What don't you like about Christmas?
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Hey now, those "other groups" came to HIS CHRISTIAN COUNTRY!
At least that's what I took away from his threads so far.
Well, and that Kestra hates MLK.
She doesn't hate MLK. She simply disagrees with emancipation.Well, and that Kestra hates MLK.
I don't like that it isn't long enough.
I don't face the majority of these pains. We have a plastic Xmas tree, I don't worry about parking because I don't drive, I have plenty of extension cords, I have no in-laws, I don't buy any gifts using credit, I don't send Xmas cards, I don't drink so I don't get hangovers etc
Nobody is offended by the use of "Christmas". The most intense sentiment I've seen about that was "Well, 'holidays' would be nicer but whatever". But apparently, a lot of people get hilariously offended, angry and defensive if you don't use "Christmas".Again, this is one of those instances when people are offended by the use of certain terminologies, and I find it very offensive that people are offended. I'm going to start being defensive.
Not really. But whatever. Enjoy your imaginary persecution.It's coming to that, ain't it?
Better what's wrong with being politically correct than what's wrong with not being politically correct.
I could just say, "Have a 4th Quarter," but I suppose that would be insensitive to the suicidal.
Personally, I think May 1st should be a major international holiday.
I know several Pagans. Also, I'm an atheist and I have a holiday tree:
Oh, and before I forget-- I always must post this in all threads about people being unnaturally offended:
It seems to be unimaginable to you that anyone but right-wingers can be against PC. I know plenty of centrist and moderate leftist folks who are against racism, sexism and homophobia but also against PC. The latter is no the only way to fight against discrimination.
Nobody is offended by the use of "Christmas". The most intense sentiment I've seen about that was "Well, 'holidays' would be nicer but whatever". But apparently, a lot of people get hilariously offended, angry and defensive if you don't use "Christmas".Again, this is one of those instances when people are offended by the use of certain terminologies, and I find it very offensive that people are offended. I'm going to start being defensive.
And for that, I'm offended, too.
EDIT:
My New Year's resolution: Use "offend, offense, offended" more often in my post. Replace "salt, salty, grain of salt."
It's not a right-wing vs. left-wing issue. It's a "people who don't care about others" vs. "people who cares" issue.It seems to be unimaginable to you that anyone but right-wingers can be against PC. I know plenty of centrist and moderate leftist folks who are against racism, sexism and homophobia but also against PC. The latter is no the only way to fight against discrimination.
In which way you are "against PC"? Do you like to insult people? Do you specifically go out of your way to treat people like shit? Do you get your kicks from using racial or sexual slurs?
"Politically correct", by itself, means nothing. The original expression was about toeing the party line about the specific political issue du jour. Right now, it's used as a political boogeyman by people who long for the day where they could use sexual and racial epithets with impunity. They decry oppression for not being able to use oppressive expressions. They scream of persecution because they are not free to persecute. So yeah, I would say that people who argue against "PC" don't care about other people. If people were respectful and polite, we wouldn't need it. Alas, the opposite is true.
"Politically correct", by itself, means nothing. The original expression was about toeing the party line about the specific political issue du jour. Right now, it's used as a political boogeyman by people who long for the day where they could use sexual and racial epithets with impunity. They decry oppression for not being able to use oppressive expressions. They scream of persecution because they are not free to persecute. So yeah, I would say that people who argue against "PC" don't care about other people. If people were respectful and polite, we wouldn't need it. Alas, the opposite is true.
If there's one thing I get tired of, it's people who say "I'm speaking out against the PC consensus" as they're not speaking great truth but using it as a cover to say something that's sexist, racist or homophobic and claim that they're being repressed in some way. If you're thoughtful and articulate you can speak in a persuasive way and people won't object. If, on the other hand, you just want to go for "shock value" then that's just tiresome and you earn all of the flak you get for your "uncomfortable truths".
Political correctness adresses the right problems yet leads to some problems of its own.
I would like to live in a society where somebody who utters a racial slur is not taken seriously. Everybody would just think "what an idiot" and ignore him.
The problem of making this an explicit rule is that this very rule creates pleasure for people who violate it.
It's like with 1950s sexual morals, it provided extra pleasure for young people to violate the sexual inhibitions (which, between the line, basically said "do it but quietly").
Another problem is that PC stays too much on the surface. It did e.g. not prevent that we rboke the torture taboo and publically talked about its potential merits after 9/11.
Take Mel Gibson, if he isn't an antisemite I don't know who is. Yet after his antisemitic outbursts he could apologize and blame his alcoholism. By political correct logic as long as he does not express antisemitic slurs he plays by the book.
I think this does not suffice, he is still an antisemite but is not viewed as one as long as he does not utter any antisemitic slurs.
If he had violated an implicit rule it would be much harder for him to redeem himself.
That's why I think that our goal should be to create societies in which anybody who says something sexist, racist or homophobic is simply out. Imagine you met somebody who defended rape or torturing animals or something like this, everybody would just stop talking to him and ignore him.
The other problem I have with PC is that it is easy to pay lipservice and say "I tolerate women/blacks/homosexuals". Ending discrimination beyond language is a problem that is not addressed by PC. To be a bit polemic, what's the point of a world where nobody uses the N word anymore but more and more black people are incarcerated? Isn't the latter at least as important as the former?
It seems to be unimaginable to you that anyone but right-wingers can be against PC. I know plenty of centrist and moderate leftist folks who are against racism, sexism and homophobia but also against PC. The latter is no the only way to fight against discrimination.
Be careful buddy. I tried using the same argument you are with the fine folks around here and was dismissed as a racist and have been ignored ever since.
I hope you get treated better. Good luck.
False dichotomies by the dozen.
"PC" is a convenient boogeyman, the definition of which seems to change depending on whatever is necessary for the situation, but as FlyingLemons says it is most often criticized in a context meant to cover the critic's own obvious bigotry.
Similar threads
