Has political correctness actually gone mad?

Seveneric said:
The Ruby Rose thing feels like when people decide to focus on small negatives so they get to cry about how PC culture has gone mad.

The "row" wasn't even widespread and most of the "outrage" was actually her being cast because she's a superlatively shit actress (which made it seem like they just cast the first LGBT actress they could find) rather than her not being "gay enough". But yeah, SJWs.

The Jack Whitehall issue is more interesting. Though, again it seems to be a small fraction of people complaining, but it's been blown up. At some point, the "PC gone mad" people will find out they actually outnumber the SJWs.
Click to expand...

Don't agree. The "row" however small it may be caused her to shut down her twitter. Essentially this is the same kind of cyber bullying that several women accuse right wing social media trolls of. Besides any argument along the lines of "how gay" someone is should be criticized even if it is only being perpetuated by a small section of zealots. Shit actors are hired everyday so there is nothing new there.
 
To be honest what happened to Ruby Rose is quite similar to what happened to Kelly Marie-Tran regarding Star Wars, just from the different side of the spectrum. People have their idea of what they think is acceptable and if they don't get what they want, then there is a backlash.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
A is asexual. I think “allied” could come under the “+” bit which is intended to be all-inclusive. Dunno why they didn’t just go for LGBT+.
Click to expand...

Just use Queer. It's far more sensible and all encompassing.

[It should be clear to all that I'm using that word respectfully and not in a derogatory manner. All of my queer friends are fine with it, for what that's worth]
 
crappycraperson said:
Don't agree. The "row" however small it may be caused her to shut down her twitter. Essentially this is the same kind of cyber bullying that several women accuse right wing social media trolls of. Besides any argument along the lines of "how gay" someone is should be criticized even if it is only being perpetuated by a small section of zealots. Shit actors are hired everyday so there is nothing new there.
Click to expand...
Sorry if it came across that way, but I wasn't downplaying the bullying aspect of it, even if she's a shit actress, she doesn't deserve to be hounded.

My point was that this is being framed as another instance of 'SJW gone mad' and I don't think it was that at all. Majority of the attacks were more along the lines of 'she's so shit, how did she score another role'. The 'criticism' of not meeting the required standard of gayness for the role was a tiny minority which has now been given undue attention, which in my opinion is pointless.
 
Seveneric said:
Sorry if it came across that way, but I wasn't downplaying the bullying aspect of it, even if she's a shit actress, she doesn't deserve to be hounded.

My point was that this is being framed as another instance of 'SJW gone mad' and I don't think it was that at all. Majority of the attacks were more along the lines of 'she's so shit, how did she score another role'. The 'criticism' of not meeting the required standard of gayness for the role was a tiny minority which has now been given undue attention, which in my opinion is pointless.
Click to expand...

Bit off-topic but just how shit an actor is she? It’s a supehero movie. You don’t need to be Laurence Olivier to star in one of those. She looks great and that’s pretty much all the qualifications needed. Look at Wonder Woman. Gai Gadat couldn’t act her way out of a paper bag but I don’t remember that being an issue when she was announced.
 
Might have to burn out my eyeballs after reading that disgusting vomit.
 


Liberty University is a right-wing univ started by Jerry Falwell.
Studies at the school have a Christian orientation, with three required Bible-studies classes in the first year for undergraduate students.[12] The school's honor code, called the "Liberty Way", prohibits premarital sex and private interactions alone between members of the opposite sex.[13][14] Described as a "bastion of the Christian right" in American politics, the university plays a prominent role in Republican politics
Click to expand...
 
berbatrick said:
It's already given us an all-timer
DkZES-wW4AA9ww8.jpg
Click to expand...
European masculinity? Big fecking nope for me.
Also, it's an actor, it'll be weird seeing a non-white bond but feck me they are making it sound like a crime.

... And I usually get hounded for my views of wanting super hero movies stick to stuff I liked from comics. :wenger:
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Reminds me of the spoof research article claiming that a penis is a social construct.
Click to expand...

I vaguely remember this same article on the caf (maybe in this thread?) and it rang some bells, so I googled and:

They have to admit that the article was rejected by NORMA: International Journal for Masculinity Studies, a Taylor and Francis journal whose editorial board is dominated by Scandinavian academics. An recent article suggests that the journal is strongly influenced by 1970s type feminism: ‘We wouldn’t be boys if we weren’t clever with our hands’ – childhood masculinity in a rural community in Norway.

Considering that is it not included in the top-ranked 115 journals in Gender Studies, being rejected by NORMA indicates a failure to leap a hurdle 6 inches above the ground. As is often (or perhaps universally) the case with being rejected by a Taylor and Francis journal, you get an autoreply inviting you to submit the article to a journal in their open-access Cogent Social Science series that despite the Taylor and Francis imprimatur functions like a predatory journal. Basically, you pony up $1,350 (the hoaxers paid half the normal fee for some reason) and Cogent will be happy to put any crap you write on their website.

Because I have been published in Capitalism, Nature and Socialism, a Taylor and Francis journal, I ended up on some mailing lists that periodically generate mass invitations to the recipients asking them to submit something to open-access predatory journals (Internet-based) as opposed to the far more expensive and exclusive print journals found on JSTOR . For a number of years, University of Colorado librarian Jeffrey Beal maintained a list of such journals that totaled 1,155 as of December 31, 2016. Beal took down his website in January 2017, providing no comment why. One surmises that he got fed up with being harassed by the conmen operating in this field, including an outfit in India that threatened him with a one billion dollar law suit.
Click to expand...


Basically it's clear that there is some rot in the field (given that Sokal got his spoof published too) but in this case they got found out by basic peer-review, and then went into swamp-territory to get a publication and a story about falling standards. (I think this story says more about predatory journals than PC).
 
Ødegaard said:
European masculinity? Big fecking nope for me.
Also, it's an actor, it'll be weird seeing a non-white bond but feck me they are making it sound like a crime.

... And I usually get hounded for my views of wanting super hero movies stick to stuff I liked from comics. :wenger:
Click to expand...

Ya, that was such a meltdown from a big public figure I thought I had to post it.
 
Full front hole nudity!
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Oh man. A spoof, surely?

Everyone knows the phrase is “front bottom” anyway.
Click to expand...

https://www.healthline.com/health/lgbtqia-safe-sex-guide#consent

The section on 'consent' is a bit nuts as well, e.g.

"Contractual consent involves creating a written contract that outlines the sexual preferences of the partners involved and clearly states the sexual acts that can and can’t be performed, and in which situations. For some people, contractual consent means consent isn’t needed in the moment. For others, verbal, implied, or enthusiastic consent still need to happen. It’s important to remember that anyone can opt out of the contract or change the terms of the contract at any time. It’s helpful to revisit contractual consents regularly to ensure each person is still on the same page."​
 
2cents said:
https://www.healthline.com/health/lgbtqia-safe-sex-guide#consent

The section on 'consent' is a bit nuts as well, e.g.

"Contractual consent involves creating a written contract that outlines the sexual preferences of the partners involved and clearly states the sexual acts that can and can’t be performed, and in which situations. For some people, contractual consent means consent isn’t needed in the moment. For others, verbal, implied, or enthusiastic consent still need to happen. It’s important to remember that anyone can opt out of the contract or change the terms of the contract at any time. It’s helpful to revisit contractual consents regularly to ensure each person is still on the same page."​
Click to expand...

Oh boy. That’s a hot mess. I love the way they seem to endorse the idea that once you’ve got your mott’s name signed on the dotted line then you actually don’t need any sign of consent “in the moment”.

They’re trying so hard to be progressive they’ve gone paradoxically back to medieval values again.

EDIT: Although I feel a bit mean taking them to task on this. Consent is a really tricky one and any attempt to educate should be applauded.
 
2cents said:
https://www.healthline.com/health/lgbtqia-safe-sex-guide#consent

The section on 'consent' is a bit nuts as well, e.g.

"Contractual consent involves creating a written contract that outlines the sexual preferences of the partners involved and clearly states the sexual acts that can and can’t be performed, and in which situations. For some people, contractual consent means consent isn’t needed in the moment. For others, verbal, implied, or enthusiastic consent still need to happen. It’s important to remember that anyone can opt out of the contract or change the terms of the contract at any time. It’s helpful to revisit contractual consents regularly to ensure each person is still on the same page."​
Click to expand...

Yeah, there's no way a 'consent contract' would stand up in court.
 
Front hole :lol:

How does changing the word make a difference when it's referring to the same thing? It's not like it's called womangina or anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.