# More PC Stupidity



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 7, 2011)

Springfield, Illinois bans 'discrimination' by private clubs:

http://www.sj-r.com/top-stories/x462605195/Council-votes-to-ban-discrimination-by-lake-clubs

This will affect the Knights of Columbus, a fraternal organization for _'Practical Catholics'_ who are male only.

http://www.kofc.org/un/en/membership/join/howtojoin.html



> If you are a practical Catholic man, age 18 or older, we welcome you to join the leading organization of Catholic laymen.



Tell me how many women want to join the Knights.  Tell me how many Protestants want to join a Catholic fraternal organization.

The net effect of this will be the local KofC council will shut down.  Loss for the Catholic community, but oh boy, the PC morons will have won a big moral victory, huh?

Strangely, I'm not filled with desire to join the Daughters of the American Revolution or the Sons of Confederate Soldiers or the NAACP or the Jewish Defense League, but in Springfield, they'd have to accept me as a member.  I wonder if MENSA will have to accept everyone now?  Will colleges have to allow anyone to enroll, regardless of ability to read and write?  I guess anti-war protesters who never served in the military have to be allowed to join the Veterans of Foreign Wars now, eh?

In the name of fairness and equality, we've become stupid beyond belief.  Will this nonsense ever end?


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 7, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Will this nonsense ever end?




Plain and simple...no it wont. And it is sad

B


----------



## granfire (Sep 7, 2011)

How ironic is it that the Knights of Columbus have chosen retarded people as their charity of main concern....actually around here one chapter had to change their bibs to say 'intellectually handicapped' :lfao: now that mission statement is to broad really to be covered by a handful of catholic guys!


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 7, 2011)

granfire said:


> How ironic is it that the Knights of Columbus have chosen retarded people as their charity of main concern....actually around here one chapter had to change their bibs to say 'intellectually handicapped' :lfao: now that mission statement is to broad really to be covered by a handful of catholic guys!



I agree.  Ironic and sad.

When wearing the yellow vest and collecting donations, I have been accosted by people who took offense at the vest, which says _"Please help retarded citizens"_ or words to that effect.  Even by parents of disabled or challenged children.  Well, here's the deal.  The ARC, which is the charity we support, uses the term 'retarded'.  They do so because (they tell us) the federal government requires it.  I do not know why - but I also do not care why.  It's not my problem.  I am out collecting money to help these children; which is more than most will bother doing.  They'll complain about our use of a word, but they will neither donate nor get off their dead asses and help their favorite charity themselves.  *At least I'm doing something.*  I'm using the wrong word?  Oh sue me.

Yeah, 'retarded' is a bad word now.  I get it.  So sorry.  Shall I stop collecting money for them because the organization we support says we have to use that word according to the federal government?  Shall I protest by withholding my support for mentally challenged people?  Oh please.  People should consider getting over themselves.  _"I'm glad you care, but you care using the incorrect words."_ Bite me.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 7, 2011)

granfire said:


> How ironic is it that the Knights of Columbus have chosen retarded people as their charity of main concern....actually around here one chapter had to change their bibs to say 'intellectually handicapped' :lfao: now that mission statement is to broad really to be covered by a handful of catholic guys!



i love that you used retard. I have been chastised over and over again for using that word.

I  work with mentally handicap people and they get mad when you call them  mentally handicap. They actually PREFER retarded. They call themselves  that and ask me to call them that. 

So what is more PC? To call  them retarded because they prefer it or to call them mentally handicap  because society has deemed them inferior? 

B


----------



## punisher73 (Sep 7, 2011)

I've never understood the sudden "badness" of the word "retard".

Retard means slow.  If I "retard" something, I am slowing it's progress.  It's a LABEL, are they going to change the name from "special education" because people call them "speds"?

Kind of like how when I was a kid they were called swamps, now they are "wetlands" and are protected.

I understand if "they" (KoC or any other group) won't let somebody in based on skin color or racial bias and putting a stop to that.  But, if your group is based on a particular reason and association I see no reason why you can't do that.  So does that mean that I can try out for Black Miss America?


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Sep 7, 2011)

punisher73 said:


> So does that mean that I can try out for Black Miss America?



If I see you in the swimsuit competition, I'm going to lose my lunch.  Just sayin'...


----------



## Empty Hands (Sep 7, 2011)

punisher73 said:


> I've never understood the sudden "badness" of the word "retard".



