• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Political Correctness

Words have meaning, and the ignoring of some harmful words can be taken as permission to use them even more.
 
Words have meaning, and the ignoring of some harmful words can be taken as permission to use them even more.

And so? You actually have the ability to take the meaning out of these words, as I stated above. Using the words again and again makes no difference.
 
I agree that everyone is deserving of basic dignity and respect. Real respect has to be freely given, though. Just as it is wrong to compel someone to convert to or away from a religion by the sword or by threats of ostracism or anything else--just as that is fear and not legitimate faith/disbelief--it's not legitimate respect if you only do it out of fear.

I'd rather people treat each other right for the right reasons...because it is right...and not under threat of consequences. (Unless of course someone is engaging in violence or threats of violence--that MUST be stopped.)

There are no politically correct laws about what you have to say. What are you talking about?
 
Words have meaning, and the ignoring of some harmful words can be taken as permission to use them even more.

And so? You actually have the ability to take the meaning out of these words, as I stated above. Using the words again and again makes no difference.
It does if the words are directed at you (or your friends or family memebers) again and again. What do you do then? Just sit there and be verbally abused?
 
. . . Also (and I say this at the risk of being considered "politically incorrect"), the majority of the complainers (in other venues besides here) about the whole idea of PC seem to skew Right and Religious. That just speaks volumes to me.
Which venues are you referring to? In my experience, those who voice objections to PC cover the whole political spectrum. The only thing they “skew” towards is a desire for common sense.

There are no politically correct laws about what you have to say. What are you talking about?
Not laws per se, but draconian “speech codes” that still exist at most American universities, and overbroad “harassment” policies at private businesses.
 
Words have meaning, and the ignoring of some harmful words can be taken as permission to use them even more.

And so? You actually have the ability to take the meaning out of these words, as I stated above. Using the words again and again makes no difference.
It does if the words are directed at you (or your friends or family memebers) again and again. What do you do then? Just sit there and be verbally abused?

That's my point. I can only be verbally "abused" if I let it happen. Why can't you just shrug words off? Why do you insist on feeling insulted when someone calls your mother a whore?

You would be amazed what effect it has on people if you simply ignore their insults.

"Don't feed the troll" is a common trope around here, isn't it? Or "turn the other cheek", for the Christians among our members. What I'm talking about is the same principle, but applied to verbal "violence". I don't think it makes sense when it becomes physical. Only an idiot would not defend himself against a physical attack (if he's able to do it). But a verbal attack, just shrug it off.




LOL, I just realized that this was also a point in Star Trek 2009. One of nuSpock weaknesses is that he gets angry at people mocking him and totally looses it. That's exactly what I mean. A stable, confident person doesn't have the need to do that. Because, as I said before, you simply know better.
 
I can only be verbally "abused" if I let it happen. Why can't you just shrug words off? Why do you insist on feeling insulted when someone calls your mother a whore?
Hell, if someone called my mother a whore, I’d take it as a compliment that he thinks she can still turn tricks at her age!
 
And so? You actually have the ability to take the meaning out of these words, as I stated above. Using the words again and again makes no difference.
It does if the words are directed at you (or your friends or family memebers) again and again. What do you do then? Just sit there and be verbally abused?
That's my point. I can only be verbally "abused" if I let it happen. Why can't you just shrug words off? Why do you insist on feeling insulted when someone calls your mother a whore?

You would be amazed what effect it has on people if you simply ignore their insults.

"Don't feed the troll" is a common trope around here, isn't it? Or "turn the other cheek", for the Christians among our members. What I'm talking about is the same principle, but applied to verbal "violence". I don't think it makes sense when it becomes physical. Only an idiot would not defend himself against a physical attack (if he's able to do it). But a verbal attack, just shrug it off.

LOL, I just realized that this was also a point in Star Trek 2009. One of nuSpock weaknesses is that he gets angry at people mocking him and totally looses it. That's exactly what I mean. A stable, confident person doesn't have the need to do that. Because, as I said before, you simply know better.
I am pretty sure you are not part of a presently or historically oppressed minority, have never been violently and ceaselessly abused during your life, and have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
 
I am pretty sure you are not part of a presently or historically oppressed minority, have never been violently and ceaselessly abused during your life, and have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

I am, but given that you simply can't know about it, I forgive you.

The important difference between words and actions is what I'm talking about.

Just think about what goes through your mind when words insult you. You are annoyed by what I said right now, aren't you? Please tell me exactly why.

From what I gather, you feel annoyed because you think I haven't endured what either you, or people you know, have endured, and now you almost feel insulted by that.

And now, whatever reason you may have, there's where your own decision comes into play: you can either decide to feel insulted, or you can decide to say: let the guy talk, he knows nothing.

It actually is that simple.
 
Not laws per se, but draconian “speech codes” that still exist at most American universities, and overbroad “harassment” policies at private businesses.
Nice try but a Koch brothers financed think-tank like Cato merely produces propaganda.


I am, but given that you simply can't know about it, I forgive you.

The important difference between words and actions is what I'm talking about.

Just think about what goes through your mind when words insult you. You are annoyed by what I said right now, aren't you? Please tell me exactly why.

From what I gather, you feel annoyed because you think I haven't endured what either you, or people you know, have endured, and now you almost feel insulted by that.

And now, whatever reason you may have, there's where your own decision comes into play: you can either decide to feel insulted, or you can decide to say: let the guy talk, he knows nothing.

It actually is that simple.
Your argument is important as a lot of actual discrimination is non-verbal but I nonetheless gotta disagree, words can be very painful. Just imagine a parent telling its child "I don't love you and have never loved you". Such emotional abuse is probably as bad as physical violence.
 
Yep. That's right. No idea at all.

Same thing. My post apparently annoyed you (and you won't explain why: are you part of an oppressed minority, for example?). You can continue reading them and stay annoyed, you can explain yourself, or you can ignore them. It's totally your choice.

Your argument is important as a lot of actual discrimination is non-verbal but I nonetheless gotta disagree, words can be very painful. Just imagine a parent telling its child "I don't love you and have never loved you". Such emotional abuse is probably as bad as physical violence.

That one I give you. If a loved or respected person tells you that, it hurts badly. But even then you can try to take away the power of these words by trying to stay as calm as possible. Even if you manage to show no reaction on the outside (while you're a total mess inside), you "win", because your opponent thinks he didn't hurt you with that, so he didn't achieve his goal. And that's about it. Words are used as "weapons" to hurt others. And just with physical violence, you need strength to deflect them. It takes a lot more strength to deal with insults coming from loved ones, it takes less strength to deal with remarks coming from people you don't know or don't care about.

Racist remarks for example come mostly from people you don't even know. So why give them more power over you than they actually have? If you let their verbal attacks hurt you, they've achieved what they wanted.
 
Last edited:
I am not annoyed. I am pointing out that your argument ignores (purposefully, I suspect) every aspect of human social interaction, and the very essence of human nature.
 
Not laws per se, but draconian “speech codes” that still exist at most American universities, and overbroad “harassment” policies at private businesses.
Nice try but a Koch brothers financed think-tank like Cato merely produces propaganda.
With factual examples to back up their assertions, if you’d actually bothered to read the piece instead of responding with a knee-jerk reaction. I only linked to that particular article because it happened to be near the top of the list on a Google search.
 
What have these two real journalists said, follow the money. The propaganda of corporate anarchists is as well suited for a discussion about social rules as Charles Manson's viewpoint is suited for a discussion about homicide laws.
 
Your argument is important as a lot of actual discrimination is non-verbal but I nonetheless gotta disagree, words can be very painful. Just imagine a parent telling its child "I don't love you and have never loved you". Such emotional abuse is probably as bad as physical violence.

That one I give you. If a loved or respected person tells you that, it hurts badly. But even then you can try to take away the power of these words by trying to stay as calm as possible. Even if you manage to show no reaction on the outside (while you're a total mess inside), you "win", because your opponent thinks he didn't hurt you with that, so he didn't achieve his goal. And that's about it. Words are used as "weapons" to hurt others. And just with physical violence, you need strength to deflect them. It takes a lot more strength to deal with insults coming from loved ones, it takes less strength to deal with remarks coming from people you don't know or don't care about.

Racist remarks for example come mostly from people you don't even know. So why give them more power over you than they actually have? If you let their verbal attacks hurt you, they've achieved what they wanted.
The problem of racist, sexist or homophobic remarks is that they may be a precursor to actual violence.
I do agree though with your point that not caring about insults is a good strategy. People who are mobbed / made fun of / excluded in a particular social group are sometimes the ones that can be easily picked on.
 
The problem of racist, sexist or homophobic remarks is that they may be a precursor to actual violence.

Absolutely true. But I think a lot of situations get out of control because one gets angry at the verbal attack.

I do agree though with your point that not caring about insults is a good strategy. People who are mobbed / made fun of / excluded in a particular social group are sometimes the ones that can be easily picked on.

That's one of the important messages you are sending out when you show that you don't care about the verbal attacks: "I could be stronger than you think."
And on the most basic level, you're simply doing yourself a favor by staying calm.
 
I am not annoyed. I am pointing out that your argument ignores (purposefully, I suspect) every aspect of human social interaction, and the very essence of human nature.
I don't think I understand. What essence would that be?
To restate:
I am pointing out that your argument ignores (purposefully, I suspect) every aspect of human social interaction, and the very essence of human nature.
I already provided as much entertainment to your evening as I'm willing to provide tonight, because it happened for please me for a little while. Now go play with somebody else.
 
And so? You actually have the ability to take the meaning out of these words, as I stated above. Using the words again and again makes no difference.
It does if the words are directed at you (or your friends or family memebers) again and again. What do you do then? Just sit there and be verbally abused?

That's my point. I can only be verbally "abused" if I let it happen. Why can't you just shrug words off? Why do you insist on feeling insulted when someone calls your mother a whore?

You would be amazed what effect it has on people if you simply ignore their insults.

"Don't feed the troll" is a common trope around here, isn't it? Or "turn the other cheek", for the Christians among our members. What I'm talking about is the same principle, but applied to verbal "violence". I don't think it makes sense when it becomes physical. Only an idiot would not defend himself against a physical attack (if he's able to do it). But a verbal attack, just shrug it off.
That just doesn't work. An attack is an attack, regardless if it's verbal or physical. One doesn't have to respond in kind, but one still has the right not to just accept the abuse.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top