Talk:Political correctness/Archive 3

message: From the article: 'Many leftists allege that the term "political correctness" started as a label jokingly used to describe one's over-commitment to various political causes.' As a person who has been active on the left in the U.S. for a long time, I don't ever remember hearing it used to refer to "over-commitment". As early as the early '80s, when I believe this was still an inside left term, it referred, clearly, to people who were over-concerned with the niggling details of language usage as against what they were actually saying and doing. It was definitely a reference to the fetishization by some members of fringe left parties of having the "correct line" on an issue rather than necessarily, as individuals, thinking about it. The term was particularly likely to be applied to, for example, a white person who seemed to have a lot of "appropriate" jargon to talk about black culture -- e.g. would have a firm commitment to whether "black" or "Afro-American" or "African-American" was the "correct" term to use -- and would have a fixed set of opinions -- e.g. would be very inclined to blame society rather than individual miscreants for any crimes in the black community -- but did not actually have any black friends, listen to any broad range of black music, understand black slang, etc.: someone whose apparent racial sensitivity was, or might as well have been, something he or she got out of a book. (Similarly on other issues, but I most remember it being used in reference to racial attitudes.) I remember, in particular, an incident where several of us were planning an event and someone, describing the band they wanted to bring, called them "soft funk." A rather P.C. white women's studies professor had no idea what the description meant; a much less P.C. white person who hung around a lot more with black people responded, "That means they're black, but they won't scare off the white people." Several white people, including the women's studies professor were rather offended. The several black people at the meeting were all completely amused by the description. 
Anyway, I'd like to see something in the article that at least talks about this aspect of the origin of the term ("correct line" rather than "over-commitment"); I'm not sure I'm the one to write it. -- Jmabel 23:19, Jun 3, 2004 (UTC)
:I'd like it if you were, you seem particularly insightful and knowledgable about the subject. You also point out an important detail: PC is not a synonym for "left", but rather is a perjorative for some on the left who have an agenda which is rarely embraced, and often even opposed, by others on the "Left". Lots of my friends are lefties, but not one of them is PC, favors censorship, etc..., but rather are more down to earth, sensible well rounded folks w a sense of humor (the opposite of a PC fascist in other words ;).Sam [Spade] 00:24, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: origin of the term

message: I think the sentence you last changed has a typo in it: "..based upon perceived or handicaps."  I'm not sure how to fix it...just FYI
--ArcticFrog 14:28, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I fixed that. Sam [Spade] 02:24, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Typo

message: When I was a teenager, I dated a "crippled" girl, and eventually broke up with her because of her daddy...who was always talking about the "communiss" conspiracy (not to mention that she was an airhead herself).  But this man swore that by the year 2000, there would be trains full 'o peeple headed to the concentration camps as the "communiss" took over.  Well, 2000 done come and gone, and I'm not on no train going anywhere....So what's my point?  I read through this article and I can smell that man's beery breath breathing on me...De "communiss" is coming...de "communiss" is coming."  And that man, to be quite un-PC, was a fruitcake.  Well, that's what this article is saying..."they" is commin'.  Well who they?  Does anyone really believe that a citation from that article by Bill Lind belongs in a supposedly neutral, hopefully informative encyclopedia article?  The man isn't an authority on anything, he doesn't have a single reference in his article for anything he says.  There is something here that smells really..."beery".  PC is not a movement; it's not a tactic of the left.  The only people I see using the term PC are the people who are raving against...what?...it.  Well, what is it?  Wouldn't it be nice to use "PC" to start a controversy, just like 'ol McCarthy and "de comuniss" or what-have-you, and rack up a bunch of unconnected nonsense, wrap it in a bag, and cover it with glue so it sticks to whoever you throw it at, regardless of whether they have anything to do with what's in yo bag or not.  Then you can say, "de communiss...no the PCiss is commin, de PCiss is commin'.  Then all the rednecks who like to hear what they want to hear get behind you with they beers in dey hands and say "Hayll yea!!  Iss a conspiracy afoot."  Where's the substance here?  I see a lot of fluff, and nothing, as in not-a-thing, to back any of it up.  Sure there are stupid people out there doing a lot of stupid things, but unless you can show that these silly unconnected incidents of people "enforcing" PCness are in some way connected through a defined group of people, it's all just conjecture.  And this article, an encyclopeda article, is telling me conjecture is the fact of the day.  Nothing is "matter of fact" in this article.
In short...this article is a damn mess.  It should present the facts, and only supportable facts.  That's the only way it will be neutral.  Get rid of all the superfluous "comuniss" conspiracy theory CRAP.  Voice it in other forums, but this is supposed to be an encyclopedia.  And asking you politely (please) to cut out biased crap don't mean Im a facist trying to censor and opress you; it's just what's appropriate in this forum.  
Also: from the Lind article:  He says we in a place and time now where we got to be afraid of what we say....We'll who's afraid??  If I use the word "Homosexual" instead of "gay", or if I use "African-American" instead of "black"..I get afraid someone's goin' to start calling me names and labeling me...(in a whisper)..."a PC comuniss"...just like one time in Germany when they used to whisper the word..."Jew"..right before they started shouting it.
The finger can point both ways, ya know.
--PaperTiger 20:59, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well... I suppose I might as well come out and admit it, I am the beer swillin' redneck to whom you refer. I suppose I could be offended, and I admit I was pretty worried about what edits your were making to the article, but the edits seem fine, and I'm actually not the type to get offended my being called a redneck (it is my ethnicity after all, and while I'm not swillin' beer at the moment, I do intend to do a bit of that later in the evening...). I'm not really sure what your intent is, if you read above I already agreed that possibly nobody, and more likely an ultra-minority, refers to themselves as PC. It is mainly a pejorative, hurled about (along w others, and among other places) wherever we beer swillers gather, there’s no doubt about that. The question is how we might improve this IMO rather acceptable article. Yelling at me till your blue in the face about the "crap" I've helped create is prob. not the answer. As I said above however, I am plenty open-minded and willing to discuss any specific particulars. Sam [Spade] 22:12, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: No worries. Any specific changes we'd like to propose? I have made a few suggestions (you can scroll up and see them thruout this page) but adding bulk content is not my strong suit. I'm generally more the editing/proof-reading/looking things over type. Sam [Spade] 02:37, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Beer swillin' rednecks

message: I'm sorry but the last lines of the first paragraph had to be changed. "Affirmative Action" is not a left-wing policy, it is the policy of American "Liberals" (a term so devoid of meaning (in America) that it pratically does not exist.) A left-winger would redistributive taxation instead of slanting requirements. Slizor 13:21, 2004 Jun 6 (UTC)
:affirmative action is PC, something I'm pretty sure you won't argue with? Sam [Spade] 02:26, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: affirmative action

message: ' "gimpy" or "nutter" '
:I like the use of external links this way, and citations generally. I felt that the reader might be well served by a cited definition of these two terms, so very common in some communities, and uncommon in others. Sam [Spade] 08:03, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gimpy nutter 

message: I have made several cuts and changed to the article, and I am prepared to defend every one of them, but I am very open to dicussion and constructive criticizm.  This is not off the hip; I have given much thought to all this. Please voice objections and concerns, but do not completely reveret my edits without a comment.  If the removed material is replaced, I expect a firm, supported defense of the claims.--ArcticFrog 15:08, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: heh, no problem. Review my edit summaries. Sam [Spade] 16:28, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: No problem. First of all what is my calibur? I prefer .50 myself ;) All those references are supposed to do is prove that somebody other than me uses the term that way. The term is actually quite regularly used that way. I don't mean to say that the articles I linked to themselves are unbiased, or of any particular quality. Do you see the distinction? I'm trying to provide the reader w an understanding of how the terms are used. Sam [Spade] 16:51, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: ok, but my advice is to Be Bold!. :) Sam [Spade] 18:51, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuts 

message: Please review this term., You guys need to understand that "liberal" means something very much like "libertarian" overseas, and is right-wing in the EU. I think we'd do our international readers a service by not using this term in this article. Sam [Spade] 16:28, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Liberal]]

message: thank you. Sam [Spade] 22:27, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Egoism and pompostic hubris bores me. I've been discussing. wikipedia:Edit wars are anti-wiki, and are perhaps the most severe threat to this communities integrity. If you want to discuss, discuss. If you want to fight, lets swap mailing addresses and maybe we can agree on a 1/2 way point where said arse whuppin's might conveniently occur. I have pretty good gas mileage w my toyota echo, and I like road trips... ;) Sam [Spade] 23:16, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't delete cited text 

message: This is very helpful:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPOV .  It's an excellent article and I recommend printing it and going over it in detail.  It's not dry, it's actually fairly interesting reading.  I certainly felt like I had learned a thing or two after I read it.  --ArcticFrog 18:41, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  A New Start: Adventures in NPOV 

message: When your hacking up the text, please try not to remove important stuff like the interwiki links to other wikis. Sam [Spade] 04:04, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: be careful

message: an anon removed the dispute header. While I agree w him that the article is factual, I am fine w somebody disputing the neutrality if need be. I don't find reason to, but there are clearly some differences of opinion as to the slant of the article. Sam [Spade] 17:36, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  dispute header 

message: For example, calling Stevie Wonder a blind black man could be said to imply that his handicap and race are more important than his significant musical influence on Motown and Soul.
I haven't read all of the discussion board so hopefully this isn't a repeat, but does anyone besides me think this is an odd sentence?  Would calling Stevie Wonder a visually-challenged African American person really make a difference?  Sure it's more PC, but does it any more (or less) "imply that his handicap and race are more important than his significant musical influence on Motown and Soul"? I'm not sure this has anything to do with PC-ness ... just a style issue.  What do others think? CES 04:29, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Stevie Wonder