Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
evilgenius wrote:Ok, so where does PC come from? Isn't it more or less directly extrapolated from an expansion of the suffrage? What gives it any gravitas? Isn't the only power it has the power of the pulpit? As such nobody has to listen to it. It has about as much authority as all of the conspiracy theorists.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:evilgenius wrote:Ok, so where does PC come from? Isn't it more or less directly extrapolated from an expansion of the suffrage? What gives it any gravitas? Isn't the only power it has the power of the pulpit? As such nobody has to listen to it. It has about as much authority as all of the conspiracy theorists.
With respect evilgenius, I think it's more complicated than that.
I believe at its roots, it's trying to address a real world problem. Basically, that people tend to be collectivist a**holes, and abusive toward other people different than them. Modern society (as a whole, at least in the first world) is increasingly tending to find that attitude unacceptable. Sad as that is, it's one group of people at a time, and the process takes a long time.
So in decades past it was about slavery, the woman's vote, the color of peoples' skin, etc. and today it's more about things like people's sexual orientation, their sex, their reproductive rights, their handicaps, and even how they look.
Now, the problem, IMO, is where you find the balance? The PC movement is an attempt to keep groups who are treated badly FROM being treated badly.
Example: I have a male friend (who wants to be called by the female pronouns, which makes my 56 year old head hurt, due to deeply ingrained HABIT, not intolerance) because she identifies herself, including dressing, as a woman. It's clearly wrong that this person is physically attacked and chased (and verbally abused) by examples of said a**holes, and any civilized person would agree to that. The PC movement is also against things like calling this person disrespectful names based on her lifestyle -- trying to get rid of the negative mindset.
So I don't see the intent as bad, when practiced with some sort of moderation. Where do you draw the line? Making it practically a hate crime to, for example, call a blind person blind instead of "sight challenged" on some college campuses, seems beyond what is reasonable to me. Especially in a country where free speech is supposedly a basic right.
I don't claim to have the answers, but I think just blanket assuming the whole PC concept is just bad is missing an important broader point as society moves toward being generally more tolerant of a wide range of differences between groups of people who SHOULD be free from abuse, discrimination, etc.
evilgenius wrote:I'm not assuming it's bad. If anything, I think the real challenge with PC is the finding of balance. I only co-mingle it with conspiracy theory in order to show those right-wingers most apt to rail against it the import of it, by associating it with something they tend to really love.
PC is not law, so why do so many rail against it as if it were? It's only argument. What causes a person to become so upset by it? Aside from overthrowing a nostalgic impulse to see the world a certain way, if may be that it gets at people because it assaults their world view. Not everybody can take that kind of assault, but if your world view is actually well thought out, and you constantly re-examine it to make certain it's valid, you should be able to. George Carlin was like that (that whole personhole cover schtick), and he essentially sought balance. Otherwise people need to rethink their selves and wonder why it is that they aren't in control of everything.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
ralfy wrote:About the origins, there are several given here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... nd/399356/
Return to North America Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests