PC: to be or not to be

[Cin]

Listening to Donald Trump explain away his xenophobic, sexist and racist comments as him just being a straight talker is appalling. He dismisses any objections concerning his marked lack of interest in displaying behavior and language that is even marginally approaching respectful. He sees it as a waste of time and energy. He calls having a problem with racist, sexist, and xenophobic comments as being PC. "Maybe they don't want a straight-talker. Maybe they don't, but I am so tired of this politically correct crap," declares Trump, eliciting the biggest cheers of his speech.

Trump goes on to equate political correctness with not being a "straight-talker", with lying. The inference is that political correctness means we cannot tell it like it is. He certainly is not alone in this belief. Many people profess to be tired of having to be PC. They believe being politically correct stifles their freedom of speech as well as the free expression of ideas.

Others believe it is important to make the effort to be politically correct in thought, word and deed. They feel it is important to attempt to eradicate everyday speech of overt racism, sexism and a variety of other isms.

I have a hard time understanding how the words "politically correct" elicit such negative connotations for some people. But many, many are tired of attempts to encourage politically correct behavior in others. Maybe the disconnect is in the definition. Personally I define politically correct as simply taking the time to be respectful of others, to be polite even when I disagree with someone, and to avoid using forms of expression or actions that insult, exclude or marginalize certain racial, cultural or "other" groups. I can't imagine anyone would advocate that as a course of action we choose to behave disrespectfully of others, that we be impolite in our dealings with people and that we speak and act in ways that are insulting to others. So I've come to the conclusion that when we say politically correct each of us has a different definition of what that means.

My hope for this thread is that people will be willing to share what PC means to them. I for one would like to understand what meaning people are using for politically correct when they say they are tired of being that.

As it can be a sensitive subject, let's try to share information, definitions and opinions without judgment or hostility. We don't have to agree on anything. I for one call it a success when I can understand another's reasons for their position on something.

Let's not attack each other.

[Kätzchen]

Thank you, Miss Tick, for an opportunity to talk about this type of thing.

All my life, I have felt compelled to see or understand another person's way of understanding of how they see the world. Especially if we are not of the same social standing, or we speak in an unfamiliar language, or we do not share the same cultural orientation and/or those whose orientation to life widely differs from my own.

Kind of like the meme in the photo below:


But, to pick up from your opening post:

It bothers me greatly that particular personalities, celebrity or common day ordinary people, will seemingly, like Mr. Trump for example, share exceptionally abrasive attitudes and opinions which defy common sense or comes across as defiantly aggressive, like they don't care that they are taking a swipe at people who have suffered socially at the proverbial hands of injustice (...).

In close encounters, here at home, I do what I can to not respond to speech that feels hateful or to personalities who come across as attention seeking when they offer insensitive, abrasive, offensive, verbal or non-verbal communication.

What I tend to do is try to respond in ways which allows myself and the other to actually have some firm of intelligent communication, which hopefully inspires either of us to act in civil ways toward each other - even if we don't share the same point of view.

Some times I feel a certain level of success if either of us can take some part, or any, of it with us. The goal I trend toward is an building up, shoring up, of positive interpersonal ties with others who either share a similar point of view or with those whose point of view widely differs from that of my own.

[Cin]

Excellent post Katzchen. Thanks for your response.

So what do you think it is that makes people want to distance themselves from political correctness?

Do they dislike the term? Or do they resent the effort required to consider their words and the effects they may have? Do they see it as a sort of forced censorship? Do they think it is just foolish because it doesn't change anything really. A rose is a rose by any other name and all that...

[dykeumentary]

I think the term "politically correct" is a rare instance in our Orwellian Newspeak World that means what it says.

Also, I appreciate when people say what they really think and don't cover it with language that disguises it- on the political right or the political left.

Can you imagine if Trump was leading the election, but we didn't know what he really thought?!!

For me, political correctness means that a person or group pays enough attention to know what the prevailing progressive sentiment about a charged issue is, and then uses language that SEEMS to support that progressive thinking -- REGARDLESS of if the language is backed up by actions. It's just words.

No one would say Angela Davis is being politically correct about prison abolition. But one could argue that the HRC is just being politically correct when they SAY they "support trans people" when the HRC is not leading the fight against putting trans people in the wrong prison (and prisons generally) from their big shiny office in DC.

Political correctness can mask dangerous action. A person who cares about humanity wouldn't just rely on language to do the hard work of social change.

[Andrea]

Political correction means, to me, that we watch the words we use in order to avoid offending or harming others.

Those people that dislike (hate) being PC are the people that really don't care about offending others and therefore have to work at being PC. It is much easier for them to be their hateful or disinterested selves.

Those that care about whether or not others are harmed by our words have little need to consider the PC label because they are already seeking ways to 'do no harm' and ways to learn how their words and/or actions affect others.

Political correctness, to me, boils down to being a humane.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by dykeumentary

I think the term "politically correct" is a rare instance in our Orwellian Newspeak World that means what it says.

Also, I appreciate when people say what they really think and don't cover it with language that disguises it- on the political right or the political left.

Can you imagine if Trump was leading the election, but we didn't know what he really thought?!!

For me, political correctness means that a person or group pays enough attention to know what the prevailing progressive sentiment about a charged issue is, and then uses language that SEEMS to support that progressive thinking -- REGARDLESS of if the language is backed up by actions. It's just words.

No one would say Angela Davis is being politically correct about prison abolition. But one could argue that the HRC is just being politically correct when they SAY they "support trans people" when the HRC is not leading the fight against putting trans people in the wrong prison (and prisons generally) from their big shiny office in DC.

Political correctness can mask dangerous action. A person who cares about humanity wouldn't just rely on language to do the hard work of social change.

I really enjoyed reading your post. And I do agree.

I certainly agree that political correctness is not a substitute for activism. A person who cares about working for social change would not rely solely on political correct speak. However, I also think that some people, not necessarily the HRC, but individual activists for example, have only so much time and energy to devote and sometimes have to settle on one or maybe two specific issues that are the most important personally and work toward change from there. They could possibly find themselves in the position of holding the prevailing progressive sentiment about a charged issue and using language that seems to support that thinking but not be in the position of backing it up with feet on the street or anything really but solidarity using words and helpful actions when the opportunities present.

As far as Donald Trump and what he really thinks, well, I believe we tend to see comments and actions that are rather unexpected or are the opposite of what we imagined as being more likely to be true. Like if we have nothing to gain from saying something then it must be truth. For example if you are applying for a job as a cashier in a convenience store and the person interviewing asks you how you feel about taking things from your place of employment and you say you would never steal the person isn't terribly convinced that you are telling the truth because the answer is seen as self serving. But if you were to say that you might take home a pen or some paper the interviewer would believe you were telling the truth because it is not the answer they expected and does not seem self serving. Trump is seen as someone who tells it like it is. He may say some things that people might be taken aback by but at least he tells the truth and doesn't waffle. Or so it seems. But in reality he flip flops as much as the next politician, actually even more. He has changed his mind so much since throwing his hat in the ring, I'm starting to believe he never had any idea what his platform was going to be about and is making it up on the fly. Other than being abrasive I'm not sure what is real and what is bullshit. He changed his mind about abortion, he changed his mind about the rich paying more taxes, he changed his mind about identifying as a democrat. For all his political incorrectness and his so called honesty, I find it hard to believe a word he says. But I get the allure of someone saying something that doesn't seem to be self serving and imaging that no matter how repulsive at least they are being honest. I'm just not sure it's true.

But there is no doubt that political correctness can mask dangerous actions.

Also in reality changing language to change minds is not terribly effective. It is probably even less effective than changing laws is to promote social change. You can't legislate a change in people's hearts nor can you change words and expect to change minds. But I still advocate trying.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Andrea

Political correction means, to me, that we watch the words we use in order to avoid offending or harming others.

Those people that dislike (hate) being PC are the people that really don't care about offending others and therefore have to work at being PC. It is much easier for them to be their hateful or disinterested selves.

Those that care about whether or not others are harmed by our words have little need to consider the PC label because they are already seeking ways to 'do no harm' and ways to learn how their words and/or actions affect others.

Political correctness, to me, boils down to being a humane.

I'm sure that is true of some. And it might be the whole of it for all I know.

But sometimes I wonder if there is some kind of disconnect in the definition of what it means to be PC. Some way that it really turns people off. I read a debate with a poll on a website that asked the question "Do you believe people spend too much time trying to be politically correct?" and the result was 90% to 10% that, yes, we do spend too much time. When I saw the percentage of people feeling that way was that high, I began to wonder what I was missing. I also began to think that maybe Donald Trump is smarter than I imagined. If he took the time to look into how much people are craving someone to just say the hell with being PC, he would have discovered how popular a position it would be. He can say whatever the hell he wants while remaining popular, yet still seeming to not care about that. He can say whatever crazy thing comes into his head and other people's little feelers be damned.

