Tv Members And Political Correctness

[bassmaster50]

I remember reading about some high-ranking woman is Rwanda who loaded pregnant women into a bus and then poured gasoline all over it and burned them alive. Women in Cambodia and Nazi Germany were as sadistic and murderous as the men. many of the female leaders throughout history such as Queen Elizabeth I and Catherine the Great were responsible for numerous atrocities. France commited numerous atrocities in Algeria and Indo-China. I personally don't believe men are superior to women. Nor do I feel women are superior to men. I think there are good people and bad people, period.

[garro]

After working 25 years in prison, I retired because of this PC crap. Convicts used to be convicts, then they were inmates, now they are residents. I was the watch commander, and someone had posted a wanted poster of Bin Laden near the gate, saying "wanted:dead or alive", which is in fact true. The superintendent, a woman who never did anything in her whole career except order paper clips and stuff and knew less about prison thn most of people on this forum, ordered it taken down as it was "offensive."

To whom, Al Qaeda? I refused, and needlless to say was written up. Then when the Bloods were on a big spree of cutting up the other inmates, I ordered the officers to search any black inmates on the walkway wearing red. The bloods are all black, and they wear red. Supt. ordered this stopped as it was "profiling." So I had to search a bunch of white guys, which was a waste of time and the bloods kept cutting everybody up. Some female civilian employee filed charges against me for using foul language to some convicted felons. The low point was when I went to the mess hall wearing sunglasses and black gloves. It was cold and sunny, but I had to give a written answer to complaint filed by numerous inmates stating that they were "intimidated' by my gloves and sunglasses. There were 300 convicted criminals, who do nothing but pump iron all day, in mess hall, yet they were intimidated by my gloves and glasses. After this an order came out saying guards must wear only blue gloves. Since I couldn't profile some corrupt guards,who happend to be black, I went to lineup sayoing I would bust anybody I caught bringing in crap to convicts, and if anyone didnt like it I would take off my lieutenant's bars and we could settle it man to man in the parking lot, which used to be common practice. These guys however, wrote a big letter and posted it on the wall saying they were offended and intimidated. Young guys did this, as the old guys thought I did the right thing. I ended up suspended for a year without pay. I retired shortly thereafter.

I suppose a lot of prison guards miss the days when they could abuse prisoners without any fear of accountability. It must have felt great to have that type of power. Not that I'm saying that you were like this of course.

There are good prison guards just like there are good prisoners. The things that he is complaining about seem reasonable enough.

Yes and it's because of the bad prison guards that the regulations have needed to be implemented. Just like in society where other regulations have been needed to protect society as a whole.

[HorseDoctor]

So you think calling women "girls" ( or love or lady ) is in no way indicative of sexism ?

not in the slightest.

as i said , its a gentle term of affection , i think you are taking it far too seriously.

Political correctness is just another tool used by feminism to advance their mostly misguided agenda. But instead of channeling energies and anger towards those societies and cultures that really do abuse women on a grand scale you get feminists complaining about how sexist signs that have 'male' shaped people on them are demeaning to women and other such nonsensical campaigns.

all you succeed in doing is making the feminist cause a laughing stock to the males that you seek to address.

YOu think calling women athletes " Girls" on the front page of a newspaper is " affectionate" and yearning for equality "misguided" because I' happen to be lucky enough (or is that " Plucky") enough to have the wherewithal live independently as possible from sexism.

HOwever many mnay women in the US the Uk and here in Thailand do not. But because I'm lucky , I should not resist sexism on their behalf?

You think Uk , US and Thailand are equal societies for women?

If so , why is a woman more in danger from a male partner in these countries than from any other cause ? Could it be for the same reason she has to change her title when she marries ?( in TLand) which is the same reason only unmarried " Miss" can be in pageants based on aesthetics. Can't belong to anyone.. ( Mrs. )

Systemic sexism.

[HorseDoctor]

And it's not countries with PM that are women that are more peaceful, it's countries with EQUAL representation within the entire government .

As women make up 50% of the population , why aren't ALL governments made up of 50% women?

Edited December 14, 2008 by HorseDoctor

[rott]

You really don't see the inequity in the common usage of this term? HOw it supports sexist attitudes?

listen love , you really are ridiculous , you poor hard done by lady. life must be absolutely terrible for you. i dont know how you can live when you are assailed by such intolerable horrors on a daily basis.

lets all have a group hug , yellow ribbon campaign , and a joan armatrading concert in hyde park for you.

Sarcasm in lieu of an argument, are you channeling Bendix?

So you think calling women "girls" ( or love or lady ) is in no way indicative of sexism ?

Countries with highe female representation are

Sweden , The Netherlands, France and interestingly, since the genocide, Rwanda. Liberia is rising and both these Afrian countiries are making huge strides toward human rights since their genocidal male leaders have been overthrown

Personally I don't think that calling females "girls" or love or lady is sexist, any more than calling males boys or lads. Though it could be, given the context.

As for your named countries, well I think the lack of aggression from Sweden and The Netherlands predates any increase in female political representation. France? Well France just tends to be pragmatic.

And women Prime Ministers didn't noticeably soften any attitudes in Israel, India or the UK.

[bassmaster50]

To be clear, I have known some very bad prison guards. For the last 20 years of my carrer I was a supervisor. For 15 years I was watch commander and in charge of the prison. I never tolerated senseless abuse of inmates, and I also had to protect the guards and civilians who worked for me. In NY, prisn guard is a very good paying job, particularly in rural areas upstate,with excellent benefits. Most guys took the job for that reason, and most guys just wanted to do their 8 hours, or more since there was lots of OT, and go home in one piece. I worked in a maximum security prison where it was guaranteed that if you were a guard, you would be assaulted by inmates. All I am saying here is that prison ran alot better before the PC stuff got out of hand. I have letters from inmates thanking me for helping to make the place safer for guys who just wanted to do their time without problems. Ironically, the PC made prison less safe for the inmates, as well as the staff.

[spiderman2]

The problem is that the anti-PC brigade miss 'the good old days' when you could openly call black people 'darkies' or 'coons'

I have a half cast childhood friend yet im now racist for calling him that, he is now mixed race, however he has a prison record for thieving and is illigitimate, so in theory i could call him a thieving black b#$%*^d

One day you will be classed as racist for highlighting skin colour and using racist terms that exclude people such as black.

and call the disabled 'spastics'.

Calling someone disabled is a sickening description, do you not know such people are called "Special Needs." move out of the 20th Century please.

They resent the fact that society wants to try and control the worst aspects of the darker side of their natures.

Why blame society thats passing the buck, why just not say people like Garro, who wish to control thought.

They fondly remember the days when you could openly spit on your neighbor (or worse) because they looked or spoke different or because they went to a different church.

Didnt you Irish murder each other for that, or is spitting how the loony left are now refering to this.

They miss the days when being an ignorant bigot or racist wasn't frowned upon so much. Poor them. The world has gone PC mad.

I miss the days where there wasnt laws telling companies and govt. institutions to discriminate against white males in Britain to pander to the white hating middle class liberals who now run the country.

[RakJungTorlae]

nvm wrong post.

Edited December 14, 2008 by RakJungTorlae

[taxexile]

My objections to political correctness include:-

1, The denial of religous poriveliges to the majority, simply because those rights are not equally given to every minority (for example, removal of religion from schools); in my view, people who wish their child to be educated in a catholic or muslim or animalist school should be free to set up such a school, and if it can fulfil the educational and administrative requirements, it should be provided with the same support that the "main stream" schools are provided. The fact that there is not sufficient support for such a school is not prejudice or discrimination, it is misfortune. FUrthermore, despite a lack of practicing faith, society in (for example) the UK is based on christian morals and teachings, and there are significant benefits in being educated in and understanding those teachings, regardless of whether you believe in either the detail or the principles. So I object to political correctness when it is used to try to suppress the faith of the nation. Tolerance does not dictate equality. To achieve equality, people should strive for the same privileges, rather than seeking to deny privileges to others.

2. Hijacking language; the inference of discriminatory or bigoted thinking when there is none. This is Orwellian, and, I think, counterproductive. Insisting on irrelevant political correctness (chalkboard instead of blackboard, chairperson instead of chairman...) invites ridicule which is then misapplied to tolerance in general and reinforces bigotry that may otherwise have withered through neglect.

spot on.

[HorseDoctor]

I remember reading about some high-ranking woman is Rwanda who loaded pregnant women into a bus and then poured gasoline all over it and burned them alive. Women in Cambodia and Nazi Germany were as sadistic and murderous as the men. many of the female leaders throughout history such as Queen Elizabeth I and Catherine the Great were responsible for numerous atrocities. France commited numerous atrocities in Algeria and Indo-China. I personally don't believe men are superior to women. Nor do I feel women are superior to men. I think there are good people and bad people, period.

And I"m not making this claim, only that countires with closer to 50% of feamale within the representatinal government are , usually more peaceful and give to human rights, Schools over bombs etc .

One of the worse countries for equal rep of women in gov- USA and look what it does on a daily basis.

[HorseDoctor]

You really don't see the inequity in the common usage of this term? HOw it supports sexist attitudes?

listen love , you really are ridiculous , you poor hard done by lady. life must be absolutely terrible for you. i dont know how you can live when you are assailed by such intolerable horrors on a daily basis.

lets all have a group hug , yellow ribbon campaign , and a joan armatrading concert in hyde park for you.

Sarcasm in lieu of an argument, are you channeling Bendix?

So you think calling women "girls" ( or love or lady ) is in no way indicative of sexism ?

Countries with highe female representation are

Sweden , The Netherlands, France and interestingly, since the genocide, Rwanda. Liberia is rising and both these Afrian countiries are making huge strides toward human rights since their genocidal male leaders have been overthrown

Personally I don't think that calling females "girls" or love or lady is sexist, any more than calling males boys or lads. Though it could be, given the context.

As for your named countries, well I think the lack of aggression from Sweden and The Netherlands predates any increase in female political representation. France? Well France just tends to be pragmatic.

And women Prime Ministers didn't noticeably soften any attitudes in Israel, India or the UK.

Yes but the sports page of The Nation isn't calling adult male athletes" boys or lads ". There's slang and then there's systemic use of language to denote male superiority .

Yes because historically thay have enjoyed a higher proportion of women within Govt

NO not a leader , but representation within the entire parlimant or Congress or whatever. Whenever MORE women are in , less violence - more human rights.

[rott]

I remember reading about some high-ranking woman is Rwanda who loaded pregnant women into a bus and then poured gasoline all over it and burned them alive. Women in Cambodia and Nazi Germany were as sadistic and murderous as the men. many of the female leaders throughout history such as Queen Elizabeth I and Catherine the Great were responsible for numerous atrocities. France commited numerous atrocities in Algeria and Indo-China. I personally don't believe men are superior to women. Nor do I feel women are superior to men. I think there are good people and bad people, period.

Exactly what atrocities are down to Queen Elizabeth 1? I think you are getting confused with the Roman Catholic Queen "Bloody" Mary.

[bassmaster50]

Horse doctor why do you need to bash the US? Whatever the US is doing on a "daily basis" is nothing compared to what most of the countries in the world are doing on a daily basis. I suppose you have notning to say about atrocities committed here on a "daily basis" against the Hmong and Karen refugees. It seems you hate men, hate the Us, but probably love horses. I like horses too as most men and people from the US do. Now I am ranting like an idiot as usual whenever I hear about this PC crap.

[garro]

spiderman 2 said;

Didnt you Irish murder each other for that, or is spitting how the loony left are now refering to this.

You see this is the problem with free speech. You get people trying to put forward arguments which they obviously know little about. Religious intolerance has and does occur in the North of Ireland. It has not been a problem in the south of the island where almost 80% of the population live. More murders occurred in London in any year of the troubles so does this mean that all English people are murderers?

In regards to your comments about the term 'disabled'. I worked in this area and 'learning difficulties' is the preferred term when referring to people with disabilities, but this has not meant that the word disability has been made redundant, but just used more selectively.

Edited December 14, 2008 by garro

[taxexile]

One of the worse countries for equal rep of women in gov- USA

maybe womens votes should have double value then.

are women prevented from standing for office , do women not have the vote in the usa?

could it just be , as impossible or as unpalatable as it may appear to you , that the suitability of those women standing for office just does not appeal to the voters , of whom i assume 50% are women.

or are you suggesting positive discrimination in favour of women ( or blacks , or whites , or jews ) whether they are capable for the job or not ??

horsedoctor , when you are in a hole , you should stop digging.

your arguments are feeble to say the least.

[JimsKnight]

It's a frequent enough complaint here in TV. When in full flow of a rant against back home and/or their former life, many a TV member will bring up the rise of "Political Correctness" as one of the issues that forced him to move to Thailand.

That said, scratching the argument often reveals a lack of understanding of what 'Political Correctness' actually is... But hey-ho, don't let that get in the way of a good rant.

In anycase we all of us from time to time adopt 'Political Correctness' either in word or attitude; were we not to do so we'd not be able to live within society, or indeed participate for very long on this board.

Well Orson Welles warned about it.

It's one of the ways the establishment dumbs down a nations language and makes society more depended on the 'system'. The old language gets destroyed and a plastic and inferior one replaces it.

It's utter hogwash and wrong but the PTB like a dumb populace

Something the left-wing and right-wing governments seem to have a hard-on for. Change is good, but not all types of change

[rott]

Garro states "More murders occurred in London in any year of the troubles". Presumably he means more than in Ulster, this does/or would surprise me, can anybody quote statistics?

[Huey]

The problem is that the anti-PC brigade miss 'the good old days' when you could openly call black people 'darkies' or 'coons' and call the disabled 'spastics'. They resent the fact that society wants to try and control the worst aspects of the darker side of their natures. They fondly remember the days when you could openly spit on your neighbor (or worse) because they looked or spoke different or because they went to a different church. They miss the days when being an ignorant bigot or racist wasn't frowned upon so much. Poor them. The world has gone PC mad.

Were that all being PC represented I'd have no problem with it, but it has been hijacked by certain persons ( usually of the female gender ) to advance stupid political policies, and relies on the desire by everyone else not to oppose them for fear of being PC uncorrect. Eg, the British home secretary is trying to eliminate ALL prostitution by criminalising the customer. The rational is that it is to combat trafficking, but overlooks the fact that most prostitution is by persons who CHOOSE to earn money that way. As most male MPs are afraid to speak out against this idiocy as they would look PC uncorrect, it will probably become law. The prostitutes collective has spoken out against it, saying that the police should deal with trafficking, and trying to eliminate prostitution will just drive it underground, making it worse for all women involved.

Incidentally, New Zealand, which is sickeningly PC, has legalised prostitution, and it has been a great success.

IMO, being PC is the last refuge of man hating women, and their spineless sycophantic male camp followers.

Oh, so those nasty PC crowd are trying to interfere with your right to openly buy sex. How dare they. I hate to break the bad news to you, but going with prostitutes was frowned upon long before the PC crowd arrived on the scene. Anyway, even many of my politically incorrect friends look upon those who pay for sex as degenerates or 'saddos'.

Very well put Garro. Anything taken to the extreme is usualy a bad thing, PC being no exception, However what basic PC means is respecting your fellow people. The only people I have ever heard voice having a problem with PC are thouse who wish they could call still call people that look like me the "N" word and not get their teeth knocked out. Bigots and shovansits the lot of them.

I do belive in freedom of speach. However freedom comes with a responsibility, a responsibility to back up your words and be ready to defend them and yourself from thouse you seek to disgrace.

[Siripon]

I asked one of the regular customers in our bank, an English expat why he hadn't lived in England for so long. He replied political correctness plus a 1984 mentality from the state. When I asked him what he meant, he said last week he'd read a story about a 'lollilop man', those who help schoolchildren cross zebra crossings, being forced to remove the tinsel from around his lollipop as it might obstruct the sign!

How petty,dull and lifeless are the authorities he complained!

[geriatrickid]

Being PC in its truest form is nothing more than following the Golden Rule of "Do unto others as one would have them do onto you". Where it goes wrong is when the people that consider themselves the annoited ones seek to use it as a vehicle to further their personal agendas. Seems to me that the worst offenders are often those that share the same characteristics as reformed boozers that discover temperance or criminals that discover religion etc.

[StreetCowboy]

"Politically Correct" and its abbreviation, PC, are themselves terms which carry prejudice.

What do people who are in favour of political correctness call it?

Can anyone give a clear definition of what is political correctness?

When I went off on my rant a few posts back, I was specifically considering

1. The insistence that no race, gender etc. should get preferential treatment, to the extent of suppressing the majority because minorities cannot be given the same support

2. Banning the use of words which include terms that could be perceived as offensive, even when those terms are being used in a different context where their use is entirely appropriate, and does not reflect any prejudice or bigotry.

If you were in favour of that, what would you call it?

Thanks

I see geriatrickid has done a good job answering this while I type it. Telepathy's not dead then... you knew I was going to say that, didn't you...

SC

[dumball]

Personal Cognisance , the point you make is irrelivant to this(MY) discussion .

[Geekfreaklover]

So you think calling women "girls" ( or love or lady ) is in no way indicative of sexism ?

not in the slightest.

as i said , its a gentle term of affection , i think you are taking it far too seriously.

Political correctness is just another tool used by feminism to advance their mostly misguided agenda. But instead of channeling energies and anger towards those societies and cultures that really do abuse women on a grand scale you get feminists complaining about how sexist signs that have 'male' shaped people on them are demeaning to women and other such nonsensical campaigns.

all you succeed in doing is making the feminist cause a laughing stock to the males that you seek to address.

I think there is nothing wrong with the Feminism movement. It just needs a man to help get it organised.

Edited December 14, 2008 by Geekfreaklover

[HorseDoctor]

So you think calling wome

[GuestHouse]

I find it curious that so many posters here easily switch from a discussion on Political Correctness to ranting over issues they themselves have with women. I mean really, there are times I wish I'd read Psychology instead of Engineering, reading many of the responses to this thread is one of them.

Take this little gem from Thaibeachlover as an example:

...

Were that all being PC represented I'd have no problem with it, but it has been hijacked by certain persons ( usually of the female gender ) to advance stupid political policies, and relies on the desire by everyone else not to oppose them for fear of being PC incorrect. This assumes a desire in others for which there is no evidence and that an accusation of being Politically Incorrect would a) be made, or actually bother anyone. Eg, the British home secretary is trying to eliminate ALL prostitution by criminalising the customer. Actually no - The proposed change in the law is to make it illegal to pay for sex from a prostitute who is controlled by another person for gain (ie being pimped or trafficked for sale in the sex trade) - the proposed change in the law, wisely thought out/or not, is against the trading of human beings for sex The rational is that it is to combat trafficking, but overlooks the fact that most prostitution is by persons who CHOOSE to earn money that way No the proposed law stipulates those buying sex from prostitutes under the control of other people for gain - a transaction involving a freelancing prostitute would not come under the law.. As most male MPs are afraid to speak out against this idiocy as they would look PC uncorrect, Again, a statement lacking foundation but pointing at Political Correctness where Political Correctness is not an issue.it will probably become law. The prostitutes collective has spoken out against it, saying that the police should deal with trafficking, and trying to eliminate prostitution will just drive it underground, making it worse for all women involved. Agreed, and that is why the law is being debated.

Incidentally, New Zealand, which is sickeningly PC, has legalised prostitution, and it has been a great success. So erm... was it Political Correctness that got that law passed or are Male NZ Members of Parliament immune to Political Correctness...... OR..... are you just screaming political correctness when you don't like the way the world is going?

IMO, being PC is the last refuge of man hating women, and their spineless sycophantic male camp followers.

So it seems Political Correctness is to be linked with the 'women issues' many men have, or if some change in the law restricts YOUR choice to play the part in abusing someone who has been trafficked or is being pimped you call that 'Political Correctness' and those men who consider it a good thing to protect other human beings against such abuse are spineless sycophantic male camp followers?!

This is a curious accusation in a post complaining about laws that restrict the right of a man to pay for a prostitute - Is there any better example of self emasculation than paying for sex?

---

I often make what might be regarded as a 'Politically Incorrect' observation that Thailand attracts a disproportionate number of men with, shall we say 'a lot of baggage', reading the responses to this thread I'm inclined to believe I may have been underestimating the extent to which this is true.

That aside, it is interesting that many who object to 'Political Correctness' (assuming of course they are referring to Political Correctness and not other problems they have ) are often quick to point to their rights to freedom of speech, it seems to escape them that rights and freedoms come with responsibility.

If, and this is not to be missed, they are unable or willing to question the language they themselves use and the impact that might have on others, what then of this right to freedom of speech - Speaking but not actually understanding what impact your words have is not using a freedom, its simply making a noise regardless of how it impacts others.

Edited December 14, 2008 by GuestHouse

[taxexile]

Speaking but not actually understanding what impact your words have is not using a freedom, its simply making a noise regardless of how it impacts others.

no it isnt.

anodyne neutral language , the emasculated language of the politically correct , be they individuals or governments or town councils , is merely the use of language for the express purpose of not having any effect whatsoever.

if we cant use language to express ourselves according to our true feelings , be it to to amuse , to enlighten or to insult , then why bother speaking , its akin to living under the fear of a stalinist regime where you didnt know what you could say or what you couldnt say for fear of saying the wrong thing and being shot. we are human beings with a wide variety of feelings and emotions , not all of them nice. you cant legislate and expect those feelings to disappear.

some people are far too easily "insulted" these days by silly little things , ( and i dont mean racial abuse or abuse of the underprivelidged , those views should be condemned by the more rational yes , but banned and prosecuted .... no ).

its become an industry.

i wouldnt want the national front banned , i want to know about the poison they speak , so i can protect myself against it. better to have ones true feelings out there , whatever they are , than have them bottled up.

[garro]

Speaking but not actually understanding what impact your words have is not using a freedom, its simply making a noise regardless of how it impacts others.

no it isnt.

anodyne neutral language , the emasculated language of the politically correct , be they individuals or governments or town councils , is merely the use of language for the express purpose of not having any effect whatsoever.

if we cant use language to express ourselves according to our true feelings , be it to to amuse , to enlighten or to insult , then why bother speaking , its akin to living under the fear of a stalinist regime where you didnt know what you could say or what you couldnt say for fear of saying the wrong thing and being shot. we are human beings with a wide variety of feelings and emotions , not all of them nice. you cant legislate and expect those feelings to disappear.

some people are far too easily "insulted" these days by silly little things , ( and i dont mean racial abuse or abuse of the underprivelidged , those views should be condemned by the more rational yes , but banned and prosecuted .... no ).

its become an industry.

i wouldnt want the national front banned , i want to know about the poison they speak , so i can protect myself against it. better to have ones true feelings out there , whatever they are , than have them bottled up.

If people were to say all that was on their minds they would be quickly locked away. Most people's true feelings can be quite vile sometimes. We can not control what enters our minds, but we are responsible for what comes out of our mouths. Luckily most people can monitor their own speech, but others are less able and this is why society needs to protect itself.

[Xangsamhua]

After working 25 years in prison, I retired because of this PC crap. Convicts used to be convicts, then they were inmates, now they are residents. I was the watch commander, and someone had posted a wanted poster of Bin Laden near the gate, saying "wanted:dead or alive", which is in fact true. The superintendent, a woman who never did anything in her whole career except order paper clips and stuff and knew less about prison thn most of people on this forum, ordered it taken down as it was "offensive."

To whom, Al Qaeda? I refused, and needlless to say was written up. Then when the Bloods were on a big spree of cutting up the other inmates, I ordered the officers to search any black inmates on the walkway wearing red. The bloods are all black, and they wear red. Supt. ordered this stopped as it was "profiling." So I had to search a bunch of white guys, which was a waste of time and the bloods kept cutting everybody up. Some female civilian employee filed charges against me for using foul language to some convicted felons. The low point was when I went to the mess hall wearing sunglasses and black gloves. It was cold and sunny, but I had to give a written answer to complaint filed by numerous inmates stating that they were "intimidated' by my gloves and sunglasses. There were 300 convicted criminals, who do nothing but pump iron all day, in mess hall, yet they were intimidated by my gloves and glasses. After this an order came out saying guards must wear only blue gloves. Since I couldn't profile some corrupt guards,who happend to be black, I went to lineup sayoing I would bust anybody I caught bringing in crap to convicts, and if anyone didnt like it I would take off my lieutenant's bars and we could settle it man to man in the parking lot, which used to be common practice. These guys however, wrote a big letter and posted it on the wall saying they were offended and intimidated. Young guys did this, as the old guys thought I did the right thing. I ended up suspended for a year without pay. I retired shortly thereafter.

Sounds like PC gone haywire. I note Garro's comment further down and take his point, but can't judge it because I've never been inside a prison. A former associate of mine took a job as a prison officer after leaving the Air Force, and he found the inmates really scary. I lost contact with him, but I doubt he lasted long.

PC seemed to really take off in the 80s and 90s and the term started to be used in the 90s when people became conscious of its restrictiveness. I worked in the Education bureaucracy and PC was rife. You had to be careful what you said or wrote, but I don't think it was as restrictive in Australia as it appears to have been in the States. Australians perhaps don't take things quite so seriously. (non-PC comment - national generalization; stereotyping of US citizens.) Australia also had a conservative government come to power in 1996 and the PC pressure was reduced - much to everyone's relief, I think, including those who could see the point of PC as a sensitizing tool.

Actually, the anti-discrimination, anti-vilification, anti-stereotyping etc that was PC's stock-in-trade and its rationale has achieved greater awareness and perhaps some forethought before making gross generalizations or accusations. It has to be kept in balance, though, with the right to speak freely and the danger, as the article points out above, of "veiling" people's real thoughts and prejudices. It can also make less articulate people (and there are many) feel that they have been muffled when they express genuinely held, though maybe uninformed views. The anti-urban, anti-middle class, anti-media backlash experienced in Australia via the One Nation Party came as a surprise to the complacent in the late 90s/early 2000s. PC didn't prepare people for that.

[Skyline]

Thank god I'm anti PC and a racist

[bassmaster50]

To be PC, you must be a liar. You cannot speak the truth if it offends someone, or is not fashionable. I believe in telling the truth, and if you don't like it, too bad. When I was watch commander in the prison, I told guards who worked for me I had four rules they had to follow: Give the cons what they are supposed to get. Don't give them things they aren't supposed to get. Never hit a guy in handcuffs. And never use racial insults. However, if a guy was an ass___,whether black, white or green, then you could tell him that. I had to go to superintendent's office numerous times for calling an inmate, or an employee, an ass___,

or a s__tbag, or some such thing. But my answer was always the same. I called him that because that is what he is. If I think someone is a jerk, I will tell him I think he is a jerk. And I have had many people tell me the same thing, and truth is I respect them more than PC types who smile and kiss up and really hate my guts. The world would be a better place if everyone just told the truth. I once had information the Muslim inmates were going to kill an inmate. I investigated this, and was told to cease the investigation because it was profiling and harassing the Muslims. So the Muslims did end up killing the guy. Naturally none of my bosses, who ordered me to stop the investigation, ever said they were wrong. They never mentioned it again, and never changed their policy, as it is more important to them to be PC and advance their careers than to save a man's life.