Nothing intrinsically bad.  No more than "Oriental" or "Negro" are intrinsically bad, but all 3 words have fallen out of favor.  Language evolves, and preferred words change, as in this case because the old word feels pejorative.  Eventually "mentally handicapped" will be viewed as pejorative, and then something else will take it's place.  That's the way things work, getting upset about it makes as much sense as getting upset at the tides.

I'm sure there are plenty of words that you consider offensive that had no offensive meaning originally.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 7, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> If I see you in the swimsuit competition, I'm going to lose my lunch.  Just sayin'...



agreed!!

I like to mess with people when it comes to PC. I like  to apply for jobs where you fill out the stuff online. Under the race  and gender section i always put something other than what im not (im a  white male for the purposes of this argument). So i sometimes put an  african american female, or asian american male. what makes it even  better is when (for some reason) the application asks for weight and  height. Then i really get to mess with them  (im 6'3" 250lbs)

Always  the same response. "why did you put this on the application?" my answer  "why is it important that you know that before meeting me?" i never get  the job but im never really interested im just trying to prove a point

B


----------



## Empty Hands (Sep 7, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> In the name of fairness and equality, we've become stupid beyond belief.  Will this nonsense ever end?



It's one town, a handful of actual representatives, enacting a bylaw which will almost certainly be found unconstitutional.  The KofC and the Boy Scouts and Rotary and even the KKK are still around, it's a little early to be making sweeping conclusions about the state of "PC" (whatever that even means) in the nation at large.

They made a mistake.  You understand the impulse though, which your post on separate cultures demonstrates.  This mistake will be rolled back so that a proper balance between freedom and the egalitarian interest of the country can be maintained.  Start getting angry if it goes further.


----------



## Empty Hands (Sep 7, 2011)

KempoGuy06 said:


> Always  the same response. "why did you put this on the application?" my answer  "why is it important that you know that before meeting me?" i never get  the job but im never really interested im just trying to prove a point.



Considering that the section is always optional by law, and you can't imagine why they might want to know, it sounds like you are more interested in being an ******* than in proving a point.

Assuming you actually do this, which I kind of doubt.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 7, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> Considering that the section is always optional by law, and you can't imagine why they might want to know, it sounds like you are more interested in being an ******* than in proving a point.
> 
> Assuming you actually do this, which I kind of doubt.



Yes i actually do it, not a lot but i do it enough.

Understandable and some people might feel that way. It shouldnt be on there at all. It usually leads people to get a preconceived image in their heads of the person they are going to meet. What is the point in that? It is usually one of the first items on the application right underneath your name and address and before past experience. If it is going to be on there than it should be last.

I understand that by law it is optional information that you are allowed to withhold but i would bet more often than not that people who leave it blank are overlook simply because they didnt fill it out.

Like i said before i have done this before not just once but several times. I do this mainly because i was told i couldnt attend a particular high school because I was white ( i hear the disbelieving muttering). Ok so i wasnt told specifically that it was because i was white but i was told that they had to keep up "racial standards". If there is a difference please explain it to me because i do get it. 

If it makes me out to be an ******* that so be it. I do plenty of stuff that could be considered being an *** as im sure you might as well if not well then you are a better person than me

B


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Sep 7, 2011)

I guess we're just going to ignore the whole "lease agreement for using land from the city" part of the article?  This isn't saying "all private groups everywhere," but instead applying to those who contract to use city land.  Additionally, the proposal is making it unlawful to commit "unlawful discrimination", which refers to the restricted civil rights categories.  It's not a general "let's be nice and PC" requirement.  

Don't get me wrong, I think it's retarded (excuse me, developmentally disabled) to apply civil rights anti-discrimination rules to private organization membership.  I agree with Empty Hands (and hope he's right) that it'll be repealed once the backlash hits.  But no, anti-war protestors who never joined the military wouldn't be required entry into VA hospitals because anti-war protestors who never joined the military aren't covered by discrimination laws.  Nor is I.Q. level a protected class.  You've a good reason to be perturbed at this article's topic, but keep its limitations in mind.


----------



## Steve (Sep 7, 2011)

KempoGuy06 said:


> Yes i actually do it, not a lot but i do it enough.
> 
> Understandable and some people might feel that way. It shouldnt be on there at all. It usually leads people to get a preconceived image in their heads of the person they are going to meet. What is the point in that? It is usually one of the first items on the application right underneath your name and address and before past experience. If it is going to be on there than it should be last.
> 
> ...