I know I have struggled with not understanding why some people feel so constrained by taking a little time to say something in a kinder, more considerate manner. I don't feel like there is anything I want to say that can be adversely affected by my not saying it meanly.

I'm wondering if I'm missing something. I feel like there's some key piece I haven't been able to locate. I mean 90% of people. I know it was just one website and one poll, but still, that's quite decisive.

[Corkey]

[QUOTE=Miss Tick;1028044]Listening to Donald Trump explain away his xenophobic, sexist and racist comments as him just being a straight talker is appalling. He dismisses any objections concerning his marked lack of interest in displaying behavior and language that is even marginally approaching respectful. He sees it as a waste of time and energy. He calls having a problem with racist, sexist, and xenophobic comments as being PC. "Maybe they don't want a straight-talker. Maybe they don't, but I am so tired of this politically correct crap," declares Trump, eliciting the biggest cheers of his speech.He is a narcissist, they don't care. He may be a pathological sociopath as well.

Trump goes on to equate political correctness with not being a "straight-talker", with lying. The inference is that political correctness means we cannot tell it like it is. He certainly is not alone in this belief. Many people profess to be tired of having to be PC. They believe being politically correct stifles their freedom of speech as well as the free expression of ideas.

Others believe it is important to make the effort to be politically correct in thought, word and deed. They feel it is important to attempt to eradicate everyday speech of overt racism, sexism and a variety of other isms.

I have a hard time understanding how the words "politically correct" elicit such negative connotations for some people. But many, many are tired of attempts to encourage politically correct behavior in others. Maybe the disconnect is in the definition. Personally I define politically correct as simply taking the time to be respectful of others, to be polite even when I disagree with someone, and to avoid using forms of expression or actions that insult, exclude or marginalize certain racial, cultural or "other" groups. I can't imagine anyone would advocate that as a course of action we choose to behave disrespectfully of others, that we be impolite in our dealings with people and that we speak and act in ways that are insulting to others. So I've come to the conclusion that when we say politically correct each of us has a different definition of what that means.

My hope for this thread is that people will be willing to share what PC means to them. I for one would like to understand what meaning people are using for politically correct when they say they are tired of being that.

As it can be a sensitive subject, let's try to share information, definitions and opinions without judgment or hostility. We don't have to agree on anything. I for one call it a success when I can understand another's reasons for their position on something.

Let's not attack each other.

The only people who don't want to be politically correct are xynophobic racists and people who are ignorant of manners. Speaking ones mind doesn't have to be at the expence of another's culture, skin color or religion.

My .10

[Gráinne]

I don't go around intentionally offending people, but I don't call myself PC, and here's why: It's offensive to me to be thought of as so thin-skinned that I can't take a non-PC word spoken in the context of a discussion, movie, or a song. I find it patronizing to have to closely watch my words as to not offend.

How far do we go? Do we ban Huckleberry Finn ? It certainly has language offensive to African-Americans in it. How about the song "Brown Sugar"? The movie Blazing Saddles?

One side's PC is another side's censorship.

Every racial, ethnic, and religious group in the history of forever has had some kind of slur or epithet attached to it. If we're talking about racial tensions, "white" people can be Irish, German, French, Russian-all of whom have had stereotypes, jokes, and slurs attached to them.

Who gets to decide what's PC and therefore, acceptable and non-offending speech/movies/plays/literature? What if I don't fall into that group? That to me is as frightening a thought as the real-life Fahrenheit 451 of Nazi Germany.

What is the difference between the censorship of 1930's Germany and the risk that a professor can ruin his or her career by a ill-thought out word and the resultant uproar? I feel that stifles, rather than encourages, open and straight talk (A professor of communications at the University of Kansas has been suspended after a protest by students-not all of whom were in her class-after she used a slur in the context of talking about racial issues).

I personally think Donald Trump is an idiot, but he can say whatever he wants and I'll consider the source before choosing whether or not to be offended. He doesn't pull punches. Neither, for that matter, did Louis Farrakhan or Malcolm X, and both of them were equally controversial.

So, I guess at best I have a sick sense of humor, and at worst, I myself am racist, sexist and anything else. Maybe this post isn't even the "right" opinion and is offensive in itself, oh well.

Voltaire is incorrectly quoted as saying "I diapprove of what you say, but I defend to the death your right to say it". The actual quote is "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too". Amen.

[storyspinner70]

I think that the thing most people object to when it comes to being called "pc" is that Politically Correct most often means not saying what you actually want to say because you'll be considered gauche, racist or archaic. It, like most things in our world, has been twisted into a shadow of what it may have started out as.

For example, if you see a child with Down's and it takes effort to not break out the "r" word because you know someone is going to be outraged by that, or you'll LOOK like you're an asshole, but that's the only reason you're whipping out the "differently abled" instead? It's lip service at best, and you're still not addressing the root problem - a child with Down's should just be a child to you like any other. At the core, isn't that disingenuous at best?

And, frankly, in the states anyway, we've become such a litigious society that people have become afraid to say or do things for fear of being sued by someone. Everyone is so eager anymore to be offended, it's becoming impossible to express an opinion without being attacked for it. I have zero problem with that, but people are being cowed into silence because of things like that. And that's never cool.

As for me, I'd rather you look me in the face and say, "Damn, you're a CUNxtTuesday" than to fill my ears with what you think you should say and hate me while you do it. So, I'm a firm advocate for using the politically correct terms, but you're a hypocrite to do it just because you feel you need to not to look like an asshole with no concept of what the foundation of being PC is really about.

Speaking of assholes, Trump isn't being some champion for truth and honesty when he spouts his nonsense freely in the name of "banishing political correctness". He's just doing what is his right - saying whatever he wants whenever he wants to. Dust off the extremely thin layer of righteousness, and he's still just an asshole with a ton of money and the freedom of speech we all enjoy.

So, really, for me...be PC if you want...be outrageous if you want...but be genuine. Be real. Let the chips fall where they may, but be you.


Oh and Grainne, you are very correct, that quote was never Voltaire, but Evelyn Beatrice Hall (as Stephen G. Tallentyre) writing about Voltaire's purported attitude.

[Angeltoes]

It's no surprise that people have ugly thoughts what's different now is that historically this country has never given such a wide platform to lunatics before. The term itself has morphed into something negative only because Conservatives in the 1990's started associating it with Communism.

Example: http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/28/we...pagewanted=all

[imperfect_cupcake]

I have a dark, sarcastic, sharp sense of humour. I enjoy being called names as a form or endearment. People teased me and called me "Moose Flaps Morgan" (flaps are vagina lips and moose was because I'm Canuck) when I first went to the UK. If I showed upset and offence, they would have hit me harder and constantly. Instead, I insulted back and laughed. And learned abut a different way to express humour and to understand *intent* rather than form. I know a shit ton neo-liberal middle class white faux lesbian gals who are verbally PC but are horrid, horrid bitches when it comes to anything they don't want in their own back yard.

Intent is a lot. But that requires trusting the person and knowing what their intent is. That means if one of my mates yells "hey slag!" To me on the street, I'll grin and waggle my butt and run over and hug them. If someone I don't know says something similar, they are going to get a new one ripped about understanding slut shaming. Because I don't know what their intent is. How the fuck would I know?? That's why posting on a forum where you don't know folks, having a change of tact is usually indicative of emotional intelligence.

I'm not all that fussed about offending people that I do. However, I'm willing to have a conversation about what they have an issue with. Their emotional response is their own. That's their biz. But if they have a critical thinking point, I'll be interested in that. Someone trying to shut down a conversation by saying "I'm offended"
God for you. And? Do you have a reason and a point to go with that?

And the offhand remark of "PC police" or "PC gone crazy" means that no critical thinking, intelligent conversation will follow. Because the term is ment to dismiss any conversation and to belittle anything that follows. It falls under the same belittling terms as: hysterical, hypersensitive, over dramatic, drama queen, storm in a tea cup, over emotional... Anyone seeing a theme in this? They are feminising insults. Because yer a hypersensitive girly man liberal if it matters. Or just a female. So anything you say is dismissed.


Frankly, I get told "stop busting my balls, bitch" along the same lines.
My response "quit whining and put on a cup"

[dykeumentary]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I'm sure that is true of some. And it might be the whole of it for all I know.

But sometimes I wonder if there is some kind of disconnect in the definition of what it means to be PC. Some way that it really turns people off. I read a debate with a poll on a website that asked the question "Do you believe people spend too much time trying to be politically correct?" and the result was 90% to 10% that, yes, we do spend too much time. When I saw the percentage of people feeling that way was that high, I began to wonder what I was missing. I also began to think that maybe Donald Trump is smarter than I imagined. *snip*

I'm wondering if I'm missing something. I feel like there's some key piece I haven't been able to locate. I mean 90% of people. I know it was just one website and one poll, but still, that's quite decisive.

I'm not disagreeing-- just adding that I wonder what te racial/class composition of the survey respondents was. I think the thing the US doesn't want to say with words is that if someone isn't white, they aren't welcome. And should leave. And die.

The resentment of "acting PC" is their another way of saying DAMN FOREIGNERS. Trump is reaching the white working class voters who feel that something has been taken from them by Black people, Mexicans and now Muslims. Trump promises to clean up America and give them back their dignity, and Brot Und Arbeit. As I think most people in this thread sing along... "It's Beginning To Look A Lot Like Bavaria In the 1930s..." I fear the discussion about the value of PCorrectness distracts from the pressing conversation about white supremacy that needs to be happening.

Racism. Xenophobia. Humans are so easily led down hateful paths by their fear and those who prey on it.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Gráinne

I don't go around intentionally offending people, but I don't call myself PC, and here's why: It's offensive to me to be thought of as so thin-skinned that I can't take a non-PC word spoken in the context of a discussion, movie, or a song.

Well I don't think it's about you being offended by a non PC word. I think it's more about offending other people using words that are racist/ misogynist/ whatever ist/

How far do we go? Do we ban Huckleberry Finn ? It certainly has language offensive to African-Americans in it. How about the song "Brown Sugar"? The movie Blazing Saddles?

To me when it comes to art I think people can make up their own minds as to what they want to look at it/watch/read.

Every racial, ethnic, and religious group in the history of forever has had some kind of slur or epithet attached to it. If we're talking about racial tensions, "white" people can be Irish, German, French, Russian-all of whom have had stereotypes, jokes, and slurs attached to them.

I doubt anyone is advocating using any ethnic slurs of any kind. So everyone should be included when talking about not offending others by using thoughtless ethnic slurs or even purposeful offensive language.

Who gets to decide what's PC and therefore, acceptable and non-offending speech/movies/plays/literature? What if I don't fall into that group? That to me is as frightening a thought as the real-life Fahrenheit 451 of Nazi Germany.

As far as movies/plays/literature I don't think there is anyone advocating throwing out art or literature because it contains offensive language. It may earn a warning at the box office or something but I never heard of it not being shown or banned in boston or whatever. I'm not positive about this but to my knowledge no one but the religious right advocates such restrictions on art and literature. They would like to control what we can read/watch/see, but I don't think that has anything to do with being sensitive toward other groups.

When speaking individually about falling into a group that is offended by some language I think it's open to interpretation by the individual concerned or the group concerned. I don't think there is any organized group that does that. I doubt the PC Police actually exists (that's a joke, I know they don't exist).

I imagine anyone who wants to advocate for themselves can do so. For example someone with autism would prefer to be called "a person with autism" rather than "autistic" and someone with schizophrenia would prefer to called "a person with schizophrenia" rather than "a schizophrenic". I doubt someone not having autism or schizophrenia just decided that one day. I am sure people with autism or schizophrenia advocated for how they would like to be referred. So I don't see any worries about falling into a group that gets forgotten and falls through the cracks. Anyone/group can advocate against the language used to describe them.

What is the difference between the censorship of 1930's Germany and the risk that a professor can ruin his or her career by a ill-thought out word and the resultant uproar? I feel that stifles, rather than encourages, open and straight talk (A professor of communications at the University of Kansas has been suspended after a protest by students-not all of whom were in her class-after she used a slur in the context of talking about racial issues).

I read an article about that and I came away from it with a completely different take. I'll just post a link to the article and people who are interested can read it and decide for themselves.

http://www.theroot.com/articles/news...ing_nword.html

I personally think Donald Trump is an idiot, but he can say whatever he wants and I'll consider the source before choosing whether or not to be offended. He doesn't pull punches. Neither, for that matter, did Louis Farrakhan or Malcolm X, and both of them were equally controversial.

It's not the punch pulling I have a problem with, just because I advocate we treat each other with respect doesn't mean I wish to be bullshitted. But rudeness and political incorrectness does not mean truth. Just look at the bullshit Trump says and the lies he tells. Offensive does not equate truth.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by dykeumentary

I'm not disagreeing-- just adding that I wonder what te racial/class composition of the survey respondents was. I think the thing the US doesn't want to say with words is that if someone isn't white, they aren't welcome. And should leave. And die.

