What’s wrong with 'PC'?

First topic message reminder :

Republican presidential contender Donald Trump is making the anti-PC stand his presidential campaign platform.  If he’s going to turn the 2016 electoral campaign into a devotional against PC, we ought to have some introspection into what we mean by the term.  PC stands for “politically correctness”.  Wiki defines it as:

Wiki wrote:…pejorative term used to criticize language, actions, or policies seen as being excessively calculated to not offend or disadvantage any particular group of people in society.

Certainly to be “correct”, or to “not offend” is ordinarily not objectionable.  Conservatives, most of all, argue that there should be order and people should follow proper procedures.  And we have manners, after all.  And even raucous white supremacists might agree to refrain from urinating in the corner of the dining room.  In sum, it’s okay to be correct in certain circumstances.

And we don’t find talking politics objectionable.  We do that all the time on this website.  ISIS?  UKIP?  Tea Party?  LW, or lefties?  RW, or righties?  Privatization?  Gaza? Benefits?  Austerity?  Voter suppression?  We talk about politics all the time.  We may hurl epithets back and forth at one another, but we don’t need a separate concept to do that.  Why waste the time objecting to PC?

The only word I see in the definition above that stands out, is “excessively”.  So, if its only ‘excessive’ that we object to, are we speaking only about degrees?  You mean this whole concept of PC that has Donald Trump at the head of the Republican polls in American, distills down to only degrees?  It’s like someone is saying: “You can shout, but don’t be ‘excessively’ loud”.  

That explanation is much too lightweight...flighty.  I think there is more in the gut when we laugh at objets PC.  Here's what I think: When we were boys, we used to love to go around upsetting the ordinary…the proper.  Farting in church was only small time.  We used to toilet paper (called 'tp'-ing) whole houses.  Once, in high school, the rowdy boys disassembled a car and rebuilt it on the roof of the gym.  As a freshman at Dartmouth University, my brother’s friends used to wire urinals to deliver shocks to boys peeing (did you know that Sulphur conducts electricity?).  Yes, there is an adolescent spirit in all of us that likes the bad-boy pranks.

And that is the instinct that I believe motivates the anti-PC crowd.  Shock-value, plain and simple.  Trump supporters love to diss Hispanics—it’s so hilarious to be able to say…get back to Mexico, you wetback!  And a sanctified war hero like John McCain…let’s light a firecracker under his shoes and watch him limp with that bum leg he got.  And women…those self-righteous twats have been preaching correctness all our lives...serves ‘em right, Megyn Kelly.

That’s the fire under Donald Trump.  Anybody got a better theory about what PC is?  Or what Donald Trump is saying?

Tommy, the point is, if you're going into politics, why would you make this the near-top of your political agenda?
Surely you can see how Stupid that is?

Cuchulain wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Being politically correct means you are putting up filters on what you really think.

That's just being dishonest.

I recommend being more child like (the most honest) - something I've learned from Trump and my 3 year old nephew. Both guys pull a lot of girls using that technique - and it works.

Also why Trump is on top of the polls. He's not being dishonest - like all other politicians.

You are of course exceptionally wrong because your stand point is based on superceeding a principle you respect in keeping with others. You would never insult another Muslims for being a Muslim, of which they are a minority group in this country.
Its not filters, its you using poor reasoning to justify discrmination to anything else you do not like.

PC

the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

Now if you naturally avoid forms of expression or action to others, which excludes them because you perceive that to be wrong, then you follow that PC principle. It is actually you creating a filter of block to this reasoning when you wish to marginalize someone else.
Methodology stands, and if you cannot prove you never hold this principle, then you clearly contradicting yourself and are yet again hypocritical.
The PC principle is flawless, as its based on the golden rule, how you wish others to treat you. Yet many times its how some wrongly perceive they are apllying it when in reality they are not if it ends up discrminating against someone else.

Is it just me? Or is your standard of English dropping recently? Because your first paragraph makes little sense.

No idea what "your stand point is based on superceeding a principle you respect in keeping with others" means.

Why would I insult another Muslim? Even without filters, I wouldn't do that. Lol! I have nothing against Muslims.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Being politically correct means you are putting up filters on what you really think.

