Political Correctness

[TenEightyOne]

Right, thank you. That has been my point all along. There is no such thing as literal "respect for the dead" it is actually "respect for the living". Glad we agree.

You have an odd sense of the literal, nowhere in the term "respect for the dead" are written any of the caveats that you mention about afterlife et al. Respect is an act of the living, the dead don't have to know any more than a country park knows if you show it respect or any more than your car knows if I show it some respect when I borrow it. I think you're misunderstanding the words in that phrase

 

[Danoff]

You have an odd sense of the literal, nowhere in the term "respect for the dead" are written any of the caveats that you mention about afterlife et al. Respect is an act of the living, the dead don't have to know any more than a country park knows if you show it respect or any more than your car knows if I show it some respect when I borrow it. I think you're misunderstanding the words in that phrase

The phrase is being levied to suggest that there is some reason to respect Auschwitz in-and-of-itself... in the absence of human perception of whatever act it is we're talking about. It is a literal interpretation of "respect for the dead", and it's being used to suggest that the mere act of speaking in that museum is inherently offensive because of what happened there... full stop... nobody needs to actually have cause for offense. That interpretation requires invoking a higher power.

 

[TenEightyOne]

The phrase is being levied to suggest that there is some reason to respect Auschwitz in-and-of-itself... in the absence of human perception of whatever act it is we're talking about. It is a literal interpretation of "respect for the dead", and it's being used to suggest that the mere act of speaking in that museum is inherently offensive because of what happened there... full stop...

Ah, I see where you're coming from but the story was slightly more than "Man Speaks Aloud in Auschwitz". The offence came from the publication of a politicised video that he'd made in there. Had he been alone it would have made zero difference (which I'm sure you'll agree with), he could have shouted anything he liked were there nobody to hear him. I don't think anybody is saying that the mere act of speaking is inherently offensive - it's the act of speaking in a particular way in company or in broadcasting political videos that one has made there. The fact that (as you rightly note) observations of social convention require witness by oneself or others (all of whom need to be alive) doesn't invalidate the literality of "respect for the dead".

I now agree with 90% of your point

 

[Danoff]

Ah, I see where you're coming from but the story was slightly more than "Man Speaks Aloud in Auschwitz". The offence came from the publication of a politicised video that he'd made in there. Had he been alone it would have made zero difference (which I'm sure you'll agree with), he could have shouted anything he liked were there nobody to hear him. I don't think anybody is saying that the mere act of speaking is inherently offensive - it's the act of speaking in a particular way in company or in broadcasting political videos that one has made there. The fact that (as you rightly note) observations of social convention require witness by oneself or others (all of whom need to be alive) doesn't invalidate the literality of "respect for the dead".

I now agree with 90% of your point

Ok. So I had this post a while back where I tried to find an injured party to be offended on behalf of - since such a thing is required once one realizes that "respect for the dead" is not literally for the dead. I couldn't find an injured party. That post was where I expected some people to argue - maybe I dismissed one of those groups a little too fast, etc. What I did not expect was the argument that no injured party was required and that the ground were simply sacred regardless.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Apparently it's racism to hire a recognizable, well known, multi-award winning actor of a different colour to save your failing broadway Broadway Show, because, you know, ticket sales shouldn't matter:

“Imagine 2 weeks into your great review in a new show, the producers come to u & “ask” you to step down so a white actor can take your place?” theater writer/producer Rafael Casal wrote on Twitter, adding, “Actors of color can’t even express frustration w/ inequality in the arts for fear of being met w/ even fewer opportunities to rise.” Tony winner Cynthia Erivo commented, “I honestly am flabbergasted….Mandy is a wonderful man, Oak is a wonderful man, this has been handled badly. Ticket sales shouldn’t override a person doing his job. What I know for a fact is that Oak worked extremely hard for this. Which makes this occurrence distasteful and uncouth … The disrespect of both actors is highly concerning.”

“Hey all. bit of a devastating last 24 hours. so sorry for how everything went down,” he wrote, “Nothing but love and artistic awe for @OakSmash. The show was in desperate shape; sales after Ingrid [Michaelson] leaving Aug 13 were catastrophically low. Show would have closed.” He continued, “It’s apparently a weird show. Turns out it needs a name to sell it. Mandy is a beautiful legend. Had no idea. He didn’t ask to out Oak, the show asked him to come asap because we were on brink of closing. So sorry to have missed the racial optics of it. We had to do same thing with dear, beloved Brittain [Ashford] so in my head it was no different. Please don’t give Mandy grief, he’s devastated. I am not sure that the show has a future now.”

Mandy Patinkin saw the writing on the wall and quit of course. I expect the rest of the cast, including any actors of colour, will be looking for work soon too. That turned out well.

Source

 

[ryzno]

I like the one bolded sentence.

 

[Carbonox]

Ah, another day, another "white and colored" separation done for righteous reasons.

 

[JKgo]

Apparently it's racism to hire a recognizable, well known, multi-award winning actor of a different colour to save your failing broadway Broadway Show, because, you know, ticket sales shouldn't matter:



Mandy Patinkin saw the writing on the wall and quit of course. I expect the rest of the cast, including any actors of colour, will be looking for work soon too. That turned out well.

...Where did this excerpt come from?

 

[Johnnypenso]

...Where did this excerpt come from?

Sorry, forgot the link...

 

[TenEightyOne]

Mandy Patinkin saw the writing on the wall and quit of course. I expect the rest of the cast, including any actors of colour, will be looking for work soon too. That turned out well.

Source

It's a strange one. It's obvious why you'd pay to bring a big name into a show. It's a shame that in an environment where they're striving to make sure that colour doesn't matter the opponents of the move have made it matter.

 

[JKgo]

Sorry, forgot the link...

...OK. Thanks.

So, the story is, Josh Groban, a big name without a doubt, left the role so this guy with a difficult name had to temp it. Meanwhile, the audience attendance numbers dropped faster than a thrown sack of potatoes off a cliffside. The desperate producers asked a name actor to replace the guy with a tough name to come in & urgently to fix the situation.

And then, there's a backlash and it looks like everyone's about to lose out. Okay. Looks like circumstances piled on top of one another, finally sinking the ship for good there.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Every Star Trek fan knows which series made the word "assimilate" iconic. Captain Picard's arch enemy, the Borg. One Manitoba, Canada fan of the series had his "ASIMIL8" vanity plate revoked because it was deemed offensive by the Bor....errr the Crown owned Manitoba Public Insurance. Two indigenous people complained it was offensive:

http://www.citynews.ca/2017/07/31/m...plate-compares-government-to-star-treks-borg/

“The irony of the rescission of my freedom of expression is not lost on me: I have been assimilated by the bureaucratic machine. The individualized expression on the plate has been subsumed and erased,” Troller’s affidavit reads.

I'm assuming at some point, the former holder of the plate, Nick Troller, will have change his last name when it too is deemed offensive to someone.

In related news, a century ago, a civic minded family named Lynch donated a swath of land to their local government so that a school or schools may be built. This resulted in Lynch Meadows, Lynch Wood and Lynch View elementary schools. Unfortunately, their last name is now considered racist because it's associated with heinous crimes committed against people of colour decades ago.

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article163129083.html

As in the above situation in Manitoba, this story drips with irony. The purpose of a school is to teach, to educate. An opportunity is presented whereby a school could educate it's students and the general public about the honour and sacrifice made to their community by an upstanding family a century ago, a sacrifice that made their schooling possible. Instead of seizing that opportunity, the district caves in to stupidity and simply changes the name.

#RIPredskinpeanuts

 

[UKMikey]

I feel bad for him and hope he doesn't have to change his last name.

 

[Northstar]

As in the above situation in Manitoba, this story drips with irony. The purpose of a school is to teach, to educate. An opportunity is presented whereby a school could educate it's students and the general public about the honour and sacrifice made to their community by an upstanding family a century ago, a sacrifice that made their schooling possible. Instead of seizing that opportunity, the district caves in to stupidity and simply changes the name.

#RIPredskinpeanuts

Adding even more irony onto it, by removing the "Lynch" name they are in a way inserting a negative connotation onto someone unjustly (in this case anyone that has Lynch as a surname, which happens to be a popular surname). Which of course seems like the sort of thing the PC crowd would usually frown upon.

I also agree with the comment on the article:

"When you choose to revise rather than teach the context, and you allow others to continue in their own ignorance, then you FAIL to be educators."

I have to wonder if we will get to a point where slavery is no longer taught in schools. And not because southern states don't want to admit to it, but because people found it offensive.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Every Star Trek fan knows which series made the word "assimilate" iconic....the former holder of the plate, Nick Troller

Please God let that be his real name. Just for me, just this once.