The resentment of "acting PC" is their another way of saying DAMN FOREIGNERS. Trump is reaching the white working class voters who feel that something has been taken from them by Black people, Mexicans and now Muslims. Trump promises to clean up America and give them back their dignity, and Brot Und Arbeit. As I think most people in this thread sing along... "It's Beginning To Look A Lot Like Bavaria In the 1930s..." I fear the discussion about the value of PCorrectness distracts from the pressing conversation about white supremacy that needs to be happening.

Racism. Xenophobia. Humans are so easily led down hateful paths by their fear and those who prey on it.

Another excellent point. I was looking at a different poll that shows people in the US are feeling like they don't recognize their country any longer. I am sure that is exactly what they meant. Everyone doesn't look like me. And I would hate to take away from the really important conversation we should be having about white supremacy/racism and xenophobia. This conversation might be too much of a distraction with all the loopholes for hating inherent in it. Let's have at it. Make a thread and I'll be there.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Offensiveness does not equal truth

Word. Yes. Absolutely.

Being offended does not mean you are right either. It just means perhaps a conversation should happen rather than expecting that being offended is a card to play to end conversation.

I get right fucked off about slut shaming and using the word whore in a derogatory way - ie someone who deserved pain or they are dirty. But me being offended isn't the issue. Those feelings are mine and frankly no one else's problem. However, the treatment and concepts of women based on how many people they have had sex with is based in religion concepts of purity, is more than just my problem. And boy the ignorance around what causes STDs due to this belief is a soap box irritation. With good reason - it causes people to treat others very poorly for false reasons.

That I Am offended is neither here nor there and inconsequential.

[Angeltoes]

I really, really hate the 'he's entitled to his opinion trend...'...'you're entitled to your opinion...'...'we're all entitled to an opinion...'

No you're not. You're not entitled to anything. You're not entitled to make up lies and call them facts. This is why we're so screwed as a society, because rather than demanding that people tell the truth, we sit back and defend their right to tell lies. The founders (most of whom I have no great respect for to be perfectly honest) had no clue that their conception of free speech would become what it is today. In their day, someone would publish an almanac or a broadside that was a bit controversial and after while it would go away. Or, someone would burn the author's publishing house down. Either way, people had to pretend to be decent in order for anyone to follow them in great numbers.

We have never before given a large audience to the Donald Trumps of the world. It's not radical to say that he has no right to speak. It's actually radical to say that he does. In the past, society expected politicians to defend their beliefs and now we say that's not necessary. Donald Trump is running for PRESIDENT and we say 'oh well he's entitled to his opinion..' opinion, opinion..

Here's more on that if you're interested...

http://theconversation.com/no-youre-...r-opinion-9978

[imperfect_cupcake]

Right to free speech is different than what people usually mean when they say they have a right to an opinion. The only time hear it is when I attempt to engage with someone about their faulty premises that their opinion is based on.

My response is always the same: yes, you do have free speech. That means you can express an opinion without being thrown in jail for it. That's what that means. It does NOT mean that if you voice an opinion, no one is allowed to challenge or dispute the premise it's based on. That is NOT what free speech means. You can also say things that make you look like a giant deranged penis hole, if you like. No one is stopping you. But people *will* call attention to things in your arsehole opinion that aren't logically sound. Suck it up and engage or shut it.


It should be obvious from that I'm not fussed if they are offended.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by imperfect_cupcake

That I Am offended is neither here nor there and inconsequential.

I think this is an important piece and certainly one that I often forget to focus on. It really is more about the significance of what you are saying universally than personally when you use offensive language.

[Angeltoes]

I was responding to the comment Gráinne:

"I personally think Donald Trump is an idiot, but he can say whatever he wants and I'll consider the source before choosing whether or not to be offended. He doesn't pull punches. Neither, for that matter, did Louis Farrakhan or Malcolm X, and both of them were equally controversial."

First of all, Malcolm X did not run for president. Second, as shocking and as offensive as they may have been at times, quite often they were right. Donald Trump is an absolute idiot. We're talking about putting our lives in his hands, and people are concerned with whether or not he's allowed to express his opinion.

Edit I take back the part about Farrakhan. He's a jerk and not in the same league as Malcolm X.