Politicaly Correct = Denial?

Tiassa said:
And, yet, it would be improper to call you a moronic brute.

Or shithead.

Or goatfucker, even though you have previously expressed your wish to do so.

Or vapid twat.

Craniosmegmatic, asshat, fucktard, God's regret ... regardless of how truly any of these terms might describe you, it would be improper to call you any of them.

So we're left with bland but accurate words that are fast becoming clichés: troll, ignorant, dishonest, hateful, &c.

And, yet, life goes on.

Imagine that.
Click to expand...

Oh, c'mon, Tiassa, you're a moderator, you can flaunt the rules around here, just say what you want to say .....don't hold back. Hell, James R, the king of the site, is in full support if you've seen his post above. C'mon, Tiassa, tell us all what you really think of this "diversity" at Sciforums! :D

Baron Max
 
Lucysnow said:
Baron what they don't get is that you hate everyone equally black, white, asian what-have-you:D
Click to expand...


.....LOL! Well, I've said it enough times, I've posted many posts which prove it conclusively, but they still don't get it. I think it's just that their hatred of me blinds them to anything but the narrow view of "Hate Baron Max". ...LOL!

Baron Max
 
Oh, give it a rest

Baron Max said:

Oh, c'mon, Tiassa, you're a moderator, you can flaunt the rules around here, just say what you want to say .....don't hold back. Hell, James R, the king of the site, is in full support if you've seen his post above. C'mon, Tiassa, tell us all what you really think of this "diversity" at Sciforums!
Click to expand...

To the one, protest all you like. Every once in a while, I spend a one-time innovation. I'd explain what that means, but it would require two or three more sentences, which is too much for you to read, so I won't waste either of our time.

To the other, your disdain of integrity undermines any complaint you might make.
 
Tiassa said:
To the one, protest all you like. Every once in a while, I spend a one-time innovation. I'd explain what that means, but it would require two or three more sentences, which is too much for you to read, so I won't waste either of our time.

To the other, your disdain of integrity undermines any complaint you might make.
Click to expand...

And tell me, Tiassa, what do you really think your nasty, snide, cutting, condescending posts say about you to all of the other members of the site? Surely you can't believe that you come across as an intelligence, moral, upstanding member/moderator, do you? ...LOL!

Oops, wait a minute ........I forgot, you just add those thingies at the bottom of your posts ....which means that you're smarter than all the rest of us! :D

Baron Max
 
Wow let this thread get away from me for a bit here.

Looking at the posts I see some confusion between insults and obvious truthfull descriptors. If you are making an assumption that someone fucks goats and call them a goatfucker then you have a fairy tale descriptor....as you really dont know. It is definatly a false descriptor with no intent but to cause emotional harm to said "goatfucker" regardless of that, in reality its just a horrible descriptor in general as how is anyone else supposed to know the person is a goatfucker?

Also I am mostly reffereing to physical traits that are obvious TRUTHFUL descriptors.

I live in Colorado and for the most part people here are pretty down to earth and chill. But there are some very liberal types who I feel like to paint a fairy tale picture of the world and ignore and refuse to acknowledge obvious descriptors or traits of certain peoples/ideals because its not PC.

I just find that occasionaly when I refer to a person as "fat" or "ugly" I will be looked at with a disgust for acknowledging the obvious but not sugar coating it for comfort.

Jew and cheap....not a fair descriptor realistic possibily on occasion but still laying claim to fairy tale knowledge of the person in questions A) religious habbits and B) financial habbits.

I would think that it would be obvious to mose educated people what is HONESTLY an insult and what is honestly just a logical practical description of someone/something that is just being missinterpreted as "unpopular"
 
sly1 said:
Looking at the posts I see some confusion between insults and obvious truthfull descriptors.
Click to expand...

The basic point is this: language is a means of communication and words only have meaning within a given linguistic context. If a word (whether you perceive it to be truthful or not) is used in pejorative context often enough, it picks up that context in common parlance, because that is how languages work.

If you know in your heart that you only mean a word as a truthful sense and not a pejorative one, that is irrelevant because language is about communication. Using words that have a commonly understood pejorative sense will be interpreted in that common sense and not according to the subjective meaning hidden in your heart.

It's simply poor communication to use words with secret meanings and then expect the listener to discern them accurately. In fact, if you mean the term in a non-pejorative sense, and explain that when using the term, many people will assume that the explanation is pretextual, and that you are really using the word in the negative sense, but lying about the sense in which you mean it.

Again, language is about communication. If you mean to use a judgment neutral description, then you should consider selecting words that do not convey, as used in the real world in actual language, a sense of judgment. If you do not do that, it shouldn't be surprising that people misinterpret you and treat you accordingly.

You can say that that is their problem for misinterpreting, though my sense is that the burden is on the speaker to convey the message he intends.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top