Political correctness run amok

Intended for constructive conversations. Exhibits of polarizing tribalism will be deleted.
Locked
BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by BRUTE »

Spartan_Warrior wrote:Is it also inoffensive for a white person to dress in blackface?
it is inoffensive to brute. why would brute give a fuck if somebody puts sharpie on their face? what's the offense? trying to look black? doesn't that imply it's offensive to be black?

brute doesn't get why oppression comes into this - yes, some black humans were/are being oppressed by some other humans, of whom some were/are white. but if a white person puts black paint on their face, how is this offensive to blacks?

Dragline
Posts: 4436
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 1:50 am

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by Dragline »

For the same reason Jewish people (and most other people) have a visceral negative reaction to swastikas, which prior to the 1920s were just a lucky symbol that originated in India.

Historically, white actors would don black face and then act like fools, buffoons and animals while wearing it for the purpose of generating laughter and delight in ridiculing black people because they were black and held to be inferior or even "sub-human". Cartoons from the 1930s-1950s are also emblematic of this. Blackface still carries that symbolism, which is why it is regarded as extremely bad manners even if no ill will or denigration is intended.

Humans are strongly primed with symbols from their cultural histories or collective memories, both positive and negative, through what Kahneman would identify as "System 1" heuristics. To pretend that these things don't matter or should not matter is to essentially say that "the problem with human beings is that they act like human beings", instead of working with them in the way they actually exist.

But you can also see where this breaks down -- where there is no cultural history or collective memory of the symbol having a particular meaning -- or if that meaning has disappeared with time which it often does --, but instead the meaning is being newly manufactured to claim victimhood, the whole idea becomes a parody of itself.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

Dragline pretty much explained why the blackface example is offensive, and this should also explain why past/present oppression in general is (or presumably should be) a prerequisite for anything to be considered politically incorrect/cultural appropriation/etc. For any act to be politically incorrect it seems to require that in some way it serves as a reminder of a past or present injustice or oppression.

This is also why, while funny, the "this is a culture, not a costume" series rather misses the mark IMO (perhaps deliberately); with few exceptions, none of those characters represents an actual culture*, much less a culture that has actually been oppressed.

*Ironically, some of the characters that do represent a culture, like Machete, would probably be considered non-PC in and of themselves by some. (I haven't seen the movie, but I seem to recall some amount of controversy.)

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by BRUTE »

Dragline wrote:To pretend that these things don't matter or should not matter is to essentially say that "the problem with human beings is that they act like human beings", instead of working with them in the way they actually exist.
instead, let's perpetuate this. great idea.

Riggerjack
Posts: 3182
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by Riggerjack »

I find political correctness offensive. Cuz mah freedums.

Specifically, I find it offensive that someone is trying to impose the rules and behaviors of children, on adults. Hall monitoring should stop in elementary school.

You have no authority over my speach. None. Ever.

There may be consequences to my speach. If that is the case, I will face them. Nobody has the right to silence me for their comfort. Everyone has the right to leave/avoid me/shout me down. To imply that I don't have the responsibility for my actions, is to deny my freedom to act, to try to relegate me to the status of dependant, a child. I will not subrogate my will to comply with the rulings of a Hall monitor.

This is important, because these "students" who are so afraid of ideas/speach/images/ideas will eventually be coworkers, supervisors, or, most likely, HR directors.

The pattern of this that I object to, is that someone finds something to be "offended" by, and then all progress of the organization must stop, and address this potentially offensive issue. How can this behavior lead to good things for society? How can such childish behavior be tolerated, and still team goals be achieved? This places "being offended" at the top of the list of problems to solve.

I don't espouse offending anyone, for any reason, but I am aware that it is an inevitable result of people with differing views/opinions/values interacting.

How is someone supposed to learn to respect other cultures if nobody is allowed to be exposed to other cultures? The disabled kids shouldn't have a stretching class for fear that someone will lose respect for yoga?

Trump 2016 in chalk on a wall, is Not the same as spray painted swastikas. If your problem can be solved by rain, maybe it should be solved by rain, or get a hose. Or chalk!