I think with 10% unemployment, you're lucky to be so unconcerned about having a job that you can afford to waste your time and the time of the interviewer to make a point by actively tanking your chances of competing for the position.  You must be in good shape financially, and extremely talented.   I have to ask one thing, because as a frequent interviewer, I've seen people do dumb things like this. 

Why are you wasting everyone's time?  I always figured it was to keep getting unemployment benefits... to show you're applying for jobs, but are a malingerer and don't ACTUALLY want to get a job.  Is there another reason I'm missing why you'd voluntarily apply for a job you don't want to compete for?


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Sep 7, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> I think with 10% unemployment, you're lucky to be so unconcerned about having a job that you can afford to waste your time and the time of the interviewer to make a point by actively tanking your chances of competing for the position. You must be in good shape financially, and extremely talented. I have to ask one thing, because as a frequent interviewer, I've seen people do dumb things like this.
> 
> Why are you wasting everyone's time? I always figured it was to keep getting unemployment benefits... to show you're applying for jobs, but are a malingerer and don't ACTUALLY want to get a job. Is there another reason I'm missing why you'd voluntarily apply for a job you don't want to compete for?



Hell, I'll take the job interview in a New York minute.  >.>


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 7, 2011)

I already have 2 jobs and go to school.

 What i do is actually research for a report for my psychology class. It looks like im taking it lightly but im actually not. I have written out a thesis, done countless hours of research, talked to several experts....etc, etc etc.  I have several people who are helping me do this research who I am actually paying and some of the data that i have gathered is pretty interesting.

the extent of what i do is not limited to me just filling out those particular sections. I also have the people that are helping leave the sections with the sex and race blank and just fill out a list of qualities that would be useful at the job and have them go to through the interview. They then report back to me on what happened, reactions of the interviewer etc...

just so everyone knows that im not intentionally being a dick or leaving these people wondering "WTF?" I contact all the managers of the store before hand and ask whether they handle hiring, if they do i say "thank you and have a nice day" if they do not i then explain what i am do and whether it would be ok or not for me to do this. I tell them it has to between us so that data is not corrupted so to speak.

 After the interview and after i have gathered my data, i then tell people what i am doing. some people dont like it and others think its pretty cool. 

It is purely research and I am in no way trying to make it sound like im some pompous idiot doing it for fun or a lazy bum who doesnt really want to work and is wasting tax payers money by collecting unemployment. 

I simply stated it the way i did originally just use as an argument for this thread. I had no idea i would get this reaction. I apologize for any misunderstandings that i may have brought about.

B


----------



## Steve (Sep 7, 2011)

Ah.  You're a student.  Thank you for providing some context.  I'm still at a loss.  What are you researching?  I have had people do all sorts of silly things in interviews.  I had one guy tell me conspiratorially that he isn't gay.  I had another guy demand (sort of) that he be paid for the interview.  Some show up in jeans, or are smart alecs or just don't take the interview seriously.  After each one, I shake my head and wonder why the person is wasting everyone's time.  If you said this to me, "why is it important that you know that before meeting me?" I would thank you for your time, offer you a hearty handshake and show you the door.  Over the years, I've come to trust my instincts and have no problem cutting an interview short if the person is TNT (thanks, no thanks.)

Maybe I'm dumb, but when I'm interviewing a potential new hire, I don't look for political agenda.  I don't look for social agenda.  I'm looking for technical qualifications, interpersonal skills, an eagerness to join the team and, more than anything, someone who is game.  In the situations above, I just see a person (typically a young person) who has submitted an application/resume, made the first cut and been asked to an interview, who doesn't seem to want the job for which he or she has applied.  

Now, just as a fellow forum poster, I'm just genuinely baffled as to what sort of legit research this could be.  It sounds pretty stupid and I cringe at the thought that you might have received a grant.


----------



## Empty Hands (Sep 7, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> Nothing intrinsically bad.  No more than "Oriental" or "Negro" are intrinsically bad, but all 3 words have fallen out of favor.



I can't believe I forgot to mention this, but "retarded" is itself a "PC replacement" of an earlier word.  It replaced "mongoloid".  Hence my point - words, especially when they become slurs, get replaced.  You've been a part of it, knowingly or not.  So not worth getting bent out of shape over.