That's just being dishonest.

I recommend being more child like (the most honest) - something I've learned from Trump and my 3 year old nephew. Both guys pull a lot of girls using that technique - and it works.

Also why Trump is on top of the polls. He's not being dishonest - like all other politicians.

I hope that's a joke

Maybe you can't hand reality.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

You are of course exceptionally wrong because your stand point is based on superceeding a principle you respect in keeping with others. You would never insult another Muslims for being a Muslim, of which they are a minority group in this country.
Its not filters, its you using poor reasoning to justify discrmination to anything else you do not like.

PC

the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

Now if you naturally avoid forms of expression or action to others, which excludes them because you perceive that to be wrong, then you follow that PC principle. It is actually you creating a filter of block to this reasoning when you wish to marginalize someone else.
Methodology stands, and if you cannot prove you never hold this principle, then you clearly contradicting yourself and are yet again hypocritical.
The PC principle is flawless, as its based on the golden rule, how you wish others to treat you. Yet many times its how some wrongly perceive they are apllying it when in reality they are not if it ends up discrminating against someone else.

Is it just me? Or is your standard of English dropping recently? Because your first paragraph makes little sense.
Poor deflection again

No idea what "your stand point is based on superceeding a principle you respect in keeping with others" means.

Why would I insult another Muslim? Even without filters, I wouldn't do that. Lol! I have nothing against Muslims.  

So you would not do that, please explain why?
The answer will enable you to understand there is no filters, you only are the one creating them as others do.
I see I ever point I made you could not answer and make excuses of then not understanding.
Surely you understand the golden rule and how even aplly at times in your life?

Back later

Cuchulain wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Is it just me? Or is your standard of English dropping recently? Because your first paragraph makes little sense.
Poor deflection again

No idea what "your stand point is based on superceeding a principle you respect in keeping with others" means.

Why would I insult another Muslim? Even without filters, I wouldn't do that. Lol! I have nothing against Muslims.  

So you would not do that, please explain why?
The answer will enable you to understand there is no filters, you only are the one creating them as others do.
I see I ever point I made you could not answer and make excuses of then not understanding.
Surely you understand the golden rule and how even aplly at times in your life?

Back later

Lol! I genuinely didn't understand your point. You're really defensive for some reason, I was just being honest.

I've already explained why I would not do that with Muslims. I have nothing against Muslims. So it would be rather stupid to be against myself - I thought that would be obvious.

As for your golden rule, I do treat others how I wish to be treated: honestly. I have no problem telling people what I honestly think about them, without filters.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


So you would not do that, please explain why?
The answer will enable you to understand there is no filters, you only are the one creating them as others do.
I see I ever point I made you could not answer and make excuses of then not understanding.
Surely you understand the golden rule and how even aplly at times in your life?

Back later

Lol! I genuinely didn't understand your point. You're really defensive for some reason, I was just being honest.
No surprise there then and even more so by your wierd emotive claim at the end

I've already explained why I would not do that with Muslims. I have nothing against Muslims. So it would be rather stupid to be against myself - I thought that would be obvious.
So you have nothing against Muslims who are ISIS followers then by that admission? They class themselves as Muslims.

As for your golden rule, I do treat others how I wish to be treated: honestly. I have no problem telling people what I honestly think about them, without filters.

He finally gets there at the end on who he would wish to be treated of which PC is based on
I guess the penny will take come time for it to drop with you.
PC never created the filiters, only those with prejudice views have formed.
Hence why PC is flawless, it asks of others to treat others as you would be wish to be treated yourself, which as seen is something we all adhere to and follow. Without discrmination PC would not exist or need to exist.

Its that simple Zack

laters

Pc is flawless...!!!???






You really are a complete fool!!!


It was the insidious Pc culture that allowed the Paki Muslim child rape gangs to operate for over a decade with impunity!!!

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Being politically correct means you are putting up filters on what you really think.

That's just being dishonest.

I recommend being more child like (the most honest) - something I've learned from Trump and my 3 year old nephew. Both guys pull a lot of girls using that technique - and it works.

Also why Trump is on top of the polls. He's not being dishonest - like all other politicians.

