egafd.com

The Brutal Truth wrote:

> Bob,
> Avoided the question for a second time...third time for luck?
>


What was the question? It's difficult to answer a question that hasn't been asked!

Earlier you said:

" ...if you disagree with my views about how dangerous PC is becoming you should champion the fact that women are getting the same pay as men at Wimbledon..."

The fact is I can't disagree with your "views of how dangerous PC is becoming" because MY argument is that political correctness, as you describe it, doesn't actually exist! If it doesn't exist, we can't argue about whether it's dangerous or not. We can, however, argue about how dangerous and stupid YOUR views are given you perceive slight everywhere.

Nobody, other than possibly a Sun columnist and the sheep who believe such things, has said the terms "husband and wife" can't be used because it'll offend gays. The fact women tennis players will get parity with the men isn't because of some middle-class lefty campaign... it's the women on the tour that have asked for it, and one by one the major tournaments have agreed. That's not "PC", that's "PP" (Player Power)

Your big mistake Brutal Lies is to believe what you read in the paper. This is NOT evidence. The only thing newspapers are after is a big story. Whether it is true or not comes a long way down their list of priorities. No doubt you are a Sun reader. I'm sure there is medical treatment to cure you of your newspaper gullibility
Keith

Is it just me or do 75% of people on here seem to use what papers someone reads to mock?

You're either a Guardian reading 'lez-lover', who wants immigrants to take over the UK, or you're a dumb, right-wing, racist, Sun reader.

Can't anyone actually read both papers(or neither in my case) and have their own fucking views independently of what rag they decide to pick up at the petrol station?

Bob Singleton wrote:

> "Political Correctness" was invented by the right in an attempt
> to claim the moral high ground, but is actually a morally
> corrupt means of oppression. It is used to intimidate people
> into not thinking in a fair and equitable way.

I can pinpoint the invention of PC by the political right and the tabloid press. It took place in the late 1980s, as an expression of their frustration that they had lost the political battle. In 1980, the right wing press was unashamedly racist and homophobic. The Sun in particular demonised black and gay people quite openly. I remember one famous headline in The Sun when London saw its first mass march of black people against racism. The Sun used a photo showing thousands of people crossing Blackfriars Bridge with the headline "Black Day In Blackfriars".

By 1990, British society had largely accepted that open hatred of people for their skin colour (or sexual orientation) was wrong, and the right wing press had to change tack or lose readers. So instead of openly bashing blacks and gays, they invented PC. PC stories always revolve around the idea that minorities are being given special treatment, and so they whip up racist/homophobic sentiment without openly being racist/homophobic.

It's a fair point Sam, but it does get frustrating when people follow an agenda set by a particular newspaper. PC is a myth, a drum that certain papers have been beating for a couple of decades now. So when I see yet another "PC is a threat to our lives" thread, I can be pretty sure I'm reading a posting by someone who lacks the ability for independent thought.

If Brutal Truth could give a concrete example for how PC is affecting his personal freedom, this would be interesting. But he can't find an example, all he can do is repeat something he read in a newspaper.

I can promise that if anyone ever tried to stop me saying "husbands and wives", I'd be the first to fight such stupid censorship. But I can also predict that nobody will stop me saying it, despite what some stupid newspaper story might claim.

I wasn't having a go at people who attack someone's 'quoting' of a news paper but if I said:

"I think immigration laws should be tightened" I'm automatically labelled a Sun/Daily Mirror reader.

If I said:

"I think immigration is the way forward for a prosperous UK." I'm automatically a middle-class Guardian reader who hugs trees on his day off.

Personally I've not purchased a tabloid newspaper for 3 years. (The last one being The Observer) and get all my news off the internet or TV. I think that's healthier as you get differing views on the same subject, rather than sticking with a favourite paper/channel and getting one view.

I'd just like to make clear that my views are my own, and 'home-made' using my own judgement. Sometimes I may agree with The Sun, sometimes I'll disagree. Sometimes the Guardian is 'spot on' and other times it's a load of tripe(according to me).

As for 'PCness' (I make up my own words !happy!), well as I've said before. 'There's a balance.' Political correctness can sometimes be used(and abused) to where some people use it to moralise others (making themselves feel superior I suppose) while others point to it's failings to hit back with secret homophobic/racist/sexist agendas. Both sets of people are arse-wipes.

I agree! People over here figure to use "PCness" as you so eloquently put it, means you're being nice about a touchy subject while not to being PC means you're being insensitive and not giving a whatever.

'Personally I've not purchased a tabloid newspaper for 3 years. (The last one being The Observer)'

The Observer is not a tabloid in any sense, physically or in content. It's format is called Berliner, like the Guardian its sister paper.

If only I'd kept reading eh andy? !laugh!

Far be it from me to say, yes.