This resulted in Lynch Meadows, Lynch Wood and Lynch View elementary schools. Unfortunately, their last name is now considered racist because it's associated with heinous crimes committed against people of colour decades ago.

That is genuinely just mad. If the fields were named for being popular lynching sites then fair enough, time for a re-think. Otherwise... it's not an offensive word in any other context. If it was named after Joshua **** then it carries wider offence but in this case... pffft.

 

[Danoff]

The anti-PC memo by one google employee. Enjoy:

http://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-...utm_source=motherboard.vice.com-RelayMediaAMP

 

[PeterJB]

Predictably of course the comments are full of racist liberals complaining about the fact that he's racist for writing this, which he's not allowed to do, because he's white.

 

[zzz_pt]

PC Corporate Culture Is a Plague That Government Helps Spread

 

[Dotini]

My view on PC is colored by my values. As a libertarian, my highest values are tangible peace and prosperity along with tangible freedom and liberty. But I can understand why many - even most others - would place more abstract political and social goals higher on their personal list of values. A socialist, globalist, or (ugh) neocon will have a much greater use for PC than I do.

 

[Com Fox]

Just a question, do think questioning something or asking questions about someone can be offensive and un-PC?

I hear a lot of people who want rights and say they want to do stuff without being questioned.

I can understand since "normies" don't get questioned but I feel like the idea of curiosity needs to be considered.

When I started out figuring out I was Asexual, I was bit of a PC Snowflake to be honest , thought I was special and actually took offense to questions like "do you 🤬?"

However later on, I came to understand from looking at other people who experience different stuff than what I do that I would want to ask questions and learn about them. So I stopped taking offense to questions and just answer them normally.

Now if the question is done in a demeaning or harassing manner, that's where I can see it being offensive (but I'd see it more as downright bullying), but I feel like most cases if someone asks a question about their identity, they are curious and want to know more.

People who can't get the questions answered will start to assume and that can lead to prejudice itself, as I think.

I would like to know people's opinion on if questioning = insulting/offensive etc.

 

[UKMikey]

I would like to know people's opinion on if questioning = insulting/offensive etc.

Intent is everything and if the questioner is obviously concern trolling then the subject is likely to take offence I think.

 

[Exorcet]

I would like to know people's opinion on if questioning = insulting/offensive etc.

By itself, it's just communication. People are social animals and have developed many ways to interact with each other including learning about one another. People can use it as an opportunity to be jerks, but even in that case I like to learn more toward benefit of the doubt. Let people know when and why something bothers you and give them a chance to understand your point of view.

 

[BobK]

By itself, it's just communication. People are social animals and have developed many ways to interact with each other including learning about one another. People can use it as an opportunity to be jerks, but even in that case I like to learn more toward benefit of the doubt. Let people know when and why something bothers you and give them a chance to understand your point of view.

I'd agree. It seems nowadays, though, that a lot of people are thin-skinned and will take offense at anything at all. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be sociable and polite, though.

 

[PeterJB]

No statement is objective, it depends who's listening. Say the same thing to your best friend, brother, mother, grandmother, boss, and a complete stranger and see the difference in response.

 

[Northstar]

I'd agree. It seems nowadays, though, that a lot of people are thin-skinned and will take offense at anything at all.

I will say that at times it's a bit hard to not be thin skinned when people ask questions. There have been quite a few times where someone has seemingly asked me an innocent question about my nose and teeth (cleft palate), only for it to end up being a setup for some joke I've likely heard 100 times before in my life.

Even if I know they are completely innocent and have no intention of making a joke there is always something in my head just waiting for the punch line.

 

[Dennisch]

Some of those have some interesting results. It's seems that Google has lost it a bit as a search site.

 

[Com Fox]

The google search of American Inventors got me confused on the George Washington picture

 

[TenEightyOne]

The google search of American Inventors got me confused on the George Washington picture

Are you sure it wasn't "George Washington Carver"?

 

[Com Fox]

Probably was, I don't know much of American history so there maybe more than 1 famous George Washington.

Are you sure it wasn't "George Washington Carver"?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Probably was, I don't know much of American history so there maybe more than 1 famous George Washington.

His name actually comes up on the search, that ellipses means that there's another word after "George Washington...".