the 70 years since. Rationalize that out however you like, the U.S. has had peaceful long-term alliances with these nations after the war ended. Part of it was because both nations had hated Soviet Russia passionately, and U.S.S.R. was the enemy of the U.S. throughout the cold war. Russians treated citizens of Eastern Europe like sub-humans. Many were deported to prison camps, many were shot dead on sight as Russia took over control of the territories. It was right to oppose them at the time. The world is not filled with all unicorns and rainbows. There is a lot of bad, and the bad don't just turn good because you asked politely.

In the end it took economic starvation to collapse the U.S.S.R., and that has directly lead to vastly better conditions for citizens in the former Soviet-Bloc nations.

 

[cubby1223]

What happens with political correctness far too often is we make harsh, permanent judgments of others based on a superficial knowledge of the situation or of the person.

 

[brycejones]

The correct answer is to simply not be offended when someone says "Merry Christmas!" and you're not a Christian. Understand that some people are Christian and this holiday gained popularity as a Christian holiday.

We still have a few months before we need to have a good "War on Christmas" thread. But I think you're wrong about which way the offense runs. I haven't seem people get pissy at Merry Christmas, but a vocal subset of Christians get very butt hurt when told Happy Holidays.

 

[CZroe]

Lord Trump criticized political correctness to explain his disparaging comments toward women, as if name calling is the opposite of being PC. Name calling is the opposite of being an adult. But his comment got a lot of applause, and I've seen some anti-PC stuff here. But if his recent "Megan Kelly blood remark" was really about women's issues, then he found true political incorrectness.

But I think the most hated form of political correctness is the phrase, "happy holidays," as if it's an intended insult toward Christians. But what do you say to someone who say isn't wearing a cross on their neck and could be celebrating Hanukkah, Mawlid an-Nabī, Uposatha, or...? Isn't "happy holidays" just easier and more inclusive? Why do people think it's anti-Christian?

And what is the alternative to political correctness? Do I start calling my partner "four eyes?" Does the n-word come back?

PC reflects adult respect in my eyes. Political incorrectness began in the schoolyard and that's where it should stay IMO.

You've got it completely backwards. The PC police are the ones pushing for "Happy Holidays," not the ones disgusted by it.

 

[MongGrel]

PC bad I'll agree on.

It's gotten stupid, all this "OMG don't say anything bad at all" when people talk behind each others backs on stop is bullshit.

You might hurt my fragile feelings.

NSFW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TNhS81w4bM

Just reading through the comments on that one, stress cards????

Give me a god damned break.

But probably true these days.

 

[MongGrel]

Political correctness is.........queue in tape, blah blah blah.

OK...

PCU - Movie Trailer


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2Fp61jJcIs

()🙂

 

[Double Trouble]

PC is stupid. Everyone is offended, no matter if its the truth. We're raising softies. You get an award for 7th place on field day or just for finishing no matter what spot. That's bullshit. Not everyone is a winner.

Sadly, you're right. We're raising a whole generation of people who can't stand to have their delicate feelings hurt by someone saying something they don't like, and who are OK with silencing people who say things they don't agree with.

Whatever happened to "I disagree with what you say but will defend your right to say it"?

 

[Ichinisan]

We still have a few months before we need to have a good "War on Christmas" thread. But I think you're wrong about which way the offense runs. I haven't seem people get pissy at Merry Christmas, but a vocal subset of Christians get very butt hurt when told Happy Holidays.

We're going full circle. The use of "happy holidays" is the "PC" term.

People are fed up with PC bullshit and letting their frustration be known.

A boss emailed the whole office years ago to say that we should use "happy holidays" to avoid offending people. I told him that there's actually a much greater chance of resistance / backlash to that than to "Merry Christmas."

The problem isn't even that people are offended by "Merry Christmas." It's that people are looking for things to be sensitive about and to show that they are more sensitive to others than you are.