Tilted Political Correctness
 

Well, I have a specific point in mind, but feel free to expound on this or draw in other points as you all see fit.

My main purpose for this thread is to ponder the following:

One of the primary rules of the TFP is that we must respect one another. It's what keeps most people on this board coming back. However, I wonder where political correctness blinds us to the things we say. Often, on the Titty Board and elsewhere, a skinny girl in a photo garners a "she needs a sammich" comment. If someone posted a picture of a voluptuous, shapely woman and a response came back "she needs a few less sammiches" I wonder what the general feeling would be here.

You see, being overweight is considered a terrible thing by many in our society (in the States at least). It's something that is mocked. It's something that is ridiculed. It's something that PC pundits tell us we should choose carefully our words about. Being skinny, however, is in many ways the opposite. It is what (misguided) teen girls and even women in their early adulthood strive towards. If one woman says to another, "Wow, have you moved up to a size 18?" the comentee would likely be upset. If one woman says to another, "Wow, have you moved down to a size -4?", the comentee would (statistically speaking) likely blush and giggle at the thought of her shrinking shape.

Now back to the TFP. Here, many of those walls do not exist. We are generally honest with one another, even bluntly. Comments, even negative ones, are generally understood not to be meant as attacks, but are offered out of sincere concern, and usually only after the door has been opened by the person receiving the comments. But do we still automatically hold back certain things or restrain from posting certain comments, even if not directed at a specific individual, because we are "trained" not to say certain things?

Your thoughts...?

I have to answer this in two ways:

Online:

There are certain things that would take a dissertation-length reply to explain thoroughly and exactly enough to avoid misunderstanding in the intent of the words. We have no "voice" on the internet, so we rely only on the thrust of our written words.

Therefore, online, I am still as honest as I am in general, but I sometimes have to change the way I'd say something and "water it down" a bit because there's simply no way of saying what I intend without causing almost certain misunderstanding.

Real life:

My personality, and the way I conduct myself, pretty much seem to give me carte blanch in speaking honestly about everything. Whatever it is that makes me "me" gives me the ability to say pretty much anything I want out of honesty, without troubles. People know that when I say something they don't want to hear, I'm saying it with sincerity and concern, and because it needed to be said.

My best example is telling a female friend of mine that she was the oldest 22 year old I'd ever met, because she was pretty much void of fun, kept more to herself, etc... essentially like an old person who stays inside and doesn't talk to anyone. Because of how I presented it, and how I said it, it eventually resulted in giving her a complete 180. She was "mad" at me for maybe a few days or so, but then she had a personal epiphany and that was that... looking back on it, she still brings it up to others in conversation that it was the best advice she'd ever gotten, and made her the very outgoing and VERY happy person that she is today. It pretty much turned her life around.

But believe me- without proper delivery, it would have been some truly, truly mean and messed up stuff to tell a person.

I would say generally I am totally honest in what I post. *However* if something offends me but I am aware that the offence is part of my naiviety or nervousness around some things - I don't post a reply. Let me explain...I saw a post on a certain kind of porn which I wasn't even aware existed before I read about it here! (can you believe I am 24!?)...it's not that I disagree with doing it, I just don't feel my opinions about it would be valid if I don't enjoy that sort of thing...am I making sense?

In other words if I felt I had a valid point in offending somebody, and was knowledgeable about the subject, I'd probably risk it here as generally people are so open-minded and more willing to accept different viewpoints and not be disrespectful of one another than elsewhere :)

Online, as in real life, discretion is often the better part of valor.

I prefer more open/unrestrained exchange as long as both sides are respectful, the writer and the reader.

It seems obvious that "political correctness" has evolved ...or devolved... into having a negative connotation since it's ludicrous (imo) trying to keep everything under the least offensive denominator; though it probably started out just trying to be respectful. So I agree with the "be respectful" concept, but that goes both ways; what you write/say and also what you read. As analog pointed out, you can't write a complete dissertation to answer a question; so on the other hand, you should read replies with an open mind and give the writer the benefit of the doubt rather than complain about a point that was not fully explained for "practical" reasons.

I think I've noticed more of the disrespectful (maybe just narrowminded?) reader effect than the other side of the coin.

TFP is no different than any other forum I frequent in that I tailor what I say so as not to get banned. There are many times I want to call someone an idiot but don't/can't because it would get me in trouble. In real life if I think someone is being an idiot though then I'll tell them. It's lost me a few "friends" but the ones that stay know and trust my opinion and often come to me for advice because they know I'll tell it like it is. As ubertuber said though discretion is vital no matter what the medium.

Pretty much what I think, except at the other forum I post at calling somebody an idiot is not a ban offense. I don't like the "be nice or don't post at all" rule. Hence the reason I've been staying out of the fetish thread in Titled Sexuality. However, the times when I feel like calling somebody an idiot seldom come up, so it's not that big of an issue. I tend to be honest in my opinions.

There's a guy I noticed on this site who has "sieg heil" as his title thing by the avatar.

Whatever you think of that, it's pretty hard to accuse a site that allows it of being too politically correct imo.

Strange Famous, I'm not saying the TFP is too PC. I love the TFP. I'm pleased to be able to spend my ethereal internet time around a group of forward thinkers, some liberal, some conservative and many in between. The fact that we have such a diverse group and that the whole thing stays together so well is part of it's charm. It was mostly a discussion point. I'm curious how other people view their ability to be completely honest in forum such as this.

I think the part I love about TFP the most is the dedication to good rhetoric. If you cannot argue your point effectively, without resorting to personal attacks, you do not belong in this community. We strive to attain a higher level of discourse among our members, and personal attacks are not a part of that.

However, there are plenty of ways to call a person an idiot without saying it directly, and plenty of ways to disagree with other members without being insulting or rude. TFP is a great place to build one's skills in rhetorical discourse, and by holding ourselves to a higher standard, we keep this place and its spirit alive.

Well on the topic of political correctness, my pet peeve would have to be using euphemisms. This happens a lot in my field of work (I work with people with disabilities). For example, if one of my clients is having a "behaviour" (temper tantrum) and I had to get them out of the environment, I would say I assisted so and so out of the room. Or I guided so and so out of the room. Really, I would have actually led them out or taken them out, but that isn't what people want to hear. Now of course, saying I forced someone to leave does have a negative conotation to it, even if all I did was link arms with someone and help them out of the room.

What also bugs me is when people say "oh fudge" or "sugar" instead of oh fuck or shit. They are purposely replacing one word with another, but the feeling behind the word is still the same. I think if you say sugar and really mean shit, it's just as "bad" (I don't think it's bad, but you know what I mean).

I mean in general, there are certain times when I try to remain politically correct, mostly with people I don't know and don't want to offend unintentionally. And I think some things are just inappropriate at certain times, but other than that, I'm pretty open and like to call things as I see them. Oh fudge! Haha, that so pisses me off.

As a member trying to keep the place civil, and even more as a moderator trying to act professionally, you wouldn't believe how many times I have to hold back with what I want to say. There are a few people I'd love to blow up at in the open, but I don't. As far as political correctness, I have no problem with people being blunt as long as they're not being insulting for the sake of insulting someone. Our society as a whole needs to take a step back from political correctness to simple tact and etiquette.

Well I have have always thought that politics was about a debate as to what was the the correct way for a society/group to proceed. So PC to me is an anachronism. For if such a thing existed there could be no politics, there would just be the way to do things. But that would just be correct, ala christian. I bet the PC's would not like that!

I think we do have to be somewhat careful.

Most times I post (and probably not often enough), I try to consider that this is an electronic forum and that my meaning may be misinterpreted. Then I add caveats and provisos to try to indicate my view better.

And then finally I cut it all out again, because the message became too long.

well I have a rep around here (I think) for being blunt and cranky on occasion. . . (ok fine, a good number of times). . . . (alRIGHT, fine, MOST OF THE TIME, are you happy now?) and part of the reason for that is that I refuse to engage in what I consider to be politically correct bullshit ;)

Say what you mean, mean what you say, and tell it straight.

This cartoon is ridiculous. The two aren't comparable.

It used to be that being "fat" or "heavy" was seen as a good thing, because it meant you ate well (usually was a status symbol because eating well meant you were rich). This was viewed as "healthy" and had nothing to do with self-image.

The overweight folk today that idolize the rail-thin models aren't doing so because they think they "look healthy", they try and emulate them because of self-image and popularity. It's based on wanting to look pretty or attractive, having nothing appearance-wise to do with health. They just have been told that skinny is hot, so therefore you need to be skinny to be attractive.

The cartoon lampoons our current situation that completely ignores the economic and social issues of the previous times in which the "roles" were reversed... people wanted to be bigger... but only because that meant healthier (not starving to death).

The health and societal benefits to being obese or even overweight at all are slim. The same goes for being undernourished. However, being too thin presents an easier issue to correct, and doesn't stand out as a weakness of character.

Swisivo - I'll take it that you mean 'perceived weakness of character'.

The problem with the whole character bit, is that it ignores any other accomplishments that a person is achieving in their life. An overweight person might simply be dedicating themselves to care of a disabled relative - or some kind of vital research. Or maybe they're completing college part-time while raising kids. Who knows.

Nimetic,

I concede that special circumstances exist, where, perhaps, it's not beneficial, nor is it at all easy for someone to get fit. But there's so much to gain by becoming mobile, strong, and healthy, and what is considered attractive that in the overwhelming majority of cases, I see being overweight as an unwise life decision. It's an inability to make a highly positive change in your life, without sacrificing much. It's a lack of desire to have a higher life expectancy. It's the flawed philosophy of refusing to adapt to the standards of society, and then acting shocked at the society's negative feedback.

I hoped there would be an excuse to post this quote. :D

Political Correctness Defined

"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical
minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick
up a turd by the clean end."

For myself, I find TFP not driven so much by pc, but by emphasis of respectful discourse among members.

Don't think anyone could have said it better Elphaba. The problem these days lies not with political correctness, but with a lack of accountability and self-reliance on an individual level. We have a society that will stand by and tell a man or woman day in and day out that no matter what they do, no matter how hard they try, they'll likely never achieve what they set their minds to; the odds of them becoming rich are famous are almost absolutely nil. That same society will then turn around and reward, laud, praise, and adore those very individuals that paid them no heed in the first place.

Grab an issue. Any issue. One that is a highly stratified, extremely emotional issue. Doesn't matter. On some level, this issue comes down to one thing. Personal choice. A person will have to make a choice. Whether it be abortion, racism, world hunger, AIDS, STDs, gay marriage, human rights, whatever. On each level of the issue, a person will have to make a choice. Someone may live or die because of that choice, but the choice remains to be made. That's not the problem. The problem lies after the choice is made. Does the person who made that choice stand behind it? Do they accept the consequences of it? Do they try to hide their involvement? Do they stand with their head held high proclaiming what they've decided?

More than likely, that individual will claim that they did in fact not have a choice, but rather were forced into their decision by economic factors, race factors, constituents, public opinion, religion, geographic background, socio-economic background, or any of a hundred other things they can force that responsibility off on.

People are scared to acknowledge responsibility, to take accountability, and to accept consequences. Fact of life. Until this changes, PC isn't going away, it's growing stronger. PC will be the death of personal responsibility and strength of character.

And yet, someone cried about it to the mods, claiming to "feel targetted" by two simple words. Nevermind the fact that its presence is clearly not a neo-Nazi statement, as my political philosophy is well known to anyone who visits Tilted Politics.

Perhaps the presence of "sieg heil" in my sig is a sign that, thankfully, TFP is not politically-correct enough to be manipulated by hypersensitive hand-wringers.:rolleyes:

I tend to believe it's just not nice to make fun of someone because of their physical appearance. Nor to judge too harshly the choices that other people make.

Rat takes a bit of time here to purport his views on personal responsiblity and I agree with him for the most part. But there is also the flip side of that coin and that is the prevalence of people judging others, even people they don't know, for the choices they have made. Personally, I find that tendency more of a turn off than "political correctness" which to me is just being polite.

the longer this thread goes the less i know what it is about.
once upon a time, there was a strange community of academics that began talking about pc as a way of expressing the sense they acquired that they were not allowed to say certain things because those things were understood as offensive. if the brave new world is supposed to be about diversity, they reasoned, then i should be able to be a nimrod. i should be able to say stupid things, i should be able to objectify others, i should be able to be a bore. but i feel shackled now because i am made self-conscious about these stupid things and i kind of miss them. so i am oppressed. boo hoo.

once upon another time, later, after this particular wave of self-pity had dissipated and that strange community of academics had dispersed into other communities of academics, conservative talk radio hosts latched onto the category of pc and began to recycle it. they began talking about pc as a way of expressing the sense they acquired that they were not allowed to say certain things because those things were understood as offensive. if the brave new world is supposed to be about diversity, they reasoned, then i should be able to be a nimrod. i should be able to say stupid things, i should be able to objectify others, i should be able to be a bore. but i feel shackled now because i am made self-conscious about these stupid things and i kind of miss them. so i am oppressed. boo hoo.

i dont know what is being discussed here. i am not sure that anything is being discussed here. so there is a bit of decorum. so people do not say exactly as they like every time they post. so writing is not speaking. where is the problem? if this were a board in which it was possible that everyone could tell anyone to fuck themselves and that became the norm, the same problem would obtain for those who did not find it interesting to see a debate that would start with a premise and be followed by a series of posts in which people told each other to fuck themselves. there is this gang, one might say, that runs the show and requires that everyone tell everyone to fuck themselves.
the meaninglessness of the term pc is such that it could be applied in that case just as accurately as it might be applied in any other case.

there are ways of thinking and writing that obtain for lots of folk here that i do not find to be particularly interesting, but that's just an effect of who happens to participate in the community. i dont find it to be offensive, i dont find it to be anything, really. it just is. i suppose i could say that the assumption that you actually can talk about who you are in a space like this is a form of political correctness. i suppose i could say that the illusion that words refer to experience directly is a form of political correctness. but it'd do nothing so say as much: the category doesn't describe anything and no function is served by using it--unless i wanted for whatever reason to set up a case for my own victimization at the hands of some unorganized, invisible de facto conspiracy. which is all that the term does.

so what are we talking about again?

Hear, hear. Very well-written, roach.

Absolutely. There is a difference.

U-HGH! U-HGH-U-HGH!!!

No, that was just me clearing my throat. Honest. That's all it was. Nothing more than just me clearing my throat.

U-HGH!!

I seem to really have something stuck in there for some reason.

U-HGH-U-HGH!!!!!

Oh, stfu, will ya? :D

A recent episode came to mind...where a new member (who may have lacked in forum skills, as well as grammatical ability) brought a very sensitive issue into our midst, in what seemed to be hope of advice, and consolation. It would seem the PC mindset was not in play there, as she was given ample explanation of her faults, and made to feel somewhat inadequate.
In this case I would not have been so quick to ridicule minor spelling, or typing quality and instead paid attention to the individuals needs, there is definately a time to correct such things....but adding insult to injury (literally) seemed to me , bad form.

I would hope we are better than that.

I saw two humans on bikes early this morning, kissing each other on the mouth!
It pleased me so much I had to smile, and they BOTH SMILED BACK. pc is for the birds.

No, wait. They love life, too.