Bob gets politically corrected
jmc
" Education and social work are the fields in which the language police are
busiest. My favourite example is from a new college textbook on human
development that includes this statement: "As a folksinger once sang, how
many roads must an individual walk down before you can call them an adult."
This gruesome effort is some educator's attempt at a gender-neutral makeover
to the classic folksong Blowin' in the Wind. In the original, it goes, "How
many roads must a man walk down before you call him a man?" "
from
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040323.wxwente0323/BNStory/Front/
What next?
Just Like a Person
You're a Big Person Now
Special Needs Wind
J Buck
sticks. Repeatedly.
Kyle Pucciarello
At least they didn't put those lines in quotes...but give me a break. Are
people really offended by someone saying "man" rather than "people."
....
>: "As a folksinger once sang, how
>many roads must an individual walk down before you can call them an adult."
----------------------------------
Where did Prince's guitar go?!
---~ Website: www.geocities.com/kpboss23 ~---
don freeman
> Amusing? No. Disgusting? Yes. These idiots should be beaten with big
> sticks. Repeatedly.
>
I don't like it when people put down political correctness as if it were
some awful imposition on humanity to fix up our oppressive language. OF
course there are extremes, and of course the extremes should be avoided,
but that doesn't mean you discredit the concept. It would be like
discrediting feminism because of the radical fringe elements.
I like it that racist and sexist terms are no longer acceptable in the
media and in polite society. I also like it that we are working toward
the elimination of racial and sexual discrimination in our society.
Of course no one should change the lyrics to Blowing in the Wind, but
they should change Dylan's lyrics about the sheiks walkin' around like
kings, wearing fancy jewels and nose rings.
Who Me
rimshot!!
Bill
"Now I've always been the kind of person that doesn't like to trespass but
sometimes you just find yourself over the line."
"I don't have any regrets, they can talk about me plenty when I'm gone."
Who Me
>some awful imposition on humanity to fix up our oppressive language.
screw ypou. That's EXACTLY what it is.
J Buck
sticks. Repeatedly>
<I don't like it when people put down political correctness as if it
were some awful imposition on humanity to fix up our oppressive
language. OF course there are extremes, and of course the extremes
should be avoided, but that doesn't mean you discredit the concept>
Well, I'd apologize but then I'd hate myself in the morning. And if
*this* isn't extreme, I don't know what is.
John Howells
<from
<http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040323.wxwente0323/BNStory/Front/
<What next?
<Just Like a Person
<Special Needs Wind
The Person In Me
Mentally Challenged Wind
--
John Howells
how...@punkhart.com
http://www.punkhart.com
don freeman
>>I don't like it when people put down political correctness as if it were
>>some awful imposition on humanity to fix up our oppressive language.
>
>
>
> screw ypou. That's EXACTLY what it is.
>
>
Well, you may think so, but then again, you're a nazi scumbag
Fhqwhgads!
"don freeman" <dfr...@nospam.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:xAK8c.3739$li5.623@pd7tw3no...
I call bullshit. Words are just words, and anyone who is offended by words
will be offended by any word. Political correctness is turning everyone into
apologetic phonies. It used to be acceptable to say nigger, then negro, then
coloured, then afro-american (am I missing any), now it's black, what's
next. I mean black seems the most negative out of all of them. You can't
even say 'those people' or 'you people' around some people. Very few people
are actually racist, they're only looked at by others who can't get past
their vernacular. And why can't anyone say that two planes crashed into the
WTC killing thousands, they have to say 'the events of September 11'.
J Buck
of Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia being demo'ed, saying it was too
reminiscent of 9/11 and insensitive to show it.
DGDevin
> some awful imposition on humanity to fix up our oppressive language. OF
> course there are extremes, and of course the extremes should be avoided,
> but that doesn't mean you discredit the concept. It would be like
> discrediting feminism because of the radical fringe elements.
The point you are missing is that Political Correctness refuses all limits,
it doesn't stop with commonsense changes, it wants everything reduced to the
same bland, colorless, insipid level. So the cigarette is digitally removed
from Paul's hand on the cover of Abbey Road, a California politician calls
for the computer industry to stop using the terms "master" and "slave" in
reference to hard drives, and schools shy away from letting students read
Huck Finn because it contains the word nigger even though it's a story of
someone discovering how monstrously evil the slavery he takes for granted
actually is. And one day we wake up to discover our "oppressive language"
has been sucked dry of all life for fear of offending someone, somewhere,
and won't we all be so much happier then.
Bobby
"DGDevin" <dgd...@worldnet.att.invalid> wrote in message
news:4yP8c.41445$PY1.7...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> The point you are missing is that Political Correctness refuses all
limits,
> it doesn't stop with commonsense changes, it wants everything reduced to
the
> same bland, colorless, insipid level. So the cigarette is digitally
removed
> from Paul's hand on the cover of Abbey Road, a California politician calls
> for the computer industry to stop using the terms "master" and "slave" in
> reference to hard drives, and schools shy away from letting students read
> Huck Finn because it contains the word nigger even though it's a story of
> someone discovering how monstrously evil the slavery he takes for granted
> actually is. And one day we wake up to discover our "oppressive language"
> has been sucked dry of all life for fear of offending someone, somewhere,
> and won't we all be so much happier then.
Hear, hear! Buy that man (oops, I meant person) a beer!
J Buck
DGDevin
news:c40doe$j7g$1...@news1.kornet.net...
>
> Hear, hear! Buy that man (oops, I meant person) a beer!
Bass Ale please. Or a Pacifico. Or Anchor Steam. Red Tail, Big Rock,
Newcastle Brown, hell just about anything is appreciated. ;-)
Mad Dan
> Amusing? No. Disgusting? Yes. These idiots should be beaten with big
> sticks. Repeatedly.
Especially because I don't consider the original BITW lines to be
intended as "non-gender-specific" - they're surely referring to a
"MAN" in the same way the admonishment "Grow up! Be a man!" would be.
The hardships, etc., a man must overcome to be A MAN DAMMIT!
tmon
<The point you are missing is that Political Correctness refuses all
limits, it doesn't stop with commonsense changes, it wants everything
reduced to the same bland, colorless, insipid level. So the cigarette is
digitally removed from Paul's hand on the cover of Abbey Road, a
California politician calls for the computer industry to stop using the
terms "master" and "slave" in reference to hard drives, and schools shy
away from letting students read Huck Finn because it contains the word
nigger even though it's a story of someone discovering how monstrously
evil the slavery he takes for granted actually is. And one day we wake
up to discover our "oppressive language" has been sucked dry of all life
for fear of offending someone, somewhere, and won't we all be so much
happier then.>
Not one, but two beers and a shot for you for this post! Plus a doobie
doobie doo.
Mad Dan
"You've got a lot of nerve to say you are my friend,
Though, when I reflect on your upbringing
Not to mention your particular - yet equally valid -
Viewpoint on life,
I have to allow that I'm really in no position to judge
And anything I may say about you is as equally valid
As any opinions you may hold about me. Or indeed anyone.
And I wouldn't want my opinions of you as an individual
To any way reflect on other people of your gender, age, race,
Religion or sexual orientation, be they right-handed OR left-handed..
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah......"
Who Me
I know you are, but what am I?...
Who Me
>of Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia being demo'ed, saying it was too
>reminiscent of 9/11 and insensitive to show it.
That's downright f-ing hilarious.
Alan Fraser
<jamesmart...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Thought this might amuse people...
>
>" Education and social work are the fields in which the language police are
>busiest. My favourite example is from a new college textbook on human
>development that includes this statement: "As a folksinger once sang, how
>many roads must an individual walk down before you can call them an adult."
>This gruesome effort is some educator's attempt at a gender-neutral makeover
>to the classic folksong Blowin' in the Wind. In the original, it goes, "How
>many roads must a man walk down before you call him a man?" "
Recently I read a review of a book which was a history of the "Weather
Movement", also known as "Weather". No mention that they were most
widely known as the Weathermen!
"You don't need a weather presenter
To know which way the wind blows"
We went to the theatre at the weekend, and saw they have a Brecht
season coming. "The Good Woman of Setzuan" had been retitled "The Good
Person of Sichuan". We were surprised that they were still performing
"Mother Courage and her Children" and not "Parent Courage and their
Children"!
Alan
Ravagesoftime
> sticks. Repeatedly.
Are you serious? If so, you certainly overreact.
It is amusing - save disgusting for something worse.
robertandrews
>It used to be acceptable to say nigger, then negro, then coloured, then
afro-american (am I missing any), now it's black, what's
next. I mean black seems the most negative out of all of them. You can't
even say 'those people' or 'you people' around some people.
I suppose you could ask Dylan, "hey, why'd you marry one of those people?"
but I'm not sure you'd appreciate the response.
LeeRand
> > sticks. Repeatedly.
> >
>
> I don't like it when people put down political correctness as if it were
It is!!
Lee
J Buck
Newcastle Brown, hell just about anything is appreciated. ;-)>
Speaking of brews, anyone know where I can find Mackeson Stout? The
local conny used to carry it but they got bought out by a big chain and
big chain discontinued it.
God, that was good stuff...
don freeman
> I call bullshit. Words are just words, and anyone who is offended by words
> will be offended by any word.
Let me use some words here to try to straighten you out.
Words can be very damaging. Try yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater, or
"I've got a bomb" on an airplane, and then tell everyone it was just words.
Try slander and libel and see where words can get you.
Hate literature is just words. Holocaust denial is just words. Saying
that Iraq was behind Sept 11 and that they had weapons of mass
destruction - just words words words.
Choose your words wisely. Words have power.
don freeman
>And one day we wake up to discover our "oppressive language"
> has been sucked dry of all life for fear of offending someone, somewhere,
> and won't we all be so much happier then.
>
>
correctness mean the whole concept is wrong, so I won't respond to that
part of your argument.
But you're worried that our language will lose its life? Have you ever
heard of poetry? Have you listened to Love & Theft?
Stephen
>
[...]
> But you're worried that our language will lose its life? Have you ever
> heard of poetry? Have you listened to Love & Theft?
You kiddin'? "L&T"'s chock full of offensive or at least dubious language, just
waiting to be altered or expunged:
"His Master's voice is calling me,"
Gender-biased religious discourse
"Sky full of fire, pain pourin' down"
Too traumatic post-911
"Got a long haired woman, she got royal Indian blood"
"The ladies down in Darktown, they're doing the Darktown Strut"
Racist
"I got eight carburetors, boys I'm using 'em all"
"I'm forty miles from the mill - I'm droppin' it into overdrive"
Pro-global warming
"Gonna break the roof in - set fire to the place as a parting gift"
"I'm gonna baptize you in fire so you can sin no more
I'm gonna establish my rule through civil war"
Violent and arsonistic
"Papa gone mad"
"Sugar Baby, get on down the road
You ain't got no brains no how"
"The Siamese twins are comin' to town"
Insensitve to the handicapped and mentally ill
"Don't know how it looked to other people
I never slept with her even once"
"Jump into the wagon, love, throw your panties overboard"
Sexual harrassment
"I asked Fat Nancy for something to eat"
Weightist
"There ain't no limit to the amount of trouble women bring"
Misogynist
"I am goin' to teach peace to the conquered
I'm gonna tame the proud"
Imperialist-jingoist-militarist
"I catch a lot, sometimes too many"
Overfishing
"There's a new grove of trees on the outskirts of town
The old one is long gone"
"You can smell the pine wood burnin'"
Clearcutting old-growth timber
"I left all my dreams and hopes
Buried under tobacco leaves"
Big Tobacco product placement
"All the rest of them rebel rivers"
Glamorizes the Confederacy (let's not even get into "Cross the Green Mountain")
"My grandfather was a duck trapper"
Heartless bastard!
J Buck
correctness mean the whole concept is wrong, so I won't respond to that
part of your argument>
So who gets to make the call? Who decides what language can be policed
and what is extreme? Is 'chairman' evil? Is saying 'man to man defense'
in a woman's basketball game so horrible?
Mike Lewis
'Political correctness' was invented by conservatives so that they can
claim victim status.
don freeman
> So who gets to make the call? Who decides what language can be policed
> and what is extreme? Is 'chairman' evil? Is saying 'man to man defense'
> in a woman's basketball game so horrible?
>
Good question.
The language just evolves and some words survive and others don't.
Homosexuals got to use the word "gay" despite other people's objections.
One rarely hears homosexuals being called "queers" anymore.
In Canada, we use the term "first nations" to describe whom Americans
call "natives." Let's see how that one works out.
We call Canadians from India "Indo-Canadians." The term "Afro-American"
was deemed offensive and one rarely hears it, as it as been replaced by
"African-Americans." Will the Indians from Canada want us to call them
"Indian-Canadians?" Probably not.
Language is always evolving, and political sensitivity is one of the
forces evolving it. I don't remember anyone calling Muhammad Ali a nigger.
I personally use the term "chairperson" but I ofter use the term "man"
to refer to humanity. I've started to call actresses "actors."
Things change.
J Buck
That's a start, Don :)
J Buck
claim victim status>
Damn right LoL
J Buck
Isn't there a more or less militant group called Queer Nation (or We're
Here And We're Queer)? Not to mention the tv show 'Queer Eye For The
Straight Guy'
Ken Wilson
> > So who gets to make the call? Who decides what language can be policed
> > and what is extreme? Is 'chairman' evil? Is saying 'man to man defense'
> > in a woman's basketball game so horrible?
> >
>
> Good question.
>
> The language just evolves and some words survive and others don't.
Don't play dumb, Don. :-) Leftists get to make the call, because they're on
the side of Progress, and their moral objections count while conservative
moral objections are by definition prejudice. That's why it's alright for
you to mock the religious.
> I ofter use the term "man"
> to refer to humanity.
For shame.
> I've started to call actresses "actors."
What do you call actors, "actresses"? What do you call actresses when you
want to distinguish them from actors, "female actors"? Don't act dumb
either.
Ken
don freeman
> Don't play dumb, Don. :-) Leftists get to make the call, because they're on
> the side of Progress, and their moral objections count while conservative
> moral objections are by definition prejudice. That's why it's alright for
> you to mock the religious.
It's alright to mock the religious because they're misguided in their
very absurd beliefs. Imagine believing in a man in the sky or the tooth
fairy.
If leftist is just another word for progressive people, then naturally
it's the leftist who influence the progression of the language.
Conservatives want to converse the old practices, like slavery and
gay-bashing.
> What do you call actors, "actresses"? What do you call actresses when you
> want to distinguish them from actors, "female actors"? Don't act dumb
> either.
What do you call a female doctor?
Ken Wilson
> I like it that racist and sexist terms are no longer acceptable in the
> media and in polite society.
Exactly -- they're no longer acceptable in polite society, no matter if that
society is fundamentalist conservative or fundamentalist leftist or
somewhere in the more commonly open-minded middle. (Except that to the most
extreme white lefties, "bitch" and "ho" and "nigger" are perfectly
acceptable coming from African-Americans, because African-Americans have
been done wrong and as such can't be expected to internalize the same
standards of decency and or even courtesy as polite society). But the
language police had nothing to do with those changes. Language changed after
consciousness changed. On the other hand, "differently-abled" never raised
anyone's consciousness. (Yes they're differently abled. In the respect we're
talking about, they're less able -- they're handicapped).
Ken
Ken Wilson
> > But you're worried that our language will lose its life? Have you ever
> > heard of poetry? Have you listened to Love & Theft?
>
> You kiddin'? "L&T"'s chock full of offensive or at least dubious
language, just
> waiting to be altered or expunged:
Thanks for the laughs, Stephen. Don, let us know when you've burned your
edited version.
Ken
Ken Wilson
> It's alright to mock the religious because they're misguided
First of all, tolerance is an attitude before it's an action. Didn't your
mother teach you not to laugh at people just because they aren't like you?
If you haven't absorbed that lesson, fundamental to true civilization -- and
you clearly haven't -- then you haven't learned to respect people who are
different than you, and you'll always fall right in with the persecuters if
persecution becomes popular. (Now have your little laugh, but it just shows
you can't gainsay the logic).
> If leftist is just another word for progressive people, then naturally
> it's the leftist who influence the progression of the language.
> Conservatives want to converse the old practices, like slavery and
> gay-bashing.
Actually, thoughful conservatives want to preserve what's good, while
thoughtful liberals and all-out lefties want to change things for the
better -- noble aims, both, at least in theory. But nevermind the moral
status of homosexual behavior, your implicit claim here is that for the law
to differentiate between behavior (choice) is on the same moral plane as for
it to differentiate between colors of skin (heredity).
By the way, Christians, those people you give yourself childish leave to
laugh at, were responsible for ending slavery here. They'd have had no truck
with PC morals. And who has been making all the noise about Christian slaves
in Sudan? Not the leftist press.
> > What do you call actors, "actresses"? What do you call actresses when
you
> > want to distinguish them from actors, "female actors"? Don't act dumb
> > either.
>
>
> What do you call a female doctor?
In language, the urge not to offend (to demonstrate virtue is more like it
sometimes) trumps the urge to actually communicate. Is that it? And I don't
remember "actress" being used as a slur in modern times.
Ken
don freeman
> mother teach you not to laugh at people just because they aren't like you?
She did, but someone not eating shellfish because of a biblical belief -
that's just absurd. Why can't I ridicule the absurd?
> If you haven't absorbed that lesson, fundamental to true civilization -- and
> you clearly haven't -- then you haven't learned to respect people who are
> different than you, and you'll always fall right in with the persecuters if
> persecution becomes popular.
No Ken, you're the one I worry about falling in with the persecutors.
I respect the people who are different from me. But a true civilization
has to be based on truth, and should tolerate crackpot ideas.
>
> I don't
> remember "actress" being used as a slur in modern times.
>
You probably don't pay much attention to gender problems in show
business. But the word "actress" is disappearing, and there are good
reasons why. Perhaps it will not disappear, who knows. But you are
usually either on the right side or the wrong side of history. I'm
betting on "actor."
Signothetimes53
>someone not eating shellfish because of a biblical belief -
>that's just absurd. Why can't I ridicule the absurd?
It's only absurd in your view.
And you _can_ ridicule, if you wish, but please don't complain when someone
takes you to task for your rudeness, your disrespect of others, and your
intolerance.
don freeman
> It's only absurd in your view.
You can't open your mind to every conceivable point of view
>
> And you _can_ ridicule, if you wish, but please don't complain when someone
> takes you to task for your rudeness, your disrespect of others, and your
> intolerance.
Agreed.
I choose to ridicule the God-Hates- Shellfishers because I find that
belief totally absurd. True, it's not doing anyone any harm, and
actually leaves more shellfish for the true shellfish believers. My
ridicule is based purely on my personal belief, and if I'm going to push
my belief onto others, I'll have to take the heat.
don freeman
> Language changed after
> consciousness changed.
Nope Ken, you've got it backwards.
In the beginning was the word.
Ken Wilson
> > Didn't your
> > mother teach you not to laugh at people just because they aren't like
you?
>
> She did, but someone not eating shellfish because of a biblical belief -
> that's just absurd. Why can't I ridicule the absurd?
Ridicule what you think is absurd all you like in private if you need to
blow off steam. Habitually ridiculing people in public for sport (deny it,
but you'll fool no one) is a sign of disrespect towards them, not just their
beliefs. "If fags had brains, they'd know you don't put semen in a
shithole." Would that be acceptable speech? Quit playing dumb. You disabuse
people of illogic through reason, not ridicule. (And you've repeatedly
backed away when asked to defend your atheism).
> But a true civilization
> has to be based on truth, and should tolerate crackpot ideas.
Much less the ideas of "Christ-killers," right? You're using the same
mindset; you're on a slope just as slippery.
> >
> > I don't
> > remember "actress" being used as a slur in modern times.
> >
>
> You probably don't pay much attention to gender problems in show
> business.
ROTFL. Tell us all about them, Don, don't hold back. "Actor" killed the
casting couch?
Ken
don freeman
> Ridicule what you think is absurd all you like in private if you need to
> blow off steam. Habitually ridiculing people in public for sport (deny it,
> but you'll fool no one) is a sign of disrespect towards them, not just their
> beliefs.
Deny it and I'll fool no one? I ridicule to spread the truth, not for sport.
>"If fags had brains, they'd know you don't put semen in a
> shithole." Would that be acceptable speech? Quit playing dumb.
Ken, you are trying to tar me with your brush. I'm the one who says
poltically incorrect speech should be disappeared.
Pete Oppel
>>some awful imposition on humanity to fix up our oppressive language.
>
>
>
>
>
Well, you may think so, but then again, you're a nazi scumbag
Actrually, the politically correct term is fascist receptacle of impurities
=========================================================
"Wouldn't this be a great world if insecurity and desperation made us more
attractive--if needy were a turn-on?"
--Aaron Altman (Albert Brooks), "Broadcast News"
harry haller
I'm not too worried about language losing it's life,but the idea of
changing a writer's work does trouble me.Regarding the words on "Slow
Train Coming" I wish he'd written differently,but it's Dylan's song. I
wouldn't say we have the right to change it.Who gives us the right to
meddle with the sung or written word?What do we have the privelege to
change?Who alters the work?We have no business changing another's
work,we can respond each according to their own ears,sometimes that
will be unpleasant........harry
Ken Wilson
> >"If fags had brains, they'd know you don't put semen in a
> > shithole." Would that be acceptable speech? Quit playing dumb.
>
> Ken, you are trying to tar me with your brush. I'm the one who says
> poltically incorrect speech should be disappeared.
But you are, to use polite terminology, conveniently inconsistent about it.
Ken
don freeman
> But you are, to use polite terminology, conveniently inconsistent about it.
No, ken, I try to go with the flow, to surf the waves of polticial
correctness, not stand on the shore and try to stop the tide.
Of course I'm inconsistent. It doesn't flow in a straight line. Don't
get hob-goblined by being too linear.
Jeff Davis
> call "natives." Let's see how that one works out.
Ah, so you're a goddamn canadian? Well, that explains a whole lot. Ain't no
liberal PC jerkwads ever gonna tell me what not to say. I calls 'em as I
sees 'em, and y'all should be shot and hanged (*), plain and simple. That
great American patriot and Dylan-collaborator Charlie Daniels summed it up
quite nicely once:
Now I ain't politically correct, I wouldn't be if you broke my neck
And if some folks don't like the way I am, well I don't give a damn
I'm gonna wave them stars & stripes everytime I can
I'm gonna keep my guns, have my fun
And call 'em just the way I see
It's a brand new world, but still the same ol' me!
Daggone right, Charlie! :-D
(*) A term Bob used himself by the way, in a recent M&A-related interview
where he was denouncing people who weren't content to mind their own
business.
J Buck
real pain in the ass?)
don freeman
> real pain in the ass?)
>
Fhqwhgads!
>
> > I call bullshit. Words are just words, and anyone who is offended by
words
> > will be offended by any word.
>
>
> Let me use some words here to try to straighten you out.
>
> Words can be very damaging. Try yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater, or
> "I've got a bomb" on an airplane, and then tell everyone it was just
words.
>
>
> Try slander and libel and see where words can get you.
>
> Hate literature is just words. Holocaust denial is just words. Saying
> that Iraq was behind Sept 11 and that they had weapons of mass
> destruction - just words words words.
>
> Choose your words wisely. Words have power.
>
Holy shite. Did you have the day off today? You must have been following
this stupid discussion all day. Anyway I say words have meaning, meaning
which we give them. Yelling fire wouldn't have the same effect as whispering
fire so it's not the word that's effecting the situation.
And though it's a common place term, I still don't understand what exactly
is defined as hate literature, or hate crimes or hate anything. Seems like
it kind of appeared when the whole PC thing got rolling.
And they call them Indians in America, like the American Indian Movement.
Though I don't think the term First Nations has anything to do with
political correctness, just historical correctness, they were here first.
J Buck
I hope you're joking, Don. As the saying goes, I like my dog more than
most people.
don freeman
> And though it's a common place term, I still don't understand what exactly
> is defined as hate literature, or hate crimes or hate anything. Seems like
> it kind of appeared when the whole PC thing got rolling.
Hate Literature legislation came before the political correctness movement.
I don't know the exact history of the anti-hate crime movement, but I
think it came after WWII, with Germany making laws against Naziism and
racial hatred. It's been a complex problem for demicracies to try to
outlaw speech that incites racial hatred
In Canada, we've been trying to prosecute a Holocaust denier. I think I
agree with the concept that if you spread around the lies that the
Nazi's didn't target and kill Jews etc. then you are doing something
that should be illega.
don freeman
> I hope you're joking, Don. As the saying goes, I like my dog more than
> most people.
>
People who hate people are the unluckiest people in the world.
I honestly think that using dogs for protein makes more sense than what
most North American big city dogs are used for.
I'd have to hear more about your dog before I'd make a decision if it
should be sent to Indonesia to feed the poor.
Bob Gill
> .... But the
> language police had nothing to do with those changes. Language changed after
> consciousness changed. On the other hand, "differently-abled" never raised
> anyone's consciousness. (Yes they're differently abled. In the respect we're
> talking about, they're less able -- they're handicapped).
That's an interesting distinction, and I might have to agree. I think the
ever-changing new terms for various handicaps are the result of well-meaning but
out-of-touch-with-reality people who actually believe at some level that if we
could just get the right *word* for being paralyzed, it wouldn't be a problem.
And no matter what word they make up, they always seem surprised when the word
quickly acquires what they call a "negative association." They fail to realize
that whatever word you use, you're describing something that's negative, whether
you like to admit it or not, and the word will inevitably pick up negative
connotations. Still, the quest would be heroic if it weren't so idiotic.
As for the whole issue of offensive terms, I'd like to repeat something I read
(paraphrased): True tolerance lies not in the commitment not to offend anyone,
as it's generally defined today, but in the commitment not to take offense when
none is intended _ or maybe even when it is.
-- Bob G.
robertandrews
>Except that to the most extreme white lefties, "bitch" and "ho" and
"nigger" are perfectly acceptable coming from African-Americans, because
African-Americans have been done wrong and as such can't be expected to
internalize the same standards of decency and or even courtesy as polite
society).
I fail to see different standards for whites & blacks regarding "bitch" &
"ho." If it's acceptable (or not) for Eminem & Bob Dylan to say "bitch" &
"ho", same goes for Snoop Dogg & Smokey Robinson.
As for "nigger," there are racial/racist aspects that lead to the double
standard. Another factor is that society usually accords greater freedom
when talking about one's own ethnicity & culture. Also, "nigger" can have
positive meanings when spoken among black folks. It can also be offensive &
racist as hell.
I'm not aware that radical leftists characterize slavery, discrimination &
racism as "African-Americans have been done wrong." Sounds more like
something I'd hear from white conservatives.
J Buck
agree with the concept that if you spread around the lies that the
Nazi's didn't target and kill Jews etc. then you are doing something
Prosecuting someone for just saying something hateful and incorrect? Or
did it go beyond just speech?
J Buck
most people>
<People who hate people are the unluckiest people in the world>
I don't hate people. I'm just not a 'people person' (hate the phrase,
but I don't know what else to use)
<I honestly think that using dogs for protein makes more sense than what
most North American big city dogs are used for>
Well, for starters, I don't live in a big city.
<I'd have to hear more about your dog before I'd make a decision if it
should be sent to Indonesia to feed the poor>
LoL Shall I send you a pic and his bio off-group?
J Buck
generally defined today, but in the commitment not to take offense when
none is intended _ or maybe even when it is>
don't know where you paraphrased that from, but it's spot on
J Buck
talking about one's own ethnicity & culture. Also, "nigger" can have
positive meanings when spoken among black folks>
I can understand that. Same reason I can call a buddy a cracker. (though
I'm not sure how 'positive' that is)
don freeman
>
> Prosecuting someone for just saying something hateful and incorrect? Or
> did it go beyond just speech?
>
If you go around saying that the Jews invented the myth of the Holocaust
and it was all a fraud, then that's like encouraging a new Holocaust and
in Canada, we lock you up for it.
Actually, the guy in question, neo-nazi Ernst Zundel, is currently in an
American jail. I'm not sure of all the details.
J Buck
did it go beyond just speech?>
<No, the point is that speech can incite racial hatred. If you go around
saying that the Jews invented the myth of the Holocaust and it was all a
fraud, then that's like encouraging a new Holocaust and in Canada, we
lock you up for it>
Wow...that is bizarre. 'O Canada' indeed. Oer the Land of the muzzled,
and the Home of the meek
BlackMonk
"J Buck" <jbu...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:16146-40...@storefull-3133.bay.webtv.net...
> <I'm really bored by the argument that the extremes of political
> correctness mean the whole concept is wrong, so I won't respond to that
> part of your argument>
>
> and what is extreme?
How about the people being referred to? If you were using the expression, to
jew someone down, without thinking about what it meant, and I told you I was
offended by it, would you insist that you didn't mean it in an offensive way
and you continue to use it?
Is 'chairman' evil? Is saying 'man to man defense'
> in a woman's basketball game so horrible?
>
If the players in the game are offended by it- and they have every right to
be- why would you insist on saying it?
Tumulty
> And though it's a common place term, I still don't understand what exactly
> is defined as hate literature, or hate crimes or hate anything. Seems like
> it kind of appeared when the whole PC thing got rolling.
Born yesterday? Perhaps the reason you don't understand about hate
literature or hate crimes or anything is that most of your relatives
died of sickness or old age instead of being murdered by the
millions? This "who cares, it ain't us" attitude around here is
absolutely sick-making.
T.
... et al.
>
>> Amusing? No. Disgusting? Yes. These idiots should be beaten with big
>> sticks. Repeatedly.
>>
>
> I don't like it when people put down political correctness as if it were
> course there are extremes, and of course the extremes should be avoided,
> but that doesn't mean you discredit the concept. It would be like
> discrediting feminism because of the radical fringe elements.
>
> I like it that racist and sexist terms are no longer acceptable in the
> media and in polite society. I also like it that we are working toward
> the elimination of racial and sexual discrimination in our society.
(done and delt with in abundance by others)
>
> Of course no one should change the lyrics to Blowing in the Wind, but
> they should change Dylan's lyrics about the sheiks walkin' around like
> kings, wearing fancy jewels and nose rings.
>
Who the fuck *they*?
The christian envangelists? the NewRightWingers? The Central
Intelligence Agency? Who the *fuck* they?
The lyrics to "Slow Train" is a piece of poetry set in motion to music.
If anyone *should* change the lyrics, it should be the author! Oh wait
he did, sort of. As a understand it, when he later performed it live, he
did leave out the verse you don't approve of.
I just saw a movie where Bob is singing the word "Negro" to an audience
consisting of what looked like a mostly negro-audience (at least up
front). (Ballad of Medgar Evers (1963-08-28)) If you are offended by
that individual word, you clearly miss the point of the song. (Similar
to the Huck' Finn in school censorship issue someone else talked about.)
What you should do, is choose to read/listen/view it, or choose not to.
If you choose to listen to it, you can like it, or not like it. Whether
you like it or not, you should be allowed to critizes it (positively or
negatively). And if you choose to do so publicly, people should be
allowed to agree with your opinions, or disagree with them, in for
example an Usenet newsgroup somewhere.
Oh look .. an exposed nipple .. horror, horror .. better run for
shelter. Better cover your babys eyes so that he doesn't look at what
he's sucking on. Better call in the Nestlé police. Better censor the
word "live" from TV broadcasting. Hey what are you gonna do, .. from New
York, it's Saturday Night ..? Hopefully Bob will be the guest-performer
there once again.
--
Please followup in newsgroup.
E-mail address is invalid due to spam-control.
don freeman
> Wow...that is bizarre. 'O Canada' indeed. Oer the Land of the muzzled,
> and the Home of the meek
>
Right. Not only does Canadar bar incitements to racial hatred, we have
gun control legislation and govenment medical insurance.
One would think, as they tried to do to Cuba, that America needs to
invade Canada to set us staight.
Avylan
"don freeman" <dfr...@nospam.shaw.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3fg9c.22746$li5.2882@pd7tw3no...
J Buck
horrible?>
<If the players in the game are offended by it- and they have every
right to be- why would you insist on saying it?>
Why do they have 'every right to be'? I insist on saying it because
saying anything else just plain sounds stupid. Use your head and a
little common sense. If they don't like it, they can switch to a zone
defense :)
BlackMonk
> <Is saying 'man to man defense' in a woman's basketball game so
> horrible?>
>
> <If the players in the game are offended by it- and they have every
> right to be- why would you insist on saying it?>
>
> Why do they have 'every right to be'?
Why don't they have the right to decide what offends them? Why should you
have more right to tell them what they should or shouldn't be offended by?
I insist on saying it because
> saying anything else just plain sounds stupid. Use your head and a
> little common sense. If they don't like it, they can switch to a zone
> defense :)
I am using common sense. I realize that whether or not a person is offended
by what I saw is more important than my use of a insignificant phrase.
don freeman
> Who could play the Ahmed Chalabi role?
Why that would be Paul Martin, our new prime minister.
J Buck
horrible?>
<If the players in the game are offended by it- and they have every
right to be- why would you insist on saying it?>
<Why do they have 'every right to be'?>
<Why don't they have the right to decide what offends them? Why should
you have more right to tell them what they should or shouldn't be
offended by?>
<I insist on saying it because saying anything else just plain sounds
stupid.Use your head and a little common sense. If they don't like it,
they can switch to a zone defense :)>
<I am using common sense. I realize that whether or not a person is
offended by what I saw is more important than my use of a insignificant
phrase>
Why don't I have every right to be offended by being told not to use
(your words here...) an insignificant phrase?
KasualKenny
>From: Alan Fraser alan....@boltblue.com
>
>Recently I read a review of a book which was a history of the "Weather
>Movement", also known as "Weather". No mention that they were most
>widely known as the Weathermen!
Actually, I think they adopted the name "Weather Underground" in 1970,
precisely because "Weathermen" came to be viewed as sexist. I must say,
however, that I've never heard them referred to either as the "Weather
Movement" or as just plain "Weather."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Underground
>We went to the theatre at the weekend, and saw they have a Brecht
>season coming. "The Good Woman of Setzuan" had been retitled "The Good
>Person of Sichuan". We were surprised that they were still performing
>"Mother Courage and her Children" and not "Parent Courage and their
>Children"!
"12 Angry Men," a 1950s teleplay that later became a feature film starring
Henry Fonda, is today usually performed theatrically as "12 Angry Jurors." Of
course, the original production did feature men only, while women are now also
cast in this play. So the name change does make good sense.
tmon
<Why don't I have every right to be offended by being told not to use
(your words here...) an insignificant phrase?>
Ah, then you must be a Nazi. :-) LOL!
BlackMonk
You haven't answered my question. But it's nice to know what your priorities
are.
BlackMonk
"tmon" <tm...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:25913-40...@storefull-3173.bay.webtv.net...
From: jbu...@webtv.net (J Buck)
No, tmon. You're the nazi here.
J Buck
shouldn't be offended by?>
<You haven't answered my question. But it's nice to know what your
priorities are>
Hey, YOU are the one who called it an insignificant phrase, not me. They
can be as offended as they want...fine, and I will be offended at being
told not to say it by PC cops like you.
Ken Wilson
> I fail to see different standards for whites & blacks regarding "bitch" &
> "ho." If it's acceptable (or not) for Eminem & Bob Dylan to say "bitch" &
> "ho", same goes for Snoop Dogg & Smokey Robinson.
That's as it should be, sure, but some whites make patronizing excuses
for the gangsta types.
> As for "nigger," there are racial/racist aspects that lead to the double
> standard. Another factor is that society usually accords greater freedom
> when talking about one's own ethnicity & culture. Also, "nigger" can have
> positive meanings when spoken among black folks. It can also be offensive &
> racist as hell.
All true, but the African-Americans who suffered in the civil rights
movement and shamed a lot of whites away from the term don't use it
themselves, and they have harsh words for the street culture where
it's acceptable.
> I'm not aware that radical leftists characterize slavery, discrimination &
> racism as "African-Americans have been done wrong." Sounds more like
> something I'd hear from white conservatives.
And that sounds like something robertandrews would say.
Ken
Ken Wilson
Very well put, although I think it's important to spotlight intolerance. A
lot of left-leaning people have this nonsensical idea that tolerance amounts
to everyone else condoning what lefties approve of. But tolerating something
isn't letting the other guy have his way, it's being a good citizen when
he's won the battle. Practically speaking, that often means that we speak
civilly to and of each other, lay off the cant and listen, and continue to
debate honestly and not simply to score rhetorical points.
Tolerance is not, pace Don Freeman in regards to homosexuality, asking the
opposition to stand by passively as you rearrange society, and locking them
up if they so much as voice their own views. Physical inbreeding produces
"mentally-challenged" children. As we can see, intellectual inbreeding,
wherein people refuse to honestly engage other opinions and only listen to
what they already agree with, produces similarly-challenged opinions.
Ken
BlackMonk
> <Why should you have more right to tell them what they should or
> shouldn't be offended by?>
>
> <You haven't answered my question. But it's nice to know what your
> priorities are>
>
> Hey, YOU are the one who called it an insignificant phrase, not me.
You think it's a significant phrase?
They
> can be as offended as they want...fine, and I will be offended at being
> told not to say it by PC cops like you.
Again, I'm glad to know what your priorities are.
But why are you offended by being told that? Does it bother you so much to
have to consider the effect the things you say have on other people? It
really sucks to be forced to acknowledge that you're not the only person in
the world, doesn't it?
>
J Buck
<You think it's a significant phrase?>
No, I don't. But it WORKS in the context in which it is being used! Why,
oh why can't you understand that?
<They can be as offended as they want...fine, and I will be offended at
being told not to say it by PC cops like you>
<Again, I'm glad to know what your priorities are>
Well, it's all about making you happy.
<Does it bother you so much to have to consider the effect the things
you say have on other people?>
And, again, vice versa. I'm being inconvenienced to learn a whole new
language because someone's feelings are hurt thru no malice on my part.
Screw that.
<It really sucks to be forced to acknowledge that you're not the only
person in the world, doesn't it?>
I'm over it. You should be too.
tmon
"J Buck" <jbu...@webtv.net> wrote in message:
<They
can be as offended as they want...fine, and I will be offended at being
told not to say it by PC cops like you.>
<Again, I'm glad to know what your priorities are.
But why are you offended by being told that?>
I won't speak for JBuck, but who are you to be dictating to people what
words they can use or not use? Just as you have the chutzpah to believe
that you have the right to impose your will on Christians and Mel Gibson
regarding their faith, you also have the chutzpah to believe that you
have the right to dictate the proper manner of speech to the rest of us.
He's probably only offended at the thought of being told what to do by a
snivelling little putz like you.
<Does it bother you so much to have to consider the effect the things
you say have on other people? It really sucks to be forced to
acknowledge that you're not the only person in the world, doesn't it?>
Funny that, coming from a little man who thinks the Jews are the center
of the universe. Oy vey, such anti-semitism already. To Abe Foxman I
will complain already.
DGDevin
news:G_X8c.12419$R27.5293@pd7tw2no...
>
> I'm really bored by the argument that the extremes of political
> correctness mean the whole concept is wrong, so I won't respond to that
That wasn't the argument, you're side-stepping the argument, but I bet you
knew that.
> But you're worried that our language will lose its life? Have you ever
> heard of poetry? Have you listened to Love & Theft?
Ah, so extremes are valid when they support *your* position huh? Big
surprise.
DGDevin
news:IyY8c.7$xo...@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...> [...]
> > But you're worried that our language will lose its life? Have you ever
> > heard of poetry? Have you listened to Love & Theft?
>
language, just
> waiting to be altered or expunged:
[snip]
BRILLIANT! 8^)
>"I catch a lot, sometimes too many"
>Overfishing
Oh man, I almost wet my pants by that point. Needless to say, no person
infected with Political Correctness could ever laugh at such a list much
less come up with it.
jmc
"KasualKenny" <kasua...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040327154739...@mb-m15.aol.com...
> Henry Fonda, is today usually performed theatrically as "12 Angry
Jurors." Of
> course, the original production did feature men only, while women are now
also
> cast in this play. So the name change does make good sense.
Luckily for us in the UK, 12 Angry Men is still known by that title. 12
Angry Jurors is an absolutely terrible title - the piece would never have
been a hit in the first place with that moniker - and if you can't see how
12 Angry Men is, simply, better, more impactful, more to-the-point and more
powerful, then my friend you have no feel for language at all. Words are
used by writers because they SOUND the right words. They feel right on the
tongue. They scan well. Leave it up to writers to choose their words - they
know what they're doing, believe me.
DGDevin
> No Ken, you're the one I worry about falling in with the persecutors.
> I respect the people who are different from me. But a true civilization
> has to be based on truth, and should tolerate crackpot ideas.
Incredible, you respect those who are different from you, except the ones
with beliefs *you've* decided are crackpot. We normally have to be
listening to a politician to hear someone speak out of both sides of their
mouth at once like this.
don freeman
> Incredible, you respect those who are different from you, except the ones
> with beliefs *you've* decided are crackpot. We normally have to be
> listening to a politician to hear someone speak out of both sides of their
> mouth at once like this.
>
>
What is so incredible about being able to distinguish crackpot beliefs
from normal beliefs.
So, if I think that I'm going to have 71 virgins to sleep with if I die
as a martyr, then I'm not a crackpot?
robertandrews
>So, if I think that I'm going to have 71 virgins to sleep with if I die as
a martyr, then I'm not a crackpot?
Strangely enough, a female martyr gets to sleep with 76 trombones.
KasualKenny
>Date: 3/28/2004 4:57 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <c47hog$45q$1...@titan.btinternet.com>
Did that condescending little outburst make you feel better? Good, I'm
delighted for you. That throbbing vein on your forehead can't be a good thing.
However, as a plain matter of fact, I had the identical reaction when I first
heard the new title used for a new staging of the play.
There's no question that the original title packs a lot more power.
Unfortunately, in the real world, it's now a rather inapt title for a play
where the curtain rises on perhaps half a dozen men and half a dozen women
sitting in a jury room.
So, in the real world--where perhaps your little set of rules doesn't apply
merely because you say so--one has to make a choice. On the one hand, there's
the better-sounding title that doesn't describe the reality in front of the
audience's eyes. On the other, there's the title that describes that reality,
but doesn't sound as good.
Most of us can probably make that choice, depending on our tastes, without
imagining that the fate of Western civilization and the principle of authorial
integrity hang in the balance.
robertandrews
>Leave it up to writers to choose their words - they know what they're
doing, believe me.
Assuming you wrote the play today with a jury of 9 women & 3 men, what's
your title?
BlackMonk
> <YOU are the one who called it an insignificant phrase, not me>
>
> <You think it's a significant phrase?>
>
> No, I don't. But it WORKS in the context in which it is being used! Why,
> oh why can't you understand that?
>
> <They can be as offended as they want...fine, and I will be offended at
> being told not to say it by PC cops like you>
>
> <Again, I'm glad to know what your priorities are>
>
> Well, it's all about making you happy.
>
> <Does it bother you so much to have to consider the effect the things
> you say have on other people?>
>
> And, again, vice versa. I'm being inconvenienced to learn a whole new
> language because someone's feelings are hurt thru no malice on my part.
> Screw that.
>
Do you drive under the speed limit, even though it hinders your ability to
reach your destination and any people who you might hurt in a traffic
accident would be hurt through no malice on your part?
DGDevin
>
> What is so incredible about being able to distinguish crackpot beliefs
> from normal beliefs.
>
> So, if I think that I'm going to have 71 virgins to sleep with if I die
> as a martyr, then I'm not a crackpot?
And you get to decide what is "normal" huh? In your case "normal" is
contrary to what three-quarters of the population of the U.S. -- actually
82% according to the NY Times -- says of itself, ie. an adherence to
Christian beliefs. So in terms of what the dictionary says "normal"
means -- "Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard,
pattern, level, or type; typical," it would seem you're actually abnormal.
Oh, and I checked with the afterlife, you don't get 71 virgins, in fact no
sexual partners at all, you're on permanent janitorial duty, moppiing up
oceans of tears in very large rooms full of self-indulgent folks such as
yourself.
John Howells
Excuse me, but why is anyone casting women in the play in the first
place? The play (written for television) was originally created
with male actors in the roles. It is an artifact of its time - the
1950s - and doesn't need to be updated. Would you rewrite Shakespeare's
Henry V to put more women in the battle scenes, because after all
women now serve in the armed forces? Would you recast and rewrite
Waiting for Godot to make one of the lead characters a woman? If
the play was originally written for male characters, there is no
reason for change. Just know that it was written that way and deal
with the time period from which it derives.
(shocked and disappointed that anyone would feel the need to "update"
someone else's work of art).
--
John Howells
how...@punkhart.com
http://www.punkhart.com
Who Me
>"don freeman" <dfr...@nospam.shaw.ca> wrote in message
>news:9lI9c.37681$li5.10398@pd7tw3no...
>>
>> What is so incredible about being able to distinguish crackpot beliefs
>> from normal beliefs.
>>
>> So, if I think that I'm going to have 71 virgins to sleep with if I die
>> as a martyr, then I'm not a crackpot?
>
>And you get to decide what is "normal" huh?
No. All he's saying is that sometimes it takes a total FOOL to NOT be able to
see what is "normal" and what is not.
Bill
"Now I've always been the kind of person that doesn't like to trespass but
sometimes you just find yourself over the line."
"I don't have any regrets, they can talk about me plenty when I'm gone."
DGDevin
news:20040329034333...@mb-m18.aol.com...
> >
> No. All he's saying is that sometimes it takes a total FOOL to NOT be able
to
> see what is "normal" and what is not.
And let me guess, whatever you believe is normal, right?
jmc
"KasualKenny" <kasua...@aol.com> wrote
>
> Did that condescending little outburst make you feel better? Good, I'm
> delighted for you. That throbbing vein on your forehead can't be a good
thing.
>
was merely passionate, whereas you are pompous.
> So, in the real world--where perhaps your little set of rules doesn't
apply
> merely because you say so--one has to make a choice. On the one hand,
there's
> the better-sounding title that doesn't describe the reality in front of
the
> audience's eyes. On the other, there's the title that describes that
reality,
> but doesn't sound as good.
>
Also luckily for us in the UK, the play has never been done with anything
other than 12 men. The play was written for 12 men, and plays best with 12
men. I am sure Reginald Rose, the author, would agree were he alive, as he
also wrote the screenplay to The Wild Geese, which implies that it was the
interaction within groups of men he was interested in as an artist.
> Most of us can probably make that choice, depending on our tastes, without
> imagining that the fate of Western civilization and the principle of
authorial
> integrity hang in the balance.
The question is, you claim that a title doesn't matter as long as it is a
pragmatic and literally descriptive. Whereas a title is an important way of
hooking in an audience. I maintain that the play would have flopped with the
new title. The writer would have been better to go back to the drawing board
and come up with an entirely NEW title - as Agatha Christie did when she
changed Ten Little Niggers to And Then There Were None - than be left with a
half-cocked alternative like the one you praise.
By the way, I never said anything about "the fate of Western civilization"
et al, and your accusatory implication that I did proves that not only do
you have no respect for the impactful nature of words and language, but that
also you are willing to use them in twisted and deceitful ways in order to
undermine anyone who dares to disagree with your mealy-mouthed philosophy.
I would personally like to see a play called 12 Pitiful Jerks, in which a
group of middle-class, PC degenerates spend a couple of hours trying to
rewrite the classics to get rid of anything which does not conform to their
own transient, historical position. It could offer some howlingly good
satire.
Disclaimer: although I oppose PC in all its forms, I am in no way a
political conservative. In fact, I believe that PC attitudes have done more
to encourage reaction and bad-feeling amongst working-class people than a
million Right Wing politicians. PC appears to me to be a way of appearing to
change society but actually not doing anything in the way of redistributing
wealth, which is the actual way we change things.
jmc
"robertandrews" <nohay...@mulhollandr.com> wrote in message
news:PpO9c.7127$Td3....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
"Guilty - not!"
robertandrews
>(shocked and disappointed that anyone would feel the need to "update"
someone else's work of art).
He that is not busy updating . . .
J Buck
to reach your destination and any people who you might hurt in a traffic
accident would be hurt through no malice on your part?>
Most of the time, yes, I do. Stay on track for crying out loud.