Do you subscribe to Political Correctness.

[Mr B S Sniffer]

I'm with this guy

<iframe width="1280" height="725" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fHMoDt3nSHs" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[said]

I don't know what Gulag you live and work in, but my life certainly isn't like that. I have a great time with colleagues. I have a home life that allows me to pursue whatever I want to do.

I don't feel any pressure from anyone. I felt more 40 years ago, as a teenager, than I ever do now.

I don't feel that society puts any constraints on me. I just live by the rule of treating others as I would wish to be treated. I don't see how societal policies have changed. There aren't notices everywhere. There aren't restrictions on me. The only big difference in the past 40 years has been the leap in technology, which I find endlessly fascinating and life improving.

Perhaps it's mental attitude that is the problem. Just because society doesn't allow people to act on the slightest impulse, it doesn't mean society is wrong. There are lots of inequalities in our society, but they are mainly from poor government. Not because you want to utter some selfish bull and get away with it.

'Just because society doesn't allow people to act on the slightest impulse' - when did society suddenly become thought police?

[Lamparilla]

'Just because society doesn't allow people to act on the slightest impulse' - when did society suddenly become thought police?

It's not a question of 'thought police'. It's a question of suppressing violent instincts (verbal or physical) for the common good. Like it or not, it's what we call 'civilisation'.

[Toodles McGinty]

'Just because society doesn't allow people to act on the slightest impulse' - when did society suddenly become thought police?

What has 'thought police' got to do with my statement. I wrote 'because society doesn't allow people to ACT on the slightest impulse'. You can think whatever you like. You can't just DO whatever you like.

[silver fox]

Do you agree with Political Correctness


Is Political Correctness a good thing in Society – do you agreewith it? The phrase 'politically correct was used to describe strictadherence to a range of ideological orthodoxies within politics, inthe early twenties of the last century. It is argued that it'sorigins began at the Frankfurt School in Germany, and is based onMarxist views. Later it became to represent both Marxist andLeninism views, promoted by German communists. Even Hitler used the concept.


It was thought by some that to allow society to progress fromWestern to Communism ideology, western civilisation must bedestroyed. By undermining a society reducing their rights, so makingthem become repressed, and emphasising the rights of minor groups,making them become weakened. To separate society. The way that thiswas decided - was to change thought and speech patterns, and spreadthe idea that vocalising your beliefs is disrespectful to others andmust be avoided. Stifle any dissenting conversation that promoteslogic. This movement was not called The Marxist Movement for fear ofpeople turning away, It was first known as Research Development andeventually Political Correctness.


I believe that Political Correctness does act to repress everyone,including minority groups. Minority groups may be protected by theThought Police – but they themselves have to be careful what theysay about others. Political Correctness will take a generation toclear tainted ideas. It is far better to promote a free, happysociety, responsibility and socially acceptable attitudes as opposedto such a repressed society. I am not a communist and I do notsubscribe to Marxism.

Just to say the biggest load of tosh I have wasted time reading today, what the hell are you on about? depends what you regard as PC? sure some use it as a blanket, but frankly the majority do not set out to insult or denigrate anyone merely from a spiteful point, equally there are those who do need reminding that their voices and actions are not wanted, these are generally the ignorant and arrogant, I see no political pattern to any of it.

[said]

It's not a question of 'thought police'. It's a question of suppressing violent instincts (verbal or physical) for the common good. Like it or not, it's what we call 'civilisation'.

So what happened before Political Correctness? Was the Western World not civilised? There is now more violent crime, more murders, more drugs etc., so what good has it done? It does not - it incites this activity.
You cannot stop humans from being human - no matter how many laws are applied. There will always be verbal abuse - it is far better teaching people how to deal with it than attempting to stop people from using it.
If people cannot deal with hot air, then they will not be equipped to deal with far more serious events. Even now, young people are unable to put forward a good argument, they fear their opponent.
Many young people have absolutely no sense of humour because life has become too serious. They have no way of defending themselves - which is what communism thrives on. This is not progression - it is regression.

[said]

Just to say the biggest load of tosh I have wasted time reading today, what the hell are you on about? depends what you regard as PC? sure some use it as a blanket, but frankly the majority do not set out to insult or denigrate anyone merely from a spiteful point, equally there are those who do need reminding that their voices and actions are not wanted, these are generally the ignorant and arrogant, I see no political pattern to any of it.

Well at least you read it, and have expressed your view. Fair enough.
But do you not think it depends on what people accept as offensive, which means it is subjective, so how can you incriminate a subjective belief?

