Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-02-2016, 01:05 PM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
(29-02-2016 12:52 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(29-02-2016 12:14 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  Yes, you can have opinions, doesn't mean they mean anything. You're allowed to rant at a rainstorm if you want to or you could do something useful. Your choice.

Yet here you are, opining about something you cannot change instead of doing something useful.

We're online to exchange opinions. If you think that's useless, turn off your computer and go for a walk, take up model-building, write a novel, invent a new vaccine.

If you don't value my opinion, great. It's not my loss. Put me on ignore and go on about your day. But questioning my ability to opine at all ("Who are you to say ...") is not something a thoughtful person interested in enriching conversation should do. It is the act of someone who is clearly uncomfortable with having her opinions challenged, but who cannot marshal a counter-argument and instead seeks to invalidate the person instead of his point.

You have a nice day now.

No, it was putting perspective on your post. You can have all the opinions you want (and cry about those who don't agree if you chose) but since you don't have a say in the vote or outcome, your telling them what to do or not do is pointless. Hence the "who are you...", you are nobody to them. I was pointing out, your point was invalid, no vote, no validation and no counter argument necessary.

Again, you can have all the opinions or rants you want, everyone can, whether you like them or not. Maybe you could be more objective and not take things so personally. Or not as you see fit.

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-02-2016, 01:28 PM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
(29-02-2016 01:02 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(29-02-2016 12:18 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Here, I'll highlight this one point:
"I disagree with their decision, is my point. "

They don't care and didn't ask your opinion. What you see as a "PC issue," they see as a conversation on race in America.

So what? No one group of people has the power to impose any one framework on a discussion. In a public discussion, anyone can opine.

(29-02-2016 12:18 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "You should stop attacking the person and attack his argument instead."

I have been. You are not your argument but seem to take personal critiques as personal attacks.

No, you haven't addressed my point about decontextualization and the meaning of words -- you simply waved it away.

Calling my response "knee-jerk" is indeed a personal attack, because it is calling me thoughtless. I think that whether or not you agree with my points here, it's clear that they're not simply me acting in an off-the-cuff manner. Being a member of a multiracial family, this topic is something I've spent a lot of time thinking about. I don't appreciate you misstating my position here and I'm not about to let you do so without objection.

(29-02-2016 12:18 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "A careful reading of the American Constitution reveals no right to be free from offense. "

So does a casual reading. Who cares? There is no personal freedom guaranteed to be offensive either. You can use your freedom of expression and speech to be offended or be offensive.

Say, you're starting to get it now.

(29-02-2016 12:18 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "Would you support banning the term "master of ceremonies" on the same basis that the word "master" hearkens back to the chattel slavery of blacks in America? Why or why not? Justify your answer."

Just as Harvard said in their decision, the term is not explicitly or implicitly tied to racism. Ergo, a unilateral replacement of the term "master" is not necessary in all cases. Only those that they (as members of their institution) see fit. I believe in context and dialogue. Why does someone want it changed? What is the motivation? What impact does it have?

If you believe in context and dialogue, why are you so obviously unconcerned that they are imposing an entirely artificial context on "master" in this case? With all of the very real racial issues plaguing this country today, this is not only insignificant, but in light of the decontextualization of "master" in order to find it offensive, is probably counter-productive.

"http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/Thread-Bernie-suffers-a-humiliating-loss-in-South-Carolina?pid=953706#pid953706"

The discussion is public here, but at Harvard, it was not.

"No, you haven't addressed my point about decontextualization and the meaning of words -- you simply waved it away."

I do not see this as important as I do not see it as meaningful to the conversation. Words have meaning, some attain their meaning based on a new context (the swastika has not always been a word or symbol associated with the Nazis)

"Say, you're starting to get it now."

I don't care if people are offended but I do care why people are offended. The offense is meaningless, the reason for the offense is not. Do I care if someone is offended by what I say? Not by default, but I do care why there were offended. Did I say something offensive unintentionally? Did I say something offensive that I didn't know was offensive? Why did they react the way they did? Are they justified in being offended? Would I do/say it again?

"If you believe in context and dialogue, why are you so obviously unconcerned that they are imposing an entirely artificial context on "master" in this case?"

They aren't. Both sides agreed to a change and as Harvard points out, it is not because the terms were racist or rooted in racism.

"With all of the very real racial issues plaguing this country today, this is not only insignificant, but in light of the decontextualization of "master" in order to find it offensive, is probably counter-productive."

Just as they say that there is no such thing as bad publicity, any way to jumpstart meaningful conversations on real issues is valuable. Changing a meaningless title? It literally hurts no one and gives students and people who might not otherwise engage in the larger conversation, a reason to join.

"Calling my response "knee-jerk" is indeed a personal attack, because it is calling me thoughtless."

No, I think it has become a knee-jerk reaction to associate the phrase "PC" with some sort of negative or counterproductive change.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-02-2016, 01:34 PM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
(29-02-2016 01:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I don't care if people are offended but I do care why people are offended. The offense is meaningless, the reason for the offense is not. Do I care if someone is offended by what I say? Not by default, but I do care why there were offended. Did I say something offensive unintentionally? Did I say something offensive that I didn't know was offensive? Why did they react the way they did? Are they justified in being offended? Would I do/say it again?

Pfft. Extending even the most basic consideration for others?

It's POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MAD I tell you. MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!!!!111!one!1

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
29-02-2016, 01:38 PM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
(29-02-2016 01:05 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  No, it was putting perspective on your post. You can have all the opinions you want (and cry about those who don't agree if you chose) but since you don't have a say in the vote or outcome, your telling them what to do or not do is pointless. Hence the "who are you...", you are nobody to them. I was pointing out, your point was invalid, no vote, no validation and no counter argument necessary.

Again, you can have all the opinions or rants you want, everyone can, whether you like them or not. Maybe you could be more objective and not take things so personally. Or not as you see fit.

That's great, I understand that Harvard isn't monitoring TTA on this topic to assure themselves that I approve their stance. I didn't really need you to point that out to me, but I appreciate you taking the time to do so.

Characterizing my point as a "rant" is a nice rhetorical touch, but I think the absence of anger on my part leaves it shorn of any validity itself. I'm not taking disagreement here personally, and it should be pointed out that you're the one who made it personal with your question. This is the Internet, where all sorts of people opine about all sorts of things that they may or may not have the power to change.

I don't take it personally when someone disagrees with me, but I'm not partial to someone going out of their way trying to shut down discussion on what is, after all, a discussion board. If you don't find the topic useful because Harvard has made their decision and nothing discussed here can change that, again, perhaps you can find better things to do than discuss it, and let those who are indeed interested in that discussion carry on with it?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
29-02-2016, 01:40 PM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
(29-02-2016 01:38 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(29-02-2016 01:05 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  No, it was putting perspective on your post. You can have all the opinions you want (and cry about those who don't agree if you chose) but since you don't have a say in the vote or outcome, your telling them what to do or not do is pointless. Hence the "who are you...", you are nobody to them. I was pointing out, your point was invalid, no vote, no validation and no counter argument necessary.

Again, you can have all the opinions or rants you want, everyone can, whether you like them or not. Maybe you could be more objective and not take things so personally. Or not as you see fit.

That's great, I understand that Harvard isn't monitoring TTA on this topic to assure themselves that I approve their stance. I didn't really need you to point that out to me, but I appreciate you taking the time to do so.

Characterizing my point as a "rant" is a nice rhetorical touch, but I think the absence of anger on my part leaves it shorn of any validity itself. I'm not taking disagreement here personally, and it should be pointed out that you're the one who made it personal with your question. This is the Internet, where all sorts of people opine about all sorts of things that they may or may not have the power to change.

I don't take it personally when someone disagrees with me, but I'm not partial to someone going out of their way trying to shut down discussion on what is, after all, a discussion board. If you don't find the topic useful because Harvard has made their decision and nothing discussed here can change that, again, perhaps you can find better things to do than discuss it, and let those who are indeed interested in that discussion carry on with it?