I hope that's a joke

Maybe you can't hand reality.

"Being politically correct means you are putting up filters on what you really think"
Says Zack.


Best line of the year.
By a mile.


Being politically correct also means being false, which means being untrue which means you've lied. That doesn't mean you're NOT racist, it means you just won't use a certain word.

It's bullshit.

What if you won't use certain words because you know how vile they are? What if you just naturally wouldn't use those words?

To take the word faggot. It is disgusting. I know how much it grates with me when I hear it; and it was worse when I was younger and less confident in my sexuality (and honestly, filled with fear and uncertainty).

I feel that for young gay kids, hearing the f word can be damaging. So fuck any twat who wants the right to use it freely at any time; I think they should be made to curb their language. I'd rather our country was more PC for the sake of young people (not just gay, but ethnic minorities, disabled and so on). I couldn't give a toss if all the tommy's, kaka's etc think that's unfair.

Decent people don't need to be PC. Twats need to be filtered.

Eilzel wrote:What if you won't use certain words because you know how vile they are? What if you just naturally wouldn't use those words?

To take the word faggot. It is disgusting. I know how much it grates with me when I hear it; and it was worse when I was younger and less confident in my sexuality (and honestly, filled with fear and uncertainty).

I feel that for young gay kids, hearing the f word can be damaging. So fuck any twat who wants the right to use it freely at any time; I think they should be made to curb their language. I'd rather our country was more PC for the sake of young people (not just gay, but ethnic minorities, disabled and so on). I couldn't give a toss if all the tommy's, kaka's etc think that's unfair.

Decent people don't need to be PC. Twats need to be filtered.

so what would you have me call these then Eil??




see this is where PC is such a prat......when it redefines the language I must use, even in contexts where it is not relevant.....just so "someone" isnt offended

jeeze...give us a break.....

Context vic, I'm not saying ban the word completely, I figured you wouldn't be one to misunderstand that...

Eilzel wrote:Context vic, I'm not saying ban the word completely, I figured you wouldn't be one to misunderstand that...

yeah but look what happened to the poor old golliwog

The dolls were always kind if ridiculous stereotype charicatures of black people. In fairness vic my concern here is not for myself, but for younger people who may be more effected by such terms. I don't really care if some people have to tread carefully.

Eilzel wrote:The dolls were always kind if ridiculous stereotype charicatures of black people. In fairness vic my concern here is not for myself, but for younger people who may be more effected by such terms. I don't really care if some people have to tread carefully.

and here is the crux of the leftist PC-ite argument

"I don't really care if some people have to tread carefully."

See there are many things which "offend" me...but i'm told for various reasons to shove it and "put up with it" and my determination of what is offensive considered "invalid", not because it is "minor" but because it doesnt sit with others agendas......
PC it seems is only for "some"

PC is a "bomb" and as long as it hits its target....who cares ablout the "collateral damage" ?????????????

Eilzel wrote:Context vic, I'm not saying ban the word completely, I figured you wouldn't be one to misunderstand that...

lets take this further

context....purely in terms of the meaning of the word and its useage

or context to include who is present?

I mean....

I used to run "backwoods" days for those adventurously inclined

and "one of those bound bundle of sticks" correctly known as a "fagot" was part and parcel of the "fire skills" and "shelter skills" units....

now if you were present on such a course, would YOU object to the use of that word, and on what grounds?

Pc is controlled/enforced thinking and behaviour onto others... decided by some self appointed twats who's opinions on what is 'right' or 'correct' are in many cases completely at odds with other peoples own thoughts and opinions and they have absolutely no right to be trying to impose anything on anyone.


They are not the boss of me and can fuck off!!!

Cuchulain wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Lol! I genuinely didn't understand your point. You're really defensive for some reason, I was just being honest.
No surprise there then and even more so by your wierd emotive claim at the end

I've already explained why I would not do that with Muslims. I have nothing against Muslims. So it would be rather stupid to be against myself - I thought that would be obvious.
So you have nothing against Muslims who are ISIS followers then by that admission? They class themselves as Muslims.

As for your golden rule, I do treat others how I wish to be treated: honestly. I have no problem telling people what I honestly think about them, without filters.