If you take for instance the use of the 'n' word in reference to skin colour. Some black people take this as offensive, while other black people use it to portray brotherhood. What is offensive to some people is not offensive to others and there are many grey areas. But under the PC stipulation there are no grey areas, there are only black and white situations. e.g. Is a musical black on black recording, using the 'n' word offensive or not?

OK! Have you heard the phrase "I am offended by......" or "I was called a ..........this is racist!" or after someone has fallen into a canal "The council should do something about fencing it off" or after someone has bumped into a lamp past "The council have put that in the wrong place, it is against Health and Safety" Or "I demand equal pay to that of my male colleague because we are in the same department"
All these type of statements make people reliant on a third party, thereby weakening society. A weak society is unable to stand up for themselves to fight for better employment, better pay, better conditions, etc., This is Marxism/Lenninism, and is the basis of communism.

[said]

What has 'thought police' got to do with my statement. I wrote 'because society doesn't allow people to ACT on the slightest impulse'. You can think whatever you like. You can't just DO whatever you like.

It is not a case of 'doing what you like' People have never been able to do what they like because we are a civilised society. Why should society govern people's lives - people should be RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS! If Children are brought up to know what is right and wrong, how to respect people and property, and taught how to deal with problems - we would not have the crime rates that we have now.

But no! Children are brought up being taught that if they find something offensive, they are to report it. If someone confronts them in an argument, they are to report it. If they get hurt or injured, it is a health and safety issue and they are to report it. That does not teach children how to stand up for themselves - it makes them scared of their own shadow. So when such children socialise with their peers - each having this same issue, - they form gangs because they feel more confident in numbers. These gangs then rebel against 'soft' society, and we have all witnessed the effects.

Young people who have been taught how to resolve their own issues, have far greater confidence, and do not need to resort to criminal activities.

[Toodles McGinty]

Well at least you read it, and have expressed your view. Fair enough.
But do you not think it depends on what people accept as offensive, which means it is subjective, so how can you incriminate a subjective belief?

If you take for instance the use of the 'n' word in reference to skin colour. Some black people take this as offensive, while other black people use it to portray brotherhood. What is offensive to some people is not offensive to others and there are many grey areas. But under the PC stipulation there are no grey areas, there are only black and white situations. e.g. Is a musical black on black recording, using the 'n' word offensive or not?

OK! Have you heard the phrase "I am offended by......" or "I was called a ..........this is racist!" or after someone has fallen into a canal "The council should do something about fencing it off" or after someone has bumped into a lamp past "The council have put that in the wrong place, it is against Health and Safety" Or "I demand equal pay to that of my male colleague because we are in the same department"
All these type of statements make people reliant on a third party, thereby weakening society. A weak society is unable to stand up for themselves to fight for better employment, better pay, better conditions, etc., This is Marxism/Lenninism, and is the basis of communism.

That's just a rant about everything you've mentioned on here before. It has nothing to do with political correctness, it's all the things you've got a bee in your bonnet over. One thing is racism, one is health and safety (always add 'gone mad'), one is your usual tirade about women's pay, and you decide all this is down to a 'weak society'.

You're not black, so don't say the 'n' word. Simple. Doesn't matter if you think it's offensive or not. It's accepted wisdom. You've no compulsion to say it. No need. Any more than you need to pass a woman in the street and call her a 'C**t'. This hasn't changed in the past 20 or 40 years. It is simple decency. Not communism. Not a 'grey area'. Decency.

Most health and safety rules make perfect sense. Some have come about because we've turned into a litigious society, always ready for an opportunity for a bit of compo. Some H&S regulations may seem OTT, but at least we've advanced from sending kids up chimneys or chewing asbestos.

Women get equal pay for the same job. As we should. End of, as they say. Get over it. Don't be such a snowflake.

None of this demands a third party. It just demands decency. And respect. As a society, we are thankfully more aware of the horrendous situations people have had to suffer, whether it is regarding someone as lesser because of skin colour, or animal rights, or employment rights. Any situation where we've failed as a society, we started to rectify it. Still a long way to go, but that isn't communism. It is a society becoming more aware, with more empathy. Empathy isn't a political position. It's a human trait, well, for most of us. Not everyone, obviously.

Odd really. What you see as a weakness, some of us see as strengths. Of course, if you're a throwback to a time where men were seen as weak if they cried, or women shouldn't do 'men's jobs', then society must be very confusing. I can only hope that evolution wipes that nonsense out, eventually.

[said]

PC affects everyone in every walk of life. So it is not surprising that it would encompass everything that we ALL protest about! So don't try to discriminate against me.

You have agreed on part of what I have said that our behaviour has always been that of a civilised society. In saying - we do not need other people to tell us what to do.

