On racist and sexist content and being "politically correct"

[bloom]

A relevant toon:



------

“Hating White People Is Politically Correct, and Other Progressive Ideas.”
-http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=3641

Horowitz demonstrates that the term "politcally correct" is still being used by the right to try to diminish any attempts by people to expect others to be treated with respect regardless of race, gender, etc. And to pretend that it is white (males) who are the victims in society (as if as a group they are victims because their group dominates the society).

This certainly isn't a new issue yet it always surprises me to see the term used here as an attempt to stifle any criticism of insults. It came up in a recent thread where the poster was upset that someone wanted to critique a cartoon because of it's possible racist content.

This is adapted from one of my posts - that some one suggested deserved a thread:

Some people notice/are more sensitive to these things than others. For instance - it's likely that someone from the Middle East would pick up on something being racist before others would.

Or like some women would pick up on victim humor denigrating women before men would see it that way.

The thing of it is - people could learn from each other - what others find offensive and try not to offend. Some people have made it clear that they enjoy seeing others being offended. So there won't be much learning going on with them.

It doesn't make sense to me that people seem to want to censor "the complainers" - but not the offenders. As if we should go around offending each other and nobody should ever complain about it. And that is freedom of speech? That doesn't make sense to me. It's easy for the oppressing class to tell others to just buck up and take it.

Or do people just expect the Muslims, the women, the gays, whatever minority to go away? THAT did seem to be the message of the Danish cartoons - at least the message that was heard by the Muslims "get out of our country" (or at least - "if you stay - you can expect us to denigrate your religion").

----

Here are excerpts from a related article:

Sense and sensitivity
It’s okay to be politically correct
BY MICHAEL BRONSKI

"Fueling the anti-PC backlash in the 1980s and ’90s was the white majority’s anger over losing social and economic power. The same feelings that gave rise to attacks on government programs such as affirmative action and created right-wing myths like the "welfare queen" prompted George Bush's 1988 presidential campaign to indulge in fear-mongering, deploying images of Willie Horton as an emblematic black rapist. Such feelings also fed the notion that the American economy was under siege by Japanese millionaires and poverty-stricken Mexican peasants.

If nothing else, the PC backlash sought to render social inequalities negligible.... Indeed, the language used by those complaining of "political correctness run amok," to use a well-worn phrase from the culture wars, tried to turn the tables: they felt "oppressed" by political correctness. Rush Limbaugh complained endlessly about his archenemies, "the feminazis," and Paglia offhandedly referred to "leftist nazis."... Paglia, a tenured professor at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, blamed all of PC on postmodern theories and French intellectuals. Limbaugh, who earns millions from his books and radio show, claimed to speak for the common man against "know-it-all intellectuals."...

It was a stroke of genius for the right to appropriate the term "political correctness" (which had been used in a self-deprecating way by progressives for years) to dismiss minorities' concerns as simply a form of fascistic social-thought control. It was a one-size-fits-all put-down that could be applied as easily to Spike Lee’s movies as to a speech by a moderate feminist like Gloria Steinem or to basic constitutional arguments for anti-gay-discrimination bills...

...what has been clear throughout the last 15 years is that the lines between freedom and respect, honest expression and hurtful utterance, become blurred when people vindicate speech that others find painful by claiming it’s just joke. That assertion trivializes the issue and willfully ignores the fact that all jokes mask serious meaning."

http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/documents/02261125.htm

[MadMaddie]

1. The cartoon is accurate....

They want anyone that is not white and Christian to go away...what they fail to realize is that it is not these groups that are responsible for their personal failures....it is the person looking back at them in the mirror....they are poor excuses for Americans....

<snip>
Or do people just expect the Muslims, the women, the gays, whatever minority to go away
<snip>

[Skittles]

2. I've seen it on DU

when I take exception to that incredibly sexist "grow some balls" while referring to courage, some DUers have accused me of trying to be PC.

[WhollyHeretic]

9. It's infuriating when that happens. People use the term because they have

no rational argument.

[Skittles]

15. "IT'S JUST A SAYING" they will protest

OMG :puke:

[Mythsaje]

3. It's an interesting notion...

Now while I definitely agree one should try not to offend, I think one should also b e careful to avoid using phrases and words that deliberately obscure truth, softening stuff that should be provocative.

