Reply With Quote
Yet how many things have happened contrary to past beliefs of the future?
I'm not saying it will happen. I just wouldn't be surprised if it did.
Women do not need men.
Look a post #87. Or are you talking about links?
Yet how many things have happened contrary to past beliefs of the future?
I'm not saying it will happen. I just wouldn't be surprised if it did.
Women do not need men.
I don't have a clue what you're specifically referring to here. You're using straw. Who out there believes that only white people owned slaves etc?
Give a specific scenario where what you're talking about is happening.
Except for child support. The single mother statistics pretty much prove that.
what stats? what do they prove?
LOL...
Why need men when they have taxpayers to support them?
Or their lesbian wife
VA Repugs calling Toni Morrison a pornographer. Repugs gotta politically correctly protect the hypersensitive students from lit porn.
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/04/virg...e+Raw+Story%29
opprobrium attaches to disparaging others for their disability, gender, race, sexual preference or national origin.
it wasn't always so. some people miss the privilege of abusing others without adverse social consequences or pine for it.
Last edited by Winehole23; 04-04-2016 at 12:58 AM.
No straw here; all these things are said by real people. You don't have to believe a word I say, but just because I don't give any links or direct examples doesn't make what I'm saying a Hayman.
1:Look up the Progressive Stack. It's terminology SJW's use to refer to the order that all groups of people rank in privilege. It's not necessarily a wide spread belief, but I'm mostly talking about high profile people who have pushed for policy that accounts for the Progressive stack. 2:The feminist Lens covers everything from Patriarchy theory (or Feminist Theory), rape culture, and the Duluth Model of domestic violence and more; all feminist policy and terminology that you can look up. 3:No Platforming is also terminology, but it's not specific to PC police. It is one of the methods used to do said policing though. An example of this is what the NECSS did to Richard Dawkins. He said something some feminist didn't like and this organiztion cut out his talk from their program. 4:Feminists hate biological determinism; it's as simple as that. They don't like when people make arguments saying women are mentally different(sometimes physically) from men at birth even when you provide scientific evidence. I guess they think people(men) will try to say that they are superior if they allow that to be true.
To be fair, it's not that SJW's say only whites have had slaves, its that whites have never been slaves. Sorry, I misspoke there. But I've heard people accuse white people, as a whole, for being responsible for many (if not all) the ill's that befall minority groups. Have you honestly never heard the claim that "If women were the the group of people that ruled throughout history that there never would have been any wars"? The same is said about white people by SJWs. This is less about terminology and more about at ude of individuals and is thus just my opinion (there is a reason that I said "seemingly" before).
Like I said before, I don't expect you to just believe me. You can do your own homework if you want and doing that would give you more context than a few links; I could try to provide links to some of this stuff (if you ask), but it would take me a lot of time and I'm not sure I could provide unbiased sources or enough sources to give you true context.
Last edited by All Mighty Janitor; 04-04-2016 at 03:01 PM. Reason: clarification
Here in Austin, the worst part is the effort to wipe away the traces of the Confederacy. The latest is them trying to change the name of Robert E Lee Elementary. The education disparity is the much more critical issue, but people are completely ignoring that to focus on a damned name.
I have no idea how credible this site is, but they rate Lee as a 9/10. Comparatively, AISD rates as a 6/10. The reviews are very favorable. All things considered, this isn't really the school that needs scrutiny. But PC folks will just keep hash-tagging away or posting stupid articles.
Political correctness can certainly get out of hand, particularly when people assume the worst possible interpretation from an innocent remark or attach hostility where no hostility was intended.
With that said, PC fights related to Confederate flags, names, sports teams, etc., escalate because of the opposition to change. It shouldn't be that difficult for everyone to agree that a state flag, school, or whatever probably doesn't need to celebrate a time when this country was split in two and killed thousands of each other in a conflict where one of the main issues at hand was the right to own slaves. I don't see the big deal in changing a school name. We wouldn't name a school after Robert E. Lee today, so why put up such a fight to keep it? Kids will still learn about him in History class.
Honestly, it shouldn't even be that difficult to agree that "Redskins" is probably a bit archaic and doesn't reflect where we are as a society now. And people should be free to say that, and to protest the name and demand it be changed, just as other people should be free to cling to it for tradition's sake or whatever other reason they have. I don't care enough to make a thing about it.
I agree with most of what you said, and that bold part really makes me think. The only reason I might be opposed to such changes is the PC police never seem to be satisfied with the changes made. They naturally move on to other problems that Political Correctness could help, but they sometimes latch on to one thing and keep pushing the issue making new demands. This is a hypothetical but it's an example of what I'm talking about: First, the name of the school must be changed. Then, there needs to be a counsel made to advise the school on PC matters because the administrators must be racist if the change wasn't made earlier. If things don't change fast enough then the Principal must go. Also, the new Principal must be from a minority group. If this happens at a University, the students must be infused into the decision making process somewhere along the line. The PC police keep going until they get control of the system they think is "problematic." You give these people any ground (like changing the name of a school) and they pounce on the opportunity to turn their beliefs into policy in that ins ution. I think this has to stop mainly, because I don't think the PC police are capable of being unbiased with their policies, but also because I don't think we should be making any government ins utions ideological.
Yeah, what people? I don't doubt there are over the top PC people out there, but maybe they have a legit reason to be over the top.
If you want to take punches at imaginary people, go for it, but there's not much to discuss then.
Pretty much that.
I'm talking about the PC Police. I could sit here and list people who are pro-PC and/or for Social Justice, but I'm not going to do that because I'm not referring to individuals here. It's why I have stuck to at ude and terminology and actions done for PC causes. I'm talking about the ideas that they have and the policy they fight for. If I bring up some individuals then we're going to focus on them as people and that's not what I'm trying to talk about here.
Last edited by All Mighty Janitor; 04-04-2016 at 03:06 PM. Reason: clarification
It doesn't make sense to lump all of those things together. "Robert E. Lee" isn't a slur. It's the name of a man who was accomplished for doing things before the Civil War and is at least widely considered to have been worthy of respect for his actions during the war. What is really the issue with him? He owned slaves? So did like every president before that time. He was a rebel? So were guys like Crockett and Bowie (who was also a slave-owner), and no one seems to care. He thought black people were inferior? Yeah, so did Lincoln and a load of other political figures before and after Lee. The whole US has a dark history when it comes to race, not just the South. There's really nothing to celebrate if you only focus on the bad parts.
That's not the same thing as using slurs, which only have negative connotations. I can see why people would be offended by that. And I can support their outrage a bit. I don't really support forcing anyone to change their company's name, but that is at least debateable. Trying to pretend that contemporary views are the only ones we need to remember is silly and self-centered. Who knows what Douglass and MLK thought about sexuality? If they hated gays, are we going to change all of the statues and roads?
This is a cultural issue more than a legal one. We live in a society where people do care enough to change names or deemphasize aspects of history. We live in a society where the younger generation is censoring the older one. Where people are using their economic power to its fullest extent. Where ideas spread faster and with less vetting than they ever used be able to. It makes sense to be concerned or at least interested to see where this new wave is going to take us.I don't see the big deal in changing a school name. We wouldn't name a school after Robert E. Lee today, so why put up such a fight to keep it? Kids will still learn about him in History class.
Honestly, it shouldn't even be that difficult to agree that "Redskins" is probably a bit archaic and doesn't reflect where we are as a society now. And people should be free to say that, and to protest the name and demand it be changed, just as other people should be free to cling to it for tradition's sake or whatever other reason they have. I don't care enough to make a thing about it.
Lee was the figure head leader of the side that fought for the right to keep slaves.
If a black person is offended by it being the name of a public school, you'll probably have to do better than "well he did accomplish a few things before the Civil War"
Yeah, that's pretty strawy.
Whatever. It's your thread to get out of it whatever you want.
That's like advocating book burning!
To like or dislike the past is one thing, but we most certainly don't want to forget both the good and the bad, else we may repeat it.
it is important to respect everyone, but you should be able to have fun and not take yourself too seriously. that is the key....to better living through racism.....J/K.
It's a proper assessment.
They are just bullies. They act like bullies in every action they take.
And Lincoln was the figurehead on the other side. They had the same beliefs on slavery and black inferiority. That's why PC is stupid. It lets people gloss over what they want to so long as they can get offended at something else.
I'd tell them to STFU and pick up a history book. They'd see a lot worse people there than Lee, including people after whom other Austin schools were named.If a black person is offended by it being the name of a public school, you'll probably have to do better than "well he did accomplish a few things before the Civil War"
I don't think it's the same as a slur either, but I'm not against re-evaluating where we place historical figures and whether we pay tribute to them on roads, schools, and other taxpayer-funded things.
Since Douglass and MLK were never involved in any active role fighting against gay rights, I don't think we're anywhere close to that level of political correctness and if we get there, then that's something worth pushing back against. Big difference between opposing historical figures for what they were known for doing vs. their personal beliefs that were unrelated.
Lee on the other hand may have done some tangential good things in his life but he's primarily known as a commanding general for the army that fought against the United States and for causes like slavery, while continuing to oppose the rights of black people even after the Civil War. It's not unreasonable to see him as a negative icon in this country's history nor to expect that the state ins utions stop paying tribute to him on publicly-funded ins utions.
With all these things being argues as "rights" over time that so many find morally repugnant, I wonder how long it will be before liberals start advocating for pedophile rights?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions