Political Correctness

northender0602

Forum Patron
Patron
I have no problem with that to be honest, to me , it's a little boy wearing a hoodie. You'll find offence if you want to, if a white kid was wearing it no-one would bat an eye lid, a black kid wears it, it's offensive. depends on how sensitive you are. if a white kid and a black kid were stood side by side misbehaving and you called them little monkeys would you be 50% racist?
 

Regardless

Forum Patron
Patron
Regarding the H&M advert... it's probably right that it's removed... a view I reached when I read that a mother was upset because her little black boy was routinely bullied, called a monkey at school. And being honest, that's regrettably a credible view.

It annoys me that H&M felt they should apologise for it though... it just gives the click-bait internet headline writers an opportunity to spread their maliciousness.
 

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron
What I find amusing about all this is we have never had a Marxist government in power in the UK, so can you explain how this Marxist issue arose in the UK? Since the late 70s we've only had governments that are way to the right of centre.

It's a good point. My own feeling is that it is more to do with government, the media and institutions.. where this type of thinking is entrenched.
For instance the bastions of revolutionary socialism during the Thatcher era could be found in higher education.. and it is noticeable that these institutions are now at the centre of the over zealous application of these ideas.

I see it as a type of mission creep. Politico's in local authorities (for example) are not satisfied with running services and want to use their position to affect change in peoples behaviours (cultural Marxism) by appearing to be concerned about XYZ wider issues. Personally I want local politicians to deal with local issues. It is combined with 20th century revolutionary idea that the overthrow of our traditional culture is a desired outcome.. that conservative or traditional ideas of morality should be challenged and overthrown.

The corporate world pays lip service to these ideas to tick the boxes and enable business with these authorities and so you have a situation where a large part of major institutions are projecting this type of thinking... This type of thinking goes unchallenged within these organisations and spreads.. and widens

So you get a situation where (rather like green politics) its influence far exceeds the numbers of people who actually practice it..

It comes from that idea that humans can be improved by placing certain restrictions on what they say.. and do. And to an extent it works.. but a large part of the population simply rejects it and sees it as barmy. It seems to me there is an element of puritanism and arrogance about it..

I would say that it is the appearance of caring or not causing offence which is different from actually caring.. I bet Harvey Weinstein has volumes of policies on how to treat "vulnerable" groups of people. It is "institutional" caring.. rather than "individual" caring.. I would argue genuine caring is something done to by individuals or small committed groups, you really cannot make a government or an institution "care" collectively because there are so many people involved. So the institution tries to project a caring attitude by making policy.. and creating policy is more an act of bureaucracy than caring.
 
Last edited:

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
It's a good point. My own feeling is that it is more to do with government, the media and institutions.. where this type of thinking is entrenched.
For instance the bastions of revolutionary socialism during the Thatcher era could be found in higher education.. and it is noticeable that these institutions are now at the centre of the over zealous application of these ideas.

I see it as a type of mission creep. Politico's in local authorities (for example) are not satisfied with running services and want to use their position to affect change in peoples behaviours (cultural Marxism) by appearing to be concerned about XYZ wider issues. Personally I want local politicians to deal with local issues. It is combined with 20th century revolutionary idea that the overthrow of our traditional culture is a desired outcome.. that conservative or traditional ideas of morality should be challenged and overthrown.

The corporate world pays lip service to these ideas to tick the boxes and enable business with these authorities and so you have a situation where a large part of major institutions are projecting this type of thinking... This type of thinking goes unchallenged within these organisations and spreads.. and widens

So you get a situation where (rather like green politics) its influence far exceeds the numbers of people who actually practice it..

It comes from that idea that humans can be improved by placing certain restrictions on what they say.. and do. And to an extent it works.. but a large part of the population simply rejects it and sees it as barmy. It seems to me there is an element of puritanism and arrogance about it..

I would say that it is the appearance of caring or not causing offence which is different from actually caring.. I bet Harvey Weinstein has volumes of policies on how to treat "vulnerable" groups of people. It is "institutional" caring.. rather than "individual" caring.. I would argue genuine caring is something done to by individuals or small committed groups, you really cannot make a government or an institution "care" collectively because there are so many people involved. So the institution tries to project a caring attitude by making policy.. and creating policy is more an act of bureaucracy than caring.

The new universities in the 60s were hotbeds of revolutionary fervour. By the time Thatcher had finished with cutting university funding, half the academics were members of the SDP rather than the CP.....unhappy days.
 

Mancunian White

Glaswegian now actually
Patron
This advert from H&M has been removed.







Is this political correctness or just Correct?

The only racist in this situation is the person that saw this advert and thought "that kid is black! He can't wear something with monkey! That's racist".
 

northender0602

Forum Patron
Patron
Regarding the H&M advert... it's probably right that it's removed... a view I reached when I read that a mother was upset because her little black boy was routinely bullied, called a monkey at school. And being honest, that's regrettably a credible view.

It annoys me that H&M felt they should apologise for it though... it just gives the click-bait internet headline writers an opportunity to spread their maliciousness.

Fair point on the first part, pity there are ignorant morons in the world.

Totally agree with you on the second bit. Some make a career out of being offended. I have always felt the biggest threat to integration / race relations are the ones that shout racist at every opportunity. I had known a black lass all my life, we were having a laugh, no problem, day after she turned on me, because some white shit stirrer, said I'd only been teasing her because she was black (race and colour was not even mentioned). She realised after a few months that it was actually someone shit stirring, but the damage was done, I remained friends with her but it was never the same.
 

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron
The new universities in the 60s were hotbeds of revolutionary fervour. By the time Thatcher had finished with cutting university funding, half the academics were members of the SDP rather than the CP.....unhappy days.

My wife did an English course at the local college a few years back and was surprised to find her tutor was advocating politics we both thought had be discredited in the 1970's.
It does seem to me that "leftist" ideas are still held widely in the arts.. it's a required certificate of participation.

Conservatism is a lot of varying traditional ideas basically saying "make money and behave as you please but don't challenge authority".. essentially the rules of the predator.

Leftist ideas seem to want to modify peoples behaviours.. that traditional ideas can be replaced with new ideas of acceptable behaviour. That the predatory nature of humans can be modified and diminished by having rules and restrictions.

?
 

raefil

Shit Fan
Patron
My wife did an English course at the local college a few years back and was surprised to find her tutor was advocating politics we both thought had be discredited in the 1970's.
It does seem to me that "leftist" ideas are still held widely in the arts.. it's a required certificate of participation.

Conservatism is a lot of varying traditional ideas basically saying "make money and behave as you please but don't challenge authority".. essentially the rules of the predator.

Leftist ideas seem to want to modify peoples behaviours.. that traditional ideas can be replaced with new ideas of acceptable behaviour. That the predatory nature of humans can be modified and diminished by having rules and restrictions.

?
Predatory nature of humans?

Id say we are a social/tribal being as opposed to predatory.
 

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron
Predatory nature of humans?

Id say we are a social/tribal being as opposed to predatory.

Just throwing ideas out there for discussion..

I agree that humans are tribal but this does not diminish the predatory aspect to our character.. you only have to look at football rivalry to see that tribal conflicts are deep rooted.
We try to gain advantage over our local rivals.. quite a lot wouldnt mind if our local rivals ceased to exist.
 

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
My wife did an English course at the local college a few years back and was surprised to find her tutor was advocating politics we both thought had be discredited in the 1970's.
It does seem to me that "leftist" ideas are still held widely in the arts.. it's a required certificate of participation.

Conservatism is a lot of varying traditional ideas basically saying "make money and behave as you please but don't challenge authority".. essentially the rules of the predator.

Leftist ideas seem to want to modify peoples behaviours.. that traditional ideas can be replaced with new ideas of acceptable behaviour. That the predatory nature of humans can be modified and diminished by having rules and restrictions.

?

Ive mentioned this before but a good read is Arguments for Socialism by Tony Benn. He points out the string links between left thinking and Christianity. It's always struck me as being ironic that the basic tenets of socialism and Christianity are so similar yet the most regressive right wingers in the USA are fundamentalist Christian types.....thou shall not kill....pass me my AK47
 

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron
Ive mentioned this before but a good read is Arguments for Socialism by Tony Benn. He points out the string links between left thinking and Christianity. It's always struck me as being ironic that the basic tenets of socialism and Christianity are so similar yet the most regressive right wingers in the USA are fundamentalist Christian types.....thou shall not kill....pass me my AK47

Conclusive proof that Christianity isn't a monolithic belief system..

I am firmly of the belief that this new form of increasingly intolerant socialism (political correctness) has developed because socialism has distanced itself from its historical associations with Christianity. "Father of the Chapel" Methodism, Christian Socialist movement etc

These Christian movements provided an alternative narrative on the left.
 

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
Conclusive proof that Christianity isn't a monolithic belief system..

I am firmly of the belief that this new form of increasingly intolerant socialism (political correctness) has developed because socialism has distanced itself from its historical associations with Christianity. "Father of the Chapel" Methodism, Christian Socialist movement etc

These Christian movements provided an alternative narrative on the left.

The democratic socialism that I believe in hasn't strayed too far from the Methodism/ teetotalism/co-operative etc etc wing of the Labour Party. I don't buy the PC/ Cultural Marxism line at all.....for the most part it's a dodgy construct associated with weird right wing apologists.
 

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron
The democratic socialism that I believe in hasn't strayed too far from the Methodism/ teetotalism/co-operative etc etc wing of the Labour Party. I don't buy the PC/ Cultural Marxism line at all.....for the most part it's a dodgy construct associated with weird right wing apologists.

We had a case yesterday.. of a Girls Grammar School saying that they wouldn't refer to girls as girls anymore. I don't think that can simply be dismissed as a dodgy right wing construct ?

In my opinion socialism was at its strongest when it stuck to arguing for material improvements in society..
 
Last edited:

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
We had a case yesterday.. of a Girls Grammar School saying that they wouldn't refer to girls as girls anymore. I don't think that can simply be dismissed as a dodgy right wing construct ?

In my opinion socialism was at its strongest when it stuck to arguing for material improvements in society..

The Grammar School thing isn't PC, it's f&cking idiocy. It's like blaming health and safety for banning conkers from school playgrounds.....nonsense decisions blamed on something which doesn't require that decision to be made. There are plenty of good reasons for requiring the use of proper language, not calling girls girls isn't one of them.
 

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron
The Grammar School thing isn't PC, it's f&cking idiocy. It's like blaming health and safety for banning conkers from school playgrounds.....nonsense decisions blamed on something which doesn't require that decision to be made. There are plenty of good reasons for requiring the use of proper language, not calling girls girls isn't one of them.

"The term political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly abbreviated to PC or P.C.) is used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society.[1][2][3][4][5] Since the late 1980s, the term has come to refer to avoiding language or behavior that can be seen as excluding, marginalizing, or insulting groups of people considered disadvantaged or discriminated against, especially groups defined by sex or race." Wikipedia

Seems to fit the Wikipedia definition.. I find it amazing that a Grammar School which many would argue is a bastion of conservatism would feel the need to adopt such a policy.
 
Last edited:

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
"The term political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly abbreviated to PC or P.C.) is used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society.[1][2][3][4][5] Since the late 1980s, the term has come to refer to avoiding language or behavior that can be seen as excluding, marginalizing, or insulting groups of people considered disadvantaged or discriminated against, especially groups defined by sex or race." Wikipedia

In this school's case it's just plain daft...especially as girls is part of the school name. They need to change that sharpish eh?
 

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
I agree its daft.. but I would say "politcal correctness" is the thinking behind it

No wonder PC is now a pejorative term. Dumb decisions like this one undermine equality and provide ammunition for those who dismiss the importance of language in equality and diversity
 
Top