What we're not seeing is that the RIGHT is also guilty of "Political Correctness" speech and phrasing. "Misled" as opposed to "Lied," for example. George Carlin did a rant several years ago about how we've allowed the language to be watered down too much. During WWI, soldiers would come back with "shell shock" which was blunt and strong wording that left little doubt what the speaker meant. Then, by WWII, it became "Battle Fatique." Now it's "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder." The 'zip' of the phrase is gone. It has almost NO impact anymore.

There are many ways to look at this debate. If "PC" language is used as a way to obscure truth, or soften something that shouldn't be softened, it's one thing. If it's simply a way of using phrasings not meant to offend a particular group of people, it's another thing entirely.

We should honestly turn this debate back around on the right. They are continuously using watered down language to avoid addressing this Administration's mistakes and misdeeds. At the moment, THEY are the ones most guilty of using "Political Correctness" as a crutch. We should call them on it.

[bloom]

4. There are truths and then there are truths

I don't know what's up with people like Limbaugh, Coulter and Flynt who take a lot of joy in being sexist and racist and obnoxious.

It's not like any of those people want dialog. I think they are using language to try to diminish dialog.


Sounds like you are mostly talking about Orwellian language - another way to diminish dialog and obscure truths. Healthy Forests - as they cut them down and sell them off - and the get more disease due to global warming....

Seems like I have heard the right refer to the left's use of Orwellian language - and I think that is just another use of Orwellian language.


They are pretty good at confusing people - I do give them credit for that.

[Solon]

10. Actually, your example doesn't hold up...

Shell Shock would be the layman's term, by and large, for the technically out of date term in the military of Battle Fatigue, while doctors call this Post Trumatic Stress Syndrom. BTW, this syndrom is NOT just shown by soldiers on the battlefield, anyone who went through a traumatic experience, such as tornado, hurricanes, earthquake, witnessing a violent crime, anything that increases stress dramatically can all come down with the syndrom. The first two terms wouldn't be accurate in describing the SAME symptoms to the same psychological syndrom. PTSD wasn't even treated properly until after the Vietnam war, before that, most soldiers who came down with it, and civilians too, would do everything from commiting suicide or murder sprees to crawling into a bottle and never coming out of it. I would say that this is one example where things have actually IMPROVED, regardless of the language involved, though its far from perfect, given the militaries atrocious record, even today, of dealing with the syndrom.

[Mythsaje]

16. I know that it affects more than soldiers...

It wasn't MY analogy, it was Carlin's.

And the improved treatment was due to improved understanding of the problem, not the use of language.

[Solon]

21. So Carlin created a false analogy...

Sorry, didn't see that in your post, you have to admit that it ISN'T an analogy about Political Correctness. I never have heard "Shell Shock" being used in a derogatory way to begin with, the worst you can say about it is being inaccurate, scientifically. But this would be similar to somebody catching the Common Cold, going to the Doctor and he calls it Acute Nasopharyngitis. That isn't an example of Political Correctness, but of scientific accuracy. After all, sometimes what people call "The Cold" is actually Influenza, just a more mild variant sometimes, plus each individual is different, etc.

[Mythsaje]

24. What it comes down to, I think

is that "Shell Shock" and PTSD are the same thing, whether caused by war or some other sort of trauma. It wasn't so much innacurate scientifically as simply the term they used to describe it before someone hatched the new "scientific" term.

It was a common phrase that everyone pretty much understood...it's been replaced with new, softer sounding terms. That was Carlin's point.

[bloom]

5. "HATE PROPAGANDA" (Canada)

I'll just throw this in here. I think it's interesting to consider that in the US it is against the law to advocate the overthrow of the gov't and one thing or another - no matter how bad it is - but it seems like people could advocate genocide and get away with it. Not in Canada. I'm not convinced that the US way is best.

-----------

318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offense and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years...

319. (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of...

320. (1) A judge who is satisfied by information on oath that there are reasonable grounds for believing that any publication, copies of which are kept for sale or distribution in premises within the jurisdiction of the court, is hate propaganda shall issue a warrant under his hand authorizing seizure of the copies....

