# How PC are you..



## Drac (Dec 7, 2008)

So just how PC are you really?? Do you use the word challenged alot aka someone who is blind is visually challlenged or do you say blind?? You get my drift..I am not PC as much as I should be...I have been known to get into peoples faces when they refer to someone who cannot speak or hear as deaf and dumb, that *REALLY* honks me off..So where do you draw the line???


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 7, 2008)

Hmm.  Interesting question.  

I would say that I am not particularly PC as such but as I try my best to be as polite as possible under as many circumstances as possible then it is possible that I am perceived as being more Politically Correct than I am  .


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 7, 2008)

"Politically Incorrect and Proud of It."


----------



## terryl965 (Dec 7, 2008)

I am like you Drac


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 7, 2008)

Functionally or tactfully PC.

There are times and places where certain phrases are just going to cause problems. 

And there times and places where the argument that "I don't care about being PC" is just a way to justify some hatefule or nasty speech.  A simple example:  I once stopped my brother after he used the phrase "jew me out of..." when he meant "cheat me out of..."  That's not being PC; it's stopping a pointless (and incorrect) stereotype.


----------



## myusername (Dec 7, 2008)

I ticked "very PC" just because the other options don't really seem to fit my views. I would say that I am definately pro political correctness as I feel that at it's heart it is about treating people fairly and courteously and has made some much needed changes to our society by its existence.

An example of the benefits of PC is that in 1970's England our wonderful Conservative Party once ran an election campaign with the slogan "If you want a ****** for a neighbour, vote Liberal or Labour!" Can you imagine a disgusting slogan like that being allowed in a post political correct society? Political Correctness justifies its existence right there for me.

The problem with political correctness is that it is a bit vague and easily taken out of context. People have assumed offence where there isn't any such ordering a black coffee or not using the term "brainstorming" in case it offends epileptics! These incidents then get used as a campaigning tool for right wing political parties and the media and as such serve to undermine all the good work that political correctness has achieved. I also think political correctness is a terrible name! I prefer the term "good manners!"
What is also quite amusing, is that in England there is a huge amount of people who confuse political correctness for health and safety legislation!


----------



## myusername (Dec 7, 2008)

Quite rightly the word in my above example of the benefits of PC has been blocked out. Just to say that it was a very unpleasant racist term.


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Dec 7, 2008)

I am not very PC. But I think you need to have some in certain situations.

There is a huge difference between "Hey Pig" and "Yes officer"


----------



## theletch1 (Dec 7, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> Functionally or tactfully PC.
> 
> There are times and places where certain phrases are just going to cause problems.
> 
> And there times and places where the argument that "I don't care about being PC" is just a way to justify some hatefule or nasty speech.  A simple example:  I once stopped my brother after he used the phrase "jew me out of..." when he meant "cheat me out of..."  That's not being PC; it's stopping a pointless (and incorrect) stereotype.


Yep.  Great example.  I think there is a difference in being PC and being tactful.  Being tactful simply means actually treating the folks around you enough like human beings that you take their emotions into account.  Being PC implies, at least to me, that if the person to whom you are speaking or referring is a part of some political special interest group or another you must use the politically approved word or phrase accepted by that group for the week...hence the political in political correctness.  I abhor political correctness as it forces folks to curtail true debate on a regular basis simply because it generates a fear of being ostracized for not using the phrase of the week.


----------



## Steve (Dec 7, 2008)

Based upon your definition, I'm pretty PC.  My rule of thumb is to treat people, as much as possible, how they wish to be treated.  So, if someone prefers to be called Stan and not Stanley, African American not black, or visually impaired instead of blind, it's easy to be polite and makes little difference to me.  

My personal opinion is that the stories of PC taken to extremes are hyperbolic and largely the stuff of urban legend.  Everyone seems to have heard about someone who knew someone who was the victim of some egregious act of political correctness.  I also believe that where the kernels of these legends occur, it's more to do with an agenda than any real offense.  People just looking for trouble.  

Maybe things are worse in other parts of the world, but here in the Seattle area in what has been referred to as one of the capitals of rampant liberalism and political correctness, the worst thing I've personally witnessed were a few somewhat militant lesbians intentionally taking offense where none was intended because they were looking for a fight.


----------



## dart68 (Dec 7, 2008)

Drac said:


> So just how PC are you really?? Do you use the word challenged alot aka someone who is blind is visually challlenged or do you say blind?? You get my drift..I am not PC as much as I should be...I have been known to get into peoples faces when they refer to someone who cannot speak or hear as deaf and dumb, that *REALLY* honks me off..So where do you draw the line???


 
I try to not be nasty, but some PC'ness is just asinine.  Someone who must wear corrective eyeware is visually challenged.  Someone who cannot see is BLIND.  There is nothing unPC about the term blind.  On the other hand, someone who cannot hear is deaf but I don't know or care for the term "dumb".  Not sure where that came from.


----------



## grydth (Dec 7, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Hmm.  Interesting question.
> 
> I would say that I am not particularly PC as such but as I try my best to be as polite as possible under as many circumstances as possible then it is possible that I am perceived as being more Politically Correct than I am  .



I'm with you. I have always viewed Politikal Korrectness as an essentially fascist concept aimed at controlling what I can think and say... and, oddly enough, I have never seen much sensitivity exhibited towards certain groups: Christians, conservatives, white males, those with traditional values.....

Nevertheless, it is preferable to avoid needlessly insulting a person. Some of the old labels and terms did that, so I try to avoid using those and may opt for a newer term.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

I voted "very PC," because that was the only option available. I'm not in the habit of correcting others' language. However, when I use a term that is considered PC, people sometimes challenge me or say, "How very PC of you."

You can be "PC" without correcting everyone's language. On the other hand, you can be "PIc," and correct everything everybody else says.

"PIc," in my belief, is sometimes a cover for vulgarity and nastiness. There are people in the world who will say the most vile things and then argue the nobility of being Politically Incorrect, suggesting that they are simply speaking freely, and PC'ers are folks who want to take that freedom away.