He finally gets there at the end on who he would wish to be treated of which PC is based on
I guess the penny will take come time for it to drop with you.
PC never created the filiters, only those with prejudice views have formed.
Hence why PC is flawless, it asks of others to treat others as you would be wish to be treated yourself, which as seen is something we all adhere to and follow. Without discrmination PC would not exist or need to exist.

Its that simple Zack

laters

I don't class ISIS as Muslims. They don't adhere to the Quran.

PC is not flawless. I have opinions against homosexuals (not major ones but I think their sexual acts are a sin), for example. Society would label me a bigot and if I was in a public discussion, I would most likely be "hushed" and told to shut up.

But that is my honest opinion WITHOUT FILTERS and I refused to be silenced by a PC society. That just silences debate and doesn't actually resolve what some people may think is bigotry.

The same applies to racism. I'd much rather have an honest racist than one who,hides away their true feelings. I can't trust such people.

eddie wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Maybe you can't hand reality.

"Being politically correct means you are putting up filters on what you really think"
Says Zack.


Best line of the year.
By a mile.


Being politically correct also means being false, which means being untrue which means you've lied. That doesn't mean you're NOT racist, it means you just won't use a certain word.

It's bullshit.

High praise indeed. I'm blushing. ;-)~

Well let's sum it up; we all know we shouldn't go around calling people names and being horrid blah blah but let's get real here, it happens.

Kids will always be horrible and blunt! If someone is ginger that's what they'll be reforred to; ginger twat, ginger bastard, ginger nut etc etc
Shall we ban the word "ginger"?

I'm really with Zack here and I'll go one step further: there are many people that find some honesty and non-PC talk refreshing. They don't necessarily walk away thinking those people are racist/homophobic/gingerist/anti-Muslim

Sometimes, calling a spade a spade means you can see it's a spade but you like it and will respect its spadeness, all the same.

Personally, I wouldn't insult someone using colour or religion or whatever; an idiot is still an idiot and I'd focus on the person being an idiot than what their skin colour is.

PC is making us all pretend to be colour-blind, for example, and the real truth is....we are not and we never can be, and those that do are trying too hard.

I know that not many on here will get that.

Pc is a lot more than just trying to restrict the use of certain words or phrases that to be honest were never really used in polite company or work anyway... it is a type of double speak that promotes a certain agenda.


Pc thinking allowed Paki Muslim child rape gangs to operate up and down the country for over a decade.

LOL don't like PC
Yet all these Brits say

Ohh Veya, he offends my little British head by telling us we are not all that and Anglo's are not intrinsically better or good and are actually historically an evil people that brutally terrorized the world.


Some non-PC advice, Brits are fools when it comes to PC and immigration. whinging pommies it even effects the migrants, they did adopt British culture Brits of Pakistani decent are bloody Whingers too .... must be a side effect of living int he Isle of Misery

told you standing on your head 24/7 could never be good......

The ultimate hypocrisy.  The word is so politically incorrect that it is one of the very few (perhaps the only) word prohibited on this website. Is it still banned? ----. Yes.  Show of hands...how many feel that word is not politically correct?

Incidentally, I'm not faulting Ben or the board.  I know that members went to him and had the word banned.  So, we have a little PC brigade right here on NewsFix.

PC is that little band of etiquette or propriety between 'unlawful' and 'intemperate'.  Murder and rape are clearly illegal and quite impolite; spitting in the hostesses' flower pot is rude, but might be overlooked.  In between is politically incorrect, or what we refer to as PC.  But it varies...every single person has his or her own little pocket of PC.  It's just a matter of whose ox gets gored.  That's my opinion.

Yep my ---- laden posts are always bleeped

Good point Quill, and it is outright hypocrisy.

Put simple, some of us are aware of historic discrimination and the violence it can and does entail. And we care enough to take steps to curtail it. AND iny defense, if the last 20 odds years have proven anything, its that it IS working. Since the UK became more PC we have seen a pretty remarkable collapse of racism, homophobia, sexism and other areas of discrimination. An undeniable FACT and something that gives me and others reason to praise the overwhelming successes of political correctness.