I'm trying to keep other cultures from the raw power my white trash culture is hoarding. Seriously? This is simply trying to shame anyone with a critical thought. If I think we gain thru diversity of thinking, I must be a racist. Ignorant. Threatened by the rise in power of the (insert sympathetic cause here).

I object to the preaching of intolerance. The fact that they preach intolerance, and call it tolerance, just adds an Orwellian twist that doesn't improve the flavor.
Last edited by Riggerjack on Fri Oct 28, 2016 2:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Riggerjack
Posts: 3182
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by Riggerjack »

For the record, I approve of kids being the force of progressive thought. Hell, that's when you should be progressive, before being exposed to the real world, and how badly the results of progressive thought go sideways with unintended consequences. I approve of protests in colleges. I think that progressives have made a lot of good contributions to society. And that society is moving in that direction, and this is good.

What I don't want to see, is censorship, victim culture, or shaming/bullying of those with minority opinions. That is the political correctness that raises my hackles.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15907
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by jacob »

Aristotle wrote:It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain more than one thought without accepting it.
Therefore, universities should by definition and construction be the last place where "safe spaces" and similar anti-intellectual ideas are entertained. They're supposed to be spaces where disagreements are solved intellectually. It seems that they're increasingly not. Perhaps this is part of the fourth turning. Intellectuals are also the first to get shut down when there's a rapid change in values. The western world is currently cycling through a period of increased fascism, so maybe that explains the desire to put in top-down restrictions "for the greater "corporate(*) good".

(*) Which in this case doesn't mean "business" but is to be taken in its contextual/political meaning.

I've also noticed that these disagreements are somewhat explainable if people are assigned to three stages for a given cause, X:
1) X is commonly and unquestionably accepted. The pre-X stage.
2) X is controversial with lines sharply drawn up. This stage is where the particular X-ism typically gets named.
3) X is commonly believed to be only of historic interest. The post-X stage.

The dynamics of the disagreement happens when people belonging to different stages interact and meet. In that case, there's a kind of Wheaton-like social dynamics going on. Except in this case it's circular! Anyone both too far ahead and too far behind is considered to be some kind of insensitive/clueless neanderthal(*) incapable of contextual reference. Hence, much disagreement ensues.

(*) ;-)

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by BRUTE »

Riggerjack wrote:You have no authority over my speach. None. Ever.
speech

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by BRUTE »

jacob wrote:Therefore, universities should by definition and construction be the last place where "safe spaces" and similar anti-intellectual ideas are entertained. They're supposed to be spaces where disagreements are solved intellectually.
schools and universities are day care for humans who haven't joined the work force and those who never will (i.e. professors and teachers).

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

BRUTE wrote:
jacob wrote:Therefore, universities should by definition and construction be the last place where "safe spaces" and similar anti-intellectual ideas are entertained. They're supposed to be spaces where disagreements are solved intellectually.
schools and universities are day care for humans who haven't joined the work force and those who never will (i.e. professors and teachers).
Exactly! I find the outrage over dress codes at university and the allusions to fascism a little much considering every one here bows (or bowed) your heads to the almighty dress code at your fascist jobs, too, right? If I wore an inappropriate costume to work I'd be in trouble there, too. You do not and have never had free speech outside of your relationship with the government itself. In other words, the only consequence of free speech from which you are (supposedly, lol) protected is arrest and prosecution. Other consequences between you and private entities, like at schools, or jobs, can remain very much in play with no infringement to anyone's rights. If anything, rules like that on a campus strike me as serving to indoctrinate--sorry, train kids for their future wage slave existences, which is the actual goal of most edumacation in this country anyway--nothing to do with intellectualism. Can we even call this a new trend? If this is fascism, it's been here quite a while, IMO. Maybe this is just a new place for it.

Also, I seem to be out of the loop on this issue (I've certainly never been in a safe space), but are we sure that safe spaces AREN'T "spaces where disagreements are solved intellectually"? According to Zalo, they are intended for just that, akin to what's happening in this thread. (Perhaps this is semantic, as it would seem the general "PC culture" is separate from the concept of "safe space", with the former being more ubiquitous and the latter being a designated zone and/or student group.)

