So, i've been thinking and i've noticed that most college students are democrats, and are almost always PC(politically correct). Well i just wanted to see what everyone thought about that and why.

Well it's pretty much recognized that youth have a much stronger tendency to be more liberal than older people, so it's not a surprise that more college kids are democrat. However they also have a higher tendency to NOT vote, which balances it out.

As far as the political correctness goes, I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean that democrats are more pc than republicans? Or just college students?

I'd say college students are more PC. I don't know if they're more accepting. Or just want to fit in?

I don't think more college kids are liberal.

I think that right-wing nutters believe that anyone who doesn't think in the same extremes that they do is automatically a "liberal."

But if college life is a seed for liberalism, then perhaps it has to do with education and the application of critical thinking.

Heh, I can tell you that I'm not a liberal. No way in hell. :dozey:

Young Liberals/Old Conservatives

It seems fairly natural that young people are more open to new ideas, more sceptical of authority and less set in their ways and less jaded.
As they grow up their views and ideals can get soured by bad experiences. They get exposed to more and more of the world's "problems" in the media. They start to worry about their own mortaility. They get more commitments and debts and so worry more about taxes and things.
I'm 28 and even I now find that, whereas i once cared nothing about tax rates and kids hanging round on corners I'm now getting more worried about such things.
I'm still a liberal (or at least a libertarian) but i'm less idealistic, more jaded and i accept that neither is totally correct and you need a balance.

I'd say that the more scared you are, the more right wing you become.

But, as was posted in another thread, there are actual differences between the brains of liberal and conservative voters... so it isn't all about changing attitudes. Certain types of people are more likely to vore certain ways just because of who they are.

Political Correctness

God i HATE the words!!!! :mad:

Even more the phrase "political correctness gone mad!!!" which is bandied about in the right wing UK press every single day about almost any issue.

Its a nonsense phrase that means very little, and is just a way to attack people.

I think what it is supposed to mean is "taking your damn liberal views to extremes", but it is applied to almost anything, from important issues to rule son the sixe of bananas. :confused: :rolleyes:

The general principle behind it is that you are aware of other groups feeling and try to take them into account and be equal, but it doesn't seem to be anything more than a dirty word anymore.

I always find it odd that the same conservatives(republicans) who are always denouncing political correctness when it is used to do things like positive discrimination or gay marriages are happy to use similar reasoning to denounce video games.

I've always found it odd that republicans support less government, less tax, less interference and red tape for business, more freedom to carry guns, but are all for as much control over what we do and see as possible.

PS/ Hiroki, what does that mean? Why not? What would be so terrible? :confused:

Well i know a lot of my teachers that are fresh out of college are very PC, and democratic. I don't have a reasoning but it's just a little wierd. Cause they all think the same thing.

I hate political correctness. Of course that doesn't mean I go up to black dudes and say "get out of my way ******", but let me explain.

It's inconvenient. When I was in secondary school (known as High School in America), a good majority of us threw the word "gay" around alot. Most of it was not used in a homophobic way, rather it meant "lame" or "man acting unmasculine" or it was just used as an offense, like saying "son of a bitch" or "motherf*cker". But PC people took offense to that, even though we were usually not using it to discriminate anyone.
Same with "motherf*cker". It doesn't mean someone f*cks mothers. Chinaman isn't normally used in a racist way, rather a way to desribe someone from China. Same with Jap or Paki.

It should be a matter of context. Like some people get offended by nudity even if it's in a non-sexual context (Schindler's List)

I'm actually fairly offended by people who use the word gay as an insult. I can understand if you call SOMETHING gay when you're mad at it that doens't really offend me as much as if you call someBODY gay, because that's insinuating that it's an insult to be refered to as a homosexual, and THAT upsets me.

Originally posted by ET Warrior
I'm actually fairly offended by people who use the word gay as an insult. I can understand if you call SOMETHING gay when you're mad at it that doens't really offend me as much as if you call someBODY gay, because that's insinuating that it's an insult to be refered to as a homosexual, and THAT upsets me.

Agreed. And then all of the sudden everyone thinks you like guys just because you don't hate homosexuals..... :rolleyes:

Agreed. And then all of the sudden everyone thinks you like guys just because you don't hate homosexuals.....This is pretty much the problem. You're either in one camp, or another, no pun intended. Of course it can also be the same in reverse. I've been in the company of a gay guy who was getting a little too friendly with me, and when I informed them in no uncertain terms that I was straight, they and one or two of their friends started treating me as though I was some sort of homophobic Hitler. Straight guys don't have the monopoly on prejudice, apparently. I mean, the word "straight" is faintly derogatory too. It conjures up images of a besuited conservative with a tidy corporate office. Hardly a nice thing to call someone. I object to it.

Anyway... I don't think calling something "gay" as a derogatory term should be censored. Censorship is pretty much always a bad thing, it invariably de-skills and insulates society to the extent that mad dictators find it easier to take over our countries, etcetera. Words only have the power that we give them, and in all cases, affecting free speech at all is a BAD idea.

Originally posted by Feanaro
Well i know a lot of my teachers that are fresh out of college are very PC, and democratic. gee... maybe it's because if thing they say offend a student and these claims are well based they can lose their job, of course it's only because they're liberal they have to be overly corteous of others. :dozey:

PC is okay to an extent, I get upset and bothered though when people pushed to have beef added to the list of unnacceptable things on tv and in movies, because it could offend people from the Hindu religion and vegetarians.

Originally posted by SkinWalker
I don't think more college kids are liberal.

I think that right-wing nutters believe that anyone who doesn't think in the same extremes that they do is automatically a "liberal."

But if college life is a seed for liberalism, then perhaps it has to do with education and the application of critical thinking. Pardon me for nitpicking, but since I've read a bunch of thread postings and can clearly see that you are:
- Very intelligent
- Well informed
- A clear and rational thinker
- and very liberal

I wanted to address something in your post. A couple of other postings seems to imply that your view of the political spectrum is:
- right wing nutters
- moderate republicans (who agree with most democratic views)
- democrats

I just want to clarify ... remember that there are:
- right wing nutters
- Republicans party-ites
-'true' conservatives
- moderates
- people who are too stupid or lazy or apathetic to have a stance
- 'true' liberals
- Democratic party-ites
- left wing nutters.

In my opinion, the best dialogues occur between the 'true' liberals and conservatives (or the other option that morphs some of each - the libertarian, which is what I'd consider myself).

Why?

- Party-ites are non-debaters, they take the stance and fight.
- Nutters for both sides are just a PITA. White guy doesn't get job - reverse racism due to failed preference policy of the left. Black guy gets arrested - racist lazy cops profiling. See? Easy answers for everything - seldom the truth.

Again - I see you like to fashion yourself as a critical thinker, and I see the potential, but open yourself up a bit more to alternative viewpoints and self-realization.

Mike

Originally posted by ET Warrior
I'm actually fairly offended by people who use the word gay as an insult. I can understand if you call SOMETHING gay when you're mad at it that doens't really offend me as much as if you call someBODY gay, because that's insinuating that it's an insult to be refered to as a homosexual, and THAT upsets me.

Well, what can I say. Not one of my high points. But it happened nothertheless.

I think that it's kind of assumed that college students will be democrats...because so many professors are democrats. Reality, though, shows otherwise. I know that in my school, as well as in the schools of several friends that I have spoken with, there are large followings in groups such as Young Republicans, and aside from political organizations, many students tend toward Republican beliefs.

As for political correctness, I haven't noticed a whole lot of it, but I personally despise PC - while at some level it may seem like a good thing to hide our true feelings in the interests of protecting the feelings of others, political correctness ultimately does nothing more than make people constantly affraid of offending someone, almost to the point that simple interaction with strangers becomes a risk. It also super-sensitizes people, basically making them psychological wimps who can't take an insult. In that kind of situation, there is no way of knowing how any given person will react should someone's true feelings shine through, given that they have no past experience in dealing with possible insults (or perceived insults).

In a way, it's like anti-bacterial soap: if you are constantly cleaning your environment with products that kill 99.9% of germs, eventually, that .1% will get you, and your immune system will be so un-used to dealing with germs that it will not be able to deal with it.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.

I hate political correctness. People these days are afraid to say "black" or "Asian". Thats sad.

We are who we are, they are who they are. No need to make everything so PC. Im white, and does it look like I take offense to being called "White"?

NO!

Cuz thats what I am.

Originally posted by txa1265

- left wing nutters.


Wieners, Liberal Wieners is what they are called. Right wing nutter was given to Republican extremists because they seem to almost enjoy making war...Liberal Wiener was given to the Democrat extremists because they are often afraid to go to war, even when it IS the right thing to do.

Originally posted by Hiroki
Wieners, Liberal Wieners is what they are called. Right wing nutter was given to Republican extremists because they seem to almost enjoy making war...Liberal Wiener was given to the Democrat extremists because they are often afraid to go to war, even when it IS the right thing to do. ah, the internet, making generalizations fun. :thmbup1: [/sarcasm]

and no, acrylic, it's not about not saying black or asian, it's about not saying ****** or chink, nip, or gook. I don't think I've ever met a person who's offended by saying black, or asian, in fact it's often said black or african american, or asian or asian american.

I'm glad I'm in Quйbec.

People here prefer marching for humanitarian reasons then political ones.

People here have a strange uncanny respect for each other.
Sure there's always some insults but people seem to take things pretty lightly and don't react violently unless it's seriously insulting.

I call respect what some people call political correctness. Though it is strange US people are more keen on complaining for small mundane things.

Then again in this era they seem to be a bit...more conservatist in general then the rest of the western world.

Yes, I know it was a Generalization, and yes, it IS fun. :D Sorry, it is just my way to treat everything as a joke, in some way. :)

This thread reminded me of something pretty cool.

"You can't be afraid of words that speak the truth. I don't like words that hide the truth. I don't like words that conceal reality. I don't like euphemisms or euphemistic language. And American english is loaded with euphemisms. Because Americans have a lot of trouble dealing with reality. Americans have trouble facing the truth. So they invent a kind of a soft language to protect themselves from it. And it gets worse with every generation. For some reason it just keeps getting worse.

I'll give you an example of that. There's a condition in combat. Most people know about it. It's when a fighting person's nervous system has been stressed to it's absolute peak and maximum, can't take any more input. The nervous system has either snapped or is about to snap.
In the first world war that condition was called shell shock. Simple, honest, direct language. Two syllables. Shell shock. Almost sounds like the guns themselves. That was 70 years ago.
Then a whole generation went by. And the second world war came along and the very same combat condition was called battle fatigue. Four syllables now. Takes a little longer to say. Doesn't seem to be as hard to say. Fatigue is a nicer word than shock. Shell shock ...Battle fatigue.
Then we had the war in Korea in 1950. Madison Avenue was riding high by that time. And the very same combat condition was called Operational Exhaustion. Hey we're up to 8 syllables now! And the humanity has been Squeezed completely out of the phrase now. It's totally sterile now. Operational Exhaustion: sounds like something that might happen to your car.
Then of course came the war in Vietnam, which has only been over for about 16 or 17 years. And thanks to the lies and deceit surrounding that war, I guess it's no surprise that the very same condition was called Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Still 8 syllables, but we've added a hyphen. And the pain is completely buried under jargon. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.
I bet you, if we'd still been calling it shell shock, some of those Vietnam veterans might have gotten the attention they needed at the time. I bet you that.
But it didn't happen. And one of the reasons is because we were using that soft language, that language that takes out the life outta life. And it is a function of time it does keep getting worse.

Give you another example. Sometime during my life toilet paper became bathroom tissue. I wasn't notified of this. No one asked me if I agreed with it. It just happened. Toilet paper became bathroom tissue.
Sneakers became running shoes.
False teeth became dental appliances.
Medicine became medication.
Information became directory assistance.
The dump became the land fill.
Car crashes became automobile accidents.
Partly cloudy became partly sunny.
Motels became motor lodges.
House trailers became mobile homes.
Used cars became previously owned transportation.
Room service became guest room dining.
Constipation became occasional irregularity.
When I was a little kid if I got sick they wanted me to go to a hospital and see the doctor. Now they want me to go to a health maintenance organization. Or a wellness center to consult a health care delivery professional!
Poor people used to live in slums. Now the economically disadvantaged occupy sub-standard housing in the inner cities. And they're BROKE! They're broke. They don't have a negative cash flow position. They're ****in' broke! Because a lot of them were fired. You know, fired. Management wanted to curtail redundancies in the human resources area. So many people are no longer viable members of the work force.

Smug, greedy well fed white people have invented a language to conceal their sins. It's as simple as that. The CIA doesn't kill people anymore, they neutralize people or they depopulate the area. The government doesn't lie, it engages in disinformation. The pentagon actually measures radiation in some thing they call sunshine units. Israeli murderers are called commandos. Arab commandos are called terrorists. Contra killers are called freedom fighters. Well if crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire what do freedom fighters fight? They never mention that part of it to us, do they.

And some of this stuff is just silly. We know that. Like when the airlines tell us to pre-board. What the hell is pre-board? What does that mean? To get on before you get on? They say they're going to pre-board those passengers in need of special assistance ... CRIPPLES! Simple honest direct language. There's no shame attached to the word cripple I can find in any dictionary. In fact it's a word used in Bible translations. "Jesus healed the cripples." Doesn't take seven words to describe that condition. But we don't have cripples in this country anymore. We have: the physically challenged. Is that a grotesque enough evasion for you? How about differently abled? I've heard them called that. Differently abled! You can't even call these people handicapped anymore. They say: "We're not handicapped, we're handy capable!" These poor people have been bull****ted by the system into believing that if you change the name of the condition somehow you'll change the condition. Well hey cousin ... [masturbatory hand gesture] ... doesn't happen! We have no more deaf people in this country. Hearing impaired. No more blind people. Partially sighted or visually impaired. No more stupid people, everyone has a learning disorder. Or he's minimally exceptional. How would you like to be told that about your child. He's minimally exceptional. Psychologists have actually started calling ugly people those with severe appearance deficits. It's getting so bad that any day now I expect to hear a rape victim referred to as an unwilling sperm recipient!

And we have no more old people in this country. No more old people. We shipped them all away and we brought in these senior citizens. Isn't that a typically American twentieth century phrase? Bloodless. Lifeless. No pulse in one of them. A senior citizen. But I've accepted that one. I've come to terms with it. I know it's here to stay. We'll never get rid of it. But the one I do resist. The one I keep resisting, is when they look at an old guy and say, "Look at him Dan, he's ninety years young." Imagine the fear of aging that reveals. To not even be able to use the word old to describe someone. To have to use an antonym. And fear of aging is natural. It's universal, isn't it? We all have that. No one wants to get old. No one wants to die. But we do. So we con ourselves. I started conning myself when I got in my forties. I'd look in the mirror and say, "Well...I guess I'm getting ...older." Older sounds a little better than old, doesn't it? Sounds like it might even last a little longer. I'm getting old. And it's okay. Because thanks to our fear of death in this country I won't have to die. I'll pass away. Or I'll expire, like a magazine subscription. If it happens in the hospital they'll call it a terminal episode. The insurance company will refer to it as negative patient care outcome. And if it's the result of malpractice they'll say it was a therapeutic misadventure.

I'm telling ya, some of this language makes me want to vomit. Well, maybe not vomit ...
... makes me want to engage in an involuntary personal protein spill."

Quoted from a George Carlin HBO special, although I can't remember which one.

Originally posted by CapNColostomy
Quoted from a George Carlin HBO special, although I can't remember which one. it's from the "you're all diseased" and I agree, and for added effect another Carlin quote. "people are f**king stupid"

Originally posted by InsaneSith
it's from the "you're all diseased" and I agree, and for added effect another Carlin quote. "people are f**king stupid"

No, it's not from that one. It's from the one before Jammin' In New York. Late 80's-early 90's.

[edit] it's from Doin' it Again.;) And that pretty much sums up what I think about pc language at least.

Originally posted by Crazy_dog no.3
It's inconvenient.

:confused:

When I was in secondary school (known as High School in America), a good majority of us threw the word "gay" around alot. Most of it was not used in a homophobic way, rather it meant "lame" or "man acting unmasculine" or it was just used as an offense, like saying "son of a bitch" or "motherf*cker". But PC people took offense to that, even though we were usually not using it to discriminate anyone.
Same with "motherf*cker". It doesn't mean someone f*cks mothers. Chinaman isn't normally used in a racist way, rather a way to desribe someone from China. Same with Jap or Paki.

PErsonally i'd say that you were using them in both a racist and a homophibic way.

It doesn't matter that you aren't saying it to one of the people concerned, that has nothing to do with it. It is that all of those words have come (through derogatory usage) to mean something negative. You yourself said you use "gay" to mean something negative.

I know that before i even knew what a homosexual WAS, i knew that something that was "gay" was something that was weird or bad, because everyone at school (who probably also didn't know what a homosexual was) called anything that sucked "gay".

So by simply using it in that fashion you are implying, and teaching a generation after generation of kids, that to be "gay" is to be weird and worthy of scorn.

The same goes for the terms jap and paki (and chinaman depending on the use). It isn't the litteral meaning of the word, it is what they have come to mean and represent. As far as describing someone, it wouldn't literally make much difference if you reffered to them as "a jap" or "japanese" or whatever... but one has a derogatory meaning attached to it and the other doesn't, one is insulting (becuase of said attached meaning) and the other isn't.

Why is it incovenient for you to use the one that has no negative meaning and isn't going to insult someone (or perpetuate the impression they are inferior)?

Even if it is inconvenient, so what... it's still considerate and nice.

This has nothing to do with political correctness, it is about politeness.

This has nothing to do with political correctness, it is about politeness.That's what the PC brigade said too. Personally I couldn't give two figs what people call each other, it's not going to change anything. And I'm just fed up of the natural progression from "trying to be nice" to... "OMG you can't call that CHALKboard a BLACKboard, because that's racist!"

Whatever you do, whatever you say, you're going to end up insulting an idiot who has too much time on his hands...

Whatever you do, whatever you say, you're going to end up insulting an idiot who has too much time on his hands...Actually I don't feel remotely insulted. :eek:

The same goes for the terms jap and paki (and chinaman depending on the use). It isn't the litteral meaning of the word, it is what they have come to mean and represent. As far as describing someone, it wouldn't literally make much difference if you reffered to them as "a jap" or "japanese" or whatever... but one has a derogatory meaning attached to it and the other doesn't, one is insulting (becuase of said attached meaning) and the other isn't.

And it's a shame that they have come to mean something offensive. I for one, don't mind if someone calls me a Russky (I'm Russian), becuase to me that's no different to calling someone who's English/Scottish/Welsh a Brit.

Brit is short for British. Just like (in theory anyway) Jap is short for Japanese.
Besides how is saying Jap, Russky, Paki, ect. considered offensive when saying something like Yank or Brit isn't.

The only [potentially] offensive word that can be used to desribe a forienger that I can think of is Chink.

Originally posted by Spider AL
"OMG you can't call that CHALKboard a BLACKboard, because that's racist!"

But whether you call it a chalkboard or a blackboard neither has any negatve connotations associated. Calling things that suck "gay", or using it as an insult among friends, might not be the end of the world, but it implies that being "gay" is somehow bad. Kids will pick up on that.

Some PC things do take ings too far... but just because a few do everyone seems to assume that all political correctness is bad. 90% of it is simple, sensible respect and politeness.... and if a few small bits are silly that doesn't mean the rest should be hated or thought of as a joke.

But whether you call it a chalkboard or a blackboard neither has any negatve connotations associated.Exactly. Such silliness is the END result of a progression STARTED when admittedly well-meaning people like yourself begin to censor the language of others.

Calling things that suck "gay", or using it as an insult among friends, might not be the end of the world, but it implies that being "gay" is somehow bad. Kids will pick up on that. Have you ANY idea of the number of similar words that have slipped into common parlance in the same manner? "Punk" for instance? If I may oversimplify archaic language for a moment; punk is an archaic term for "rent boy". Nowadays it's used as a mild insult implying inexperience, and nobody worries about offending the sensibilities of young gay men forced into prostitution, do they? Why? Because it was left alone. The longer words are out in the open the less offensive power they have.

If you start censoring people for using the word "gay" to describe something negative, like losing a computer game, you merely DRAW ATTENTION to its original meaning, RE-ASSOCIATING it with its original connotations. And frankly, that'll do more harm than good as I'm sure you can see.

Some PC things do take ings too far... but just because a few do everyone seems to assume that all political correctness is bad.Political correctness is about censoring people. It's about deciding what we can say and what we can't say and as such, it's dictatorial. It's also about reminding people of the tenuous racial connotations of perfectly innoccuous words. Let it go on long enough, and it becomes about calling a blackboard a chalkboard. We've seen the stupid place where it led us before, I for one refuse to allow it to begin again.

Screw PC. :mad:

Instead of teaching political correctness, we should teach simple respect.

Good one, Luke. I agree with that 100%. And I am also getting a little pissed off with the way everyone takes offence at every little comment out there...that really peeves me, and almost tempts me to say something PI, just so they'll grow up.

Originally posted by Hiroki
pissed


Please, no swearing.

Originally posted by Spider AL
"OMG you can't call that CHALKboard a BLACKboard, because that's racist!"

if i would be *black* i wouldn't find it quite polite if anybody if not everybody makes such a deal out of it. i mean, black skin is black skin, what's the point? there is nothing bad about it, or some reason why this shouldn't be mentioned. everybody in the world can say "he's a white man" without being inpolite. why is saying "black man" inpolite? it's just a simple fact. like saying someone has black or red hair.

the point is it is not necessarily WHAT is said, but HOW it is said or INTENDED. nearly everything can be seen insulting or offensive..

Sometimes I say "He's a jew" and people take offence. Yet they are jewish.

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
Instead of teaching political correctness, we should teach simple respect.

but you still would end up with an area that is hard to define, some people not liking the "inconvienience" of having to change the way they treat people and some people being more sensitive than others. And then people would complain about it being "respect gone mad!!" and respect would get a bad name...

There will always be a few people who take things to extremes, but that is no reason to throw a fit and declare the whole thing unworkable.

If you start censoring people for using the word "gay" to describe something negative, like losing a computer game, you merely DRAW ATTENTION to its original meaning, RE-ASSOCIATING it with its original connotations. And frankly, that'll do more harm than good as I'm sure you can see.

I don't see that at all, and i don't follow your logic. The meaning of words change all the time, and it may well be that "gay" will slowly loose its old meaning and slip into common usage, and that is fine. But in order to become innofensive it would have to become disassociated from it's original meaning. I didn't know where punk came from, i doubt any punks knew where punk came from. So it has no associated meaning anymore. "gay" still does.

I guess you could argue that by going around using such words you are helping to remove it's stigma... but i very much doubt it.

Punk was actually an archaic term for prostitute. I don't think anyone really knows it's origin though.

punk

\Punk\, n. [Cf. Spunk.]
1. Wood so decayed as to be dry, crumbly, and useful for tinder; touchwood.

2. A fungus (Polyporus fomentarius, etc.) sometimes dried for tinder; agaric.

3. An artificial tinder. See Amadou, and Spunk.

4. A prostitute; a strumpet. [Obsoles.]


punk1 (pngk)
n.

1. Slang.
1. A young person, especially a member of a rebellious counterculture group.
2. An inexperienced young man.
2. Music.
1. Punk rock.
2. A punk rocker.
3.
1. Slang. A young man who is the sexual partner of an older man.
2.Archaic. A prostitute.


Dictionary: Punk (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=punk)


the word punk itself isn't offensive, but depending on how people say it, and their intention of using it, it can be offensive, same with anyword though. But some words just have a long history of hate in them.

Hmm, perhaps you could clarify your point, Insanesith? I'm not sure what you're trying to say in response to Toms... Just for my benefit eh. ;)

toms:

I don't see that at all, and i don't follow your logic. The meaning of words change all the time, and it may well be that "gay" will slowly loose its old meaning and slip into common usage, and that is fine. But in order to become innofensive it would have to become disassociated from it's original meaning. I didn't know where punk came from, i doubt any punks knew where punk came from. So it has no associated meaning anymore. "gay" still does. I already gave you the archaic meaning of the word "punk".

The word "punk" became disassociated from its original, more offensive and extreme meaning over time.

The word "gay" is likewise being disassociated from its original meaning. People lose a computer game, and say "that's ghey d00d." Well obviously they're not ascribing genuine homosexual tendencies to their LOSS, are they. It doesn't take a million miles of hindsight to hypothesise that "punk" followed a similar path. Instead of being used only as a pejorative term for (mostly male) prostitutes, it became more widespread and common in its usage, so much so that nowadays it is used to describe an inexperienced person. And it's not very insulting anymore.

You're one of many people trying to stop the word "gay" from breaking out into general usage for fear of hurting some homosexuals' feelings. In the long run however, "gay" would be stripped of its serious connotations and its original meaning would likely be almost totally forgotten. That's the natural progression of language.

By attempting to STOP people from saying whatever they wish, when they wish, you merely build resentment among THEM, and of course draw attention back to the original word's meaning, re-associating the negative usage of the word with its ORIGINAL MEANING.

I guess you could argue that by going around using such words you are helping to remove it's stigma... but i very much doubt it.I'd seriously like to hear any logical arguments you can produce to back up this doubt.

There will always be a few people who take things to extremes, but that is no reason to throw a fit and declare the whole thing unworkable. You could say the same thing about fascism I suppose. :rolleyes: PC is after all, dictatorial censorship. As such it bears some similarities... Book burning, anyone?

i'm completely failing to follow your logic. It doesn't follow that just because the word punk became stripped of all it's meaning and came to be less offensive that other words would.

For one thing it's original meaning of some kind of rent-boy was hardly likely to have been widespread knowledge, and i can't see a lot of rent-boys being offended if you called someone a punk (it is hardly a slur against them is it?)
Gay, on the other hand, already has a well established meaning that everyone knows... what you are advocating is that it stops meaning anything to do with homosexual,and just comes to mean something bad. I see no evidence that that is likely to happen in the near future, unless all gays disappear from sight.
Words like faggot and ****** have been around (in common usage) for longer, and have lost neither their original meaning or their pwer to hurt or be offensive.

Of course words meanings change over time, but that occurs when the original meaning is used less and less and the "new meanin" takes over as the most common usage. So you are advocating that the best way not to offend everyone is to go around using words like gay and fag and ****** as insults until people evenutally forget that they meant homosexual or black?

Surely it would just be easier to stop using them as insults??? :confused:

Still, i'm glad that your crusade to use these words is based on your desire to improve the world, not the fact you like them, or your mates use them, or you don't like being told what to say.... ;)

political correctness
n : avoidance of expressions or actions that can be perceived to exclude or marginalize or insult people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against
Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University

You are right, that is just like book burning..... :confused: :rolleyes:

Although, as you can see by the fact the second definition has made it into a dictionary, even PC has become subject to a change in meaning... coming to mean something bad that it never used to mean.
politically correct adj. Abbr. PC
1- Of, relating to, or supporting broad social, political, and educational change, especially to redress historical injustices in matters such as race, class, gender, and sexual orientation.
2- Being or perceived as being overconcerned with such change, often to the exclusion of other matters.
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

Still, if you keep using it to mean the second meaning, maybe eventually people will forget the first meaning and it can be used only as an insult. :D

fair meant pretty...now it means average.
Punk was offensive...now it isn't.
Gay was offensive...it now means pathetic.

Although traditionally 'Gay' was offensive, its usage isn't a slur against homosexuality, its merely evolved to have a different meaning.
Obviously some sensitive people don't recognise this yet, but over time its new meaning with gradually become universal, as happened weith countless other words.

i'm completely failing to follow your logic. I apologise for any lack of clarity on my part, not that I think there WAS any lack of clarity... I will reiterate... :D

It doesn't follow that just because the word punk became stripped of all it's meaning and came to be less offensive that other words would. Other words HAVE. (Take "ass" for instance. When you call someone an ass, you are no longer calling them a donkey.) And other words will. It's already happened to a certain degree to "gay" as I stated before. You cannot dispute this. It is fact: The word "gay" is no longer merely used in its original context.