Others are not aware enough of that history OR don't care.

Two different outlooks of course. But without PC culture we may well be in a state where discrimination against ethnic minorities, gays and women was still as commonplace as it was 30 or more years ago.

Racism, homophobia, sexism yes, but where do we draw the line though? When in some towns you can't call Christmas, 'Christmas' any more, its forbidden to hang up an English flag. When you can't use baa baa, black sheep in a nursery rhyme. Which is all a nonsense. Some more of that nonsense:


1. The BBC has dropped the use of the terms Before Christ (BC) and Anno Domini (AD) on one of their programmes and decided that the terms 'Before Common Era' / 'Common Era' are more appropriate

2. The European Parliament introduced proposals to outlaw titles stating marital status such as 'Miss' and 'Mrs' so as not to cause offence. It also meant that 'Madame' and 'Mademoiselle', 'Frau' and 'Fraulein' and 'Senora' and 'Senorita' would be banned.

3. Throughout several US councils and organisations, any terms using the word 'man' as a prefix or suffix have been ruled as not being politically correct. 'Manhole' is now referred to as a 'utility' or 'maintenance' hole.

4. Loveable cartoon rogue Dennis the Menace has been given a politically correct make over. BBC chiefs decided to take away his edge in the remake. Gone are his bombs, catapult, water pistol and pea shooter - and in their place is a simple boyish grin.

5. Spotted Dick - a classic English dessert has been renamed to avoid embarrassment. The traditional pud Spotted Dick has been given the title Spotted Richard, after UK council bosses feared the original name might cause offence.

6. A school in Seattle renamed its Easter eggs 'spring spheres' to avoid causing offence to people who did not celebrate Easter.

7. A UK council has banned the term 'brainstorming' – and replaced it with 'thought showers', as local lawmakers thought the term may offend epileptics.

8. A UK recruiter was stunned when her job advert for 'reliable' and 'hard-working' applicants was rejected by the job centre as it could be offensive to unreliable and lazy people.

9. Gillingham fans had begun to fondly offer celery to their goalkeeper, ‘Big Fat’ Jim Stannard. The club, however, decided that celery could result in health and safety issues inside the ground. As a result, fans were subjected to celery searches with the ultimate sanction for possession of celery allegedly being a life ban.’

10. In 2007, Santa Clauses in Sydney, Australia, were banned from saying 'Ho Ho Ho'. Their employer, the recruitment firm Westaff (that supplies hundreds of Santas across Australia), allegedly told all trainees that 'ho ho ho' could frighten children, and be derogatory to women. Why ? Because 'Ho Ho Ho' is too close to the American (not Australian, mind you) slang for prostitute.

11. Some US schools now have a 'holiday tree' every at Christmas, rather than a Christmas tree.

Every example you just gave points to the tiny few taking things too far, hardly a massive problem. And even if it was, the general extinguishing of most racist, homophobic attitudes is a great victory for which those few silly exceptions you mention are a worthy exchange.

If one gay kid is not subjected to homophobic slurs and the exchange is a tree is named a Holiday tree then fine, that is a price any good person should be happy to pay.

I read a story about a chap who put a Robertson's golly badge on Ebay, and they took it off on the grounds that it was offensive. However, a cursory glance at Ebay shows loads of golly stuff, even though they're supposedly prohibited.

http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2015-08-20/ebay-tells-seller-to-take-down-offensive-golly-badge/

A tiny few taking things a bit too far...?


NOt at all, just examples of The idiocy of it all.

Cognitive linguists will tell us that words are the medium of thinking.  In between objectivity and subjectivity there is the experientialist reality.  Our eyes and ears may see something, but only through our language do we really experience it.  Experience articulates it...makes sense of it...and most of all, judges it.

Words that are unfairly derogatory to other people, or other kinds of people, are counter-social.  That is, they are contrary to our social existence, and our sense of justice within the society.  These are gay slurs, racial slurs and gender slurs, together with associated entailments and implications.  

What's more, they are not worth anything.  They do not promote anything of value.  Most often, they are what I call compensatory.  Psychologists recognize that sometimes we do things because of our own feelings of inadequacy...in other words, we compensate.  So, some of these language symbols are built upon the worst in us, and that is destructive of society.  These are the words--or should be the words--we consider politically incorrect.

But, sometimes we get out on the edge, what with banning Christmas and all.  The example that Christie gives about the origin of "BC/AD" is on-point; it's just a linguistic expression that is useful in everyday life.  In my pub (when I was drinking) there was a group of dog lovers; one lady was getting a schnauzer, "as soon as the pup could be weaned from the bitch."  One guy rose and denounced her for using a sexist term.  The term comes from canine talk, FCS...and here it is so co-opted we can no longer use it in its original form.

Sometimes the PC debate itself teaches us something about ourselves.  Take my example of the modern version of the Latin cunnus.  Why is that word so bad?  We have finger, nose, foot, hand and even butt...and no one complains.  But cunt touches a nerve within us...we have issues with sex.  We are afraid of it.  We avoid it.  And we avoid any part of it.  See?  We...we...we...we... It's not the world; it's us. It's just our own lack of self-esteem.

This is not just about changing a few words...

Tommy Monk wrote:This is not just about changing a few words...

Yes it is...when you realize that words are all you got.

A very limited view quill...

Tommy Monk wrote:A very limited view quill...

I don't know why you say that...it pretty much covers the whole subject.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


He finally gets there at the end on who he would wish to be treated of which PC is based on
I guess the penny will take come time for it to drop with you.
PC never created the filiters, only those with prejudice views have formed.
Hence why PC is flawless, it asks of others to treat others as you would be wish to be treated yourself, which as seen is something we all adhere to and follow. Without discrmination PC would not exist or need to exist.

Its that simple Zack

laters

I don't class ISIS as Muslims. They don't adhere to the Quran.

PC is not flawless. I have opinions against homosexuals (not major ones but I think their sexual acts are a sin), for example. Society would label me a bigot and if I was in a public discussion, I would most likely be "hushed" and told to shut up.

But that is my honest opinion WITHOUT FILTERS  and I refused to be silenced by a PC society. That just silences debate and doesn't actually resolve what some people may think is bigotry.

The same applies to racism. I'd much rather have an honest racist than one who,hides away their true feelings. I can't trust such people.

They class themselves as Muslims, which means there are Muslims like I stated who you are prejudiced against. You are not in a position to decide who are Muslims, just the same with the countless Christian denominations. Just because they are extreme does not make them not Muslims. That is an absurd view and looks to disassociate Islam from many of the wrongs it has in its faith. The Quran is meant to be finate, the last message, so all its views will be meant for all time and why groups like ISIS have more association to the Quran than you do.
The point is you are creating the prejudice against homosexuls, and thus the filters also.
You have no justification to be prejudiced becuase of the Golden rule. Also you have no justification anyway because your reasoning is based on bullshit myths.
Two consenting adults in love has no grounds for anyone to be at odds with that and it shows it is you that looks for a reason to do so, creating the filters how you would otherwise treat others.
PC is flawless, sometimes people think they aplly it when they do not, like with claims to changing Christmas, as that ends up also being prejudice against Christians. Hence why when applied PC is never wrong.
There is no justification for racism either, because racism is an invention and has no scientific bases, so you are saying you would rather have a dishonest discussion with a racist because racism is dishonesty at its best.

You never think anything through do you.
You can debate all these topics without PC needing to be applied, which is another reason why you fail to understand PC altogether.

Political correctness is a social construction and what ever its original intent it has caused more harm than good. It has become an insidious mission creep exercise to remove anything that could possibly offend anyone anywhere from our culture.
The sheer fuckwittery of council chambers full of handwringing zealots voting to ban words like manhole cover, chairman and black board is nauseating. Poor old baa baa black sheep and golly never stood a chance.
All PC culture has done is create an environment where people are scared to voice an opinion for fear of being labelled racist or homophobic etc and allow those with agendas to cry foul on some imagined slight.
Tommy is right this situation and its instigators are responsible for the situation that allowed gangs of men to groom and rape girls, it allowed schools to be turned into radicalisation centres and worst of all it facilitated the rise of the EDL etc.

Seriously laughed at that babble and just about the worst defense of prejudice going.
So now where PC rightly defends people from prejudices this some how has caused more harm?
WTF, yeah I am sure people being denied being utterly vile and nasty is far worse than being allowed to do so.
PC did not allow any gangs to groom girls, as that is not even PC, but a down right failure to act where men were abusing young girls. Laws were being broken so blame PC where PC could not even be applied is not only daft but abusrd to claim it hindered here.
People it seems do not understand PC. Now if some feared to act for being in fear of being labelled racist, then they are at fault. Nobody else is to blame for that failling. To blame racism as a means to not act is a failing in itself and shows it is people at fault and how some are disgustingly now blaming PC for where people failed top act themselves. If people arew placing their own fears of how they will be seen over apllying the law, then they are not fit to perform that duty and should be sacked for gross negligence.
It seems people wish to excuse people because of nothing more than a concept when it is people who act themselves.
Hence why again PC is flawless, but humans are not flawless and it is how it is wrongly applied at times, when it conflicts with PC.

How did this stop social services and the Police acting?

political correctness
noun
the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

It never did, and anytime someone lays claim to use PC, when it conflicts, it can never be PC.
There is nothing worse than people offering up excuses, for the local authority, the social services and Police who failed to act.

Cuchulain wrote:Seriously laughed at that babble and just about the worst defense of prejudice going.
So now where PC rightly defends people from prejudices this some how has caused more harm?
WTF, yeah I am sure people being denied being utterly vile and nasty is far worse than being allowed to do so.
PC did not allow any gangs to groom girls, as that is not even PC, but a down right failure to act where men were abusing young girls. Laws were being broken so blame PC where PC could not even be applied is not only daft but abusrd to claim it hindered here.
People it seems do not understand PC. Now if some feared to act for being in fear of being labelled racist, then they are at fault. Nobody else is to blame for that failling. To blame racism as a means to not act is a failing in itself and shows it is people at fault and how some are disgustingly now blaming PC for where people failed top act themselves. If people arew placing their own fears of how they will be seen over apllying the law, then they are not fit to perform that duty and should be sacked for gross negligence.
It seems people wish to excuse people because of nothing more than a concept when it is people who act themselves.
Hence why again PC is flawless, but humans are not flawless and it is how it is wrongly applied at times, when it conflicts with PC.

How did this stop social services and the Police acting?

political correctness
noun
the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

It never did, and anytime someone lays claim to use PC, when it conflicts, it can never be PC.
There is nothing worse than people offering up excuses, for the local authority, the social services and Police who failed to act.

Did hell freeze?
No, so who gives a shit what you think?

Im posting my opinion still allowed last time I looked

Nems wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:Seriously laughed at that babble and just about the worst defense of prejudice going.
So now where PC rightly defends people from prejudices this some how has caused more harm?
WTF, yeah I am sure people being denied being utterly vile and nasty is far worse than being allowed to do so.
PC did not allow any gangs to groom girls, as that is not even PC, but a down right failure to act where men were abusing young girls. Laws were being broken so blame PC where PC could not even be applied is not only daft but abusrd to claim it hindered here.
People it seems do not understand PC. Now if some feared to act for being in fear of being labelled racist, then they are at fault. Nobody else is to blame for that failling. To blame racism as a means to not act is a failing in itself and shows it is people at fault and how some are disgustingly now blaming PC for where people failed top act themselves. If people arew placing their own fears of how they will be seen over apllying the law, then they are not fit to perform that duty and should be sacked for gross negligence.
It seems people wish to excuse people because of nothing more than a concept when it is people who act themselves.
Hence why again PC is flawless, but humans are not flawless and it is how it is wrongly applied at times, when it conflicts with PC.

How did this stop social services and the Police acting?

political correctness
noun
the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

It never did, and anytime someone lays claim to use PC, when it conflicts, it can never be PC.
There is nothing worse than people offering up excuses, for the local authority, the social services and Police who failed to act.

Did hell freeze?
No, so who gives a shit what you think?

