| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration will allow you to join in the discussion which is amazingly free of personal rancor and trolls! We are currently looking for posters from both the left and the right who have a demonstrated capacity to discuss fervently without letting personalities get in the way. Is that you? We need more staff. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Political Correctness As Civility? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 26 2007, 06:19 AM (356 Views) | |
| Post #1 Nov 26 2007, 06:19 AM | groovyhks |
|
Here is something I've been pondering for awhile. With all the rabid concern about political correctness and not offending someone, hasn't civility taken a downturn rather than increasing? I seem to notice that the political correctness movement is anything but civil. In fact, it seems far more willing to insult those who tell the truth, regardless of how unpopular that truth may be. It has been said that once we reach the point of understanding, all else is choice." If that is true and someone makes crappy choices, why shouldn't he or she be called down? |
Newbie
  ![]](http://z2.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
 
|
 |
| Post #2 Nov 26 2007, 12:37 PM |
|
|
Congratulations on being the first new member approved under our new member application system! You clearly have some valuable thoughts to share here. Welcome. This is a great post and I will move it to a generally visible area. I don't have time to give a thoughtful response now, so I will later. I will also move your introductory post to the welcome area and change your membership groups to give you more complete access. Don't forget to close your tags before posting! |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #3 Nov 26 2007, 04:07 PM |
|
|
We should all strive not to use epithets, but political correctness goes so far sometimes as to hide the truth, just because the truth might offend. We shouldn't try simply not to offend, we should limit offense to only when unavoidable without convolution. While common decency dictates that you do not walk up to a person and say, "You're fat!" political correctness also excoriates the sizing of seats to fit more than 99% of the population and politely asking the remaining 1% to make the seat work or buy a second seat. Common decency says you don't address a lady as "sir" or "mister," just because you think her position should be filled by a man. Political correctness used to say that you address her as a lady and with a title like "chairwoman." Now, even that is taboo. You have to use totally gender-neutral terms for all, like "chair." We have become furniture. I have to check and recheck everything I type these days. Using "they" and "them" as non-masculine and non-feminine, singular pronouns has so crept into the language, that I find myself using those words in that way, instead of the politically incorrect (but, grammatically correct) and generic "he" or "him." Sometimes, I bounce back and forth, mid-sentence, confusing myself! But, groovy is right. We are so careful not to offend, that the truth is often lost in the mass of overly-sensitive terminology, using multiple words to convey a simple idea, when one would have sufficed. Truth, deferred or softened, is often truth, when aged, harshened. We should be decent, not politically correct. If you have no pressing need to offend, don't. If something needs to be said or done, it should not be avoided simply because it might offend. On an official note: The goal of Civility, as a site, is not to prevent offense. That purpose is not to offend just for the sake of offense. Strongly stated opinions on words or deeds are most welcome--even if they offend. One of the reasons we do not allow personal attacks here is because they only serve to offend. They are not intended to further one's POV debunking another's words, ideas, or actions. They are designed simply to cut the other person down, hoping to use the halos-and-horns effect to discredit his ideas alongside his discredited person. (This is usually a sign of a failed argument for one's POV.) We should not pathologically avoid offense. However, we should not deliberately seek to offend! |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · What is civility? · Next Topic » |
3:11 PM Feb 6