• Welcome to The Cave of Dragonflies forums, where the smallest bugs live alongside the strongest dragons.

    Guests are not able to post messages or even read certain areas of the forums. Now, that's boring, don't you think? Registration, on the other hand, is simple, completely free of charge, and does not require you to give out any personal information at all. As soon as you register, you can take part in some of the happy fun things at the forums such as posting messages, voting in polls, sending private messages to people and being told that this is where we drink tea and eat cod.

    Of course I'm not forcing you to do anything if you don't want to, but seriously, what have you got to lose? Five seconds of your life?

Political correctness

Ether's Bane

future Singaporean
Pronoun
he
This has been a hot-button (though veiled) issue at this forum, so I decided to set this up. Also, although this thread is somewhat based on (and derived from posts found in) the Gender thread, don't veer too much into that territory - post in that thread if it has more to do with gender than political correctness.

Questions:

1) What does political correctness mean to you?
2a) Is political correctness inherently a good thing?
2b) Why?
3a) Is political correctness a needful thing?
3b) Why?
4) How far should political correctness extend before it has "gone too far"?
5) How much of a hold on society as a whole would you say political correctness has?
6) How much of a hold on society as a whole should political correctness have?
 
Last edited:
I refuse to dignify or justify a propagandist right-wing term for discrediting inclusive efforts.
 
Yeaaaaaaaaah no it's called 'being polite'. Hell, it's more basic than politeness, it's more 'not being a fucking asshole'.
 
I have to concur with the above posters. In the few uncommon cases (if there even are any) where a member of a minority has abused their minority status for personal gain, then the problem isn't "political correctness", the problem is we've created an unequal status where people are discriminated against and need an extra leg-up to get a fair chance in life. It's just a term used by people who promote an essentially unequal society to attack people trying to reshape it into one with equal opportunities for all.
 
Eh, this sort of thing makes me feel sick. Like, literally.
I know that insults and ting are wrong, but I also know that censorship is wrong.
I can just never figure out which is more wrong.
 
TES said:
I have to concur with the above posters. In the few uncommon cases (if there even are any) where a member of a minority has abused their minority status for personal gain, then the problem isn't "political correctness", the problem is we've created an unequal status where people are discriminated against and need an extra leg-up to get a fair chance in life. It's just a term used by people who promote an essentially unequal society to attack people trying to reshape it into one with equal opportunities for all.

Not always true. Of course I don't support, for example, calling all gays faggots, or running around making jokes out of rape, but what do you call it when THIS happens?

If you don't want to click on the link:

the article I linked to said:
BLACK sheep are on the endangered species list as some children in north Queensland learn to sing Baa Baa Rainbow Sheep.
The English nursery rhyme may have survived for 200-plus years but political correctness could finally put it out to pasture.
Some schools in Britain have banned the song for being racist, but Pelicans Innisfail Child Care allows children to sing about black sheep or rainbow sheep.
Director Pam McLaughlin said some teachers sang the changed lyrics, and some children already knew the changes.
"We just go with whatever the children want," Ms McLaughlin said.
"The kids are just singing and having fun. Some sing black sheep, some sing rainbow sheep. It's just a song.
"We don't have anything that says, 'You have to sing it this way'."
The BBC reported in 2000 that Birmingham City Council had banned the song for being racist. It was later overturned after a backlash from parents.
The council said it had obtained the guidelines, which stated: "The history behind the rhyme is very negative and also very offensive to black people, due to the fact that the rhyme originates from slavery".
Six years later in 2006, a nursery in Sutton Courtenay in Britain banned the nursery rhyme.
In other examples, the principal of a school in NSW last year adapted the lyrics from Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree so children would say how happy, rather than gay, his life must be.
In 2009 the Birmingham council took creative licence to change the ending of Humpty Dumpty from couldn't "put Humpty together again" to "made Humpty happy again".
Golliwog dolls have been taken off shelves because of racism concerns and passages have been removed from Enid Blyton books because of perceived homosexual undertones between Noddy and Big Ears.
Australian National University social psychologist Michael Platow said he doubted Baa Baa Black Sheep would teach racism.
"I don't know why a child would associate a black sheep with a black man," he said.
The Office of Early Childhood Education and Care associate director-General Zea Johnston said no direction had been given and centres were responsible for their own education programs.
Pelicans has indigenous and non-indigenous children, and recognises diversity. Children play with white dolls, darker-skinned dolls and dolls of both sexes.
Ms McLaughlin said she thought changing the lyrics was a bit confusing for children. "You can get a black sheep but you can't get a rainbow sheep."

And there's also the fact that, for instance, if you were in charge of a business and had five vacancies, and not one was filled by a minority, despite the fact that:

a) You have nothing against minorities
b) Those who applied who weren't from minorities were more qualified and more suited to the position

You would still be labelled discriminatory, even though the fact that those people who you didn't accept were minorities had nothing to do with turning them down.

EDIT: And by expressing that opinion, I think I've sealed my fate. :(
 
^ You have, when you're in an environment where you need to find a politically correct term for "politically correct".

EDIT: But, uh, I guess we need to strike a balance between political correctness and losing sight of matters. Because I think that political correctness is a Band-Aid (oops, adhesive strip) solution to bigger problems.
 
I could post an amazingly long post about it. But I can't because I keep laughing about a conversation I had with a friend about this involving, "It kills free speech" that spiraled into something I won't even mention on the internet.
 
Not always true. Of course I don't support, for example, calling all gays faggots, or running around making jokes out of rape, but what do you call it when THIS happens?
Well, that's a little bit unfair, considering that this has been a thing since at least the 80's:
Wikipedia said:
A controversy emerged over changing the language of 'Baa Baa Black Sheep' in Britain from 1986, because, it was alleged in the popular press, it was seen as racially dubious. This was based only on a rewriting of the rhyme in one private nursery as an exercise for the children there and not on any local government policy.[4] A similar controversy emerged in 1999 when reservations about the rhyme were submitted to Birmingham City Council by a working group on racism in children's resources, which were never approved or implemented.[5] Two private nurseries in Oxfordshire in 2006 altered the song to "Baa Baa Rainbow Sheep", with black being replaced with a variety of other adjectives, like "happy, sad, hopping" and "pink".[6] Commentators have asserted that these controversies have been exaggerated or distorted by some elements of the press as part of a more general campaign against political correctness.[4]

People always pick the 'baa baa rainbow sheep' thing as the epitome of PC, but as far as I can tell, it actually hasn't been such a big deal as the press makes it out to be. :/ Not to mention australian press often picks on dumb things like this because nothing happens here they need a story. In any case, if people were actually offended by baa baa black sheep (whether for racial connotations or not) would you be against the lyric change? It's such a small thing that would probably make people feel a little more accepted, so I don't get why it's such a problem in the first place.
 
Effercon said:
but what do you call it when THIS happens?

I call it people being stupid.
Because children will /obviously/ be able to pick up on very subtle potentially racist attributes in songs and/or dolls.
Also what is even going on with the Humpty Dumpty thing
 
People always pick the 'baa baa rainbow sheep' thing as the epitome of PC, but as far as I can tell, it actually hasn't been such a big deal as the press makes it out to be. :/ Not to mention australian press often picks on dumb things like this because nothing happens here they need a story. In any case, if people were actually offended by baa baa black sheep (whether for racial connotations or not) would you be against the lyric change? It's such a small thing that would probably make people feel a little more accepted, so I don't get why it's such a problem in the first place.

Well, no one seems to actually be offended by it, so I don't see the problem.

EDIT: And speaking of young children and political correctness, I found this article. I posted it in the Gender thread, but it works here, too.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1014003--swedish-preschool-takes-aim-at-gender-stereotypes

STOCKHOLM—At the “Egalia” preschool, staff avoid using words like “him” or “her” and address the 33 kids as “friends” rather than girls and boys.

From the colour and placement of toys to the choice of books, every detail has been carefully planned to make sure the children don’t fall into gender stereotypes.

“Society expects girls to be girly, nice and pretty and boys to be manly, rough and outgoing,” says Jenny Johnsson, a 31-year-old teacher. “Egalia gives them a fantastic opportunity to be whoever they want to be.”

The taxpayer-funded preschool which opened last year in the liberal Sodermalm district of Stockholm for kids aged one to six is among the most radical examples of Sweden’s efforts to engineer equality between the sexes from childhood onward.

Breaking down gender roles is a core mission in the national curriculum for preschools, underpinned by the theory that even in highly egalitarian-minded Sweden, society gives boys an unfair edge.

To even things out, many preschools have hired “gender pedagogues” to help staff identify language and behaviour that risk reinforcing stereotypes.

Some parents worry things have gone too far. An obsession with obliterating gender roles, they say, could make the children confused and ill-prepared to face the world outside kindergarten.

“Different gender roles aren’t problematic as long as they are equally valued,” says Tanja Bergkvist, a 37-year-old blogger and a leading voice against what she calls “gender madness” in Sweden.

Those bent on shattering gender roles “say there’s a hierarchy where everything that boys do is given higher value, but I wonder who decides that it has higher value,” she says. “Why is there higher value in playing with cars?”

At Egalia — the title connotes “equality” — boys and girls play together with a toy kitchen, waving plastic utensils and pretending to cook. One boy hides inside the toy stove, his head popping out through a hole.

Lego bricks and other building blocks are intentionally placed next to the kitchen, to make sure the children draw no mental barriers between cooking and construction.

Director Lotta Rajalin notes that Egalia places a special emphasis on fostering an environment tolerant of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. From a bookcase she pulls out a story about two male giraffes who are sad to be childless — until they come across an abandoned crocodile egg.

Nearly all the children’s books deal with homosexual couples, single parents or adopted children. There are no “Snow White,” “Cinderella” or other classic fairy tales seen as cementing stereotypes.

Rajalin, 52, says the staff also try to help the children discover new ideas when they play.

“A concrete example could be when they’re playing ‘house’ and the role of the mom already is taken and they start to squabble,” she says. “Then we suggest two moms or three moms and so on.”

Egalia’s methods are controversial; some say they amount to mind control. Rajalin says the staff have received threats from racists apparently upset about the preschool’s use of black dolls.

But she says that there’s a long waiting list for admission to Egalia, and that only one couple has pulled a child out of the school.

Jukka Korpi, 44, says he and his wife chose Egalia “to give our children all the possibilities based on who they are and not on their gender.”

Sweden has promoted women’s rights for decades, and more recently was a pioneer among European countries in allowing gay and lesbian couples to legalize their partnerships and adopt children.

Gender studies permeate academic life in Sweden. Bergkvist noted on her blog that the state-funded Swedish Science Council had granted $80,000 for a postdoctoral fellowship aimed at analyzing “the trumpet as a symbol of gender.”

Jay Belsky, a child psychologist at the University of California, Davis, said he’s not aware of any other school like Egalia, and he questioned whether it was the right way to go.

“The kind of things that boys like to do — run around and turn sticks into swords — will soon be disapproved of,” he said. “So gender neutrality at its worst is emasculating maleness.”

Egalia is unusual even for Sweden. Staff try to shed masculine and feminine references from their speech, including the pronouns him or her — “han” or “hon” in Swedish. Instead, they’ve have adopted the genderless “hen,” a word that doesn’t exist in Swedish but is used in some feminist and gay circles.

“We use the word ‘hen’ for example when a doctor, police, electrician or plumber or such is coming to the kindergarten,” Rajalin says. “We don’t know if it’s a he or a she so we just say ‘Hen is coming around 2 p.m.’ Then the children can imagine both a man or a woman. This widens their view.”

Egalia doesn’t deny the biological differences between boys and girls — the dolls the children play with are anatomically correct.

What matters is that children understand that their biological differences “don’t mean boys and girls have different interests and abilities,” Rajalin says. “This is about democracy. About human equality.”

Just what is needed, or going too far?
 
Last edited:
Not always true. Of course I don't support, for example, calling all gays faggots, or running around making jokes out of rape, but what do you call it when THIS happens?

If you don't want to click on the link:



And there's also the fact that, for instance, if you were in charge of a business and had five vacancies, and not one was filled by a minority, despite the fact that:

a) You have nothing against minorities
b) Those who applied who weren't from minorities were more qualified and more suited to the position

You would still be labelled discriminatory, even though the fact that those people who you didn't accept were minorities had nothing to do with turning them down.

EDIT: And by expressing that opinion, I think I've sealed my fate. :(

I wouldn't call that political correctness, I'd call that fucking stupidity. The article explicitly states that no outside influences caused the schools to ban it, they took it upon themselves to do it for no apparent reason. Also, banning Enid Blyton books due to homosexual undertones between characters is an example of homophobia, not of so-called "political correctness".

And that second scenario is absolute bullshit; first of all, in that scenario, no one would be labelled discriminatory, because they're quite clearly not, and second of all, even in scenarios where people are genuinely being discriminatory, it's almost impossible to bring a case against them because the only way you would know you were being discriminated against is if you knew the race, gender, sexuality, religion and social class of every other applicant, as well as their CVs, which is incredibly unlikely to be the case, so if it's almost impossible to bring a case against someone who is actually being discriminatory, then it's even closer to impossibility to bring a false case against someone who isn't being discriminatory.
 
Well, no one seems to actually be offended by it, so I don't see the problem.

EDIT: And speaking of young children and political correctness, I found this article. I posted it in the Gender thread, but it works here, too.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1014003--swedish-preschool-takes-aim-at-gender-stereotypes



Just what is needed, or going too far?
okay, first of all (I wanted to edit this into my original post, but forum was being a derp) - tabloids aren't credible sources. tabloids are well known for jumping on things like baa baa, rainbow sheep and making them a much bigger deal than they already are. tabloids are also well known for manipulating the truth for a good story.

secondly, what exactly is wrong with having a gender-neutral classroom? What exactly is bad about it? How is it at all a bad thing? What is wrong with being inclusive - especially when are there people who aren't male or female?

thirdly, it'd be nice if you expressed an opinion instead of seemingly playing devil's advocate and saying 'just what is too far??' - it's not exactly facilitating the discussion. I have no idea what it is you're trying to get across. you haven't said why this is 'political correctness' or what you think about it.

also I specifically asked you what you would think if people were offended by baa baa black sheep. going 'people aren't, so there's no problem' is avoiding the question. :o
“The kind of things that boys like to do — run around and turn sticks into swords — will soon be disapproved of,” he said. “So gender neutrality at its worst is emasculating maleness.”
This also makes little sense - first of all, it doesn't say anywhere that 'boy' activities aren't allowed, just that boys are allowed to do 'girl' activities like cooking and stuff. Secondly, how is it emasculating anyone? What is maleness? This quote pigeonholes boys as a) liking swords and fighting and b) not liking those means they are 'emasculated'.

I'm not really sure why you quoted that, unless you're suggesting gender equality is a bad thing? o.o

there's lots of other things wrong with that article, such as 'this is unusual even for Sweden' which is plain ridiculous. EVEN FOR SWEDEN! those crazy swedes with their gender equality?
 
Last edited:
Well, no one seems to actually be offended by it, so I don't see the problem.

EDIT: And speaking of young children and political correctness, I found this article. I posted it in the Gender thread, but it works here, too.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1014003--swedish-preschool-takes-aim-at-gender-stereotypes



Just what is needed, or going too far?

Yeah, this is pretty cool. I did laugh at the "even for Sweden". Because the rest of the world is so gender-centric compared to it?

One thing I didn't like was the way they axed traditional stories such as Cinderella and Snow White. I mean, they're fairy tales. They were such a distinctive part of my childhood, it feels weird to have them branded as wrong. I guess I can sort of see how they reinforce stereotypes, but it does seem a bit extreme to just destroy them.

This reminds me of a different story, actually, in which a study was done concerning parents not reading Snow White to their children because of the term "Dwarves" not being Politically Correct, which I found kind of stupid.

Concerning the Baa Baa Black Sheep story, that seemed...strange. Kind of like the thing that a paranoid Ned Flanders gets caught up on, and resolves to change. And banning Enid Blyton books because of Homosexual undertones is nothing but Homophonic.

The main question I have to ask is what the hell is that with the Humpty Dumpty thing. Really? "Put him back together again"? Egad, the sheer humanity! So many of my friends have been wounded to their very soul by those very words...

"Made him happy again" is almost worse. I mean, what kind of things do you to shattered eggshell and goo to make it 'happy again'? >.>
 
thirdly, it'd be nice if you expressed an opinion instead of seemingly playing devil's advocate and saying 'just what is too far??' - it's not exactly facilitating the discussion. I have no idea what it is you're trying to get across. you haven't said why this is 'political correctness' or what you think about it.

Okay then.

I think it's a good idea. Maybe a bit over-the-top in some areas (like banning Snow White and Cinderella and having almost all the parents in books as same-sex couples), but if it works, it could influence other kindergartens to be less gender-centric (if that's even a word.)

also I specifically asked you what you would think if people were offended by baa baa black sheep. going 'people aren't, so there's no problem' is avoiding the question. :o

Sure. If they were, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I'm not really sure why you quoted that, unless you're suggesting gender equality is a bad thing? o.o

It was purely to see what you guys thought about it.

there's lots of other things wrong with that article, such as 'this is unusual even for Sweden' which is plain ridiculous. EVEN FOR SWEDEN! those crazy swedes with their gender equality?

It is one of the most pro-women's rights countries in the world, so I can see where they're coming from on that. Still, I get your point.

TL;DR: I think it's a little over-the-top, but overall, a good and worthy concept.
 
Golliwog dolls have been taken off shelves because of racism concerns

racism concerns hahahaha what

I call it people being stupid.
Because children will /obviously/ be able to pick up on very subtle potentially racist attributes in songs and/or dolls.

Well. Yeah. That's. Sort of why there are problems with things like this. Like uv said, Rainbow Sheep is kind of a buzzword-type tabloid spin, so there's not really anything to say about it, but the point of wondering whether things like fairy tales and nursery rhymes are questionable is not because they go goose goose duck black people suck but because they reinforce things.

Like, I'm sure you've heard of socialisation? Instilling heteronormativity from the moment a child is born is kind of how that child grows up thinking that certain things are the norm, that things should be this way, that that person is wrong and gross. To create an actual reasonable scenario, if 'plain' pale pink plasters were discontinued for 'racism concerns', the tabloids would be all over it, but a child silently seeing and processing this information, that pale pink is default and 'plain', the idea that white people are the norm and black people are the other people is reinforced.

And it's reinforced, over and over again! Through absolutely countless ways throughout your entire life! And yes, I would say that fairy tales (I assume we're talking about Disney-type fairy tales, not the older ones...) are just another thing that reinforce heteronormativity. If kids are taught it at a young age, yeah, it's kinda not great? I would consider it a pretty good idea if some school somewhere quietly began phasing out fairy tales from story time rather than keeping them going just for ~~tradition~~ when it doesn't really help kids at all! Fairy tales are culturally fairly influential, so their influence is actually pretty fun and interesting to study (I would know, I'm doing it at university-level :D) Just know that usually these things aren't quite so simple as "banning fairy tales because some left-wing nuts think it makes girls want to spin thread all day!!!!!!! it's pc gone MAD".
 
Hate political correctness. Much like the term 'common sense' or the mythical being Sasquatch, I find that all of these are just judgements based on perception (which is innately biased). I doubt what anyone deems 'politically correct' is an self evident truth for every culture around the globe. It seems like a silly concept for silly people to justify their silly little actions. Bit of a self serving concept to be honest.

I think Wikipedia sums up political correctness nicely when they say it is, 'pejorative.' And that its inherently negative connotation in modern society really extinguishes the chance for a real debate here. By that I mean its unlikely for anyone to be in support of being PC. (although I should probably read some of the posts, but I went immediately from OP, down to the reply box)

But if you are in support of being PC, I would be interested in reading a list of what PC should censor or if you prefer, shield from the public eye. (Instead of say, calling me an idiot, then listing your opinion)

But in any case I would never be in support of something that limits, or censors, the human experience.

V for Vendetta. And that's where my mind keeps repeatedly taking me to. Really there should be a thread on the discussion of the philosophy of nihilism, but I'm too timid to post something like that.
 
Last edited:
Hate political correctness. Much like the term 'common sense' or the mythical being Sasquatch, I find that all of these are just judgements based on perception (which is innately biased). I doubt what anyone deems 'politically correct' is an self evident truth for every culture around the globe. It seems like a silly concept for silly people to justify their silly little actions. Bit of a self serving concept to be honest.

I think Wikipedia sums up political correctness nicely when they say it is, 'pejorative.' And that its inherently negative connotation in modern society really extinguishes the chance for a real debate here. By that I mean its unlikely for anyone to be in support of being PC. (although I should probably read some of the posts, but I went immediately from OP, down to the reply box)

But if you are in support of being PC, I would be interested in reading a list of what PC should censor or if you prefer, shield from the public eye.

But in any case I would never be in support of something that limits, or censors, the human experience.

V for Vendetta. And that's where my mind keeps repeatedly taking me to. Really there should be a thread on the discussion of the philosophy of nihilism, but I'm too timid to post something like that.

Best of luck at surviving here - you'll need it. *hands over bulletproof vest*
 
I think Wikipedia sums up political correctness nicely when they say it is, 'pejorative.'

Yes, it's pejorative because it's largely circled to discredit the movement of 'not being an ass and excluding people from society'. Just because it's given a buzzword term doesn't mean I can't agree with the underlying principles.

You would agree with avoiding use of 'nigger' to refer to a black person just, say, on the news, right? Oh, then I guess you believe in ~censorship~. To be honest, I personally place the comfort of the marginalised higher than your presumed right to 'the human experience'.

Also, could we refrain from 'hahahaha people are going to disagree with you' posts in the Serious Business board, please? Hilarious as it is, it doesn't actually, you know, add to the discussion at all.
 
Back
Top Bottom