You mention health and safety - there are Health and Safety rules that are necessary such as when using machinery that one is not familiar with, or entering areas where there are risks, etc., But most of that which is described as Health and Safety in society today used to be termed 'Common Sense'
When I was in Norway, about to go on a rocky mountain hike, the bus driver called after me as I left the bus - "and don't expect to find safety railings all around, they only have those in sissy England"

Yes, indeed women should be on equal pay for the same job - but only if those women do not require the services of a male colleague to aid them in that job! i.e. Heavy lifting etc., If the women are quite capable in doing it on their own, Fair enough!
Wikipedia states:
That Men are physically stronger than women, as generally women have less total muscle mass."
Both have an equal part to play in life - but they have different roles. Men are more capable of doing heavy work, Women are more likely to do detailed lighter work. It is not about going back in time - it is purely common sense.
"skin colour, or animal rights, or employment rights." now you are well over your head! Skin colour has never meant anything - but personality has - you can be of any colour to have a lousy personality! On the other hand - many people have a fantastic sense of humour - they are the people I enjoy mixing with - whatever their colour!
Animal rights - that so? Do you eat Halal meat? In fact, do you eat meat at all, or anything with animal products in it, wear leather? What rights have those cattle? Where have animal rights helped animals? Are there no more birds being shot down? Have people treated their animals any better? Employment rights? Speak to any solicitor on that one - they will tell you that there are millions of people mistreated at work and that they have no legal redress.

Read up on the 'Origins of Political Correctness' then get back to me!

Did you get your tin foil hat yet?

[Toodles McGinty]

PC affects everyone in every walk of life. So it is not surprising that it would encompass everything that we ALL protest about! So don't try to discriminate against me.....

... do you eat meat at all, or anything with animal products in it, wear leather? What rights have those cattle? Where have animal rights helped animals? Are there no more birds being shot down? Have people treated their animals any better? Employment rights? Speak to any solicitor on that one - they will tell you that there are millions of people mistreated at work and that they have no legal redress.

Read up on the 'Origins of Political Correctness' then get back to me!

Did you get your tin foil hat yet?

Waffle
Waffle
Something else that never happened
Waffle
Waffle
Nonsense.

You've had your rant about your usual subjects. Move along now.

[said]

Waffle
Waffle
Something else that never happened
Waffle
Waffle
Nonsense.

You've had your rant about your usual subjects. Move along now.

All you ever publish are straw man arguments. Rather like the guy who claims he is a marksman, shooting a gun at the side of a shed, then going and drawing targets round the bullet holes.

You can fool some on here! But you don't fool me!

[bensherman]

For what it's worth.

I worked in HR and management consultancy for nearly 40 years .

It's what people THINK and how they act as a result, which matters, rather than how they speak. How they speak might reflect their thoughts, but in my experience there has been an over-emphasis on vocabulary, as though making people use the "right" words changes attitudes.

To an extent this has been due to lack of genuine commitment at senior levels, and superficial training delivered by equality trainers which opted for vocabulary focus.

I have known managers who learned the new terms but who remained chauvinist, xenophobic and racist; and others whose expression was "non-PC" but who acted in a civil and considerate way.

These attitudes run deep. For example, women are outperforming men in educational attainment. Generally companies with women in CEO or CFO roles outperform others. Yet women are still massively under-represented in boardrooms.

I used to run classes for managers on recruitment. I asked " if you had a man and a woman applicant for a job, both 25 and equal in education and experience, which would you hire?". 90% chose the man, and would eventually reveal that would be because they expected the woman to have children in the next few years. Yet research showed that in terms of getting service from the man and the woman, you would be likely to get LESS from the man.

[Toodles McGinty]

All you ever publish are straw man arguments. Rather like the guy who claims he is a marksman, shooting a gun at the side of a shed, then going and drawing targets round the bullet holes.

You can fool some on here! But you don't fool me!

I don't think you know what a 'straw man' argument is.

I'm not trying to fool anyone. Fool them into what, exactly? What have I to gain by 'fooling' someone?

Your view of the world, or society is very different to mine. Yours is a sinister perspective, seeing personal restrictions everywhere. You seem to think you should be free to speak and act as you wish. Society isn't like that. That is the path to anarchy, which some might argue has far more freedom than a regulated culture.

But with your version of the ideal society, there always seems to be a victim. Some minority that should just suck it up and deal with it, because they are weak, and that will make them stronger.

You seem to think this peculiar world you want to live in existed 20 or 40 years ago. It didn't. But that's pretty much par for the course with a Brexiteer, so I shouldn't be surprised.

[local]

Political Correctness is like salt it should be applied sparingly as and when needed

A build up is bad for society and exchange of thought.

Too much kills debate.