----------



## granfire (Sep 7, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> I can't believe I forgot to mention this, but "retarded" is itself a "PC replacement" of an earlier word.  It replaced "mongoloid".  Hence my point - words, especially when they become slurs, get replaced.  You've been a part of it, knowingly or not.  So not worth getting bent out of shape over.



I suppose it replaced a slew of descriptive terms...


----------



## elder999 (Sep 7, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Strangely, I'm not filled with desire to join the Daughters of the American Revolution or the Sons of Confederate Soldiers or the NAACP or the Jewish Defense League, but in Springfield, they'd have to accept me as a member. I wonder if MENSA will have to accept everyone now? Will colleges have to allow anyone to enroll, regardless of ability to read and write? I guess anti-war protesters who never served in the military have to be allowed to join the Veterans of Foreign Wars now, eh?
> 
> In the name of fairness and equality, we've become stupid beyond belief. Will this nonsense ever end?



I share your frustration, but I do have to point out that the NAACP accepts and encourages people of all races to join, and that at least two of its founders were, in fact, white.

(MENSA is just a wife-swapping club for psuedo-intellectual posers :lfao: )


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 8, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> Ah.  You're a student.  Thank you for providing some context.  I'm still at a loss.  What are you researching?  I have had people do all sorts of silly things in interviews.  I had one guy tell me conspiratorially that he isn't gay.  I had another guy demand (sort of) that he be paid for the interview.  Some show up in jeans, or are smart alecs or just don't take the interview seriously.  After each one, I shake my head and wonder why the person is wasting everyone's time.  If you said this to me, "why is it important that you know that before meeting me?" I would thank you for your time, offer you a hearty handshake and show you the door.  Over the years, I've come to trust my instincts and have no problem cutting an interview short if the person is TNT (thanks, no thanks.)
> 
> Maybe I'm dumb, but when I'm interviewing a potential new hire, I don't look for political agenda.  I don't look for social agenda.  I'm looking for technical qualifications, interpersonal skills, an eagerness to join the team and, more than anything, someone who is game.  In the situations above, I just see a person (typically a young person) who has submitted an application/resume, made the first cut and been asked to an interview, who doesn't seem to want the job for which he or she has applied.
> 
> Now, just as a fellow forum poster, I'm just genuinely baffled as to what sort of legit research this could be.  It sounds pretty stupid and I cringe at the thought that you might have received a grant.



The context of my paper is how subtle racism and political correctness affects people getting a job over outward and blatant racism. 

For example. One of my "employees" (for lack of a better term and we will call this one 'Joe') filled out an application (I wont say for what company for legal reasons). He filled in everything correctly except he left race and gender blank (he is a black male, late 20's,). He has a degree in Electrical Engineering and has since gone back to school as pre-med (very ambitious). He is a super nice guy, straight forward, very intelligent and well spoken. His qualifications met all the requirements for the job he was seeking. 

After the interview Joe told me about the interviewers reactions. Joe told me that the interviewer seemed surprised that my employee had all these qualifications. He asked several questions about his background and upbringing. Joe admitted that he couldnt tell whether the interviewers astonishment at his age or the fact that he was african american. Joe did note however that the interviewer was overly formal, he seemed agitated as though he wanted the interview to end quickly. There were no hand shakes of greeting or farewell, the interviewer ended the interview by only saying "we will call you in a week or two with our decision".

On the flip. Same company, same position, similar qualifications but this time with a white male, late 20's (he will be called Bill). Bill reported in with a very different response. The interviewer this time was also surprised at his qualifications but made it apparent that it was age related. Bill told me that the interviewer was laid back and laughing. After the interview ended he told Bill that he could all but guarantee him the job. There were still no handshakes. 

That is one of the more obvious and blatant cases but it none the less gives you an example of what I am doing. 

And no, no grant was received. Im doing on my own, out of my pocket for school. It might seem stupid and i agree a little simply because i hate school with a passion but I was given my the topic to explore by my professor and was told to come up with an original experiment. I intend to get an "A" and this is what I came up with to get that "A". 

B


----------



## punisher73 (Sep 8, 2011)

Was it the same interviewer too?


----------



## punisher73 (Sep 8, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> Nothing intrinsically bad. No more than "Oriental" or "Negro" are intrinsically bad, but all 3 words have fallen out of favor. Language evolves, and preferred words change, as in this case because the old word feels pejorative. Eventually "mentally handicapped" will be viewed as pejorative, and then something else will take it's place. That's the way things work, getting upset about it makes as much sense as getting upset at the tides.
> 
> I'm sure there are plenty of words that you consider offensive that had no offensive meaning originally.



Just pointing out that changing the label won't change the attitude behind it.  We would be better off trying to educate and change the attitudes than doing nothing but swicthing around labels.

I really don't get offended by words.  Again, it's the attitude behind it, look at the word "*****" and it is ok for blacks to call other blacks that, but NOT ok for a white person to call a black person that.  It's not the word that is offensive it is the person who is saying it.

I know George Carlin had a lot of bits on language and word usage, he was right on point with them most of the time.


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 8, 2011)

punisher73 said:


> Was it the same interviewer too?



yes it was. sorry should have stated that.

B


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 8, 2011)

punisher73 said:


> Just pointing out that changing the label won't change the attitude behind it.  We would be better off trying to educate and change the attitudes than doing nothing but swicthing around labels.
> 
> I really don't get offended by words.  Again, it's the attitude behind it, look at the word "*****" and it is ok for blacks to call other blacks that, but NOT ok for a white person to call a black person that.  It's not the word that is offensive it is the person who is saying it.
> 
> I know George Carlin had a lot of bits on language and word usage, he was right on point with them most of the time.



I like what you said here and i agree but i have a slightly different take on it. As for the word "*****" or any variation of it, a lot of my black friends have said its not so much the fact that white people say it as it is the history behind the word. For years it was derogatory and demeaning (as it is still used today in some places). They said that from talking to their older relatives a lot of the younger generation started to use it after the civil rights movement as a sort of a slap in the face to white people. as in "we are going to take this word and make it our own" sort of thing.

Thoughts?

B


----------



## Empty Hands (Sep 8, 2011)

punisher73 said:


> Again, it's the attitude behind it, look at the word "*****" and it is ok for blacks to call other blacks that, but NOT ok for a white person to call a black person that.  It's not the word that is offensive it is the person who is saying it.



Certainly you can understand why.  I'm absolutely positive in fact that you take a similar view on different words.  Would you mind if a man you just met called your children or spouse "honey" or "sweetie"?  I'll bet your friends call you a few nasty names all in good fun now and again, when if a stranger did the same would earn a punch in the nose.  And so on.


----------



## punisher73 (Sep 8, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> Certainly you can understand why. I'm absolutely positive in fact that you take a similar view on different words. Would you mind if a man you just met called your children or spouse "honey" or "sweetie"? I'll bet your friends call you a few nasty names all in good fun now and again, when if a stranger did the same would earn a punch in the nose. And so on.



I have been there when several old men have called my wife "hon" or "sweetie" and meant it in a nice grandfatherly way.  If someone were to call her that with a different intent then the attitude would dictate the response, not the word itself.


----------



## JohnEdward (Sep 8, 2011)

*WARNING MAYBE OFFENSIVE: ** It is my intention to discuss the subject absent of the PC guards and racial guards that are set in place in society.  **It is not my intention to use the post and my opinion to discredit, insult, harass, offend, be racist, or otherwise. 
**IF you are easily offended, have a chip on your shoulder, pro PC, wear your heart on your sleeve, hyper-sensitive to language etc., or in any other such offended my terms deem socially unacceptable DON'T READ this. Rated XXX (not as porn movies goes) for use of many socially deemed inappropriate and highly offensive words.  





*


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 8, 2011)

johnedward said:


> *warning maybe offensive: ** it is my intention to discuss the subject absent of the pc guards and racial guards that are set in place in society.  **it is not my intention to use the post and my opinion to discredit, insult, harass, offend, be racist, or otherwise.
> **if you are easily offended, have a chip on your shoulder, pro pc, wear your heart on your sleeve, hyper-sensitive to language etc., or in any other such offended my terms deem socially unacceptable don't read this. rated xxx (not as porn movies goes) for use of many socially deemed inappropriate and highly offensive words.
> 
> 
> ...



lol!

B


----------



## elder999 (Sep 8, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> *WARNING MAYBE OFFENSIVE: **It is my intention to discuss the subject absent of the PC guards and racial guards that are set in place in society. **It is not my intention to use the post and my opinion to discredit, insult, harass, offend, be racist, or otherwise.
> **IF you are easily offended, have a chip on your shoulder, pro PC, wear your heart on your sleeve, hyper-sensitive to language etc., or in any other such offended my terms deem socially unacceptable DON'T READ this. Rated XXX (not as porn movies goes) for use of many socially deemed inappropriate and highly offensive words.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## JohnEdward (Sep 8, 2011)

*WARNING MAYBE OFFENSIVE: IF you are easily offended, have a chip on your shoulder, pro PC, wear your heart on your sleeve, hyper-sensitive, or in any other such way I have not mentioned DON'T READ. Rated X for use of many inappropriate words.  
*
It is not my intention to use the post and my opinion to discredit, insult, harass, offend, be racist, or otherwise.  It is my intention to discuss the subject absent of the PC guards and racial guards that are set in place in society. 


Blind, SOB, Bastard, A-hole, Dumb-Fck Mother-F-fer, Sht-head Bastard, Bytch, Whore, Hooker, Pimp, Ho, Fool, Slut, Snob, Cougar, Trophy wife, dick, john, Stupid, Moron, Butt-kisser, Brown noser, Punk, Thug, Criminal, Con, Con artist, Ghetto (Jew where forced to live on that island when considered trash), White thrash, Hillbilly, Country, Black, White, Red, Yellow, Asian, African, Gringo, plus many more, these people should all get together as a group and make these words off limits, and exercise their PC rights too.  Such words should be tagged PC unfriendly, as Fag, Retarded, Crippled, etc.  

By no means should we expect those groups or people's who have offensive derogatory words be targeted and PC them out, NO WAY. May the PC god forbid we do that. We can't offend such offended groups for using derogatory terms for others.  


For the op, what is happening to KofC is so that other groups can have their exclusive organizations. KofC is a "white male" oppressive organization. Seen as a symbol of what many PC groups are sensitive to, though I doubt the KofC where or ever was like the KKK.  The new oppressive power organization is PC.


----------



## elder999 (Sep 8, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> *WARNING MAYBE OFFENSIVE: IF you are easily offended, have a chip on your shoulder, pro PC, wear your heart on your sleeve, hyper-sensitive, or in any other such way I have not mentioned DON'T READ. Rated X for use of many inappropriate words.  *It is not my intention to use the post and my opinion to discredit, insult, harass, offend, be racist, or otherwise.  It is my intention to discuss the subject absent of the PC guards and racial guards that are set in place in society. Blind, SOB, Bastard, A-hole, Dumb-Fck Mother-F-fer, Sht-head Bastard, Bytch, Whore, Hooker, Pimp, Ho, Fool, Slut, Snob, Cougar, Trophy wife, dick, john, Stupid, Moron, Butt-kisser, Brown noser, Punk, Thug, Criminal, Con, Con artist, Ghetto (Jew where forced to live on that island when considered trash), White thrash, Hillbilly, Country, Black, White, Red, Yellow, Asian, African, Gringo, plus many more, these people should all get together as a group and make these words off limits, and exercise their PC rights too.  Such words should be tagged PC unfriendly, as Fag, Retarded, Crippled, etc.  By no means should we expect those groups or people's who have offensive derogatory words be targeted and PC them out, NO WAY. May the PC god forbid we do that. We can't offend such offended groups for using derogatory terms for others.  For the op, what is happening to KofC is so that other groups can have their exclusive organizations. KofC is a "white male" oppressive organization. Seen as a symbol of what many PC groups are sensitive to, though I doubt the KofC where or ever was like the KKK.  The new oppressive power organization is PC.


Nope.....I gotta stick with the pancake bunny here, sorry :lfao: (and scratching head)


----------



## KempoGuy06 (Sep 8, 2011)

elder999 said:


> Nope.....I gotta stick with the pancake bunny here, sorry :lfao: (and scratching head)



pancake bunny was hilarious

B


----------



## Touch Of Death (Sep 8, 2011)

punisher73 said:


> I've never understood the sudden "badness" of the word "retard".
> 
> Retard means slow.  If I "retard" something, I am slowing it's progress.  It's a LABEL, are they going to change the name from "special education" because people call them "speds"?
> 
> ...


As with any form of identity, the magic moment happens when people start using the term as a slur. Idiot used to be a great way to describe a retarded person, but since we call bad decisions idiotic, the word lost its meaning and took on a negative connotation. Try using that term now and you will get punched in the face, unless you are talking about a normal person that made a poor decision.
Sean


----------

