not only is there zero PC garbage
Unpopular opinion: Approximately 106% of the time, people who complain about ‘PC culture’ are either jerks who can’t handle that people don’t like them being jerks or people ignorant of just how restrictive culture was even 10-20 years ago.
This. People may make jokes about “I identify as X” and whatever, but the old addage “Do as you would be done by” has been around a lot longer and still holds true to this day.
Think you’d feel upset if people attacked you over who you are? Well done! Other people probably feel the exact same way when you are a jerkwad towards them and people like them!
At the end of the day, so long as no one is actively trying to influence who YOU are, it doesn’t matter one jot who or what THEY are in THEIR lives. So… leave 'em alone?
Very true. Thankfully warlocks can pull it off!
But they don’t always leave you alone.
They try to force people to accept them, and if you don’t care or w/e, they will call you homophobic, racist, sexist, you name it!
That’s where the hate towards PC culture comes from, being forced with this crabs down your throat, or you’ll face being called stuff.
I don’t care what people do as long as they are happy with it, to a certain degree (as in pedos, as they should just be shot if they do anything).
Except that, 9/10 times, this is a totally misconstrued argument.
Example of characters in games or films, for instance. SO many people get SO bent out of shape, screaming “This is forcing this agenda down peoples throats!!”
Well… not really? I mean, it’s not like the crushingly overwhelming majority of film and game characters have not been A Certain Way since… well, forever? If thats a valid argument, then its JUST as valid the other way, is it not? Or it’s not valid at all.
If people didn’t kick up such a damn fuss, then this ‘PC culture’ and ‘forcing it into the open’ wouldn’t exist. Guarenteed. It’s BECAUSE people feel fearful and silenced and told to stay out of the way and keep quiet that they end up protesting and ‘making a big deal’. How would you feel being treated the way most of them are? Pretty sure you wouldn’t like it. I know I wouldn’t.
Edit: I mean, yes, I KNOW you can get some fringe cases/whackjobs who are particularly unpleasant. An old uni friend had to move houses because they were stuck with some particularly militant vegans who out and out vandalised her property. Is that ok? No, funnily enough. But the majority of these groups are NOT like that, and just want to be left alone and not have to be in fear of just being themselves, I would wager.
I think PC culture becomes an issue when it divides people and gives some a pretense to elevate themselves above others to judge and condemn them.
Furthermore I think PC culture becomes problematic when it affects legislation and law. There are some things more important than ensuring that people don’t take offense or are represented properly.
‘Live and let live’ does not match ‘Do as you would be done by’ as proven by many of my forum arguments; it doesn’t work online, but funnily enough it does work IRL. Yet another reason why I believe people should stop treating the internet as ‘its the internet bro’—you’re still engaging with real human beings.
What I consider ok, finding it morally just and socially appropriate behaviour, some people face as the biggest attack on their being (hyperbolic, ik)/take out of context or w/e.
PC culture isn’t a big thing in comparison to delicate sensitivities & thin-skinned opinionists who can’t handle confrontation—but they’re similar, which is why people confuse them.
based & true
As if to make my point about outrage culture–… You don’t really know me, you’ve never spoken to me but because I don’t agree with you immeditately you go on the offensive like some ideologue. No amount of word twisting is going to change the fact that it was no near as bad as it is today.
This is probably what I do. I mix them up, but I can accept that I am the one in the wrong here, though.
Like, I don’t care if you’re gay, trans, or w/e, but if I didn’t ask if you are either of those things, I didn’t care if you were, so you don’t need to mention it, imo.
I don’t assume everyone is straight, and I really wouldn’t give a damn if you are or not.
It’s fairly common and only really becomes apparent once pointed out. I only realised because I mixed everyone in the same bag as well.
Outrage culture is a joke, something stoked by the fact that website thrive on click bait and no one ever bothers to do any research in their rush for the latest batch of virtue signalling to be done.
It’s like a digital gold rush, that ruins peoples lives, often for nothing but being in the wrong place with the wrong skin colour.
No amount of word twisting is going to change the fact that it was no near as bad as it is today.
Blasphemy was illegal until 2008. You are factually incorrect.
I’m confused… are you talking about ‘It’s bad that people get offended these days!’ or ‘I’m ignoring the fact people were literally killed or chemically castrated or worse back then’?
Alan Turing, the man who cracked the Enigma Code and was a major part in ending WW2, was rewarded for his service by a choice between chemical castration or jail time because of his sexuality. I think I’d take the modern culture of fighting back against historical inequality (and the drawbacks that entails, which do exist) over the social injustices of years ago.
The world is a far better place than it used to be and although we still have work to do and a balance to find, I would far rather the evil PC culture than anything more malign.
In your country? With a quick google search I assume that’s the UK. Looking over it, it states that people stopped being prosecuted sucessfully after the 1977 even when someone spoke a poem about a roman soldier graphically having sex with Jesus outside St Martin-in-the-fields. So that in itself feels like a dishonest comparison and more a technicality based on an old law which was amended in your country.
Yes, every day I get up and put on my fash boots, wave my truncheon and revel in the suffering of people in the past. Nothing pleases me more than listening to Oswald Mosley, Mussolini and Hitler simultaneously.
And now people can be prosecuted in Canada if they call someone by the wrong pronoun.
In 1979, Monty Python’s Life of Brian was banned in several counties across England.
Please tell me how the world as it is now is worse than a time where making a fairly tame comedic film was censored (particularly by the BBC, which is funded by public money) and considered a matter that required debate. 1979 was 40 years ago - a long time in real terms, but both within living memory and small potatoes where generational shifts are concerned. This practice was fairly common - of comedians being shut down from venues and arrested for blasphemous or offensive speech for things that would barely raise an eyebrow today.
This is why I made my summation; when people claim that their speech has never been more restricted, I usually find it’s for trying to say things that we as a society have now decided is inappropriate or hurtful, and trying to equate people exercising their free speech to voice their disapproval to government and private censorship.
And now people can be prosecuted in Canada if they call someone by the wrong pronoun.
As usual, you are completely wrong. Read the law properly.
But the ideological arm of the left wing are doing this now? Not just in the US but in your country I believe. Didn’t your courts try to arrest a youtube user named Count Dankula? I was also under the impression your police officers spend time policing words on twitter and for a long time ignoring certain groups of people commiting crimes for fear of being called racist. I believe it was called the Rotherham scandal?
Well where I am from we do not think offense is considered something that needs to be enforced by law, infact we reject it because we lived under authoritarianism once. That’s what upsets me when I talk about these things and made my initial post.
With a user name like that he unironically deserved it
This essentially.
I think PC culture is problematic, still- But the devil’s in the details. It’s impossible to give an all-sweeping answer on what should be allowed and what shouldn’t be because they’re case-by-case situations.
In my view, people should be able to say whatever they wish so long as it is not:
Other than that, I think you should be allowed to say anything you want and wish without fearing prosecution. You can call your neighbour who you’ve been having a feud with for several years with whatever you like up to his face, without getting a paper the next day challenging you to the court for disputing his character.
Freedom of speech should be as unrestricted as possible, when it doesn’t tread noticeably over other liberties of an individual.
The thing is he’s been to the court and appealed twice (?), both times turned down. He was convicted for hate speech and promoting anti-semitism, and fined 800 pounds- Which, to this date, he’s not paid out of principle (But so far the police hasn’t went to take him to jail).
I find it appalling that a guy gets a criminal record about doing something like that. If you had a comedian do the exact same thing as he did but in front of a live audience you wouldn’t think twice about him being innocent, but apparently since it was posted online it was masked as promoting genocide.
If you can with a straight face say that you don’t find that problematic then I don’t know what to say. This seems like something that you’d expect happening in the middle east, but here we are, in Great Britain, a western civilization.
This may be due to Britain’s legislation structure, though. From what I’ve understood (and do correct me if I’m wrong), but the british system doesn’t have the same principle as for example Finland does, in that your act must be done “with malicious intent” and that it must have been “Against the common goodwill”.
Under current criteria here for example, the malicious intent wouldn’t fill under any circumstance because there’s no malicious intent being posted about the case in the said video nor in other contexts.
The “acting against common goodwill” -could- (and that is a very unlikely could) fill the criteria, assuming that it was against the common goodwill- And considering dark humor about things like race, gender and alike are very common in Finland, it most likely wouldn’t fly either. Maybe it’d be the case in Britain, but I doubt it.