The Big Picture: Correctitude
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Frankly I do agree with most of the points you make (glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks south park has a brain 
)
)
I´m not from north america and i don´t know about half of the people that appear on this clip...
But that was an awesome episode.
But that was an awesome episode.
Things like actress/actor or stewardess/steward imply that there is a difference between the two roles, when there isn't. Also, it implies that the feminine term is lesser, as suffixes like 'ess' or 'ette' are also used to describe miniturisations (Cigar>cigarette). English is inherently sexist and whilst I wouldn't really call anyone out on it, it makes sense to change it. You wouldn't dream of calling anyone a 'Lady doctor' these days, so why is 'male nurse' acceptable?tkioz said:
On the subject of chairman, you can just say Chair.
I've got to agree about Jeff Dunham, it's the puppets that say politically incorrect things and Jeff admonishes them for it. And what the puppets do say fits their personality.Crimson_Dragoon said:
Because we're not supposed to fantasize about the traditional dress and stereotypes of ethnicities who view themselves as losers in the current political environment. Them's the rules. So no Pocahontas, either!pffh said:Why is that offensive and thisMasochisticMuse said:For a long time now I've held the unpopular opinion that RE5 was indeed fucked in terms of depictions of race.
And it's not even about a white dude killing black zombies. You encounter zombies, you're gonna kill them, no matter what race you or they are.
No. It's not about the zombies, but it is about this;
That's not sexy. It's just offensive.
isn't?
That's akin to saying "You are free to take X's property" and then unleashing the police upon them, it's a very different use of free. Wilders is on trial, that's not criticism (which is fine and healthy) but actually censoring what can be said. Why is it so hard to grasp that distinction?BobDobolina said:
On that scandal, the knee-jerk response was as you called it "Whitey shooting Blacks", OMG!. That response developed well before the game came out and fermented up to the release date. However when the professional reviewers got hold of the game they where able to express the games issues with more finesse, describing as Bob said that the game was really insensitive, and listed the reasons why.
Of course people should be able to say what they want, there's no "political correctness" law or anything where you have to be nice to everyone. But if you're saying something offensive man the fuck up and deal with the consequences; don't complain that the "PC brigade" is taking over or something, like a little *****.awesomeClaw said:
As Bob said, "words mean things", if you're deliberately gonna be offensive it's not everyone else being overly sensitive if someone says "hey man, not cool". Just like if you were taking the piss out of someone for being, I dunno, fat or something.
'Cuz they have an inferiority complex about their culture, to the point where they find it offensive to be reminded of it at all.pffh said:Why is that offensive and thisMasochisticMuse said:For a long time now I've held the unpopular opinion that RE5 was indeed fucked in terms of depictions of race.
And it's not even about a white dude killing black zombies. You encounter zombies, you're gonna kill them, no matter what race you or they are.
No. It's not about the zombies, but it is about this;
That's not sexy. It's just offensive.
isn't?
Up until this point, I disagreed with some of the things you said, but could find common ground with your arguments, but this...this is indefensible.Therumancer said:
First of all, bigotry and "ignoring political correctness" does not "focus on problems like a laser." In fact, if anything, it clouds the real issues. Take the so-called "War on Terror," for instance, which has really been America's bloodlust against Muslims. People in this country have played into Osama bin Laden's hands by turning it into a religious war. In our haste to fight back at these "Arabs" that killed our citizens, despite our complicity in the creation of their mindset (government support of dictators, propping up Afghani rebels during the Soviet invasion, only to abandon them after the war ravaged most of their country, etc.), and proceed to persecute people who "look" like they are Muslim, act angry or fearful when we see actual Muslims do benign things like pray towards Mecca, or even claim that we should just "nuke the entire Middle East," a quote I've heard several times from people of various social backgrounds. It's not helpful, it offer no insight, and in fact makes we, the people easier to manipulate by the powers that be by having us fight each other rather than the corrupt systems that want power and money. I have problems with certain elements of Islam (mostly how it's practiced in certain regions of the Middle East), but I'm not going to hate every single Muslim that I see and claim that "they are all the same" just because of those problems (why, if I were to do that to a white Christian without having heard a word they said or seen their actions, everyone would be pointing out all the numerous ways they could be different).
Despite the protestations of a lot of people, "political correctness" is not this pervasive, all-threatening entity that's driving us to ignore the problem (anyone who thinks it is hasn't been watching the news, since we let a lot of incorrect statements like "All terrorists are Muslims" go unchallenged). Is it sometimes really stupid? Yes, but the "anti-PC" movement is a lot dumber (Larry the Cable Guy titled a chapter in his hack book "David Cross and the PC Police," despite Cross being about as un-PC as modern comedians get) and way more destructive to society, as what they are really doing is goading the dumb into hating minorities so that they can be sold their own racism back to them.
You're a libertarian and I'm not, so I usually groan when you go into politics. I was pleasantly surprised to hear you give the correct opinion on this issue.
Yeah, pretty much this...voorhees123 said:
I do agree that a lot of the time people just use the anti-PC banner to just go too far, however, I don't know what it's like in America but there's plenty of PC stuff in the UK that just gets on my tits. For example, about 5-6 years ago there was this new thing about how we have to call Black/Asian/Eastern European/Arab people all "Ethnic Minorities" (thankfully that seems to have died down). Now is it just me, or does that seem even MORE insulting? For one thing you're just drawing attention to their status as a minority when it's not needed, and for another you're cramming them all under the same banner rather than appreciating their diversity. Fuck. That. I have black friends and when I have to point them out to anybody I call them black because it is a valid aspect of their appearance, and it is also easy to say.
I just grabbed the first picture I found but my point still stands. Why is a dark african girl in a skimpy stereoptypical outfit more offensive then a blond viking girl in a skimpy stereotypical outfit?wildcard9 said:Because that's not offensive, it's tackypffh said:Why is that offensive and this
isn't?
What's wrong with gender specific terms? So they might have started off meaning something else, but so what, let it freaking go.TheRightToArmBears said:
And no, I wouldn't dreaming of calling the most recent female doctor I've had dealings with a "Lady Doctor" because that would imply I've seen her act like ladies, not a stuck up cranky prig. There is nothing wrong with Gentlemen and Lady as terms, those are things one should aspire too.