Im posting my opinion still allowed last time I looked

You posted a load of shit trying to defend the people who failed to act by offering the poorest excuse going.
What you think counts for shit and why your view will never be taken serioulsy by intelligent people.
If the law is broken and people feared to act off a label placed on them, then they gave no due care to the job they were doing and thought they would be cast wrongly as racist for doing their job. That is their failing, nobody made them feel that way or would they have received such a label if they did their job.
So yes you are entittled to have an opinion and I am entittled to ridicule it when it tries to excuse people where they failed at their job, leaving countless girls suffering. And it was not just with grooming gangs either, the countless celebrity cases and now of Politicians shows how badly people act when young people make claims of sexual abuse, but I guess you did not think of that. That the real problem is clearly young people not being believed when they claim sexual abuse.

Seriously get a brain because you really are one clueless dummy.
As I say there is nothing worse when idiots use girls/boys being abused to make the worst pathetic point as you just did and why I will easily ridicule such stupidity.

Im off
you are beyond belief
Im off to clean my bathrooms, far better use of time than you.

If any one decent turns up please give me a shout

Nems wrote:Im off
you are beyond belief
Im off to clean my bathrooms, far better use of time than you.

If any one decent turns up please give me a shout  

Yeah bow out as that is just about the only thing you are good at.
You do not want to move on so will treat any stupidity you offer with ridicule which is mostly what you post anyway.
How you even try to excuse people where other law enforcement officers have acted shows you are making poor excuses for some
Again if you fail to see that in countless cases young girls and boys claims are not taken seriously as the main problem, then it shows why you have your head firmly stuck in the ground.

Nems wrote:Political correctness is a social construction and what ever its original intent it has caused more harm than good. It has become an insidious mission creep exercise to remove anything that could possibly offend anyone anywhere from our culture.
The sheer fuckwittery of council chambers full of handwringing zealots voting to ban words like manhole cover, chairman and black board is nauseating. Poor old baa baa black sheep and golly never stood a chance.
All PC culture has done is create an environment where people are scared to voice an opinion for fear of being labelled racist or homophobic etc and allow those with agendas to cry foul on some imagined slight.
Tommy is right this situation  and its instigators are responsible for the situation that allowed gangs of men to groom and rape girls, it allowed schools to be turned into radicalisation centres and worst of all it facilitated the rise of the EDL etc.

Not sure in the last paragraph but the first part of this post is spot on for me.

There's no PC in real places with real people. That's where I have my roots and that's where I'm staying.

It has been well publicised that pc thinking prevented action against the Paki Muslim child rape gangs.


Thank you Nems!

Tommy Monk wrote:It has been well publicised that pc thinking prevented action against the Paki Muslim child rape gangs.


Thank you Nems!

So you are saying it has nothing to do with the Police, social services not taking seriously claims made by victims them?
Not only here with grooming gangs, but with countless other cases like with celebrities?
Nothing worse than people excusing those who failed the victims

Tommy Monk wrote:It has been well publicised that pc thinking prevented action against the Paki Muslim child rape gangs.


Thank you Nems!

No worry Tommy

Nems, I have noticed how honest you are when agreeing with me... why do the other lefties deny what I say and then accuse me of SIXHIRB for daring to mention things...!!!???


THINGS THAT ARE TRUE!!!???

Tommy Monk wrote:

Nems, I have noticed how honest you are when agreeing with me... why do the other lefties deny what I say and then accuse me of SIXHIRB for daring to mention things...!!!???


THINGS THAT ARE TRUE!!!???

So you are saying it has nothing to do with the Police, social services not taking seriously claims made by victims them?
Not only here with grooming gangs, but with countless other cases like with celebrities?
Nothing worse than people excusing those who failed the victims

It was pc driven agenda throughout all the public services/councils/police...


Widely publicised... plus how the Muslims in council positions also actively worked to cover it up and suppress any action...

Tommy Monk wrote:
It was pc driven agenda throughout all the public services/councils/police...


Widely publicised... plus how the Muslims in council positions also actively worked to cover it up and suppress any action...

Again in all the cases whether it be care homes, politicians, celebrities, grooming gangs, there is one factor that is relevant in all.
None of the victims claims were taken seriously.
That is the failing and it has nothing to do with PC as the source of the problem has always been where many have not believed the victims