And words don't merely change in meaning over time, some simply fade, losing all power as "damn" did. Words can disappear altogether.

Of course words meanings change over time, but that occurs when the original meaning is used less and less and the "new meanin" takes over as the most common usage. So you are advocating that the best way not to offend everyone is to go around using words like gay and fag and ****** as insults until people evenutally forget that they meant homosexual or black? It's not "MY solution". It's just the way things work. And the way things work... is better than YOUR solution, which is to tell people what they can and cannot say. What arrogance!

Words like faggot and ****** have been around (in common usage) for longer, and have lost neither their original meaning or their pwer to hurt or be offensive. That's because people are always reminded of their original meanings. And when we ask why, we must remember that it's not just racists and homophobes that use them.

As a point of interest, the original meaning of the word "faggot" was a bundle of sticks, or perhaps a small piece of wood, particularly one that is burning or has been burned. A variant of this word can also be an abbreviation in musical terminology for a bassoon. Isn't linguistics fun? Case in point: Words EVOLVE if LEFT ALONE.

Surely it would just be easier to stop using them as insults??? The more sanctimonious people try to censor the populace, the more the populace will rise up against those who try to censor them. That's not a recipe for the type of harmony you profess to wish to engender. On the contrary, I often suspect people of your ilk of wishing nothing more than to exercise control over others.

Still, i'm glad that your crusade to use these words is based on your desire to improve the world, not the fact you like them, or your mates use them, or you don't like being told what to say.... Ahh unpleasant little implication, the most immature form of debating tactic.

FYI, I don't use the words we've been discussing mostly because I have a vocabulary large enough to accomodate the gaps. But I'll defend the right to free speech with my life blood, make no mistake.

And no, I DON'T like people telling me what I CAN and CANNOT say. Because that impinges on my right to free speech.

I can't say that I use the word "courgette" in conversation much. But if you started telling me that I couldn't use it anymore because it offended people,.. oh I'd get very angry. Neither you nor anyone else restricts my right to say what I want, when I want.

Still, if you keep using it to mean the second meaning, maybe eventually people will forget the first meaning and it can be used only as an insultBelieve me, when I call someone politically correct, it IS meant as an insult.

You are right, that is just like book burning..... Actually it is. EVEN that pro-PC definition implies censorship. Censorship is what the burning of the books was all about, one only has to read a little about the nazis to understand that their ideology was the ideology of punishing those who didn't conform to their ideal.

That's what the PC brigade do too, and don't give us any utter rot to the contrary. I've met and debated with many PC people in my time who wouldn't bat an eyelid to the idea of executing or imprisoning hard-line racists.

Yes, racists are pathetic, ignorant and therefore evil, ignorance being the one true sin.

No, we can't go around eliminating people to force our ideal into being. And eliminating thought and expression of thought is JUST as bad, if not worse.

For one thing it's original meaning of some kind of rent-boy was hardly likely to have been widespread knowledgeActually it's pretty likely that it was widespread, depending on the size and decadence of the city one lived in.

and i can't see a lot of rent-boys being offended if you called someone a punk (it is hardly a slur against them is it?) Well that doesn't fit. You say you think that two guys playing a computer game calling each other "ghey" is a slur against homosexuals, and yet you think that in the olden days calling each other "punks" wasn't a comparable slur against male prostitutes? Make your mind up.

I don't see what the worry about PC is anyways. If words change, they'll change. Politeness and modesty were taken to what are in my opinion ridiculous extremes during the Victorian Era. I'm sure we've all heard about those absolutely scandelous table legs, after all. Look where we are now. The ever innocent Brittney Spears is half-naked in videos meant for pre-tween girls, lingerie models plainly visible through shop windows, and...you get the point.

Victorian Era conservitism didn't slaughter thousands of innocents or raise the Third Reich or produce genetic weapons. There may have been a little book burning and those womens' waists were probably in pain, which I do sympathize with, but look where we are today. PC won't go away for awhile, but if it ever did become too stifling it would just blow over.

Frankly I don't think it's the place of the law or any judicial system to determine political correctness. If a leadership says something the people don't like, it can simply be disposed of.

On a person to person level things become more difficult, and I like to think that even when it comes to free speech, my rights end where yours begin. I don't think it's right if I, for example, posted pictures of some random person all over a neighborhood and printed the words "CHILD MOLESTER" under it for all to see. In the same vein, I don't want people screaming "BOMB" in a place they shouldn't so that I'm trampled in the ensuing panic.

I'm certainly not saying peole shouldn't be allowed to say those things! But there are certain contexts when some words are and are not appropriate, and in my extreme examples anyways, such contexts are pretty specific and concise. Granted, this is more of a safety or legal issue than a human rights one, but I think it's applicable to the topic.

Verbal politeness isn't tangible, but it can and cannot produce tangible results. If someone is polite to me, I'll probably be polite to them. If someone continually insults me without explanation, obviously I'm going to consider taking a more tangible form of action other than asking them to stop.

Verbal political correctness, on the other hand, I usually ignore altogether. The way I see it, people should be allowed to say what they want to say. If it harms your feelings, too bad. Inevitably such problems can be overcome without censorship and without shielding oneself from the world, at least in my opinion.

But if someone tried to hurt me in any other way with their words, I wouldn't just stand there and take it. If someone is using lies to limit what I do and take away my rights, I'm just as entitled to retalitory action as I am entitled to say what I want.

Are you saying that 'shaking your ass' doesn't mean the vigorous wobbling of a donkey?

I don't see what the worry about PC is anyways. If words change, they'll change. Politeness and modesty were taken to what are in my opinion ridiculous extremes during the Victorian Era. ... Victorian Era conservitism didn't slaughter thousands of innocents or raise the Third Reich or produce genetic weapons. There may have been a little book burning and those womens' waists were probably in pain, which I do sympathize with, but look where we are today. PC won't go away for awhile, but if it ever did become too stifling it would just blow over. Are you referring to the era in which the traffic of slavery continued to be rampant, asian immigrants were referred to as "the yellow peril" and so-called scientists found new and idiotic ways to "prove" that people of other races and yes, other CLASSES were physically and mentally inferior to the white upper classes?

White upper class people being polite and modest to each other hardly equates to contemporary PC, which is in fact not based on social propriety but left-wing censorship.

On the other hand, you may be right, PC might just blow over if allowed to flourish. I'm not willing to take that chance however, and so I shall do my best to support those who wish to stamp out PC altogether.

Verbal political correctness, on the other hand, I usually ignore altogether. The way I see it, people should be allowed to say what they want to say. If it harms your feelings, too bad. Inevitably such problems can be overcome without censorship and without shielding oneself from the world, at least in my opinion. Quite so, hear hear.

Are you saying that 'shaking your ass' doesn't mean the vigorous wobbling of a donkey?Oh, how I wish it did.

I should think that there are certain things that are considered "politically correct" that both transcend international cultures and fail to do so. Certain concepts, ideas or terms that mean indicate that the perception of them is not necessarily equal to the intent of them.

"Having a fag," for instance means something different in London than it does in San Francisco.

But a using racial epithets intended to belittle, demean, or unfairly criticize a marginalized class will transcend a culture (assuming that the language is understood) becuase of its intention.

The perception might be misunderstood if your British friend visits you in Iowa and asks if you "care for a fag," but thats only due to ignorance of the intent. These kinds of things are usually cleared up when people talk to each other or as you get to know one another. But just like with international cultures, intranational cultures can experience the same or similar issues. Such as with the term "******" or "nigga." As a child, when I heard this it was in the demeaning and belittling frame of mind. It means something different to today's so-called "urban" culture and is accepted among each other because they understand the intent to each other.

So when we talk about "political correctness," I think there are a number of things to consider, perceptions and intentions being among them. But also we have to consider the marginalization, either past or present, of other cultures, sub-cultures, religions, or demographic units.

Does continued use of the term "nigga" or "******" in the non-racial context with non-racial intentions still evoke memories, some of them very fresh, in those that were affected by the stigma of extreme racial prejudice and hatred. Something that today's generation and today's youth think they understand, but something that my generation witnessed first-hand.

Being a white person who grew up in rural Virginia, the terms evoke past memories and feelings.

These are just my thoughts and opinions... and not meant to convince anyone of any side or the other on the issue of political correctness. I have to confess that I have mixed thoughts on the issue. I definately see instances where PC can go to far, but I also see instances where it is a good thing. Too bad the line cannot be clearly delineated.

well with the same idea, the word gay is often used where there is no relation to homosexuality.

For instance, I've heard people say 'Oh that film was gay'

"Did you like it?"
"No, it was gay"

Substitute gay for pathetic and you'd get their overall meaning.
Substitute gay for homosexual and you'd get quite a different meaning.

Both situations have no relevance to creating a certain disposition regarding homosexuality. The fact that the word gay may be a (derogatory) term for homosexuals is irrelevant.
Many words have double meanings (as gay has evolved to have a very separate meaning), and bear no resemblance to each other.

Speaking of extreme political correctness, take a look at the "Cingular Question of the Day," right at this page (http://www.channelone.com/).

In case you look at that link one day too late, it asks if sports teams bearing Native American related names should be forced to use a different name.

They've already banned Native Americans names for sports teams in California.

Oh good lord what will happen to the Cleveland Indians!


:rolleyes:

Well, nothing has been passed to change any of the NFL team's names.