I believe Ann Coulter has called both Al Gore and John Edwards a "fag." I think that's a form of Political Incorrectness that most inteligent people would not want any part of.


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 7, 2008)

The concept of political correctness absolutely has the power to shape how we think and discuss matters.  By way of an analogy, one of the courts in my area used to frequently plead shoplifters down to trespass, using an arcane reasoning that the shoplifter violated the terms under which they were permitted entry into the private property of the store.  There's only one problem with that, in my opinion:  You change the nature of the offense.  You've got two applicants who come to you for a job.  Both have 1 misdemeanor conviction, a few years ago.  Both admit to the criminal history.  One says he was convicted of trespass, and the other shoplifting (petit larceny).  The job in question has some issues of trust, maybe responsibility for a petty cash fund or the like, with minimal supervision or checks.  Think that criminal history might shape who you choose?  Even though both actually stole something from a store?

Carried to the extreme, political correctness prevents us from discussing the underlying issue.   I'll refer the reader to George Orwell's book *1984* for more...


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> ...By way of an analogy, one of the courts in my area used to frequently plead shoplifters down to trespass, using an arcane reasoning that the shoplifter violated the terms under which they were permitted entry into the private property of the store.  There's only one problem with that, in my opinion:  You change the nature of the offense...
> 
> One says he was convicted of trespass, and the other shoplifting (petit larceny)...



That certainly is a matter of legal language, but I'm not sure it falls into a PC/PIc question. Different courts, different times, different outcomes. I think that's very common. When person acts to cause the death of another person, s/he can be convicted on a lesser charge than was initially made.



> Carried to the extreme, political correctness prevents us from discussing the underlying issue...



If we are arguing over terminology and not issues, I agree absolutely. My point is that many PC'ers and PIc'ers do exactly that. It doesn't come down to one side causing all the fuss.


----------



## MA-Caver (Dec 7, 2008)

I'm only PC when it's prudent to be polite... otherwise... I am like Carlin who thinks that the "soft language" or euphemisms that people have adopted has truly ruined the English language. If a person is deaf then I say they're deaf, if they're blind, I say they're blind, if they're crippled then so be it, they're crippled. As Carlin said: "There's no shame attached to the word cripple in any dictionary!"  



 (caution: language... -- pardon the pun). 

It's like calling a Kenpoist a Karate person... not entirely correct... but not entirely wrong either is it? :lol: 

Adding "challenged" to the end of an adjective is to me, implying failure. Get rid of the damn word will ya? Simple honest direct language. 
Shell shock became battle fatigue which became operational exhaustion which became post traumatic stress disorder which is now gulf war syndrome ... unless I missed something they haven't given a euphemism to the soldiers returning home (shell shocked) from Iraq yet. Perhaps they should call it *Bushed*! 

For years deaf people have fought against the "dumb" label that was attached to only part of their *ahem* impairment... because it was (and rightly so) a gross mislabel of what they actually can do. Many deaf people can speak and many do speak well enough to be understood. Their voices or pronunciation may not be crisp or clear but then again whose is? Not many I'll tell ya that. Kinda like the typos that several people here on MT are well known for.  (j/k folks) 
Dumb actually does refer to the inability to speak, as in struck dumb but then dumb also appears in most people's vocabularies as stupid or PC would say... ignorant, which by itself really doesn't mean the same thing. Ignorance is simply "not knowing or unaware"... just because you don't know something doesn't necessarily make you stupid. It's when you can't learn something that makes you stupid. 

PC has truly ruined our language to where there are unexploded ordinances of politically incorrect land-mines all over the place when we speak/write. 
We need to get over it, we need to not be so thin-skinned and just face facts. We are who we are and we are what we are. 

By the way... never, never refer to me as anything other than a Caver... A Martial Arts Caver to be sure but never as a Martial Arts Spelunker...


----------



## Steve (Dec 7, 2008)

I agree with most of you.  Words and labels have power.  Death Tax is much more offensive than Estate Tax, because of the connotations involved.  Everyone dies while the word "Estate" tends to connote wealth.  So, when conservatives want to get poor people behind ending the Estate Tax, they imply that it disadvantages everyone.

There are tons of examples of this in politics, and that's where I think people often lose the concept.  It's "Political" correctness because it's political, and once again, used to persuade people to an agenda, often using specious logic.

Grydth, I think it's interesting that you chose to use the word "fascist."  Liberals and the left are often accused by conservatives of wielding political correctness as a weapon, but I agree with you that this is often a right-wing tactic.  Hopefully, with a new president in the white house, we can move away from this era of fascism in our government.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

MA-Caver said:


> I'm only PC when it's prudent to be polite... otherwise... I am like Carlin who thinks that the "soft language" or euphemisms that people have adopted has truly ruined the English language. If a person is deaf then I say they're deaf, if they're blind, I say they're blind, if they're crippled then so be it, they're crippled. As Carlin said: "There's no shame attached to the word cripple in any dictionary!"
> 
> 
> 
> (caution: language... -- pardon the pun).



I love Carlin, and I love that clip, especially where he talks about the progression from "shell shock" to "battle fatigue" to "operational malfunction" to "PTSD." He is right, but he is also talking about euphemisms employed by bureaucracies to hide truth. This kind language -- I'm thinking of  examples of militaryspeak from the first Gulf War: incontinent ordinance, surgical strike, sortie, and so forth -- is not only used by governments and military, it is immediately adopted by the press and shoveled into the minds of news readers and TV viewers. Before long, you're not even talking about a war with blood and guts.

That's the PC debate we should be having. Instead, one person chastises another for saying "Black," instead of "African Heritage." Somebody whines about not being 'allowed' to call somebody else 'blind.' A favourite anti-PC comment of mine: "We're not even allowed to call them such-n-such anymore." I'm not sure that anything has been sacrificed because people with intellectual disabilities would prefer not to be called "retards" or "retarded." I think that might be progress, and I think individuals have a right to self-identify.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 7, 2008)

dart68 said:


> I try to not be nasty, but some PC'ness is just asinine. Someone who must wear corrective eyeware is visually challenged. Someone who cannot see is BLIND. There is nothing unPC about the term blind. On the other hand, someone who cannot hear is deaf but I don't know or care for the term "dumb". *Not sure where that* *came from*.