...sure, sure... Drinking Beverage

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-02-2016, 01:46 PM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
(29-02-2016 01:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "No, you haven't addressed my point about decontextualization and the meaning of words -- you simply waved it away."

I do not see this as important as I do not see it as meaningful to the conversation. Words have meaning, some attain their meaning based on a new context (the swastika has not always been a word or symbol associated with the Nazis)

Yes, I already know you've waved my point away without addressing it.

(29-02-2016 01:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "Say, you're starting to get it now."

I don't care if people are offended but I do care why people are offended. The offense is meaningless, the reason for the offense is not. Do I care if someone is offended by what I say? Not by default, but I do care why there were offended. Did I say something offensive unintentionally? Did I say something offensive that I didn't know was offensive? Why did they react the way they did? Are they justified in being offended? Would I do/say it again?

Fair points. We could all do better in examining our behavior so that we don't give offense unintentionally. However, I do think that intent should be considered when someone feels offended. When I'm offended by someone's behavior, I certainly take into account whether they were doing it out of thoughtlessness, or whether they were actively trying to be a douche.

(29-02-2016 01:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "If you believe in context and dialogue, why are you so obviously unconcerned that they are imposing an entirely artificial context on "master" in this case?"

They aren't. Both sides agreed to a change and as Harvard points out, it is not because the terms were racist or rooted in racism.

It isn't Harvard's stance that I'm saying is decontextualizing. It's the students; they are asserting that "master" in this context is redolent of slave-history in America, when that isn't the case.

(29-02-2016 01:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "With all of the very real racial issues plaguing this country today, this is not only insignificant, but in light of the decontextualization of "master" in order to find it offensive, is probably counter-productive."

Just as they say that there is no such thing as bad publicity, any way to jumpstart meaningful conversations on real issues is valuable. Changing a meaningless title? It literally hurts no one and gives students and people who might not otherwise engage in the larger conversation, a reason to join.

Ever read The Boy Who Cried Wolf?

(29-02-2016 01:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "Calling my response "knee-jerk" is indeed a personal attack, because it is calling me thoughtless."

No, I think it has become a knee-jerk reaction to associate the phrase "PC" with some sort of negative or counterproductive change.

Thanks for imputing to me a position I don't hold -- much appreciated.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
29-02-2016, 01:49 PM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
(29-02-2016 01:40 PM)Heatheness Wrote:  ...sure, sure... Drinking Beverage

[Image: 5do6cl.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-02-2016, 01:49 PM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
"When I'm offended by someone's behavior, I certainly take into account whether they were doing it out of thoughtlessness, or whether they were actively trying to be a douche."

That is my point too.

"It isn't Harvard's stance that I'm saying is decontextualizing. It's the students; they are asserting that "master" in this context is redolent of slave-history in America, when that isn't the case."

They are saying it could be conceived of that way and pointing out that a change in title to prevent unintentional insult is a small change to make.

"Ever read The Boy Who Cried Wolf?"

Were they merely "crying wolf," you'd have a point.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2016, 12:51 AM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
(29-02-2016 01:49 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  They are saying it could be conceived of that way and pointing out that a change in title to prevent unintentional insult is a small change to make.

"Ever read The Boy Who Cried Wolf?"

Were they merely "crying wolf," you'd have a point.

[Red emphasis added -- Thump]

You seem to think that they are yourself, given that you say "it could be conceived" and not "it has been shown". Perhaps you didn't word that as tightly as you had intended.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2016, 05:22 AM
RE: Another Example of the Insanity of PC Culture
(01-03-2016 12:51 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(29-02-2016 01:49 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  They are saying it could be conceived of that way and pointing out that a change in title to prevent unintentional insult is a small change to make.

"Ever read The Boy Who Cried Wolf?"

Were they merely "crying wolf," you'd have a point.

[Red emphasis added -- Thump]

You seem to think that they are yourself, given that you say "it could be conceived" and not "it has been shown". Perhaps you didn't word that as tightly as you had intended.

No, I chose my words carefully.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: