Has political correctness actually gone mad?

redman5 said:
That might be so, but I'm confident you'd struggle to find a comparable amount of right wing tosh on the internet to that found in a lot videos relating to feminism, BLM, LGBTQ, & a few others.
Click to expand...
There is a very large group of people who spend a lot of time trying to discredit most of these groups, so it's not really surprising that videos of members of said groups being dumb tend to pop up frequently.

I guess it's also very much in the eye of the beholder. To me, any video of Jordan Peterson talking about feminism, or Ben Shapiro talking about anything, is just as dumb as those feminists taking offense at the idea that men are taller than women on average.
 
Halftrack said:
There is a very large group of people who spend a lot of time trying to discredit most of these groups, so it's not really surprising that videos of members of said groups being dumb tend to pop up frequently.

I guess it's also very much in the eye of the beholder. To me, any video of Jordan Peterson talking about feminism, or Ben Shapiro talking about anything, is just as dumb as those feminists taking offense at the idea that men are taller than women on average.
Click to expand...

Does that mean you dismiss, & disagree, with everything the likes of Peterson & Shapiro say on such matters.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Anything willing to go along with 'white genocide' nonsense.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd go along with that. Anyway, if there's anyone to blame for 'white genocide' at some point in the future it's probably white people themselves. The demise in strong family bonds & ties has resulted in far fewer children being born amongst the white demographics than there was 30, 40, 50 years ago.
 
redman5 said:
Yeah, I'd go along with that. Anyway, if there's anyone to blame for 'white genocide' at some point in the future it's probably white people themselves. The demise in strong family bonds & ties has resulted in far fewer children being born amongst the white demographics than there was 30, 40, 50 years ago.
Click to expand...
Birth rates amongst natural born citizens in wealthy Western countries could be an interesting topic, if you fancy making the thread.
 
redman5 said:
You're comparing extreme right wing views - of which we're talking a minority - to identity politics which is far more mainstream.
Click to expand...

The rabid SJW types really aren't all that mainstream though. Their presence is exaggerated by people with vested interests who want everyone to think anyone who's even remotely liberal is somehow like this, when in reality plenty of left-wing people I know are either put off by such rhetoric or are even sceptical as to PC. Liberals/lefties can't really be grouped together into one, unanimous collective, even though it's convenient for the right to band everyone from David Cameron to Jeremy Corbyn in the one sect.
 
I'm with the SJWs, the reasonable ones. Carry on doing what you're doing. Anyone moaning about them is usually a bit of a snowflake or someone with an agenda I can't relate to or get behind.
 
redman5 said:
It could be something to discuss, but at this juncture I'm afraid I don't have the time. I'll leave you with this piece from The Irish Times though, as it's probably more in keeping with the overall theme of this thread.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/why-is-europe-losing-the-will-to-breed-1.2644169
Click to expand...

I suspect the simple reasons for lower birthrates is that we're in a more advanced society now where people no longer need to have children to provide for them in order to survive. Sex education (while still archaic a lot of the time) is generally better than it was and so as a result people are less likely to have kids when they might see it as a fairly pointless venture that'll only cause more stress and lead to them spending a lot of money on someone else. I don't even think it's necessarily that problematic - over the longer term we'll either see governments creating incentives for people to procreate, people wanting to have kids more because automation means they have more time to provide for them, or we'll see population levels propped up by immigration from other, overcrowded countries.
 
afrocentricity said:
I'm with the SJWs, the reasonable ones. Carry on doing what you're doing. Anyone moaning about them is usually a bit of a snowflake or someone with an agenda I can't relate to or get behind.
Click to expand...

Me too, they're great for cannibalizing the left.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Anything willing to go along with 'white genocide' nonsense.
Click to expand...

How dare you downplay this extremely serious issue

28279629_1806325266328760_7616597099037480789_n.jpg
 
Even when it was the bears, I knew it was the cats.
 
In America, there's always been a contemptuous crowd thirsty to pick off the extremists in and caricature movements for social change. We see it in the old cartoons painting suffragettes as red-faced old spinsters or black people as shiftless watermelon eaters, and in taunts of anti-war activists as dirty hippies and commie pinkos. SJWs are the new SDS; Stay Woke jackets and BLM T-shirts the new long hair. As young people agitate for much-needed change, be it on racial bias, rampant sexual harassment, or gun control, there will always be behind-the-curve commentators getting paid to do nothing but lecture "Respect First." The left would do well by not showing up to play character actors in fake free-speech theater. But the Free Speech Grifters never seem to be concerned with exactly whom they are entertaining with their performative indignation and why. It's kayfabe for those who are perfectly comfortable with enforcing the status quo.
Click to expand...

https://www.gq.com/story/free-speech-grifting
 


Related:
Screen_Shot_2018_03_09_at_11.29.46_AM.png



Screen_Shot_2018_03_09_at_12.01.17_PM.png


Snowflake college students killing free speech...


Unrelated point - it is irritating that all political divides in the US fall into liberal=conservative without any consideration of left-right.
 
Classic liberal types thinkers arent generally the ones trying to deplatform speakers in the US, so much as the mindset of the progressive left.
Long time democrat voting classic liberal thinkers such as Dave Rubin tell they find their place on the right lately due to issues with progressivism, one of those being free speech, I'm sure he's not the only one.
 
Nooooo, not the caaaatttssss! :(
 
Mrs Smoker said:
4Vfuhcg.png


https://www.met.police.uk/advice-and-information/hate-crime/what-is-hate-crime/
Click to expand...

Where are you getting this bit?

The link says:

A Hate Crime is defined as "Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person's race or perceived race; religion or perceived religion; sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation; disability or perceived disability and any crime motivated by hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender."
Click to expand...
 
BennyBlanco said:
Classic liberal types thinkers arent generally the ones trying to deplatform speakers in the US, so much as the mindset of the progressive left.
Long time democrat voting classic liberal thinkers such as Dave Rubin tell they find their place on the right lately due to issues with progressivism, one of those being free speech, I'm sure he's not the only one.
Click to expand...

He's a clown. A dishonest hack. His show is basically a right-wing safe-space.
 
Mrs Smoker said:
Looks like they've changed it. Got the screengrab from an archive of the original.
Click to expand...

Makes no sense to define a crime as something «that isn't a criminal offence». Either it's a crime or not. Surely this must be satire? "By the victim or anyone else". :lol:
 
Completely agreed. Changed one is a bit scary too.

A Hate Incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someone’s prejudice towards them because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender.
 
Mrs Smoker said:
Completely agreed. Changed one is a bit scary too.

A Hate Incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someone’s prejudice towards them because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender.
Click to expand...

Personally I don't think that is scary since it's just the definition of a hate incident, which - going by the following paragraph - is not a hate crime in itself.

Not all hate incidents will amount to criminal offences, but it is equally important that these are reported and recorded by the police.
 
The main problem seems to be that the definition rests on the victim's perception, which is subjective for all sorts of potential reasons.
 
Bogga said:
The reason I think this PC stuff is laughable is the rejection of simple biological facts... I'm all for equality, same job = same pay and so on. But these feminists and sjw just take it so far

Like these people...
Click to expand...
Yeah, I see where you're coming from. But the speaker in that case states that Men are taller than Women, which can be understood wrongly because it implies a general rule like all men are supposedly taller than all women. So, if you look at it from a statistical point of view, then you can not describe the difference with "men are taller than women". That's simply wrong. And I do think that such wrong simplifications can also create wrong biases in our heads.
 
UweBein said:
Yeah, I see where you're coming from. But the speaker in that case states that Men are taller than Women, which can be understood wrongly because it implies a general rule like all men are supposedly taller than all women. So, if you look at it from a statistical point of view, then you can not describe the difference with "men are taller than women". That's simply wrong. And I do think that such wrong simplifications can also create wrong biases in our heads.
Click to expand...

I suppose she's talking in general... and in general, men are taller than women. That's a fact... the other things she says are also biological facts. Denying biological facts without any evidence of the opposite are just retarded
 
2cents said:
The main problem seems to be that the definition rests on the victim's perception, which is subjective for all sorts of potential reasons.
Click to expand...

It's a way of forcing the police who ignore hate crime to actually investigate and prosecute hate crime. This case below is an obvious hate crime murder of a young Egyptian woman by a group of white women. The police said 'no evidence of hate crime' is absolutely disgusting in my view:

https://www.aljazeera.com/programme...ptian-teen-uk-hate-crime-180316183739429.html

I've reported a crime which I believed was a hate crime and the police said unless there was evidence they wouldn't come out and question the suspect about it.
This isn't actually different from rape law where the victims gets greater credance than in other crimes.

EDIT: I assumed wrong that it was a group of white women, it was a group of black females who attacked her. Still a hate crime for me.
 
Last edited:
Bogga said:
I suppose she's talking in general... and in general, men are taller than women. That's a fact... the other things she says are also biological facts. Denying biological facts without any evidence of the opposite are just retarded
Click to expand...
I suppose it's because using "biological facts" to define gender is something that trans people are trying to get people to move away from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.