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/c-46/41491.html

---------------------------------
1. WHAT IS HATE PROPAGANDA?

Hate propaganda is the public promotion or incitement of hatred against an identifiable group. Hate propaganda targets persons and/or property, based on such factors as colour, race, religion, or ethnic origin (Section 318 (4) of the Criminal Code of Canada). York University identifies sex, sexual orientation and gender identification as additional factors.

2. WHY IS HATE PROPAGANDA WRONG AND ILLEGAL?

Hate propaganda causes harm to individuals and to society as a whole. It harms individuals by diminishing them in their dignity and self-worth. It harms society as a whole by encouraging hostility, discrimination and violence.

As well as undermining individual dignity and social harmony, hate propaganda creates a menacing environment incompatible with learning and self-growth, and is antithetical to the objects and purposes of York University as defined in section 4 of the York Act:

(a) the advancement of learning and the dissemination of knowledge; and

(b) the intellectual, spiritual, social, moral and physical development of its members and the betterment of society.

Disseminating hate propaganda is also a Criminal Code offense and may be subject to prosecution under Sections 318 (advocating genocide) and 319 (public incitement of hatred) of the Criminal Code of Canada.

3. WHAT ARE THE FORMS OF HATE PROPAGANDA?

Hate propaganda may manifest itself in many different forms, whether oral or written, including but not limited to flyers, pamphlets, or posters, graffiti, recorded telephone messages, and Internet messages.

http://www.yorku.ca/secretariat/policies/document.php?document=19

[mongo]

29. Under that definition of Hate Propaganda

I could see our government shutting DU down. Don't forget the people in power interpret the laws.

I'll stick with our 1st ammendment, thanks.

[Odin2005]

6. Too much PC just creates needless euphemisms

A good example I have seem here on DU is "differently abled" for disabled and "learning diference" instead of learning disability, and bashing people who use the term "get some balls" as sexist. Not being intentionally offensive is one thing, obsfuscation and creating euphemisms out of fear of causing offense is quite another.

[bloom]

7. It doesn't bother me

to see people trying to be considerate.


The balls thing does bother me. Since we don't all have "balls" - and I think the concept (sometimes language speaks volumes) that men have power and women don't doesn't need any encouragement. There is a lot of sexist language like that that I would like to have disappear. I don't see it as "fear of causing offense" or something as much as I see it as removing one brick at a time from the wall of inequality.

Sometimes perceptions are reality. And while some of us create our own reality - there is something about wanting to be connected to others that share a common reality as well. That's what I think it's about. It seems to me that when people intentionally (or mindlessly) offend a different group - it's a way of saying that they are not interested in that group. There may be a group mentality (guys who like to refer to balls, for instance) of exclusion that may not even be conscious.

It seems very odd to me - that it often appears to be the dominant group that does most of the offending.

[Katherine Brengle]

22. I agree -- being too "PC" for the sake of avoiding conflict dilutes the

power of many arguments, especially in relation to race and gender issues.

[WhollyHeretic]

8. Great post! I've always thought that cartoon summed up "PC" well.

I will never use the term "PC", it is dismissive and condescending. It is also a way for people to ignore and mask their own bigotry.

[Bunny]

14. Yep - I tend to think people who sniff about "political correctness"

are just annoyed that their close-mindedness and assholery are being pointed out to them.

I think the willingness to listen and learn is a great quality, and it is something that should be ongoing throughout life.

[FVZA_Colonel]

19. There was a Candorville comic about just that very thing.

It featured the main character, a black journalist, sitting on the park bench, listening to a seemingly middle-aged white man loudly exclaiming "I'm sick and tired of everyone being so politically correct," while at the same time he thought I'm sick and tired of behaving like a jerk.

[dorkulon]

11. I agree, but...

we should still be able to laugh. Self-consciousness kills comedy.

[cally]

12. I've always found when folks say someone is too PC

that it is a way of dismissing them and their argument. Great post.

[Solon]

13. Those who bitch about things being "too PC" are simply White folks...

who wish they could say "nigger" in polite company again.

[kevinbgoode]

17. Hetero white males are NOT the majority

which should make their unreasonable hold on all the power even more suspect.

[Katherine Brengle]

23. I was about to post a similar comment -- women are not a minority -- if

anything, we are a repressed majority (particularly in terms of our representation in government), but certainly not a minority.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

18. I Thought This Was Going To Be About You Saying Blacks Can't Be Racist and

women can't be sexist or some other absurdity. Glad to see it wasn't.

[omega minimo]

20. Why do you hate America?

:patriot: :grouphug: :hi: Hi Bloom!!

During the height of the cartoon controversy, I learned right here at DU that plenty of folks think that "freedom of speech" = the right to offend and piss off others....................... whereas others think it is the right to show respect and receive it in return (or not).

"Political correctness" is R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Those who use the phrase in its current twisted, denigrating usage are defensive about their own inability to be respectful and try to ridicule the whole concept.

[wickerwoman]

25. "It's not PC, it's BC- basic courtesy"

This is what I told the last person who accused me of being too PC.

Obviously you have a right to insult people to their faces, but why would you want to?

That shut him up good.

[PsychoDad]

26. Very Relevant

Great toon and so true. Thank you for posting this.

Peace.

[Hidden Stillness]

27. Hypocrite, Thy Name is Male

We as Democrats/progressives, those who take the side of the attacked, have the harder job, unlike Republicans/corporate lobbyists of "D"LC, Inc. etc., whose only task is to lie and flatter people, and then when they have fallen for it--steal everything they have. We have the difficult task of turning to people who had only neutral feelings for us, and tell them they were wrong. Republicans use the kind of corporate sales pitch sloganeering that appeals to bloated ego selfishness--"We are the Greatest," "Don't Change Anything," "We are the Center of the Universe," "You Deserve It"--and then we have to tell them, "You are a hypocrite," "We have problems, we need to correct them, and it will be hard," because we are not trying to set them up for exploitation. We are trying to work to make things better, and it is harder to educate than to "sell."

This is a lovely cartoon by Tom Tomorrow. This is the same cartoonist, by the way, who a little while ago had a cartoon ATTACKING all the "missing" (actually raped, tortured and murdered, or as we say, lynched) white women for hogging all the dick media air time, as if it were their doing. Males and their violent, oppressive hate are going to have to be addressed, as the whole world is drowning in blood because of it. Women find, over and over again, that very few males are "liberal" or "Democratic" when it comes to us, and that they are indistinguishable from Republican males who admit they oppress us (although they pretend their iron-fisted control is "nature").

Don't dare touch their sacred woman-degrading porn, because every selfish urge they have, no matter what it was made up of or who it was imposed on, cannot be criticized. A woman who drinks at a bar late at night, however, deserves to be raped, tortured and murdered, as the law student case now going on in New York. A pregnancy is "the male's accomplishment," but "the woman's fault." No sexual harassment claim is ever valid, according to this type. They offend us by inventing the expression that anything great, brave, etc., has "balls," then lecture us that "we are sexist" for mentioning it. They lecture us that "rape is a serious charge to make," then they tell rape jokes and minimize the damage it does to victims--as when they give 60-day sentences, or tell us about how "the poor guy" was driven to it. My "favorite," if that is the word, comment about this came from a former rapist, some years ago, who later felt remorse for the crimes, and became a counselor in prison, to confront other rapists with what they had done. When describing the police interrogation (male police,of course) the rapist, who knew that the whole story was a lie and that the woman was telling the truth, that the crime had happened, said afterward, "I couldn't believe it. They believed everything that I said." An extremely rare example of a male telling the truth.

It is easy to sidestep the issue, and say that "Christians" are the problem, or "rich white males," and just avoid it. It is harder to work up the courage to turn to the selfish males everywhere, all around us, and say directly, "You are the problem. You are causing this," when their selfishness has made them so arrogant that any criticism at all sets them off, with even more bigoted hate.

[bloom]

28. That is one excellent rant!

And I am more disturbed by my supposedly "liberal" friends who embrace and identify with assholes (even if they are supposedly "leftist" assholes) than I am with the right-wingers who do the same. Because I was hoping that the group I identify with was better than that. And while it's not like one or ten or 100 leftists ruin the group - when some of the spokespeople/leaders of the group are on the side of the assholes - that IS bad for the group.

http://www.hustlingtheleft.com/