 
It came originally from the fact that many deaf people hadn't been taught to speak and were therefore dumb. I think dumb in American is used more as a word for stupid as opposed to being unable to speak. It was never meant to be derogatory just descriptive in bygone times.
The word *bushed* here means to be exhausted, tired or knackered (that also means broken).

The RAF has long been known for it's slang, a plane didn't crash it pranged, pilots didn't die, they bought it. You can't be someone on the frontline and keep your sanity for long unless you have these euphemisms, you can't dwell on death if you are a soldier and have to remain functioning. That the media and the politicians use this euphemism is not the same thing, they have no excuse to hide behind these words.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> The RAF has long been known for it's slang, a plane didn't crash it pranged, pilots didn't die, they bought it. You can't be someone on the frontline and keep your sanity for long unless you have these euphemisms...



But at least this slang has a certain sharpness to it -- kind of like whistling past the graveyard. "Buying it" is remarkably more truthful than "non-operative personnel." 

See below:

http://www.iwm.org.uk/upload/package/29/mediawar/resources.htm


----------



## thardey (Dec 7, 2008)

My sign language teacher (who was deaf, but could speak) preferred the term "mute" because it was more accurate to the "American-English" language.

When I was in High School, my English teacher handed out a "PC guideline" we were supposed to follow when writing our papers. We couldn't say "Waiter or Waitress," we had to say "Female Waiter" or Waitperson. Same with Stewardess, Actress, etc. 

That was most of it, it didn't talk about being "challenged" of any sort -- I think most of that is either limited to specific settings, or the stuff of jokes.

What bothered me about the "Waitress, Waiter" stuff was that I would go directly from English to Spanish class, where _everything_ had a gender, whether it was a door, a light, or a car. I couldn't figure out why applying a female or male/neutral gender was _that_ insulting. Left over from Patriarchy, yes, but offensive?

As far as race slang goes, I've known Mexicans who were insulted by the term "Latin-American" and vice-versa. I've known people who prefer "Black" over "African American" and vice-versa. Usually, what bothers them the most is whether I respect their wishes or not. If they don't like the term "Black" I don't use it around them. Whichever. Trying to please everybody is what makes the "PC" stuff a joke.

On the other hand, I used to refer to "That black guy" or "That Mexican guy." Now I just say "That guy." If someone doesn't know who I'm talking about then I'll describe them with a physical descripton, which may or may not include their race. But I like to separate their race from their identity, at least in the US.

Which brings up a question I've been wanting to ask of our neighbors "Across the Pond:" is "Limey" a derogatory term? Or is it like calling us a "Yank?" (That is, a nickname you're kind of proud to wear?)


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 7, 2008)

Well, yes, altho' not so pronounced now as was in centuries past, 'Limey' was a term of abuse and some of us would still take offense at it, depending on how it was said - me included.

On similar vein, I was once told, by a Southern (United States) gentleman, that to call a Southerner "Yank" was quite a good way to start a fight as, in certain places, the wounds caused by the Civil War still wept.  Is that still so?

EDIT:  Bonus credit to any non-English person who can explain where 'Limey' came from (I know some here already know but it'd be interesting to see what percentage are aware of it's historical roots).


----------



## grydth (Dec 7, 2008)

Limes eaten on ships to prevent scurvy?  (I heard the RN got very tired of sucking on lemons)


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> EDIT:  Bonus credit to any non-English person who can explain where 'Limey' came from (I know some here already know but it'd be interesting to see what percentage are aware of it's historical roots).



British sailors put lime in the beer to prevent scurvy. Now lime cordial is often used -- as in, "I'll take a lager and lime, barman." 

In my barkeep days, occasionally I was asked for a shandy. Originally, I believe that was made with lemonade and lager. Now, it's common to use 7Up, Sprite, or Ginger Ale.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

Gordon Nore said:


> British sailors put lime in the beer to prevent scurvy. Now lime cordial is often used -- as in, "I'll take a lager and lime, barman."
> 
> In my barkeep days, occasionally I was asked for a shandy. Originally, I believe that was made with lemonade and lager. Now, it's common to use 7Up, Sprite, or Ginger Ale.



Post Script: I'll never forget the time I was asked if we served Chip Butties. Anyone?


----------



## myusername (Dec 7, 2008)

I personally wouldn't find being called a Limey offensive as being a mental health nurse and drug worker I have been called much worse things by my patients! As with all of these things it depends on the delivery, tone and motivation for using the term that makes the difference between it being an affectionate, tongue in cheek nickname or an insult.


----------



## zeeberex (Dec 7, 2008)

Drac said:


> So just how PC are you really?? Do you use the word challenged alot aka someone who is blind is visually challlenged or do you say blind?? You get my drift..I am not PC as much as I should be...I have been known to get into peoples faces when they refer to someone who cannot speak or hear as deaf and dumb, that *REALLY* honks me off..So where do you draw the line???



deliberate hateful redneck level ignorance is grounds for a beating


----------



## myusername (Dec 7, 2008)

Gordon Nore said:


> Post Script: I'll never forget the time I was asked if we served Chip Butties. Anyone?



Could I bum a fag off you as well?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 7, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Well, yes, altho' not so pronounced now as was in centuries past, *'Limey' was a term of abuse and some of us would still take offense at it, depending on how it was said - me included.*
> 
> On similar vein, I was once told, by a Southern (United States) gentleman, that to call a Southerner "Yank" was quite a good way to start a fight as, in certain places, the wounds caused by the Civil War still wept. Is that still so?
> 
> EDIT: Bonus credit to any non-English person who can explain where 'Limey' came from (I know some here already know but it'd be interesting to see what percentage are aware of it's historical roots).


 
Yep!  
Perhaps the strange thing to Americans is that to us whatever the colour or race you may designate yourselves as, to us regardless you are all 'Yanks', white/ black/African-American/Hispanic? nah Yanks all, lol!
I remember an old lady telling me that during the war when the Americans arrived the white Americans were more than a little horrified at the locals treating them and the black soldiers exactly the same, they either liked Americans or they didn't but they were all just Americans to them. it was also during the war that being called limey as an insult was at it's worst I believe. As with the Aussies calling us Poms. Of course the Aussies had their moments too with the Yanks lol. The infamous Battle of Brisbane, a two day 'war' between American soldiers and the Diggers! One war correspondent described it as the most ferocious fighting he'd seen in the war!


----------



## grydth (Dec 7, 2008)

stevebjj said:


> I agree with most of you.  Words and labels have power.  Death Tax is much more offensive than Estate Tax, because of the connotations involved.  Everyone dies while the word "Estate" tends to connote wealth.  So, when conservatives want to get poor people behind ending the Estate Tax, they imply that it disadvantages everyone.
> 
> There are tons of examples of this in politics, and that's where I think people often lose the concept.  It's "Political" correctness because it's political, and once again, used to persuade people to an agenda, often using specious logic.
> 
> Grydth, I think it's interesting that you chose to use the word "fascist."  Liberals and the left are often accused by conservatives of wielding political correctness as a weapon, but I agree with you that this is often a right-wing tactic.  Hopefully, with a new president in the white house, we can move away from this era of fascism in our government.



I've got about as much use for the loony left as I do for the extreme right, which is zero. Don't need either one telling me what to say or believe. I voted for President Obama because I feel he will go beyond mere words, that he can unify this country. His oratory is, indeed, magnificent.... but I believe there is so much more to this man.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

myusername said:


> Could I bum a fag off you as well?



:lfao:


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

thardey said:


> When I was in High School, my English teacher handed out a "PC guideline" we were supposed to follow when writing our papers. We couldn't say "Waiter or Waitress," we had to say "Female Waiter" or Waitperson. Same with Stewardess, Actress, etc.


 
Now that does bother me. Did the teacher actually call it a "PC guideline." We're getting into Carlin's issue of context here. One can't simply expunge words from the language. 

What if you're writing creatively -- you need access all words to convey the sensibilities of real characters and to tell a real story. I've had to defend (still) the presence of "Go Ask Alice" in my middle school library. "There's a lot of swear words," I've been told. "Of course there are," I say, "This is a deeply disturbed youngster, addicted to drugs, living on the street. What's she going to say? Fiddlesticks?"

Case in point: One of my favourite films growing up was *To Kill a Mockingbird*. The book was actually studied in Ontario high schools, and it's a fine example of American literature. A powerful scene for me is when Atticus is confronted by the father of an alleged rape victim and called a "N Lover." I watched the film again on late-night television (this was in the seventies), but they had bleeped out the word ******.

I've discussed this with students many times. Although the word may be despised, it has a place historically, socially and journalistically. It was during the OJ trials, I think, (the first time around) that this bizarre phrase, "The 'N' Word" seemed to take hold. They'd play audio clips of people actually speaking, and bleep out the word. For whom is this being done?

Like Carlin said, we need to get away from the idea that there good and bad words. We need to understand context.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 7, 2008)

Gordon Nore said:


> Now that does bother me. Did the teacher actually call it a "PC guideline." We're getting into Carlin's issue of context here. One can't simply expunge words from the language.
> 
> What if you're writing creatively -- you need access all words to convey the sensibilities of real characters and to tell a real story. I've had to defend (still) the presence of "Go Ask Alice" in my middle school library. "There's a lot of swear words," I've been told. "Of course there are," I say, "This is a deeply disturbed youngster, addicted to drugs, living on the street. What's she going to say? Fiddlesticks?"
> 
> ...


 
Bleeping it out is a mistake, how can you understand how wrong it is to use words like that unless you know why? This book gives the words a context and shows how hateful it is, that it should be despised. Constantly bleeping the words out lessens the impact, you should be shocked when you hear words like this not just sit there complacently listening to bleeps!


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> Bleeping it out is a mistake, how can you understand how wrong it is to use words like that unless you know why? This book gives the words a context and shows how hateful it is, that it should be despised. Constantly bleeping the words out lessens the impact, you should be shocked when you hear words like this not just sit there complacently listening to bleeps!



Speaking specifically of the OJ trial, there was a level of absurdity in seeing newscasters, as well as participants in the courtroom, using the phrase, "'N' word." If it was said, it was said. Yet the actual unadorned version is staple of some comedy and popular music. On the one hand, it's ok to use it for entertainment, but people must never talk about the word as it occurs in real life.


----------



## MA-Caver (Dec 7, 2008)

Tez is right that bleeping out the word is a mistake... also kinda hypocritical since that 12 hour mini-series "Roots" had the word ****** four or five dozen times over. It was used in historical context there... why wouldn't it be used in historical context in this fine film? Same with "A Time To Kill" (another powerful anti-racist movie) and "American History X" which used ****** in it's dialogue. True these two stories (and several others) are NOT history but irregardless they did reflect attitudes and mores of the people involved. 
Still the infamous "N-word" is a racial epithet and by and large has been used as a racial slur. It's still a mystery as to why those who are most offended by the word tend to use it in reference to themselves. 

We've become a societies of thin skinned people. Easily offended. Why? Well, because those who brought their offenses to courts, won. Therefore don't use those labels because you might get sued. 

As I said on another thread ... about those who take umbrage against those who use their rights to interact or not with whomever they please... spoiled brats!  

Many of the original words that are now PIC's (politically incorrect) are simply truths; blind, deaf, crippled, retarded, idiot savants (now called Autistic although one could pick apart the differences between the two... it's in generalities that I speak here  check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot_savant) and so on... simply truth of the matters... while some PC words do afford dignity to those they apply to (and rightly so) ... the originals aren't really derogatory... are they? And the people they describe ... aren't any less human than we are ... right?


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 7, 2008)

I think this is where we are getting into the real, corrosive, nature of censorship.  

Even if it is self-imposed because of social pressure, censorship, in the end, is deleterious.  The person who would rather call someone of African derivation a "******" but instead uses "Coloured" or "Black", for social acceptance, has not changed their attitudes.  Indeed, they have probably been hardened even further into the negative because they can't say what they think (however unpleasant most of us might find their words to be).

I do concur that words, particularly labels, have power and that 'outlawing' some can have a superficial effect that makes things look better but in the end it is a self-defeating tactic.  It does not often remove the underlying feelings, just the expression of them and in the end the negative pressure builds to explosive levels.

That's what is starting to happen here in Britain with the "Immigrant problem".  

Common sense or statistics notwithstanding, the ordinary person in the street is now starting to hold the opinion that cheap immigrant labour is a big part of our economic woes.  Regardless of the 'truth' or otherwise of that, the fact that it is not acceptable by the establishment to talk or moan about the Polacks, Irish, Blacks, Paki's et al in even an economic sense is welding shut the necessary social safety valve to keep things a below danger level.  

At the same time, the immigrant population are perfectly free to publically 'expose' the prejudice against themselves and criticise the indiginous population for daring to even think anything detrimental about them.

That is just the sort of wrong-headed legislative thinking that drives wedges between social groupings that have been working towards a working accomodation for decades.  In even the past coupe of decades I have seen it change.  Whilst there were some dyed-in-the-wool true racists in the population of the city I lived in, most of us got along fine whether we were English, Irish, Scots, Indian, Pakistani, African, Jamaican, Chinese and so on.  

Now it is terrible, with the children being the worst because they have not yet learned to keep their mouths shut.  I was in a Chinese take-away the other night and a bunch of local 'urchins' burst in the door, harranged the staff with all kinds of abuse that I shall not repeat here and then ran off.  I was mortified with embarassment that people of my 'race' could behave that way and didn't know what to say to the poor girls behind the counter - "Does that happen often?" I asked.  "Several times a day" they replied.  I left feeling ashamed and guilty, as if it was any doing of mine.  The flip side is that just across the road is a Turkish restaurant where I have learned, thanks to a friend who speaks the language, that the staff continually abuse and insult the diners (particularly the women) and get away with it because noone understands and they smile whilst they do it.

The particular thing that stands out is that it seems that it is only persons of English or American lineage that are cursed by this 'disease' of Political Correctness (and to some extent Germans with regard to Jews).  From my contact with people of other European and Asian nations, it does not seem that they 'gag the throats of their own' in this fashion.  Or is my personal experience insular and this is prevelent in other nationalities too?


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 7, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Well, yes, altho' not so pronounced now as was in centuries past, 'Limey' was a term of abuse and some of us would still take offense at it, depending on how it was said - me included.
> 
> On similar vein, I was once told, by a Southern (United States) gentleman, that to call a Southerner "Yank" was quite a good way to start a fight as, in certain places, the wounds caused by the Civil War still wept.  Is that still so?
> 
> EDIT:  Bonus credit to any non-English person who can explain where 'Limey' came from (I know some here already know but it'd be interesting to see what percentage are aware of it's historical roots).


So as not to give the answer completely away... I'll note simply that it's nautical, and has to do with Vitamin C.

Of course, had I read on before replying... I'd know that others had already answered!  :shrug:


----------



## Steve (Dec 7, 2008)

grydth said:


> I've got about as much use for the loony left as I do for the extreme right, which is zero. Don't need either one telling me what to say or believe. I voted for President Obama because I feel he will go beyond mere words, that he can unify this country. His oratory is, indeed, magnificent.... but I believe there is so much more to this man.


Sounds reasonable.  I was speaking to your use of the term "fascist" which refers to the extreme right wing political philosophy, as socialism refers to the leftist extreme.  In this case, I just think it's interesting that PC is often a term used to describe the extreme left by the right, but as you said, often as not is the tool of an extreme right wing agenda.


----------



## MA-Caver (Dec 7, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> I think this is where we are getting into the real, corrosive, nature of censorship.
> 
> Even if it is self-imposed because of social pressure, censorship, in the end, is deleterious.  The person who would rather call someone of African derivation a "******" but instead uses "Coloured" or "Black", for social acceptance, has not changed their attitudes.  Indeed, they have probably been hardened even further into the negative because they can't say what they think (however unpleasant most of us might find their words to be).
> 
> ...


Well, that's the whole point isn't it... the kids. Learning from their fathers/older brothers to "hate the race". Years of listening to the fixed opinions/beliefs of or a tirade of hatred against this or that people and the kid grows up believing that... until of course sometimes... they have a life changing event that alters that skewed perception. 
I still believe that change can come... but not from those hardwired already to be racist deep down inside themselves, forget what you see on the surface... all the world's a stage right? But until we teach our children how NOT to hate, how to look beyond the color of a man's skin or the shape of his eyes or the God that he chooses to worship or anything else that is prejudiced against ... it's always going to be there. 
As long as it's there we're going to find new words to soften the blow of the truth of who/what they are. 
Funny thing is... truth is relative.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

I've been reflecting on language changes pertaining to disabled people. Carlin argues that the word, "cripple," has no derogatory connotation. He may be right in that, but I think it's socially limiting. When I think of the word "crippled" from childhood, I perceive someone who is the recipient of charity or sympathy. My mother used to make donations to a group called "Crippled Civilians."  http://www.goodwill.on.ca/2006_wherewecamefrom.html The word, "crippled," also reminds me of Tiny Tim from _A Christmas Carol_, whose survival depends on an act of charity.

Back in the days, "crippled" people had limited expectations of employment and participation in daily life. I remember hearing John Howard Griffin (author of _Black Like Me_) speaking in Toronto when I was in high school. He talked about an earlier time in his life when he was temporarily blind. He happened to be sitting in a park, overhearing a conversation _about_ him. (He joked that blind people are sometimes confused for deaf.) The cut and thrust of the conversation that he should be out in public because his presence was upsetting to others.

The shift from "crippled" to "disabled," rather than being politically correct, I suspect, was a conscious effort to alter public thinking and open up our imaginations a little. It's very hard to look at images of Terry Fox or Rick Hansen and think of them as crippled. 

Now, I agree that "differently-abled" and "handicapable" are two of dumbest things I've ever heard. The polysylabism of those terms makes them absolutely bloodless. Pure jargon.

I worked in a literacy agency in the eighties that also advocated for disabled people, and nobody talked that way. However, one of our meeting rooms in the rear of the building faced the lobby of a very expensive condominium complex. The managers of that building asked us to draw our blinds, just in case the wheel chairs upset their residents and visitors.


----------



## MA-Caver (Dec 7, 2008)

Gordon Nore said:


> I worked in a literacy agency in the eighties that also advocated for disabled people, and nobody talked that way. However, one of our meeting rooms in the rear of the building faced the lobby of a very expensive condominium complex. The managers of that building asked us to draw our blinds, just in case the wheel chairs upset their residents and visitors.


See that's the kind of stupid thinking (not yours Gordon) that we need to get rid of... not partially, but completely. It puts a lie to what's really out there. It hides the truth. 
I don't think the word disabled is a bad one either... it still says that the person referred to does still have limitations. But technology IS getting better and better all the time. So should our attitudes.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 7, 2008)

MA-Caver said:


> Well, that's the whole point isn't it... the kids. Learning from their fathers/older brothers to "hate the race". Years of listening to the fixed opinions/beliefs of or a tirade of hatred against this or that people and the kid grows up believing that


 
I'm not so sure.  The point that I was hinting at is that things have changed for the worse in the past twent years.  There were those who were so deeply mired in one-dimensional 'race hatred' that they would never change but nearly everyone I knew, of whatever ethnicity, got along perfectly well.  Indeed, the myth of White Boy Racism was just that; the worst racsm I ever saw was between Indians and Pakistani's.  Now it is as if passions are being manoeuvered to pit each facet of the society against each other.




MA-Caver said:


> I still believe that change can come


 
There we sadly diverge; at least in terms of whether the change will be positive or negative.  

Things will get worse before they get better, I feel.  Much worse.  Tho' I do hope that we can still gently coach people into not dividing along racial and religious lines, I don't think it's going to happen any time soon - the 'tide' has reversed somehow.

It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that soon this country will see the 'rivers of blood' that Enoch Powell spoke of all those years ago.  The BNP is growing in underground influence.  They are gaining members on the regional councils and speaking of things that, on the surface, make so much sense to the ordinary person who feels disadvantaged in their own country by those of different religion or nationality.

It is the classic tactics of division and diversion and it's very scary to see it at work.  To my mind, Political Correctness plays right into the hands of such people.  It is the scenario of the Road to Hell being paved with Good Intentions.

EDIT:  Actually, reading through the above, I think I'm a bit too tired for a discussion of this depth .  Too emotional and Tin-Foil-Hat Conspiracy Theory I reckon .

However, the circumstance that Gordon raised in his last paragraph is a true eye-widener .


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 7, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that soon this country will see the 'rivers of blood' that Enoch Powell spoke of all those years ago. The BNP is growing in underground influence. They are gaining members on the regional councils and speaking of things that, on the surface, make so much sense to the ordinary person who feels disadvantaged in their own country by those of different religion or nationality.
> 
> It is the classic tactics of division and diversion and it's very scary to see it at work. To my mind, Political Correctness plays right into the hands of such people. It is the classic scenario of the Road to Hell.



I just read up on the BNP. They've got everything but the swastika.


----------



## thardey (Dec 8, 2008)

Gordon Nore said:


> Now that does bother me. Did the teacher actually call it a "PC guideline." We're getting into Carlin's issue of context here. One can't simply expunge words from the language.


 
Yeah, it wasn't a set of "rules" but it was definitely a guideline. It was in the form of Memo given to all the students in her class, and posted on the wall, alongside the format required for submitting papers, works cited pages, and the like.

That was actually my first introduction of the concept of "Politically Correct." Needless to say, it left a bad taste in my mouth.

Yeah, some Southerners would prefer not to be called "Yanks," but coming from a Brit, I think many would remember that you see us differently, and would correct you with non-violent means. They wouldn't expect a foreigner to understand about the "War of Northern Aggression."

Technically, only New England, or the colonies North of the Mason-Dixon line would be considered Yankees.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 8, 2008)

The problem with words is that even in countries speaking the same language they have different meanings, we've been over this before though. To the Europeans and the British Socialism and liberalism are totally different things than they are to the Americans, hence much antaogonistic arguing when we are in fact talking about different things.

I do think a lot of the PC talk is actually made up by media and perhaps politicians too to discredit others, the word blind is still used here to describe people who can't see, The Royal National Institute for the Blind is still going strong with it's original name as  it's deaf counterpart, my friend is a sign language interpreter and the deaf still call themselves deaf. Disabled is still the word used unless a medical description is used as in paraplegic. During the recent Para Olympics nobodiy was using the word challenged other than its proper usage it. Retard is not a word thats really ever been used here other than as an insult, people were usually called 'backward', usually now 'learning difficulties' is used which is probably a more accurate description anyway. 

The BNP otherwise known as the National Front does have the swastika in it's paramilitary group Combat 18, the 18 part is Hitlers bithday which is celebrated. Nasty, nasty people.


----------



## jarrod (Dec 8, 2008)

i approach political correctness is just like anything else: i try to put myself in the other person's position & if i wouldn't like it, i don't do it.  

sukerkin, didn't english sailors carry lots of limes with them to ward off scurvy?

jf


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 8, 2008)

:tup:  It's a pleasure to see quite a few respondants correctly detailing what the practical roots of the derogatory term "Limey" were.


----------



## jarrod (Dec 8, 2008)

sukerkin, maybe you can answer this for me: i know irish are sometimes called micks, which i've always assumed derived from the prefix of Mc/Mac in front of many irish names.  is there a derogatory term for scottish, welsh, or manx folks?  

jf


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 8, 2008)

Aye, we do have such terms.  I was going to call them 'nicknames' but for many people they are still insulting so that would make too light of them.

The Scottish receive the sobriquet of "Jock" whilst the Welsh get "Taffies".  As far as I know, the Manx have not had the 'honour' of a specific derogatory name.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 8, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Aye, we do have such terms. I was going to call them 'nicknames' but for many people they are still insulting so that would make too light of them.
> 
> The Scottish receive the sobriquet of "Jock" whilst the Welsh get "Taffies". As far as I know, the Manx have not had the 'honour' of a specific derogatory name.


 
Taffy is derogatory as it comes with a rhyme which is libellious if I write it down! A lot of Scots don't like being called Jock I know. It has a lot to do with the context it's used in too I think.


----------



## Drac (Dec 8, 2008)

grydth said:


> Limes eaten on ships to prevent scurvy? (I heard the RN got very tired of sucking on lemons)


 
Wahhhh I wanted to say it...


----------



## Drac (Dec 8, 2008)

Bob Hubbard said:


> "Politically Incorrect and Proud of It."


 


terryl965 said:


> I am like you Drac


 
Thanks Guys....


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 8, 2008)

How PC am I...

not at all.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Dec 8, 2008)

i call it how i see it. i express my opinion and share my views and people usually get mad but thats how it is. 

Im not an a** or anything, im very nice and very polite. I was taught to adress people as sir or ma'am, I shake the hand of every US troop I meet but i express my opinion when I want to thats also how i was raised

B


----------



## thardey (Dec 8, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> :tup: It's a pleasure to see quite a few respondants correctly detailing what the practical roots of the derogatory term "Limey" were.


 
Done right, Lime, sugar, water, and rum (Grog) is my hands-down favorite drink!
%-}
(Does that make me a "Limey" too? - jk!)

I always thought it had to do with the cliffs.


----------



## MA-Caver (Dec 8, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> Taffy is derogatory as it comes with a rhyme which is libellious if I write it down! A lot of Scots don't like being called Jock I know. It has a lot to do with the context it's used in too I think.


Heh... send it over to the AfterDark section of this forum...


----------



## JBrainard (Dec 8, 2008)

Drac said:


> So just how PC are you really?? Do you use the word challenged alot aka someone who is blind is visually challlenged or do you say blind?? You get my drift..I am not PC as much as I should be...I have been known to get into peoples faces when they refer to someone who cannot speak or hear as deaf and dumb, that *REALLY* honks me off..So where do you draw the line???


 
I'm as PC as the situation warrants. At work I'm very PC. With friends and people I know well I'm not PC (I don't use slurrs except in the correct context of course). And, when in doubt, I just feel out the situation. If someone wants to be called visually challenged instead of blind, I'll call them visually challenged out of respect for thier wishes.
I dunno, the whole "PC" thing seems to bug a lot of people, but I really don't think that it's that big of a deal. Just speak to people the way you would want them to speak to you, even if it sometimes seems silly.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Dec 8, 2008)

I'm not PC at all. A couple people mentioned that they are simply polite and courteous. That would be what I try to do. I don't swear or use profanity when talking to people and don't use racial slurs. That's not being politically correct, IMHO, it's called trying not to be a boor and a bigot.

I will say this, I have noticed that _some_ people who claim to be PC still engage in using slurs when referring to ceertain groups of people. For example, I have heard more than one PC maven refer to rednecks, using the term as an insult, as well as referring to Evangelical Christians and Catholics in very insulting ways. Apparently political correctness only goes so far. Go figure. Which is one reason why I think it would simply be better to treat others the way you want to be treated instead of the current "speech codes" being foisted on people.

The point a few people made about political correctness doing damage to English is a good one, too, and I tend to think that the whole endeavor goes hand in hand with "inclusive language" which seems to have been invented by people who don't know basic grammar.

Pax,

Chris

PS
This whole "limey" thing intrigues me. I have known about the term and its origin for years (half my family is form England orginally). I have always wondered, however, how a practice that was used to ward of scurvy became an insult. Why would the one's who were _not_ getting scurvy be insulted? I just think that somehow the whole thing should be reversed, somehow.


----------



## jkembry (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi all....I finally made it back after a 3 month stint of getting use to a new job.  PC...not very...unless the situation warrants it.  And certainly not PC if it involves speaking something that is not the truth.  The way I see it if my bosses ask a question they deserve to be told the truth...without sugar coating it.

Happy to be back online again.


----------



## jarrod (Dec 8, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Aye, we do have such terms. I was going to call them 'nicknames' but for many people they are still insulting so that would make too light of them.
> 
> The Scottish receive the sobriquet of "Jock" whilst the Welsh get "Taffies". As far as I know, the Manx have not had the 'honour' of a specific derogatory name.


 


Tez3 said:


> Taffy is derogatory as it comes with a rhyme which is libellious if I write it down! A lot of Scots don't like being called Jock I know. It has a lot to do with the context it's used in too I think.


 
any knowledge of where those terms came from?

trivia: "cracker" for an american white is short for "whip-cracker"

jf


----------



## morph4me (Dec 8, 2008)

I will be PC, to a point, once it gets to the point where I feel it's stupid, I become decidedly PI.  I remember that years ago there was a story on the news, and the anchor used the phrase "chinks in his armor" after the commerical he came back and apologized to his asian audience for any offense that may have been given. In that context, the word chink was perfectly acceptabe and nothing to apologize for.

The problem with some of the terms that have become PC is that they are not necessarily accurate. I have some very good friends that were born in South Africa, the came to the US and became citizens. In the truest sense of the words, they are African American, they are also white.


----------



## thardey (Dec 8, 2008)

morph4me said:


> I will be PC, to a point, once it gets to the point where I feel it's stupid, I become decidedly PI. I remember that years ago there was a story on the news, and the anchor used the phrase "chinks in his armor" after the commerical he came back and apologized to his asian audience for any offense that may have been given. In that context, the word chink was perfectly acceptabe and nothing to apologize for.
> 
> The problem with some of the terms that have become PC is that they are not necessarily accurate. I have some very good friends that were born in South Africa, the came to the US and became citizens. In the truest sense of the words, they are African American, they are also white.


 
That reminds me of some public figure who used the phrase "Tar-Baby" and got into trouble for being racist.

How is that racist? It's a folk-tale from Africa, and yes, the baby made of tar is black, but what makes that racist?


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 8, 2008)

thardey said:


> That reminds me of some public figure who used the phrase "Tar-Baby" and got into trouble for being racist.
> 
> How is that racist? It's a folk-tale from Africa, and yes, the baby made of tar is black, but what makes that racist?



Context.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 8, 2008)

jarrod said:


> sukerkin, maybe you can answer this for me: i know irish are sometimes called _micks_, which i've always assumed derived from the prefix of Mc/Mac in front of many irish names.  is there a derogatory term for scottish, welsh, or manx folks?
> 
> jf



Watch the movie or read the book _Angela's Ashes_. Very stark depiction of the treatment of poor Irish Catholics seeking charity. I think it was the Society of Saint Vincent de Paul depicted in the story. Anyhow, you see these repeated scenes of a struggling mom begging for things like a fresh mattress after one of her children died in bed.

Another good film to see is _Cal_, 





> from imdb: Cal, a young man on the fringes of the IRA, falls in love with Marcella, a Catholic woman whose husband, a Protestant policeman, was killed one year earlier by the IRA



Back in the eighties I tended bar in couple of 'pubs' in Toronto that were modeled after those found in the UK. They attracted customers who had emigrated from the British Isles. I had a lot of customers -- predominantly male -- from England, Ireland and Scotland, in particular. Many of them from very tough neighbourhoods in Glasgow, London, Belfast.

The wrong word spoken at the wrong time could immediately summon old grievances and erupt in violence. Occasionally, Canadian-born patrons, in an effort to be chummy, might use terminology they thought to be quite benign (Mick or Paddy), only to discover that it had strongly nationalistic or religious undertones.

It provided a good insight for me into the power of words... I met one fellow once, who was visiting with a soccer club from Belfast -- actually I stepped in when two people people were beating him up. He thanked me for the rescue, and explained that he was Catholic, and they were Protestant, and that started the row. After calming him down, I quietly explained to him that I was born Protestant and had come to his aid for other than religious reasons...

He went on about having brothers and uncles in the infamous Maze Prison, and one day we'd hear about him going there too. (Now this was all taking place in mid-town Toronto in the 1980s) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maze_Prison 

There was a pair of brothers I knew who were from Glasgow. Occasionally the elder would talk about going back there to avenge his brother, who had died in a bar knife fight.

When I was attending a Catholic school as a Protestant in the early seventies, I was vaguely aware of some people who had held hostility towards me. It wasn't until I was older that I learned that the City of Toronto was essentially run by the Orange Lodge (a Protestant organization) until the late sixties. This meant Catholics -- especially the Irish -- were locked out socially, virtually unable to get city jobs. At one time if you had Scottish surname in my town, you had a very good shot at getting a job with the fire department or police. 

My mother's home Province of Newfoundland on the eastern coast of Canada was hot-bead of Irish-Catholic hostilities right into my lifetime. It's harder for me to see these hostilities as someone who has grown up in a generally more secular world, but they do exist. And they are still close to the surface for many people.


----------



## myusername (Dec 8, 2008)

This guy here pretty much summarises my views on political correctness. I think he takes it a little far near the end of the clip but I think he was getting a little carried away with his passion for the argument. I think on the whole he makes a really good point though.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Dec 8, 2008)

myusername said:


> This guy here pretty much summarises my views on political correctness. I think he takes it a little far near the end of the clip but I think he was getting a little carried away with his passion for the argument. I think on the whole he makes a really good point though.



I think it's an astonishingly good argument. What he's saying, IMO, is, _You get caught calling someone a "N" or the like, don't turn around and say *you're* some kind of victim of PC.
_
Stewart is speaking of taking responsibility for ones own beliefs, I think.

Personally, if it comes down to extremes, I would rather be tagged a sniveling, twittering PC droid, than be in the same room with a fellow middle-age, white educated male who talks -- often in hushed tones and carefully chosen words -- about how tough it's gotten for "us." If I am PC, it is by choice, not by indoctrination or some conspiracy against my intellect.

I am not a self-loathing white. I don't believe that I have stolen anything from my fellows, but I am the recipient of stolen goods. Regardless of what laws are enacted in the name of equity or affirmative action, my privilege remains intact. It doesn't rub off. In my country, I am not questioned when I identify as "Canadian." Nobody says, "Yeah, but what are you really?" There is no intense curiosity as to my ethnic origins.

Nobody raises their eyebrows when I say I have two university degrees. There is no, "Good for you," in condescending tones. Successes I've achieved in life, while they may be associated with that privilege, have never been misconstrued as being the result of someone else's largesse over my incompetence or disadvantage.

Certain terminology -- let's take "N" -- got tossed on the scrapheap of vile, cruel incivility before the term "political correctness" reached mainstream consciousness. I chose -- as a sentient human with a fully-functioning heart -- to put other words, like "fag" and "Paki," which were staples of my adolescence, on there as well. Nobody had to tell me to do this -- there was no Grand Poobah of PC who told me that certain words and ideas are despicable. I learned that from the pain in other people's faces. I learned it from the anger of those who said those things. And I learned from the guilt I heard in my own voice when I repeated them aloud.

My beliefs -- PC or not -- were not the result of some trivial list. They're very much informed by people who had an impact on me, like my parents, who -- though far from perfect -- in their small way, identified injustices and tried to point them out to me. Similarly, the lives of people like Dr King had a transforming affect on my youth.

I sense the anger in my own post here, so I will end soon. That little YouTube clip by Stewart really encapsulates the frustration I feel when having my choice of language castigated by others. I suspect PC and PIC are mutually censoring of oneanother and, in the extreme, suggest that the two arguing don't have the stones to debate what eachother is saying, so criticizing how they say it will have to suffice.


----------

