No i didn't. Maybe another time when i have the time.
Political Correctness
- Thread starter Gmart
- Start date
No i didn't. Maybe another time when i have the time.
fela fan said:
FF, this claim from you, and an earlier similar one, was the matter I'd wanted to reply to.
You can't claim that established UK media discourse on 'PC' is irrelevant to your own take on it, given the massive similarities in tone you both adopt. Your very use and definition of the term 'political correctness' and your rather wild claim that 'PC' is a 'cancer', is fairly inseperable from mainstream right wing take on the subject in the UK media, whether in the papers (which you say you never see) or among the people who undercritically , undersceptically and over gullibly allow themselves to be influenced by them (people you no doubt would claim not to be influenced by).
It doesn't add up. You wouldn't be talking about 'political correctness' at all, in the way you do, if you hadn't already bought more or less completely into established (and profoundly conservative) ways of defining it -- whatever 'it' is!! --- reacting to it, perceiving it. However unintentional that influence, the influence is there and very visible in your posts.
You can cite British Council examples of 'PC' that you claim actually exist, as much as you like, but I have this funny feeling that you may already have reached a conclusion on 'PC', and will therefore be inclined to take most notice of the self-perceived/self defined examples that most fit your already arrived at conclusion.
Sounds familiar??
For objectivity's sake, it could be useful to hear exactly what examples you mean (you've been VERY vague on detail so far!) and what the British Council themselves say about it. Their version, not your summary of it ....
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
The thing is of course that fela has absolutely no idea about anything to do with the UK media whatsoever. I must warn you of this - he really doesn't have the first clue, and doesn't care (he "doesn't do evidence"). If I were you I would not bother.
Gmarthews said:
'Not having time for' is not the same as 'ignoring'. Remember I've been away all weekend and at other earlier times too.
The entire substance of Julian Petley's review is something you've ignored really.
He pretty much demolished any claim by Browne might have to be an objective, critically discerning historical observer. I'm a historian by background myself, and to me the severest criticism of Browne is his unquestioning acceptance and regugitation of tabloid versions of self-defined 'PC' reality** as some sort of established objective truth. And it's not just Petley making this point.
**and BBC stories -- hello, Today!
-- recycling lightly disguised Daily Mail ones doesn't make the stories any less bollocksYou may claim to be opposed to exaggeration (or whatever) 'on both sides,', but ALL your own criticism in this thread has been exclusively reserved for the side you see, or are told are, 'PC'. Without -- it seems to me -- you ever substantively criticising the politics, motives, credentials and ultra-selective use of 'evidence' (from often dodgy and unreliable sources) of people like Browne.
Nino's links/information much earlier about Browne's political background, allies and credentials shows you clearly enough that the man is pushing a very partisan agenda. You seem to think that's irrelevant too.
And see my reply to fela above -- I'd say the same to you as I would to him -- your posts give every appearance of you having bought right into the established media take on this 'PC' phenomenon. One that in the vast majority of cases, the mainstream right wing media and their very conservative, riduculously partisan allies have invented, defined, demonised, named and lied about.
Being 'objective' between two sides on an issue as polarised as this, not that you're being in any way objective about 'PC' anyway, is like 'objectively' allowing that that creationism and evolutionary science have equal validity.
I'm not objective about 'PC' myself, far from. Still, my being willing to take a clear positon myself does not mean I'm mindlessly defending any odd example of dodginess that may exist (before you start preremptorily ordering me to justify every example on your list of 'PC' outrages).
But at least my take on all this isn't being shaped -- even indirectly -- by lie-recycling chalatans like Browne.
Fair dos ... you're more familiar with his modus operandi on here than I am I should think.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
I remember this, he doesn't read links. Yet, without evidence, whatever is said will be nothing more than hearsay or gossip. He's completely ignore the links that I've posted.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Yet, fela would try to claim that he isn't partisan but those who describe themselves thus and spout phrases like "PC gone mad" are the worst offenders.
"absolutely no idea"... "whatsoever"... good old subjective ranting newspaper language...
It can categorically be seen from this post that the poster is talking somewhat subjectively, and has got it wrong too as i shall now show, with even some beloved evidence some always call for on this forum.
I was born in the UK, and lived there for 27 years until i left my country of birth somewhat accidentally.
I read the papers avidly from about the age of 13 until i left. Mostly i read them every day. For my trips back home in my first ten years of emigrating i always bought papers everyday. I returned after a decade for nearly two years to study, and bought a paper every day.
Furthermore, in the line of my subsequent work, i have several times analysed british newspapers for their language content, most notably for the choice of language and the underlying connotations. My work requires me also to be able to teach the various content and aspects found in both tabloids and broadsheets.
In short i am fully aware of the UK press, their content, and their ability to disseminate propaganda to varying degrees of overtness and covertness.
Approximately five years ago, i finally shook the almost addiction-like need for my daily fix of newspapers. This roughly coincides with my time here on urban.
Fridgemagnet, you are wrong mate, simple as that. You have confused what i know about something with what you think i know about something.
And just because you don't want to bother interacting with me due to your misinterpretations and biases, why should you be advising others to do the same?
Be careful whose word you take for things WoW. He may be familiar, but that is no by no means an indication of being correct. He used tabloid language to display his totally wrong judgment of my knowledge of the UK press, as i've just shown.
Incidentally, i don't have a 'modus operandi' unless you call posting things as you see them in life one. I have no prior agenda here on urban. I just like to speak and offer my ideas. I also speak what i think, which is non-PC in my understanding of the term...
If you had said i 'sometimes' don't read links you'd've been correct in your assertion. As it happens you are incorrect in what you say since i probably read between a third and half of links in threads i'm interested in. Maybe more sometimes. One of the things i've always liked about urban in my six years here is all the interesting links that posters have posted up. I have found many good websites thanks to urban.
So another person wallowing in their own misguided judgments and 'facts' and 'evidence'.
And you bang on here about evidence, yet have managed to state a fact about me with no evidence, and indeed, you were completely wrong.
And as for the links you posted that i have not read, i didn't ignore them, i'm currently in an extremely busy period of time at work, and don't have much brain power left over.
You are a slave to your own prejudices and pre-judgements here nino.
Wrong again unsurprisingly. I do not claim to not be partisan, nor would i wish to claim this. I'm partisan like just about everybody else, at least so long as the topics are of a political nature. It's impossible not to be.
I'm not aware of having taken refuge in the term 'PC gone mad', except perhaps with tongue firmly in cheek. That is a term that belongs to the tabloids, and i would never like to find myself in the same camp as them.
You're suddenly bringing objectivity into the debate? Wow! I think that belongs somewhere else mate. And just how exactly do you suggest i bring here what the BC say about themselves?
Since you don't want my summary of it, fair enough.
I lived in britain at the time PC was imported there from the campus halls of california, its birth place i believe. My understanding of PC is that certain people impress upon other people that this or that language, this or that word, this or that phrase, is no longer to be used since it will offend this or that person, this or that group of people. They then offer alternative choices for people to start using instead.
At that time of course i was in my avid newspaper reading stage of life. Nowadays i barely look at them, with the exception of my visits back home (I want to see what changes, if any, have occurred), and occasional forays into the electronic versions of the guardian and independent.
And just about every visit back to england (every two to three years), i notice new language being used, and i notice gaps in language previously used in certain contexts. [I have trained myself in the art of noticing language being used in the contexts i hear it being used to help in my line of work.]
It's my opinion that the British Councils around the world are a microcosm of Britain itself, so they're good harbingers of what one should or should not say, and how one should or should not communicate.
Very rushed this
What language do you feel you're not allowed to use any more back in the UK? And why do you miss it?
(No time for rest atm)
What language do you feel you're not allowed to use any more back in the UK? And why do you miss it?
(No time for rest atm)
To be honest mate i don't really want to expand on this, don't really want to go down that road. I get enough jib on this website as it is.
The only time i feel i need to consider what language i'm using is when i get back to the UK. Not just the language, but the choice of topic too. The reasons are down to simple experience in the past. Freedom of speech exists... but within parameters and boundaries that are unconsciously known by everybody, including journalists. PC is one of the tools to keep the free ideas within limits.
Even in this thread i reckon it's more trouble than it's worth to say exactly what i want to say. This is always the way in a british context.
You always seem a bit rushed! Too much work is not healthy...
I must have been unclear. I don't miss it. I just notice language usage changes. And being away for large periods of time means i'm more likely to notice the changes than someone who grows with them.
fogbat
The Talibum
No spelling "black" with two "g"s...
It's obviously a word on your mind not mine. Hmm, insightful that.
I emigrated to a country where white is a rare colour - very few white people and no snow. Colour if of no issue to me, humans are humans.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
I get the feeling that the 'pc gone mad' argument is resisted because of the people who espouse it.
The neo-cons go on about it, and so every policy they have must be wrong!
In the words of JR Ewing:
And they have stumbled onto a point. that is again not to say that PC should be ignored, just that it is just pretty automatic if you stay open and think. I very rarely get into any trouble over it and I don't think about what is PC or not ever. I just follow logic carefully.
Like with the Elderly sign which is being ignored by the antis atm. I instinctively thought that the charity was right, because it could be viewed as a negative portrayal of the old. Yet ON SECOND THOUGHTS, I realised that this was simplistic, and that in fact the priority must be what the sign is warning against - ie paying attention to the Elderly in the area. So for this message to be communicated the clearest, we have to keep the original sign which is recognised by all drivers and which has been part of the Highway Code for 25 years. Thus the charity needs to recognise this and drop its spurious claim. The sign is only marginally insulting at best and indeed I suspect that the charity has more time than it knows what to do with...
The neo-cons go on about it, and so every policy they have must be wrong!
In the words of JR Ewing:
And they have stumbled onto a point. that is again not to say that PC should be ignored, just that it is just pretty automatic if you stay open and think. I very rarely get into any trouble over it and I don't think about what is PC or not ever. I just follow logic carefully.
Like with the Elderly sign which is being ignored by the antis atm. I instinctively thought that the charity was right, because it could be viewed as a negative portrayal of the old. Yet ON SECOND THOUGHTS, I realised that this was simplistic, and that in fact the priority must be what the sign is warning against - ie paying attention to the Elderly in the area. So for this message to be communicated the clearest, we have to keep the original sign which is recognised by all drivers and which has been part of the Highway Code for 25 years. Thus the charity needs to recognise this and drop its spurious claim. The sign is only marginally insulting at best and indeed I suspect that the charity has more time than it knows what to do with...
But maybe you didn't read my earlier comments that only those who differentiate between different peoples get sucked into PC, ie internal language self-censorship. Why did you not just spell out the word 'nigger' eh fogbat? Why did you hide behind it?
If one fights for human rights, not individual group rights, then there is no need to watch one's language use.
PC is watching out for what you say for fear it might give clues to what you think...
If one fights for human rights, not individual group rights, then there is no need to watch one's language use.
PC is watching out for what you say for fear it might give clues to what you think...
So you don't think you could update the sign and still make it recognisable to others then.
Amazing how all those commercial brands manage it eh?
TBH honest GM, you never seem to think before you post. On one hand you say that you can understand why folks may want to change the sign, yet your gut reaction and daft conclusion is telling.
How long do you think it took the charity to suggest a change of sign. One minute in a meeting and a bullet point on the minutes? You've probably spent as much as your life muttering on about this inconsequential idea, imbuing it with all sorts of significance.
Amazing how all those commercial brands manage it eh?
TBH honest GM, you never seem to think before you post. On one hand you say that you can understand why folks may want to change the sign, yet your gut reaction and daft conclusion is telling.
How long do you think it took the charity to suggest a change of sign. One minute in a meeting and a bullet point on the minutes? You've probably spent as much as your life muttering on about this inconsequential idea, imbuing it with all sorts of significance.
When i saw that sign for the first time, i could not fathom why it was there. After all, don't old codgers just die pretty soon? Surely the sign will outlive the old people and therefore make itself redundant...
Should i have said 'elderly' people...?!
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
How am I "wrong"? You have taken the side of the right in this; that's pretty partisan to me. Furthermore, the right (as I have already stated) have their own form of Political Correctness and neither you or marthews has commented on this.
I'm not sure what you're saying in your last paragraph.
Nino mate, you're wrong because i have not taken the side of the right, and i'm not claiming to not be partisan. That's how you're wrong. You tell me what i have done, but in reality it's not what i've done, just what you have judged me to have done. But your judgment is not right.
It's impossible for me to take the side of the right, i don't know what their side is. I take my own side, i write from my own experiences, not from anybody else's.
In the last paragraph i'm saying that the term 'pc gone mad' has nothing to do with me. I've never used it in a manner of accepting it as natural discourse.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Either you are in denial or you're being deliberately obtuse (or thick or both). Shall I quote your posts for you?
What a weasel.
You're wrong on all four counts. None of your four choices (or is it five?) are correct. Whatever you may think i am, you are wrong in this post as in the other one.
Stop being wrong all the time man!
They said in our PGCE class today that we aren't allowed to use the term "Brainstorm" any more because of PC. Surely that has to be an example of where it is bona fide 'gone mad' rather than any rational ground?
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Is JR Ewing a philosopher?
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
That's right, wriggle away, maaaaaan. You seem to have difficulty accepting responsibility for your posts to the extent that you have disavowed the contents of those posts where you agree with marthews.
What galls me is the way you read things into my posts. Try reading them again instead of making presumptions.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
So no comment about any of these articles, fela? No, I didn't think so.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Here's one of those posts, fela. Here you not only agree with marthews but adopt the same right wing tone regarding "PC". The only people shutting down thinking are those on the right who crap on about "PC".
Similar threads
