Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
And people who think language policing and hand-wringing over the potential for hurt feelings can never go too far are dogmatic zealots who derive tremendous satisfaction from broadcasting their piety and outrage on behalf of others. See how that works?
I see how I used "usually" in my description to acknowledge that not everyone falls into the same generality, whereas you haven't bothered to qualify your statement, yes. Is that the "how it works" you're referring to?
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
The pretzels these Neanderthals tie themselves in to respect some BS law that allows rape is disgusting. You know what, dickheads? God might just be happier with you if you didn't rape people. Bam. No justification required.
Donald Trump's ex-wife's claim he 'raped' her resurfaces in new documentary
"You’re talking about the front-runner for the GOP, presidential candidate, as well as private individual who never raped anybody. And, of course, understand that by the very definition, you can’t rape your spouse."
“It is true. You cannot rape your spouse. And there’s very clear case law.”
- Michael Cohen, special counsel at The Trump Organisation
In this case, devout treating people with respect doctrinaires demand all sorts of crazy things, e.g. medical professionals can't give medical advice if it'll upset someone, professors of classical literature can't teach Ovid because of the presence of sexual assault in the narrative, evolutionary biologists can't write papers describing inherent differences in the behaviours of women and men, or the classic cultural relativist schtick that the moral practices of other cultures can't be criticized because to do so would be somehow insensitive or racist. When someone then says that treating people with respect is resulting in some highly objectionable, and in some cases batcrap insane edicts, they'll then retreat to the motte: "But treating people with respect just means treating people with respect!"
Then once everyone agrees that treating everyone with respect is a good thing - because that's obvious, and no one short of a sociopath would object to that statement - the proponents can go back to calling people misogynists for suggesting that the phrase "rape culture" is a bit much.
Counterpoint, instant hilarity that tends to reflect the underlying tone of the statement:
I mean, sure, lolol, so long as you also understand that it's in no small part that exact mix of self-righteousness and smug derision that's driven so many people right into Trump's rallies.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Yeah, that's never not been true, especially in American politics... I'm not sure it's mostly about stupid and smart here, though. We've really played our part in screwing up the collective discourse over the past decade and a half.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Realtalk: I think the speed of information (and disinformation) has played a greater part in ####ing up the discourse than anything else. Social progress was on a pretty steady train until the late 90s, then everything increased at a breakneck pace that left a significant portion of society behind, and in the last 7 or 8 years, the LCD embracement of social media platforms has deepend the entrenchment of those not caught up in the previous discourse.
Also, black president, seeekrit Muslim, etc. etc. etc.
It's more than that, though. The secularization of politics on the left has been generally a good thing but has had some unforeseen results, where the void has been filled by what is essentially a new, secular religion of left wing dogma that's held equally sacred as any religious precepts and against which blasphemies are even more stridently punished. This is a habit of mind that's inherent in our imperfectly evolved brains, apparently. They fill a psychological need, so we fall into this same pattern, just with different sacred objects.
So, Bush and the GOP weren't just bad, they were evil, morally bankrupt people and we were morally superior. People will behave terribly, and take their beliefs to insane extremes if they truly believe their cause is the right one. It's a short hop from that to just labeling people as the "bad people" and thereby not having to listen to or engage their evil evil views.
This is obviously a hobby horse for Cliffletcher and myself, but it's becoming a real schism on the left. Ora's about to launch new shows with Gad Saad and Lalo Dagach, so I'm guessing we're not the only ones banging this drum. We ####ed up, now it's time to fix this before we turn into something just as bad as the right has down south.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 03-14-2016 at 04:11 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
says a lot of things
There's no such thing as "PC or social justice culture". It's right up there with "rape culture" as a lazy way to define and denigrate people's opinions.
Also, fat-shaming isn't wrong because fat is right, but because shaming people is wrong. So "fat is good" is not taking things to an extreme, it's misunderstanding the original concept completely. Which you also apparently have done.
