The difference in that scenario, Jon, is that I'd have prior knowledge of that person - and therefore evidence with which to make up my own mind. If I hated him because he'd tortured me, then I could be forgiven for not wanting to be courteous. If I hated him because he's black - that makes me prejudiced. See the difference?
Is Political Correctness toxic?
- Thread starter Jon
- Start date
[kind of sarcasm, kind of serious]
I see the whole P.C. Movement as excessive and targeted against heterosexual, white Christian males the most.
If I talk about a scholarship fund that is only available to people of color, it's considered acceptable. Do the same thing for whites only and you are quickly labeled a racist.
Discuss a 30 y/o teacher having sex with a 17 y/o student:
Female teacher + Male student = Good Job
Male teacher + Female student = Public hanging
(exaggerated, of course)
It creates an untenable multiple standard that I refuse to incorporate into my life. I will settle for "equal opportunity asshole" (If I haven't offended you yet, wait your turn)
[/kind of sarcasm, kind of serious]
On a more serious and not exaggerated note:
I believe we should be courteous to each other for two reasons.
1. I believe it is more productive and leads to making friends even while disagreements may occur.
2. If you speak discourteously to someone on the edge with nothing left to lose, you may not survive. Err on the side of caution as a method of self-preservation.
I see the whole P.C. Movement as excessive and targeted against heterosexual, white Christian males the most.
If I talk about a scholarship fund that is only available to people of color, it's considered acceptable. Do the same thing for whites only and you are quickly labeled a racist.
Discuss a 30 y/o teacher having sex with a 17 y/o student:
Female teacher + Male student = Good Job
Male teacher + Female student = Public hanging
(exaggerated, of course)
It creates an untenable multiple standard that I refuse to incorporate into my life. I will settle for "equal opportunity asshole" (If I haven't offended you yet, wait your turn)
[/kind of sarcasm, kind of serious]
On a more serious and not exaggerated note:
I believe we should be courteous to each other for two reasons.
1. I believe it is more productive and leads to making friends even while disagreements may occur.
2. If you speak discourteously to someone on the edge with nothing left to lose, you may not survive. Err on the side of caution as a method of self-preservation.
White Privilege: Another way to demonize white people, while discounting your own poor decisions as the cause for your poor results in life.
I'm white. I have things. I've been working since I was a kid. Tell me again why I'm privileged to have these things while you sat on your couch and I worked two jobs during college and raised a family.
Don't even begin on the "missed opportunity" thing either, I imagine where I could have gone if I didn't lose my able learners program as a kid. The only thing I can do about that bit is take advantage of the opportunities I have now and create the ones I still need.
I'm white. I have things. I've been working since I was a kid. Tell me again why I'm privileged to have these things while you sat on your couch and I worked two jobs during college and raised a family.
Don't even begin on the "missed opportunity" thing either, I imagine where I could have gone if I didn't lose my able learners program as a kid. The only thing I can do about that bit is take advantage of the opportunities I have now and create the ones I still need.
If Barrack Obama would actually visit my home, I would invite him for dinner and a fire in the back yard.
I spent a lot of time being an angry conservative republican until I started thinking about it. I was supposed to hate Obama because he's a left wing so and so. You know what, the people who kept telling me to hate him couldn't convince me they were actually correct on the points they were making. I'd like to meet him and find out for myself if I would like him or not.
[sarcasm]
anyway, Barrack is half-privileged so I shouldn't have to explain much.
[/sarcasm]
I spent a lot of time being an angry conservative republican until I started thinking about it. I was supposed to hate Obama because he's a left wing so and so. You know what, the people who kept telling me to hate him couldn't convince me they were actually correct on the points they were making. I'd like to meet him and find out for myself if I would like him or not.
[sarcasm]
anyway, Barrack is half-privileged so I shouldn't have to explain much.
[/sarcasm]
Insane_AI, to be clear, I wasn't referring to your home specifically! I just bring that line out of the bag to contrast the living conditions of a black president verses an impoverished white man as a means of stress testing the concept of "white privilege".
Regarding Barack Obama, I agree with you. For me, he has dignity.
I also agree with everything you said in post #24 and #25. Double standards seem to permeate everything nowadays.
Regarding Barack Obama, I agree with you. For me, he has dignity.
I also agree with everything you said in post #24 and #25. Double standards seem to permeate everything nowadays.
Insane_AI's post has also made me reflect on the linguistic differences between our countries. In the States, it's acceptable to say 'people of colour'. Over here that is absolutely not the term to use. So, when I say 'black' I am hoping that our American friends understand that is the correct terminology for this country, in the same way I see past 'people of colour'.
Don't get me started on the Kavanaugh issues. (Or, since this IS the P.C. thread... maybe it's too late.)
Let me be absolutely clear. No women should ever be forced into a sexually involved situation without her consent. The #MeToo movement in the USA isn't ill founded. I believe every woman who was ever mistreated in a sexual way, whether subtly at work or with an outright violent act of rape, should have her day in court and her chance to get justice. There is no excuse for non-consensual sexual behavior. When I was a young man, I was conscientious about asking more than once before engaging in intimacy and I always made it clear that it was fine to say no. And I honored those "no" answers. My parents taught me to respect others. OK? Clear?
Where I begin to get really antsy about the Kavanaugh hearings is that the Democrats have pulled three cases, each 30+ years old, where whatever happened, it wasn't reported. By now, if it HAD been a criminal action, the statute of limitations has run out. Today I read a quote from actress Alyssa Milano that said something like "No alleged sex offender should sit on the U.S. Supreme Court." To which my answer is "Why not? Now if you had said, 'No TRIED AND CONVICTED sex offender' then I would be 100% behind you. But thirty-year-old allegations and five dollars will get you a small cup of coffee."
The problem with the Kavanaugh hearings is that he has been denied HIS basic right to a fair trial. He has the right to confront his accuser in a court of law and to admit or deny any claims and to challenge those claims, demanding proof. The USA ideal of "Equal justice before the law" is being TRAMPLED here. The #MeToo movement DOES NOT have the right to rescind the principle of DUE PROCESS as enumerated in the 4th Amendment to the U.S. constitution. The #MeToo group is using "political correctness" to bring stuff up in the court of public opinion that should NEVER EVER been allowed to sit quietly that long - unless there was another issue such as victim uncertainty as to whether she might have consented or whether she has the right person or other things.
Some of the headlines here show so many switchbacks and memory issues - and contradictory witnesses - that any competent prosecutor at any level would decline the charges. So, lacking any substantive complaints, the Dems pull three moldy-oldies out of their closet - and have to push hard to get their first victim to agree in principle to testify. Even the victim knows it's a shaky case at best.
My complaint is that there is an old phrase: "Justice delayed is justice denied" which is based on the idea that the accused has equal rights to a presumption of innocence until a trial determines guilt according to the standards for the crime. And the constitutional guarantees to having a fair and speedy trial HAVE been the grounds for many cases being dropped. The entire idea of a statute of limitations is based on this concept.
Here is where I might get controversial. I understand that sometimes a woman doesn't want to come forward for fear of shame or reprisal or the compounded shame of not being believed. But the ONLY way in our legal system to get justice is to bring charges. Therefore, excuse me but if you aren't going to file a complaint, then you are saying in effect, "It wasn't that big a deal." How else are we to interpret the situation? And if you wait for thirty years, why are we going to give any credibility to your complaint?
Getting sexually attacked is NOT the woman's fault. But not seeing justice done because she doesn't want to bring the charges in public? The pain she might feel long afterwards IS at least partly her fault. That pain is the price of her silence.
Let me be absolutely clear. No women should ever be forced into a sexually involved situation without her consent. The #MeToo movement in the USA isn't ill founded. I believe every woman who was ever mistreated in a sexual way, whether subtly at work or with an outright violent act of rape, should have her day in court and her chance to get justice. There is no excuse for non-consensual sexual behavior. When I was a young man, I was conscientious about asking more than once before engaging in intimacy and I always made it clear that it was fine to say no. And I honored those "no" answers. My parents taught me to respect others. OK? Clear?
Where I begin to get really antsy about the Kavanaugh hearings is that the Democrats have pulled three cases, each 30+ years old, where whatever happened, it wasn't reported. By now, if it HAD been a criminal action, the statute of limitations has run out. Today I read a quote from actress Alyssa Milano that said something like "No alleged sex offender should sit on the U.S. Supreme Court." To which my answer is "Why not? Now if you had said, 'No TRIED AND CONVICTED sex offender' then I would be 100% behind you. But thirty-year-old allegations and five dollars will get you a small cup of coffee."
The problem with the Kavanaugh hearings is that he has been denied HIS basic right to a fair trial. He has the right to confront his accuser in a court of law and to admit or deny any claims and to challenge those claims, demanding proof. The USA ideal of "Equal justice before the law" is being TRAMPLED here. The #MeToo movement DOES NOT have the right to rescind the principle of DUE PROCESS as enumerated in the 4th Amendment to the U.S. constitution. The #MeToo group is using "political correctness" to bring stuff up in the court of public opinion that should NEVER EVER been allowed to sit quietly that long - unless there was another issue such as victim uncertainty as to whether she might have consented or whether she has the right person or other things.
Some of the headlines here show so many switchbacks and memory issues - and contradictory witnesses - that any competent prosecutor at any level would decline the charges. So, lacking any substantive complaints, the Dems pull three moldy-oldies out of their closet - and have to push hard to get their first victim to agree in principle to testify. Even the victim knows it's a shaky case at best.
My complaint is that there is an old phrase: "Justice delayed is justice denied" which is based on the idea that the accused has equal rights to a presumption of innocence until a trial determines guilt according to the standards for the crime. And the constitutional guarantees to having a fair and speedy trial HAVE been the grounds for many cases being dropped. The entire idea of a statute of limitations is based on this concept.
Here is where I might get controversial. I understand that sometimes a woman doesn't want to come forward for fear of shame or reprisal or the compounded shame of not being believed. But the ONLY way in our legal system to get justice is to bring charges. Therefore, excuse me but if you aren't going to file a complaint, then you are saying in effect, "It wasn't that big a deal." How else are we to interpret the situation? And if you wait for thirty years, why are we going to give any credibility to your complaint?
Getting sexually attacked is NOT the woman's fault. But not seeing justice done because she doesn't want to bring the charges in public? The pain she might feel long afterwards IS at least partly her fault. That pain is the price of her silence.
I was with you, Doc, right up to this point:
I think there are many reasons women don't come forward. You've mentioned some of them, such as fear of not being believed, or shame, or fear of reprisal. For some women those feelings are so overwhelming - particularly shame. We are taught to believe it's our fault, somehow. I think sexual assault is a very big deal - I don't know a woman who doesn't think that way.
Everything else you've said, I agree with. And thank you for being one of those men who understands how important respect is.
I think there are many reasons women don't come forward. You've mentioned some of them, such as fear of not being believed, or shame, or fear of reprisal. For some women those feelings are so overwhelming - particularly shame. We are taught to believe it's our fault, somehow. I think sexual assault is a very big deal - I don't know a woman who doesn't think that way.
Everything else you've said, I agree with. And thank you for being one of those men who understands how important respect is.
Let me be clear: victims of sexual abuse, assault or any other offense deserve to be treated with respect and get their day in court both men and women.
With that said, the #MeToo movement is crafted, not spontaneous. The left wing elite and Hollywood types started using P.C. offenses from high school and college to get senior level executives removed from their posts and they tasted power. Then they evolved.
These people chose the symbolism and the phrasing knowing full well how it can be abused and even how it can be mocked. I have 0% confidence in the sincerity of the people behind the movement; that opinion does not apply to those who joined the movement, especially the victims.
Bee, you hit the nail on the head with that one. It's just as bad for little boys and yes women help make it happen in some cases. The gender bias in this whole #MeToo movement is disgusting. The Asia Argento payoff makes a very clear statement to me about who matters to the movement and who doesn't. What about Brenden Frasier? (Another victim shamed and dismissed) Wrong is wrong and picking which victims are 'real' or not based on their reproductive organs is, in my opinion, at best insincere.
@The_Doc_Man: The journey from "victim" to "survivor" is different for everyone. Testifying requires re-living the experience over and over again for the police, attorneys, depositions, testimony, cross examination, news outlets, concerned family and friends etc. Please consider that and see if your opinion changes.
With that said, the #MeToo movement is crafted, not spontaneous. The left wing elite and Hollywood types started using P.C. offenses from high school and college to get senior level executives removed from their posts and they tasted power. Then they evolved.
These people chose the symbolism and the phrasing knowing full well how it can be abused and even how it can be mocked. I have 0% confidence in the sincerity of the people behind the movement; that opinion does not apply to those who joined the movement, especially the victims.
Bee, you hit the nail on the head with that one. It's just as bad for little boys and yes women help make it happen in some cases. The gender bias in this whole #MeToo movement is disgusting. The Asia Argento payoff makes a very clear statement to me about who matters to the movement and who doesn't. What about Brenden Frasier? (Another victim shamed and dismissed) Wrong is wrong and picking which victims are 'real' or not based on their reproductive organs is, in my opinion, at best insincere.
@The_Doc_Man: The journey from "victim" to "survivor" is different for everyone. Testifying requires re-living the experience over and over again for the police, attorneys, depositions, testimony, cross examination, news outlets, concerned family and friends etc. Please consider that and see if your opinion changes.
I should also state that of course, sexual assault happens to all genders. I struggle with the #metoo movement for the reasons you illustrate above, but just looking at Facebook, at all my female (and some male) friends who posted the hashtag to show it had happened to them also was sobering. And yes, it's happened to 'me too'. We are just ordinary folk, with no agenda, or celebrity. Survey your [female] friends - see how many have been on the receiving end of unwanted and unsolicited attention (and worse). What Hollywood has done is virtue signalling of the highest order. It's not about solidarity. It's not about raising awareness. If it was, someone would have put a stop to it decades ago.
What I have always advocated though is anonymity not just for the alleged victim, but also the alleged perpetrator. I don't know if it's the same in America, but over here, the law adopts the stance of innocent until proven guilty. So many men have been falsely accused (please don't get me started on that, it makes my blood boil) and had their lives turned upside down as a result. And it's wrong.
What I have always advocated though is anonymity not just for the alleged victim, but also the alleged perpetrator. I don't know if it's the same in America, but over here, the law adopts the stance of innocent until proven guilty. So many men have been falsely accused (please don't get me started on that, it makes my blood boil) and had their lives turned upside down as a result. And it's wrong.