Tv Members And Political Correctness

[bonobo]

I watched Robin Hood on BBC Entertainment, here in Thailand tonight. A member of his band is a Muslim woman.(?) Todays story was all about a chap the Sheriff of Nottingham imprisoned for helping Robin Hood by making saracen type bows, supposedly for his band to use.

What a load of PC tosh! I read the original stories when I was a kid, and there was never a member of the "merry men" who was anything other than white anglo saxon. As for the bows, if saracen bows were superior, how come the English Longbow was still used for 300 years or so after the time Robin Hood was supposed to have been around?

The BBC should not be allowed to interfere with traditional tales, just to make them fit into the PC fantasies it tries to project.

I'm half expecting a gay merry man next week, presumably dressed in Lincoln pink, instead of the traditional green.

No offence intended here to muslims, women or gays, just trying to illustrate how ludicrous the PC world is becoming - doesn't help anyone, in my humble opinion.

So you get equally upset when non-Jews star in the nativity play? I doubt there were many Anglo-Saxons in Bethlehem so white people in nativity plays is obviously PC gone mad. Is the religious leanings of the characters that important in Robin Hood? Would you be upset with an atheist playing Friar Tuck? The tale of Robin Hood contains universal themes, and the fact that they can incorporate a Muslim into the story just shows how similar we all really are. If it upsets people too much there is always the classic movie channels which mostly use white Anglo-Saxons.

Of course, now your going to reply that you are only upset because they are trying to re-tell the story with a Muslim character, but all stories need to change over time otherwise they become stale. If they didn't need to change we wouldn't need new books or movies.

I am sorry, but that is not a good analogy. If the story of Robin Hood was being filmed in Egypt for viewing in the Arab market, no one would complain about Arab actors playing the roles or the language being spoken by Robin and his Merry Men being Arabic.

But for the BBC, filiming a show in the UK, to change a very traditional tale to introduce a highly unlikely character is a different situation. There is no need for that in as far as the production of the show. It is most likely merely a ploy to broaden the appeal of the show to more people of different backgrounds.

WHile I am not going to get too upset about it, I do understand WeeGB's view on the matter.

Ok, I actually think it was a fair enough example, but for the sake of argument I'll go along with you. What about West-Side story? Did you find that offensive? It is a retelling of Romeo & Juliet after all. As I said in the last post stories need to change and be updated to make them interesting.

A main argument of the anti-PC crowd is that immigrants don't want to become part of the larger culture. When efforts are made though to make them feel part of this culture the same people accuse the liberals of pandering to them with cires of 'keep Robin Hood white' and the like.

On a side issue, the story of Robin Hood is not just about Anglo-saxons. It is actually the story of a the struggle between the Anglo-Saxon and their Norman rulers; so perhaps having a Muslim character is very 'now' - after all, both these cultures were immigrants to the British Isles.

Once again, the analogy fails. West Side Story did not have Puerto Rican and White actors spouting Shakespeare. This was simply a theme retold in a completely different setting. I agree with you that some stories are retold that way to make them current or more interesting, and I find nothing wrong with that myself.

However, if I went to see a Shakespeare production of Othello, and the main character was a White woman, then yes, I would find that bothersome. I do feel that artists can do what they want in the attempt to entertain, and if a production company wants to recast the main character that way, so be it. I don't find much in this vein "offensive," as you put it. I just doubt I would venture to pay for a ticket to watch it.

And as far as a Muslim character being in any tale of Robin Hood, there is a high degree of improbability to that. Remember, the story contends that Robin's nemisis was John, Richard's evil brother, who had power only because Richard was off fighting the Third Crusade. So if England was locked in a Crusade against the Islamic world, and if Robin really is loyal to Richard, then it hardly seems likely that he would have a Muslim in his group.

Of course, if you study the historic development of the Robin Hood story, then there have been many changes over the years (such as Richard's role, Maid Marian, Robin being of noble blood, etc.)

I thought Mel GIbson took much greater license with changing history in his story about William Wallace in Braveheart, and that bothered me a little more as that was playing with actual events. Shifts in a story about Robin Hood, Arthur, Sinbad, and the like do not bother me very much, but I would be somewhat puzzled by Scheherazade suddenly adding a tale of a French maiden to her list of stories. Changes in tales liek this should be reasonable.

[PhilHarries]

Well at least we are off the women v girls battlefront.

Now we are on Hollywood's, and television's, historical representation of mythical subjects etc. Hollywood, in particular, has been misrepresenting history from it's inception. Don't tell me you guys still believe Krakatoa is East of Java?

If we follow this line of thinking all films should be remade with Germans in WWII films portrayed by German actors mostly speaking German and all the natives in those jungle romp films should be blacks speaking Swahili or similar. Movies are not true life documentaries, they are made for entertainment even those purporting to be based on a true story. If you want true factual representations go down the library and look under "Non Fiction".

It's all very well conducting this Oxbridge debate of learned minds over the rights and wrongs of political correctness but the base line is how it is perceived by the average Joe Bloggs on the bulding site. The perception of PC on the street, way below the rarified atmosphere of this forum, is moulded by the screaming antics of the press aided by the lunatic PC brigade. Until you get both of those factions in line you will continue to face an uphill battle in your attempt to attain equality. You can control speech and you can control the written word, both in the public domain, but if a man considers blacks to be n*****s there's very little you can do about it.

[G54]

So you get equally upset when non-Jews star in the nativity play? I doubt there were many Anglo-Saxons in Bethlehem so white people in nativity plays is obviously PC gone mad. Is the religious leanings of the characters that important in Robin Hood? Would you be upset with an atheist playing Friar Tuck? The tale of Robin Hood contains universal themes, and the fact that they can incorporate a Muslim into the story just shows how similar we all really are. If it upsets people too much there is always the classic movie channels which mostly use white Anglo-Saxons.

Of course, now your going to reply that you are only upset because they are trying to re-tell the story with a Muslim character, but all stories need to change over time otherwise they become stale. If they didn't need to change we wouldn't need new books or movies.

Garro - I suppose that next, you will be advocating a white golliwog ??

Point of order - in my school nativity play we had no jews, so we had to use C of E characters. They pulled it off though, no one noticed !

Not seen a Golliwog for years. Must be collectors items now - if you are even allowed to collect such 'offensive' items. Maybe expect a raid from the PC police for daring to own some?

Reminds me of the Black & White Minstrel Show. That was also banned, yet it was only a musical. But I am showing my age

In the Bethlehem Nativity did they not show dark skinned Arabian Gentlemen? I am surprised the PC brigade do not insist we employ such people for each 'Nativity', just to keep the record straight.

[rott]

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.

And I bet you really object to people being stereotyped.

If your only response to an opposite point of view is to twist it, distort it and lie about it you must be feeling on dodgy ground yourself.

According to you everybody who is anti-PC is just wanting to be able to call people 'darkies' or 'coons' or 'spastics', or spit on them. These people are obviously bigots and racists who have prejudices, and not PC, fair-minded people with logical opinions such as yourself.

My experience of anti-PC people is that in their own country(ies) they feel they are being marginalised and being made to feel uncomfortable about their own culture, with outsiders, minorities-call them what you will being given preferential treament. There is a feeling that there is respect for every culture but their own.

PC generally means being left wing, if a right wing post with equivalent sentiments had appeared I can imagine your howls of sanctimonious, self-righteous indignation.

I have never read such nastiness and hypocrisy.

[Ulysses G.]

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.

And I bet you really object to people being stereotyped.

If your only response to an opposite point of view is to twist it, distort it and lie about it you must be feeling on dodgy ground yourself.

According to you everybody who is anti-PC is just wanting to be able to call people 'darkies' or 'coons' or 'spastics', or spit on them. These people are obviously bigots and racists who have prejudices, and not PC, fair-minded people with logical opinions such as yourself.

My experience of anti-PC people is that in their own country(ies) they feel they are being marginalised and being made to feel uncomfortable about their own culture, with outsiders, minorities-call them what you will being given preferential treament. There is a feeling that there is respect for every culture but their own.

PC generally means being left wing, if a right wing post with equivalent sentiments had appeared I can imagine your howls of sanctimonious, self-righteous indignation.

I have never read such nastiness and hypocrisy.

A truthful post indeed. A poster who can see further than his own nose!

[Gary A]

Some time back I had to laugh at a friend of mine. He was chuckling and told me, "I IS now a sanitary engineer". "What is a sanitary engineer?" He said he didn't get a raise and he still collected garbage for a living. My friend thought it was ridiculous. He was one of the owners of the company and worked the route with the other owners. They called it what it was, a garbage route.

This whole fiasco was brought about by people who had too much time on their hands. If they had had a job, they wouldn't have been so bored. If you want to set up a nativity scene across from my house, be my guest. Why should it bother me if it makes you happy. On the other hand, I was upset by the religious chanting over loud speaker systems at ridiculous hours when I lived in Bangkok. I'm a live and let live type, but do your worship thing quietly. I would have been just as irritated if it had been a bar making all the noise. The bar could have been legally dealt with, but the religious things are NOT to be criticized. How stupid is that?

Edited December 16, 2008 by Gary A

[GuestHouse]

You can control speech and you can control the written word, both in the public domain, but if a man considers blacks to be n*****s there's very little you can do about it.

No, but he's far less likely to spread his filth where the abusive language he might have used 10 or 20 years ago is no longer acceptable in the work place, or in public.

--

Who was it saying that the Black and White Minstals where banned? - No they where not banned, they simply became ridiculous as British society changed with the influx of the West Indians who successive British Governments invited to come to the UK. Take a look at some old photos of the Black and White Minstrals and ask yourself if that would be offensive or demeaning to black people?

Society changes, values change and language changes, this should not surprise anyone.

The significant change has been a shift in the balance, being a white male is not longer in itself enough to guarantee life's opportunities, they need to be shared with women, people of other ethnic backgrounds, people with a wider range of health and more recently people of a wider age range.

White men don't have the ball to themselves any more. Not a bad thing I think.

[bonobo]

To large extent, I see it like this:

In one corner, you have the rabid PC group who wants to ignore tradition, history, and culture to homogenize the world into their own narrow, bland image.

In another corner, you have the rabid anti-PC group who wants to cling to negative phrases and connotations no matter whom it might offend and possibly just to stick it to the PC crowd.

And in the middle, you have the vast majority of people. They just want to get on with their lives, they care about other's feelings and views, and they give and expect respect back. They might roll their eyes at the lengths some people go to be PC, and they might scowl upon hearing racial epithets. But PC is not something often thought about. It just isn't a major issue.

[thaibeachlovers]

I mentioned it above, perhaps because it came as a surprise, that Political Correctness clearly equates in the minds of many of the men responding here with issues they themselves have over women.

What surprises me more is the depth of these 'women issues' in some of the male respondents, not just what they are telling us (much of which seems more fitting for a patient doctor conversation) but also in that this baggage they are carrying spills over into open hostility towards female members of this board.

Hmmm. Would disagree with that; more about Christianity and misrepresentation of historical figures on the Beeb. Incidentally, in the new Beeb show about Merlin and Prince Arthur a major character is a black ( or perhaps coffee colored ) female!

Perhaps most of these type posts will always include rants against women, because they deserve it! Many men have been financially and emotionaly devastated by ex partners, and end up in Thailand where women are ( superficially at least ) less hostile to men. The only PC related aspect, IMO, is that the ( western ) courts generally favour women over men, especially where children are concerned, though in my experience there is nothing to prove that fathers do a worse job than women in raising children.

[bonobo]

Well at least we are off the women v girls battlefront.

Now we are on Hollywood's, and television's, historical representation of mythical subjects etc. Hollywood, in particular, has been misrepresenting history from it's inception. Don't tell me you guys still believe Krakatoa is East of Java?

If we follow this line of thinking all films should be remade with Germans in WWII films portrayed by German actors mostly speaking German and all the natives in those jungle romp films should be blacks speaking Swahili or similar. Movies are not true life documentaries, they are made for entertainment even those purporting to be based on a true story. If you want true factual representations go down the library and look under "Non Fiction".

Hollywood gets many things wrong, but not always for PC reasons. The list of inaccuracies is endless. I dumped on Mel Gibson in an earlier post for not being factual in Braveheart, but coming from this king of the not-very-PC individuals, I don't think this was for PC reasons. His filming of Apocalypto entirely in Mayan was probably him tryng to flex his artistic muscles, not for PC reasons as well.

In the movie In the Name of the King, two of the generals in Burt Reynold's army are black men. They are about the only black men in the movie, and it hardly seems likely that two men would rise in such a situation to be generals. But this is a fantasy movie with magic and fictional creatures, so even if this was a specific casting decision made with PC considerations in mind, who the heck cares?

But in movies purporting to be factual, or movies taking place in the context of history, being PC should not be a consideration. Saving Private Ryan was a piece of fiction taking place on the backdrop of the D-Day landings. Whether the Germans in the film spoke German to retain a more accurate feeling or spoke English so the English-speaking audience could understand them is not so important and has nothing to do with being PC. Putting an obligatory Jew in the patrol to save Private Ryan has the obvious dramatic tension, but it is plausible, so even if there is a PC consideration, once again, who cares? It could very well have happened like that. But should Spielberg have put an African-American or Japanese-American in that patrol in order to be PC, even though this was a fictional story, this would be taking PC too far. Neither demographic groups fought in integrated units during the war, so this would be re-writing history in order to seem more PC.

I agree that Hollywood does this all the time, but that does not mean it is correct, and in this case, I would side with those in this thread who feel PC sometime runs amok.

[garro]

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.

And I bet you really object to people being stereotyped.

If your only response to an opposite point of view is to twist it, distort it and lie about it you must be feeling on dodgy ground yourself.

According to you everybody who is anti-PC is just wanting to be able to call people 'darkies' or 'coons' or 'spastics', or spit on them. These people are obviously bigots and racists who have prejudices, and not PC, fair-minded people with logical opinions such as yourself.

My experience of anti-PC people is that in their own country(ies) they feel they are being marginalised and being made to feel uncomfortable about their own culture, with outsiders, minorities-call them what you will being given preferential treament. There is a feeling that there is respect for every culture but their own.

PC generally means being left wing, if a right wing post with equivalent sentiments had appeared I can imagine your howls of sanctimonious, self-righteous indignation.

I have never read such nastiness and hypocrisy.

If somebody was posting equivalent sentiments as mine then they wouldn't be right-wing so there would be no howls from me.

If you have never read such nastiness and hypocrisy as my post then you have led a very privileged life. I have not only read far nastier, but also seen far nastier acts done by the anti-PC crowd. I remember working in Southwark in London just over a decade ago and having people ask a good friend, "where she got her monkey from?" - they were referring of course to the fact that her baby was half-Chinese. Those lovable anti-PC people who after all are only trying to protect their culture from the loony-left. Of course these people were able to justify their racism by crying that their jobs were been given to 'blacks'. You had to ask yourself though, who would employ these guys in the first place.

Edited December 16, 2008 by garro

[thaibeachlovers]

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.

Actually yes. While the law may specify paying for sex from a prostitute controlled by a pimp, in practice it will be impossible for a punter to be CERTAIN that s/he is not in fact being pimped.

While you may object to men ( and hopefully women ) paying for sex, it is yourself using PC to try and put down persons so doing. What business is it of yours if a woman willingly rents her anatomy to a man wishing to pay for the use of it. No one is trying to excuse trafficking, but there is no excuse to interfere with free will. Perhaps you believe that willing prostitutes need to be protected from themselves. Very PC!

As for the law concerning prostitution in New Zealand, it is just common sense at work, and perhaps males there tend to be less PC than their UK equivalents.

If Thailand attracts a disproportionate number of men with baggage, it may be that they are the ones lucky enough to retain enough money after the courts gave their ex wives most of their cash, that they are able to get out of the west. Perhaps you should listen to their story before putting them down.

One of the characteristics of PC persons is that they are only too ready to use the language of denigration against persons contravening the PC person's version of correct behaviour. Anyone for self emasculation?

As a final observation, IMO, any woman who seeks a greater amount of money than the minimum amount needed to live a reasonable life from a husband during divorce proceedings ( unless she actually helped to make it ), is a prostitute. I could give examples, but not sure as to TV policy on naming people.

Edited December 16, 2008 by thaibeachlovers

[bonobo]

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.

And I bet you really object to people being stereotyped.

If your only response to an opposite point of view is to twist it, distort it and lie about it you must be feeling on dodgy ground yourself.

According to you everybody who is anti-PC is just wanting to be able to call people 'darkies' or 'coons' or 'spastics', or spit on them. These people are obviously bigots and racists who have prejudices, and not PC, fair-minded people with logical opinions such as yourself.

My experience of anti-PC people is that in their own country(ies) they feel they are being marginalised and being made to feel uncomfortable about their own culture, with outsiders, minorities-call them what you will being given preferential treament. There is a feeling that there is respect for every culture but their own.

PC generally means being left wing, if a right wing post with equivalent sentiments had appeared I can imagine your howls of sanctimonious, self-righteous indignation.

I have never read such nastiness and hypocrisy.

If somebody was posting equivalent sentiments as mine then they wouldn't be right-wing so there would be no howls from me.

If you have never read such nastiness and hypocrisy as my post then you have led a very privleged life. I have not only read far nastier, but also seen far nastier acts done by the anti-PC crowd. I remember working in Southwark in London just over a decade ago and having people ask a good friend, "where she got her monkey from?" - they were referring of course to the fact that her baby was half-Chinese. Those lovable anti-PC people who after all are only trying to protect their culture from the loony-left. Of course these people were able to justify their racism by crying that their jobs were been given to 'blacks'. You had to ask yourself though, who would employ these guys in the first place.

I am asking in all earnestness here whether people who would use the term "monkey" to describe a baby are really anti-PC or just uncouth louts?

It seems to me that being anti-PC means you are taking a stand against the move to being PC. You object to Christmas decorations not being allowed, you object to renderings of history being changed for PC reasons, you object to people telling you that you can't say obesity is a health hazard. In other words, you are actively taking a stand against the PC movement.

But some people are just crude and obnoxious. I rather doubt that those rude people you described had anything anti-PC in mind. I mean, I don't think they thought, "Hey, this is Politically Incorrect, so I am going to call this baby a monkey."

[garro]

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.

And I bet you really object to people being stereotyped.

If your only response to an opposite point of view is to twist it, distort it and lie about it you must be feeling on dodgy ground yourself.

According to you everybody who is anti-PC is just wanting to be able to call people 'darkies' or 'coons' or 'spastics', or spit on them. These people are obviously bigots and racists who have prejudices, and not PC, fair-minded people with logical opinions such as yourself.

My experience of anti-PC people is that in their own country(ies) they feel they are being marginalised and being made to feel uncomfortable about their own culture, with outsiders, minorities-call them what you will being given preferential treament. There is a feeling that there is respect for every culture but their own.

PC generally means being left wing, if a right wing post with equivalent sentiments had appeared I can imagine your howls of sanctimonious, self-righteous indignation.

I have never read such nastiness and hypocrisy.

If somebody was posting equivalent sentiments as mine then they wouldn't be right-wing so there would be no howls from me.

If you have never read such nastiness and hypocrisy as my post then you have led a very privleged life. I have not only read far nastier, but also seen far nastier acts done by the anti-PC crowd. I remember working in Southwark in London just over a decade ago and having people ask a good friend, "where she got her monkey from?" - they were referring of course to the fact that her baby was half-Chinese. Those lovable anti-PC people who after all are only trying to protect their culture from the loony-left. Of course these people were able to justify their racism by crying that their jobs were been given to 'blacks'. You had to ask yourself though, who would employ these guys in the first place.

I am asking in all earnestness here whether people who would use the term "monkey" to describe a baby are really anti-PC or just uncouth louts?

It seems to me that being anti-PC means you are taking a stand against the move to being PC. You object to Christmas decorations not being allowed, you object to renderings of history being changed for PC reasons, you object to people telling you that you can't say obesity is a health hazard. In other words, you are actively taking a stand against the PC movement.

But some people are just crude and obnoxious. I rather doubt that those rude people you described had anything anti-PC in mind. I mean, I don't think they thought, "Hey, this is Politically Incorrect, so I am going to call this baby a monkey."

I worked in a busy hospital in London and would frequently meet people who would make these and worse comments. When challenged about why they made these comments the excuse was always that the world had gone PC mad and that they should be allowed to call people what they want to call them. Maybe not every anti-PC person is a racist or bigot, but all racists and bigots are anti-PC.

[PhilHarries]

You can control speech and you can control the written word, both in the public domain, but if a man considers blacks to be n*****s there's very little you can do about it.

No, but he's far less likely to spread his filth where the abusive language he might have used 10 or 20 years ago is no longer acceptable in the work place, or in public.

True, but should he sound off with such language in the workplace he is more likely to find some sympathy and kindred spirits by holding up some of the evidence of PC stupidity to back up his vitriol.

--

Who was it saying that the Black and White Minstals where banned? - No they where not banned, they simply became ridiculous as British society changed with the influx of the West Indians who successive British Governments invited to come to the UK. Take a look at some old photos of the Black and White Minstrals and ask yourself if that would be offensive or demeaning to black people?

I am old enough to remember the Black and White Minstrels and can assure you they were every bit as ridiculous then as they would appear now. Did it predujice my views towards coloured people? Not conciously, it was just a ridiculous TV programme that my parents used to watch (maily because in those days there was precious little else on the box).

btw, as I remember it the B&W Minstrels was in black and white, anyone know if it was ever broadcast in colour?

Society changes, values change and language changes, this should not surprise anyone.

True, things may come and things may go but the art school dance goes on forever.

The significant change has been a shift in the balance, being a white male is not longer in itself enough to guarantee life's opportunities, they need to be shared with women, people of other ethnic backgrounds, people with a wider range of health and more recently people of a wider age range.

White men don't have the ball to themselves any more. Not a bad thing I think.

No problem with competition provided it is equal competition, positive discrimination helps nobody. When I worked in Thailand I specifically set out to hire a woman engineer purely because I wanted balance in the group and an alternative perspective on things. I did and she has proved her worth doing assignments in Spain and currently Singapore outshining some of her colleagues.

btw I didn't apply positive discrimination, the academic and experience standards were the same for her as for the men in the group.

[bonobo]

I worked in a busy hospital in London and would frequently meet people who would make these and worse comments. When challenged about why they made these comments the excuse was always that the world had gone PC mad and that they should be allowed to call people what they want to call them. Maybe not every anti-PC person is a racist or bigot, but all racists and bigots are anti-PC.

OK then. I stand corrected.

I guess it is just hard for me to understand why people would intentionally act like that. I assumed people like that just had it ingrained in them for some reason or another.

[thaibeachlovers]

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'.

Who are you to say it is wrong to openly buy sex, provided it is sold by a willing and autonomous person?

Just who are these people frowning? PC people? Emotionaly retarded people? Please specify whom they are, and why their opinion is of more consequence than the people who think it OK to buy sex.

As a PC person, why do you think it OK to use derogatory names against people who can't get a girlfriend to have free sex with them. Consider disabled and burn victims. Are they to be denied sex because you and your friends think they are degenerates or saddos? What about people too ugly to have a normal relationship? What about persons who don't want a long term relationship for whatever reason? Perhaps they should be castrated to avoid upsetting all those fine upstanding people who go to pubs, drink themselves stupid, and have casual sex behind a dumpster in an alley ( just as long as it's free, OK ).

I would have thought that being PC was avoiding using language offensive to people, but perhaps you think it's OK to be offensive to people that YOU don't like. Oops, isn't that what this post is all about?

[bonobo]

The significant change has been a shift in the balance, being a white male is not longer in itself enough to guarantee life's opportunities, they need to be shared with women, people of other ethnic backgrounds, people with a wider range of health and more recently people of a wider age range.

White men don't have the ball to themselves any more. Not a bad thing I think.

No problem with competition provided it is equal competition, positive discrimination helps nobody. When I worked in Thailand I specifically set out to hire a woman engineer purely because I wanted balance in the group and an alternative perspective on things. I did and she has proved her worth doing assignments in Spain and currently Singapore outshining some of her colleagues.

btw I didn't apply positive discrimination, the academic and experience standards were the same for her as for the men in the group.

Ah, but the rabid PC crowd would tell you you were wrong. You shouldn't look to hire specifically a woman or any ohter demographic, for that matter. And here I really disagree with this trend

When I was getting my doctorate in business, I had a number of arguements about this. We were doing a case study once about Smirinov and its inroads into the gay demographic. When I opined that their marketing group probably would do well to have a gay person onboard, I was told I was being bigotted, that straight people can market to gays just as well as gay people. Or when we saw a film on P & G (or some other soap company), I noticed that despite one of the lines being specifically targeted towards the African-American market, not one person in that shampoo team was African-American. Once again, I was told I was being biggoted.

Of course people can serve more than their own particular demographic group. But call me old fashioned, if I am suddenly the major brand choice of the gay community, and if I have a team of 20 or 30 people now handling that demographic, surely there is a qualified gay person to join that team, and logically, that person may have some valuable insights into the gay community which might help me solidify or even increase my market share.

But I know, such thinking is very "un-PC."

[garro]

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'.

Who are you to say it is wrong to openly buy sex, provided it is sold by a willing and autonomous person?

Just who are these people frowning? PC people? Emotionaly retarded people? Please specify whom they are, and why their opinion is of more consequence than the people who think it OK to buy sex.

As a PC person, why do you think it OK to use derogatory names against people who can't get a girlfriend to have free sex with them. Consider disabled and burn victims. Are they to be denied sex because you and your friends think they are degenerates or saddos? What about people too ugly to have a normal relationship? What about persons who don't want a long term relationship for whatever reason? Perhaps they should be castrated to avoid upsetting all those fine upstanding people who go to pubs, drink themselves stupid, and have casual sex behind a dumpster in an alley ( just as long as it's free, OK ).

I would have thought that being PC was avoiding using language offensive to people, but perhaps you think it's OK to be offensive to people that YOU don't like. Oops, isn't that what this post is all about?

Is it morally wrong to buy sex? That is a difficult question, but I would say that so long as there was no exploitation involved maybe it would be OK. Not my cup of tea though. The fact is though that in many countries it is illegal to buy sex. According to Thai law it is illegal here.

You seem to have misunderstood the second part of my post which was that even otherwise non-PC people dislike the idea of people going with prostitutes. Many people do see those who pay for sex as deviants and this has nothing to do with whether they are PC or not. As for why they feel this way? You would have to ask them. Their reasons differ.

Edited December 16, 2008 by garro

[thaibeachlovers]

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'.

Who are you to say it is wrong to openly buy sex, provided it is sold by a willing and autonomous person?

Just who are these people frowning? PC people? Emotionaly retarded people? Please specify whom they are, and why their opinion is of more consequence than the people who think it OK to buy sex.

As a PC person, why do you think it OK to use derogatory names against people who can't get a girlfriend to have free sex with them. Consider disabled and burn victims. Are they to be denied sex because you and your friends think they are degenerates or saddos? What about people too ugly to have a normal relationship? What about persons who don't want a long term relationship for whatever reason? Perhaps they should be castrated to avoid upsetting all those fine upstanding people who go to pubs, drink themselves stupid, and have casual sex behind a dumpster in an alley ( just as long as it's free, OK ).

I would have thought that being PC was avoiding using language offensive to people, but perhaps you think it's OK to be offensive to people that YOU don't like. Oops, isn't that what this post is all about?

Is it morally wrong to buy sex? That is a difficult question, but I would say that so long as there was no exploitation involved maybe it would be OK. Not my cup of tea though. The fact is though that in many countries it is illegal to buy sex. According to Thai law it is illegal here.

You seem to have misunderstood the second part of my post which was that even otherwise non-PC people dislike the idea of people going with prostitutes. Many people do see those who pay for sex as deviants and this has nothing to do with whether they are PC or not. As for why they feel this way? You would have to ask them. Their reasons differ.

Yes, it is illegal to pay for sex, but just like hiring an escort in the west, it is not illegal to pay someone for their time. What happens between escort and client after that is their business. If not so, there would be many thousands of farangs under arrest at this very time.

As for many people seeing people paying for sex as deviants, there must be millions and millions of deviants in the world.

Something to bear in mind; most troops fighting overseas during the ongoing and recent past wars would have used prostitutes, which means that many people's sons, brothers, fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers are by that definition deviants, or is it OK if it's a relative?

[garro]

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'.

Who are you to say it is wrong to openly buy sex, provided it is sold by a willing and autonomous person?

Just who are these people frowning? PC people? Emotionaly retarded people? Please specify whom they are, and why their opinion is of more consequence than the people who think it OK to buy sex.

As a PC person, why do you think it OK to use derogatory names against people who can't get a girlfriend to have free sex with them. Consider disabled and burn victims. Are they to be denied sex because you and your friends think they are degenerates or saddos? What about people too ugly to have a normal relationship? What about persons who don't want a long term relationship for whatever reason? Perhaps they should be castrated to avoid upsetting all those fine upstanding people who go to pubs, drink themselves stupid, and have casual sex behind a dumpster in an alley ( just as long as it's free, OK ).

I would have thought that being PC was avoiding using language offensive to people, but perhaps you think it's OK to be offensive to people that YOU don't like. Oops, isn't that what this post is all about?

Is it morally wrong to buy sex? That is a difficult question, but I would say that so long as there was no exploitation involved maybe it would be OK. Not my cup of tea though. The fact is though that in many countries it is illegal to buy sex. According to Thai law it is illegal here.

You seem to have misunderstood the second part of my post which was that even otherwise non-PC people dislike the idea of people going with prostitutes. Many people do see those who pay for sex as deviants and this has nothing to do with whether they are PC or not. As for why they feel this way? You would have to ask them. Their reasons differ.

Yes, it is illegal to pay for sex, but just like hiring an escort in the west, it is not illegal to pay someone for their time. What happens between escort and client after that is their business. If not so, there would be many thousands of farangs under arrest at this very time.

As for many people seeing people paying for sex as deviants, there must be millions and millions of deviants in the world.

Something to bear in mind; most troops fighting overseas during the ongoing and recent past wars would have used prostitutes, which means that many people's sons, brothers, fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers are by that definition deviants, or is it OK if it's a relative?

The whole question about the sex trade would make a nice thread, but would likely be quickly closed. My point though is that the pro and anti-prostitution part of the population does not divide along PC and anti-PC lines. There are many anti-PC people who are against prostitution.

[tomahawk]

This is Thailand here and this whole forum is sort of irrelevant. This is not such a PC place. Racism is very prevalent here and not hidden very well at all. Different groups are called demeaning names in the Thai language, there is definitely bigotry towards black people and Thai people generally thing farangs (not very PC in itself, I believe), are barbarians. Understandable if anyone has been to Pattaya. So I assume anyone who chooses to live here can't really be too strongly into PC or they would have to leave in order to live with themselves.

[bonobo]

This is Thailand here and this whole forum is sort of irrelevant. This is not such a PC place. Racism is very prevalent here and not hidden very well at all. Different groups are called demeaning names in the Thai language, there is definitely bigotry towards black people and Thai people generally thing farangs (not very PC in itself, I believe), are barbarians. Understandable if anyone has been to Pattaya. So I assume anyone who chooses to live here can't really be too strongly into PC or they would have to leave in order to live with themselves.

Good point. Thailand isn't a very PC kind of place.

But all you have to do is read posts here and other threads to realize that many people who live here, foreign and Thai alike, have very strong PC-type affinities.

[garro]

This is Thailand here and this whole forum is sort of irrelevant. This is not such a PC place. Racism is very prevalent here and not hidden very well at all. Different groups are called demeaning names in the Thai language, there is definitely bigotry towards black people and Thai people generally thing farangs (not very PC in itself, I believe), are barbarians. Understandable if anyone has been to Pattaya. So I assume anyone who chooses to live here can't really be too strongly into PC or they would have to leave in order to live with themselves.

Perhaps this is your view of the Thais and Thailand, but I have found some very liberal and ever liberated thinkers here - in fact it is this which drew me to Thailand in the first place. Liberal thinkers such as Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Buddhassa for example. This is always the problem with the anti-PC mob, they try and talk about groups of people like they did not contain individuals. They see the Thais as one unit, black people like another unit, and feel justified in making comments about them. Of course I too by using the terms PC and non-PC could be accused of dividing people into units but in this case I would argue that it is justified because we are referring to a way of thinking; although I do accept that there will be variety even among people who subscribe to the same ideology.

Edited December 16, 2008 by garro

[GarryP]

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?

Probably because not enough women are daft enough to run for election.

[popmybubble]

Not seen a Golliwog for years. Must be collectors items now - if you are even allowed to collect such 'offensive' items. Maybe expect a raid from the PC police for daring to own some?

You can still buy them in shops in the UK, I used to want one.

Edited December 16, 2008 by popmybubble

[mahtin]

http://www.golliwogg.co.uk/racism.htm

This should get you up to speed, if interested.

[bonobo]

http://www.golliwogg.co.uk/racism.htm

This should get you up to speed, if interested.

I have heard of the term "<deleted>" before and knew the meaning, but I have to admit that I had never heard of a golliwog before reading this thread. Thanks for the link.

[garro]

http://www.golliwogg.co.uk/racism.htm

This should get you up to speed, if interested.

Yes, this is a good article.

I doubt though it will have much affect on those who are determined to hide their hatreds under the banner of freedom of speech.

[mc2]

campainers are trying to ban this cheese for its racist name.