"PC" is the modern equivalent of "The Man". "PC is keeping us down!" is railing against an ill-defined bogeyman instead of specific stupidities. Treating it as if it is real is conceding defeat before you even start fighting.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to jammies For This Useful Post:
Yeah okay Jammies. Absolutely none of this is happening. We're all just imagining it. You keep doing what you're doing, I'm going to oppose what I think are terrible ideas and a perversion of liberal values from people who claim to share them with me.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
It has little to do with what is happening, but how you perceive why it is happening and how to oppose it. If you think that calling something "PC", and aligning yourself with the idiots that moan and whine about how "PC" is taking everything over is likely to solve problems, have at it.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
I'm not sure I care who you think it "aligns" me with just because we're complaining about the same things (even if in entirely different ways and for different reasons). If there's something I think is clearly an awful idea, I hope I can say why. The whole "I don't want to be on the same side as that guy" impulse you seem to be describing is idiotic. I'd prefer to be right than to avoid being lazily and inappropriately tarred by association with jerks.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
The whole "I don't want to be on the same side as that guy" impulse you seem to be describing is idiotic.
It's idiotic when you use the same arguments as idiots. Arguing something being "too PC" is what idiots do. I'm not sure I can make this more explicit, I am not saying you can't argue against bad ideas, I'm saying calling something PC is not a good argument.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
The Following User Says Thank You to jammies For This Useful Post:
It's idiotic when you use the same arguments as idiots. Arguing something being "too PC" is what idiots do. I'm not sure I can make this more explicit, I am not saying you can't argue against bad ideas, I'm saying calling something PC is not a good argument.
If you've read the last couple of pages and still can't figure out precisely what my argument is, I don't know that there's any point in continuing. But just for the sake of clarity, it is this.
Further, suddenly being offended has some currency, and this is exploited to suppress viewpoints that one doesn't agree with ab initio - some of which viewpoints are likely worthy of rejection, but others that may not be. Because of this, everyone's essentially competing for a higher victimhood score, to demonstrate their lack of privilege and grant them entitlement to speak more authoritatively on certain important social topics while dismissing the views of others for reasons other than the merit of those views.
This is a mess. It's obviously well intentioned in theory - not causing offense to people is a laudable goal. But it's taken on a life of its own, and resulted in some really bad ideas being advanced as being ideologically pure and righteous, and people who question this dogma are cast as on the same side as the bigots, as if any criticism is tantamount to a desire to just be an #######... as you're implying now by saying this is "what idiots do".
If this isn't resonating with you, well, it's the best effort I'm willing to make in this medium to get you to see my perspective, so there's not much point in continuing.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 03-14-2016 at 04:59 PM.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
There's no such thing as "PC or social justice culture". It's right up there with "rape culture" as a lazy way to define and denigrate people's opinions.
Sure, it may be a lazy catchphrase. Still, it's the best term we have to capture the cluster of social orthodoxies that include:
Language policing
Fierce social taboos around issues of race, gender, and sexual identity
The mandatory self-flaggelation of any public figure who transgresses social norms or expresses insufficient delicacy around the above issues
A remarkable uniformity and conformity in values promoted in institutes of higher education
Double-standards regarding criticisms of religion and conservatism depending on the ethnicity of conservatives
The notion that the merits of an argument are dependent on the ethnicity of gender of the person making the argument ("check your privilege")
The quasi-religious sanctification of suffering and victimhood
The controversy over scientific findings that challenge progressive orthodoxies such as the blank slate and naturalism myths
Sure, it's probably better if we avoid the shorthand of 'PC.' It's probably better if we avoid the shorthand of 'right-wing' or 'redneck' too, and instead focus on individual issues and values on a case-by-case basis. More nuance is almost always a good thing.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
Last edited by CliffFletcher; 03-14-2016 at 05:08 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
If this isn't resonating with you, well, it's the best effort I'm willing to make in this medium to get you to see my perspective, so there's not much point in continuing.
I understand your perspective quite well, thanks. I think, however, that it's wrong.
Puritanism will always have a following. Orthodoxy, as CliffFletcher defines it, will always exist. "PC" or "evangelical" or "Wahhabi", the labels and exact details of a particular manifestation are irrelevant - what defeats such movements is not focusing on those details, but rather asserting the primacy and continuing relevance of the ideals of free speech and free association, along with actively promoting and accelerating the fragmentation of society to create smaller, more responsive, yet less generally effective accretions of power and authority.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds
I take it you havnt visited the Godless Apostate thread?
I somewhat don't agree that shaming people is wrong, either. Shaming people shouldn't be done for reasons of cruelty, malice, or to make the shamer feel better about themselves, but mockery has its place. The idea that everyone has the right to believe what they want and be who they want to be without criticism is ridiculous.
So, really, fat-shaming is wrong because it almost never proceeds from a genuine desire to change behaviour, it's just an excuse for thinner people to feel good about themselves for not being fat, or to try to exercise control and dominance.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jammies For This Useful Post:
