Politically Correct

[The Good Reverend Roger]

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

Because you're half-assing this. If you're already gonna change how you use pronouns to promote equality that's the change you should be making.

Has anyone ever explained to you that when members of the oppressing class show up to tell the oppressed how they're doing the struggle wrong, it does not end well?

[Cain]

Common courtesy is not FULL COMMUNISM, comrade.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Contemplating asking for a thread split just to clear out all the Shandor.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Something of an aside, but I suspect the value of PC relates directly to the industry you're dealing with. I would imagine you get far fewer blatant racists in the halls of academia than compared to building sites and wrecking yards.

For me, the irony here is that you find that humans can adapt to PC rather quickly once they understand that it relates to their ability to gain money. The further irony being that once so adapted, they will actually teach and enforce the behavior in others.

I suppose the point is that you deal with as much racist (and such) bullshit as you allow around you. I tolerate very little, because why the fuck should you? If the people you're working with aren't at least smart enough to shut the fuck up, they're probably fucking useless at their job too. It's anecdotal, but I've yet to encounter a guy throwing out racist shit who was actually good at their job. I've found that to be true in many industries. I suspect it's some combination of fear for their own continued employment mixed with a dash of the other and ignorance.

So basically I wanted to say that you have made a couple of really good points here. One is that it's not actually that hard to be a considerate human being who takes into account the perspectives and feelings of those around you, as evidenced by the fact that, as you say, people seem to manage it if their jobs depend on it.

The other is that if you happen to be in a position of authority, you do get to make the rules about acceptable behavior. So, if you are an executive, you get to say "I won't tolerate the word faggot in my office". However, if you are a cleaning lady, you don't get to say "I won't tolerate being referred to as 'girl' in my workplace".

What you often end up with is people who are used to making the decisions, who think they have a right to make the decisions, feeling angry because they are being told "don't call the cleaning lady 'girl', it's sexist and rude". But they KNOW deep inside that they are good people, so something that comes easily to them, that they don't even think about, can't possibly be sexist and rude. On top of that, they feel like they're taking orders from below. This is what happens when common courtesy and basic decency butt heads with privilege.

Shandor, with his insistence that he should get  to define other people's feelings and identity, exemplifies this.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'd guess that part of the reason for social media being such a shitheap would be in part due to the fact that these people are somewhat censored through the day. Imagine: Going 8 hours not being able to shout your stupid mouth off or you can't pay rent. So what do you do? Make a great big noise on facebook and the like about how it's VERY UNFAIR that you are oppressed by THEM. This would explain how people are (still) losing jobs due to whatever crap they posted on facebook, etc.

I'm open to other theories but I suspect that this or something close has a part in it.

I think you hit the nail right on the head. It's essentially the same impulse that leads to Ayn Rand Libertarianism: "I AM better than everyone else, but Those People won't LET me be better. It's THEIR FAULT."

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

I didn't say that I should get to define other people. I said that they are defined, as we all are, by an unfeeling external reality

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

And, on top of that, there is the common inability to separate the concept of behaving badly from the concept of being a bad person. Unfortunately, if you can't separate those two things, if every single time someone tells you that your behavior is bad you interpret that as them YOU are bad, that if they tell you that you said something kind of racist it means they are saying YOU ARE A GODDAMN NAZI, it becomes almost impossible to simply accept criticism, let alone change behaviors.

[Pergamos]

Something of an aside, but I suspect the value of PC relates directly to the industry you're dealing with. I would imagine you get far fewer blatant racists in the halls of academia than compared to building sites and wrecking yards.

For me, the irony here is that you find that humans can adapt to PC rather quickly once they understand that it relates to their ability to gain money. The further irony being that once so adapted, they will actually teach and enforce the behavior in others.

I suppose the point is that you deal with as much racist (and such) bullshit as you allow around you. I tolerate very little, because why the fuck should you? If the people you're working with aren't at least smart enough to shut the fuck up, they're probably fucking useless at their job too. It's anecdotal, but I've yet to encounter a guy throwing out racist shit who was actually good at their job. I've found that to be true in many industries. I suspect it's some combination of fear for their own continued employment mixed with a dash of the other and ignorance.

So basically I wanted to say that you have made a couple of really good points here. One is that it's not actually that hard to be a considerate human being who takes into account the perspectives and feelings of those around you, as evidenced by the fact that, as you say, people seem to manage it if their jobs depend on it.

The other is that if you happen to be in a position of authority, you do get to make the rules about acceptable behavior. So, if you are an executive, you get to say "I won't tolerate the word faggot in my office". However, if you are a cleaning lady, you don't get to say "I won't tolerate being referred to as 'girl' in my workplace".

What you often end up with is people who are used to making the decisions, who think they have a right to make the decisions, feeling angry because they are being told "don't call the cleaning lady 'girl', it's sexist and rude". But they KNOW deep inside that they are good people, so something that comes easily to them, that they don't even think about, can't possibly be sexist and rude. On top of that, they feel like they're taking orders from below. This is what happens when common courtesy and basic decency butt heads with privilege.

Shandor, with his insistence that he should get  to define other people's feelings and identity, exemplifies this.

Bit of a tangent, but if the cleaning lady is part of a union, or even just a sizeable company like merry maids, then that organization does have the power to insist that their members not be called girl.

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

What differentiates talk about "privelege" from sour grapes? I genuinely don't understand this . It all seems to carry the distinct (though usually not explicitly spoken) implication that just because Fortuna has shit on someone else a little bit less than she's shit on you that that somehow makes them a bad or ignorant person.

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

I hate you more than hangnails.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

What differentiates talk about "privelege" from sour grapes? I genuinely don't understand this . It all seems to carry the distinct (though usually not explicitly spoken) implication that just because Fortuna has shit on someone else a little bit less than she's shit on you that that somehow makes them a bad or ignorant person.

You know, the two reasons why I view the privilege discussion as relevant are embodied by people like you. 

First, you won't listen because you can't listen, but I'm going to try once to get this across, the same way it was finally made plain to me:  Privilege isn't something you do or a quality of your personality, it is something that happens to you.  If you have any control over it, it's not privilege.

Second, because you take the time out of your day to make sure everyone knows that you have nothing but contempt for their situation.  This is why you are a shitneck.  This is why you will continue to bleat your outrage over other peoples' outrage.  You are the reason mommy drinks, son. 

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

What differentiates talk about "privelege" from sour grapes? I genuinely don't understand this . It all seems to carry the distinct (though usually not explicitly spoken) implication that just because Fortuna has shit on someone else a little bit less than she's shit on you that that somehow makes them a bad or ignorant person.

You know, the two reasons why I view the privilege discussion as relevant are embodied by people like you. 

First, you won't listen because you can't listen, but I'm going to try once to get this across, the same way it was finally made plain to me:  Privilege isn't something you do or a quality of your personality, it is something that happens to you.  If you have any control over it, it's not privilege.

I understand that. That is precisely the crux of why I take issue to the fact that people (at least seem to) judge people for it. It's a pejorative synonym for "luck"

[The Good Reverend Roger]

What differentiates talk about "privelege" from sour grapes? I genuinely don't understand this . It all seems to carry the distinct (though usually not explicitly spoken) implication that just because Fortuna has shit on someone else a little bit less than she's shit on you that that somehow makes them a bad or ignorant person.

You know, the two reasons why I view the privilege discussion as relevant are embodied by people like you. 

First, you won't listen because you can't listen, but I'm going to try once to get this across, the same way it was finally made plain to me:  Privilege isn't something you do or a quality of your personality, it is something that happens to you.  If you have any control over it, it's not privilege.

I understand that. That is precisely the crux of why I take issue to the fact that people (at least seem to) judge people for it. It's a pejorative synonym for "luck"

No, what you took issue with was the OP, in which it was fairly clearly explained that political correctness is merely "not being a bigot".  It was a very simple notion, yet you were compelled to argue the point.  Why?

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

Because that's far from the usual definition of the term, if that's all he was trying to say than I suppose I was confused