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 6851
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by jennypenny »

Tyler9000 wrote:It reminds me of a conversation I had with a young San Francisco native and Berkeley grad upon me moving to the Bay Area. Paraphrasing her (and spoken without a scent of irony): "I love San Francisco. It's the most diverse, inclusive, and tolerant city, and everyone is welcome. Well, unless you're Republican or Christian. In which case, GTFO. You don't belong here."
Article from the Yale News: Election 2016: Conservative Views Considered Unwelcome at Yale

"Despite ongoing campus discussions about free speech, Yale remains deeply unwelcoming to students with conservative political beliefs, according to a News survey distributed earlier this month."

This is why people don't want to be lectured by the same people about not being PC enough.

TopHatFox
Posts: 2322
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:07 pm
Location: FL; 25

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by TopHatFox »

Spartan_Warrior wrote: micro-aggressions is sort of a luxury of the affluent.
From what I understand (I can't represent my entire age cohort, so please continue doing your own research too ya'll), micro-aggressions are not necessarily a topic of interest for wealthy people to discuss, as much as they are a subtle indicator of underlying systematic problems in the way our country and culture are run. For instance, I remember watching a video where a black person wearing a suit in NY was treated about as equally as a white person wearing casual clothing, and a black person wearing the same casual clothing was treated worse than when the white person wore them (the venues were at a bus stop, the cash register at shops, when talking with strangers, etc.). The inherent message in this specific micro-aggression is that there tends to be a culture of thinking white-appearing people are more trustworthy and upstanding than black-appearing people.

The larger systematic consequences of the aggregate of these micro-aggressions include a large percentage of black people being incarcerated in prisons (a large percentage of those for minor possession of weed), black people having less access to education, black people growing up in low-income, low-opportunity neighborhoods, and more. There's something to be said for personal initiative and resilience, but a systematic starting point that is much lower than everybody elses definitely requires more personal initiative to overcome.

Personally, I do not think race is real--meaning physiologically different enough to matter--but I definitely do think racism--and ultimately, prejudice, discrimination, and racial violence--is very real (as in, statistically significant).

------------------------------

All of this can be applied similarly to issues of trans identities, queer identities, women, POCs, migrants, and other systematically disadvantaged groups.

All of that said, there is certainly a spectrum of camps in the so-called "politically correct movement". I do think it can be taken too far. For example, when thinking about systematic inequality causes groups to think of themselves as victims without agency, or if it causes permanent segregation between groups, I think this line of thinking does more of a disservice than anything else. The point of thinking about systematic inequality is to work toward more people's needs being met. A minority of people owning the majority of the wealth comes to mind. (Yes, ERE and MMM are things pretty much anybody in a developed nation can do, but only a tiny minority will. I don't think it's a stretch to say that usually it's the people with greater levels of opportunity, education, a stable family, and other benefits).

On safe spaces, I believe they can be a designated closed meeting for the minority group in question to talk with only people that share their identity. This is the point where the allies of that minority identity are asked to acknowledge the fact that they can never emphasize with the affected group's position, and let them deliberate for that set time and space. So for instance, it could be a closed group of undocumented migrants talking about how to overcome illegality together. Having a documented person in that closed space could be problematic at best.

On the media, it does a absolute shit job at accurately representing the movements currently being discussed and pushed forward on college campuses. It does this intentionally. From what I've seen, the media thrives off of controversy between liberals and conservatives. One can usually tell by the headline if the article is using the issue for views and ad revenue or not. This practice is damaging to the validity of movements, even if does increase their notoriety (for better or usually worse). As George Carlin astutely said: "think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that". Just take a look at the comments section of any mainstream media article to have some proof for that statement.

-------------------------------

A question to prod home with: is it a coincidence that the majority of the people on this board, on MMMs board, and in most personal finance spaces are white (or white-passing), and male?

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by BRUTE »

"race" as a biological concept is indeed not "real", and has long been dropped from the professional conversation. it simply is too arbitrary. there are no hard and fast biological markers that makes up what humans consider a "race" - they're just clusterings of geno/phenotypes.

any human who believes in "race" should go visit Brazil, and observe a 6ft girl with black skin, and bright blue almond eyes. unlike the US, Brazil never forbade marriage and sex between different "races" (=skin colors), so they're mixed through thoroughly. and what a sight it is to behold :D

brute whole-heartedly approves of genetic mixing.

brute also agrees that there are terrible systemic disadvantages that affect black (and some latino) humans, especially in the "justice" system.

the whole idea of privilege seems to be that anyone not affected or less affected by systemic prejudice is at fault for it. with this, brute disagrees. one, it's not true. two, it's counter productive.

in order to get rid of systemic prejudice, showing that it exists is necessary. but how is blaming it on an entire population of humans, who happen to not suffer from it, going to solve the problem? all that happens is that these humans now feel alienated and sometimes threatened by the privilege-accuser. instead of joining the cause or having an open mind, they will now shut down and either do their best to ignore the cause, or even become hostile to it ("reverse racism").

having a "latino lounge" or "black club" on campus is fine. but increasingly, students protest to have comedians or other speakers banned from the entire campus, making it impossible for the 90% of students who are NOT "threatened" or "triggered" by edgy jokes to listen to the speaker. this is also happening to curriculums. it's one thing to be safe, it's another to threaten others with "feeling unsafe". it's the difference between disallowing yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, and policing everyone's political opinion on grounds that many remember a fire when they hear "Trump".

as for Olaz' last question, it's not a coincidence. Olaz will observe a huge part of the FI crowd are white male computer programmers. are programmers privileged? brute thinks it's more an overlap of habits, interests, and skills.

to program computers for a living, humans have to be slightly autistic. sitting in front of a box for 40 hours a week and think about logical structures and program flow isn't something most humans would enjoy or want to sustain. computer programmers are typically socially awkward, somewhat loners, like to stay indoors, and spend time with their hobbies. they're not very integrated into society, and therefore don't necessarily suffer all the societal pressures to buy a McMansion, drive a new BMW, and so on. they have grown up doing their own thing, often alone or in small groups of similar minded humans.

in addition, computer programmers right now have a somewhat unique position in that it's a well-paying job that comes without any of the typical societal "obligations" that lawyers, doctors, and so on have. no wearing suits, no going to dinner parties, shaving not necessary, status is dished out by nerdy standards, not by who has the biggest car or the fanciest dinners.

but is this privilege?

to brute, it feels more like a curse that happens to be of great value in a niche market, in this very specific time period. anywhere from 2000 BC to 1980 AD, these humans would've been considered losers. somehow, since then, this autistic ability to focus on very abstract things for long periods of time, has become valuable.

brute would say this is definitely a thing that male humans have more. male humans decide that they'll spend their lives doing silly shit like becoming professional players of ball games, climb high mountains, or ride their bicycles very fast. it seems males are more often able to "cut lose" from society and its pressures.

and sure, white people in the US do not suffer from much systematic prejudice like blacks and latinos do. then again, neither do most asians. so is the best use of time really to yell at the white/asian people, or should it be spent on removing the systemic prejudice against blacks and latinos?

User avatar
GandK
Posts: 2059
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:00 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by GandK »

@BRUTE

Outstanding post.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

BRUTE said: to program computers for a living, humans have to be slightly autistic. sitting in front of a box for 40 hours a week and think about logical structures and program flow
Chicken or the egg? Back in the olden days, when I studied FORTRAN, I had to go down into a sub-sub-basement laboratory, with cinder-block walls and fluorescent lighting, to work on my programs, and every time I emerged from that environment and looked at myself in the mirror in the only bathroom for females in the building, I noticed that my appearance had become remarkably un-prettier.

TopHatFox
Posts: 2322
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:07 pm
Location: FL; 25

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by TopHatFox »

BRUTE wrote:so is the best use of time really to yell at the white/asian people, or should it be spent on removing the systemic prejudice against blacks and latinos?
I think our ideas agree. The point is to remove systematic prejudice, discrimination, etc. against black, Latinos, and other currently disadvantaged and underrepresented groups. White guilt or shaming is not helpful; it's counterproductive because it takes the attention away from actually meeting the needs of all people in a population. Acknowledging history is only useful if it helps make the current and future iteration of society more just and equitable for all.

I'm in the part of the PC spectrum that is fine with politically incorrect comedians or unpopular opinions being presented on campus, though I do prefer it if their opinions are based on evidence rather than emotional arguments. For instance, climate deniers are really annoying people to be on campus, because they shift the attention away from solving climate change back to questioning its existence--which has already been proven to be 99% true.

On free speech, it's legal and should be encouraged, but with great freedom comes great responsibility. I would appreciate it if people took ownership of the consequences of saying potentially racist, sexist, or other ignorant statements. For instance, Trump essentially saying "boy's will be boy's" in a national election is problematic because it condones and likely perpetuates sexual disrespect of women by men from top-down leadership to the millions of Americans that vote for him.
Last edited by TopHatFox on Sun Oct 30, 2016 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 6851
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by jennypenny »

Olaz wrote: From what I understand (I can't represent my entire age cohort, so please continue doing your own research too ya'll), micro-aggressions are not necessarily a topic of interest for wealthy people to discuss, as much as they are a subtle indicator of underlying systematic problems in the way our country and culture are run. For instance, I remember watching a video where a black person wearing a suit in NY was treated about as equally as a white person wearing casual clothing, and a black person wearing the same casual clothing was treated worse than when the white person wore them (the venues were at a bus stop, the cash register at shops, when talking with strangers, etc.). The inherent message in this specific micro-aggression is that there tends to be a culture of thinking white-appearing people are more trustworthy and upstanding than black-appearing people. ...

All of this can be applied similarly to issues of trans identities, queer identities, women, POCs, migrants, and other systematically disadvantaged groups.
I won't argue with any of that. I've often thought the same myself regarding Mark Zuckerberg and his basement-dweller attire. Would Sheryl Sandberg be COO of FB if she wore the same clothing? Of course not.

That said, I think you're underestimating the vehemence of the current PC movement, particularly on campuses. It goes beyond a desire to stamp out so-called micro-aggressions to the point of retaliatory prejudice. There's a difference between wanting to create a more equal society and wanting to exact retribution from the perceived offenders. Social justice has transformed into retributive justice, and when most SJWs act more like RJWs, they come across as hypocritical for exhibiting behavior similar to that which they are criticizing. The most disturbing part to me is that institutions built on a foundation of open and free speech are now using anti-discrimination ferver as an excuse to silence opposing viewpoints. It's inherently hypocritical and will lower the intellectual quality of those institutions and their students, not to mention the Orwellian effect it is having on the country.*

*To be fair, the Patriot Act, NSA, et al, has done just as much to chill free speech. It's frightening that both ends of the political spectrum are unknowingly(?) colluding to suppress free thought and speech.

TopHatFox
Posts: 2322
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:07 pm
Location: FL; 25

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by TopHatFox »

Yeah, to be honest, I've seen the nasty side of social justice too. At the campus's most tense point, some of my friends at Hampshire College (one of the most progressive/liberal colleges in the whole country) literally felt uncomfortable leaving their dormitories in fear of being called out and outed from the community as any "-ist".

I think the crux of the PC movement is that it absolutely needs to come with a healthy dose of forward thinking, forgiveness, and kindness.When it's not the case, I tend to leave. Although I understand where the idea is coming from, retributive justice does not seem useful to apply because what happened in the past is a sunk cost that should not solely determine the best course of action in the present. I'm hoping the edge of the PC movement matures into greater forgiveness, greater understanding of both sides, and societal problem solving over time.
Last edited by TopHatFox on Sun Oct 30, 2016 1:39 pm, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 6851
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by jennypenny »

Olaz wrote:I think the crux of the PC movement is that it absolutely needs to come with a healthy dose of forward thinking, forgiveness, and kindness. When it's not the case, I tend to leave.
Agreed. I have the same feelings about some in the Christian community when they use the Bible as a club instead of a guide.

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Political correctness run amok

Post by BRUTE »

7Wannabe5 wrote: Chicken or the egg?
yes

Locked