Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 101 posts

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#21

Post by karaterobot »

tootie wrote: post #10
SeanLuke wrote: post #2

For an article with this headline, it's rather surprising that it never says why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness. Here's why, I think: because Stephen Fry is, among other things, a comedian. And comedians are highly sensitive to political correctness and its ills. They are the canaries in the coal mine of wokeness.

I think he's arguing from the most superficial level. That shaming people for things like use of language is ineffective at actually convincing them to change their minds. FWIW, I think he's actually wrong. Just by observing my kids and their school-aged peers, they are incredibly accepting of different types of people and lifestyles without a second thought. And they enforce "political correctness" of speech without…

It's not safe to generalize to all human behavior if your only sample is school-age kids. Kids behave differently than adults. Kids who are being observed behave differently than kids who aren't.

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#22

Post by syzar »

Grimburger wrote: post #15
tootie wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he's arguing from the most superficial level. That shaming people for things like use of language is ineffective at actually convincing them to change their minds. FWIW, I think he's actually wrong. Just by observing my kids and their school-aged peers, they are incredibly accepting of different types of people and lifestyles without a second thought. And they enforce "political correctness" of speech without…

So what are your kids pejoratives?

Removing pejoratives involving sexual orientation still leaves quite a few left. Are you asking because you think his kids might not have a sufficiently rich vocabulary with which to insult someone? Is this a version of “think of the kids”?

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#23

Post by silicon2401 »

deltasevennine wrote: post #20
Bakary wrote: post #7

Are there any examples of discussions or arguments having to do with political correctness that are actually thought-provoking? Seems like it's always the same ideas that come up whether the people involved are for it or not.

Yes. It's rather interesting from my perspective. There are actually three sides. Not two. Three. The first side is those who support political correctness. This side is singular. Simple. The other two sides are those who don't. This is where it gets interesting. One side that doesn't support it actually has hatred for marginalized groups. They aren't politically correct because of actual raw hatred. These people inc…

> We'd all be happier if everyone was politically correct

That's objectively false. I would not be happier if everyone were politically correct, because I'm a strong believer in free speech, even if it's offensive. You can say whatever heinous, horrendous things you want about me and my loved ones as long as I'm able to walk away and disengage (if you pursue and target me, it changes from free speech to harassment/assault IMO). I'm also a strong believer in the ideal of objectivity, so I hate the idea of white lies or convenient falsehoods.

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#24

Post by incomingpain »

melvyn2 wrote: post #17
incomingpain wrote: post #14

This PC cycle is interesting. Bill Maher and "politically incorrect" ended 20 years ago. Paving way for real time, but omg I'm feeling old. The PC cycle must exist, it will come and go in strength. Here's what happens when the cycle breaks. Tautological by definition, for 'politeness' to exist, you must have impoliteness. If you have a culture whose population has shifted more polite, like Canada, then democratically…

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-post-millennial/ When you have to cite trash like this, it weakens your argument considerably. Maybe cite a better source?

>When you have to cite trash like this, it weakens your argument considerably. Maybe cite a better source?

https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/ca/20/00/2020BCCA0011.htm

You never attempted to rebut the actual content because it is legitimate. I suspect you even followed the sourcing and read for yourself. Instead you're here just to attack the source?

I'm not invested in post millennial, why are you actively going after them?

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#25

Post by zimpenfish »

melvyn2 wrote: post #17
incomingpain wrote: post #14

This PC cycle is interesting. Bill Maher and "politically incorrect" ended 20 years ago. Paving way for real time, but omg I'm feeling old. The PC cycle must exist, it will come and go in strength. Here's what happens when the cycle breaks. Tautological by definition, for 'politeness' to exist, you must have impoliteness. If you have a culture whose population has shifted more polite, like Canada, then democratically…

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-post-millennial/ When you have to cite trash like this, it weakens your argument considerably. Maybe cite a better source?

I did a search for the name "Rob Hoogland" and pretty much all the sources were awful weak agenda-pushers. Top result was City Journal who have a large staff crossover with the Manhattan Institute - "a right-wing non-profit think tank" funded at least in part by the Kochs.

The NY Post was the least bad, if you can believe it.

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#26

Post by jollybean »

incomingpain wrote: post #14

This PC cycle is interesting. Bill Maher and "politically incorrect" ended 20 years ago. Paving way for real time, but omg I'm feeling old. The PC cycle must exist, it will come and go in strength. Here's what happens when the cycle breaks. Tautological by definition, for 'politeness' to exist, you must have impoliteness. If you have a culture whose population has shifted more polite, like Canada, then democratically…

For whatever reason, most of those who challenge the orthodoxy on this go downhill, I mean Jordan Peterson used to be a 'quixotic person with an opinion', but this popularity made him a hero to 'one side' and so he's gone down a really odd path.

There is no meaningful debate on the issue because nobody (or rather very few) is willing to dump their career to challenge the orthodoxy. Therefore only voices challenging the system are far-right wingnuts like Matt Gaetz, the Trump sons etc.

I order for the issue to be taken serious, people need to be a few notches above 'Joe Rogan' and there just not that many.

Also, if they are reasonable, neither Fox nor CNN/MSNBC want to carry them.

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#27

Post by coldtea »

Bakary wrote: post #7

Are there any examples of discussions or arguments having to do with political correctness that are actually thought-provoking? Seems like it's always the same ideas that come up whether the people involved are for it or not.

There can't be any thought-provoking arguments about this, if one dismisses them in advance as non-thought-provoking.

Which is usually the case.

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#28

Post by jollybean »

melvyn2 wrote: post #17
incomingpain wrote: post #14

This PC cycle is interesting. Bill Maher and "politically incorrect" ended 20 years ago. Paving way for real time, but omg I'm feeling old. The PC cycle must exist, it will come and go in strength. Here's what happens when the cycle breaks. Tautological by definition, for 'politeness' to exist, you must have impoliteness. If you have a culture whose population has shifted more polite, like Canada, then democratically…

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-post-millennial/ When you have to cite trash like this, it weakens your argument considerably. Maybe cite a better source?

This kind of toxic purview is one of the 'roots of the problem'.

It seems as though the facts of the situation have some legitimacy; that there is scant coverage is probably an indication of something awry in the media system itself.

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#29

Post by Joeboy »

boxmonster wrote: post #3

> "I'm very, very... I won't say dreading, but I'm, hmm, somewhat tentative about this whole thing That's the problem. Shaming and shunning is an ancient technique for punishing transgressors, but social media enables it to be applied too broadly. All transgressions are put on full blast. If I were a full on Nazi I would get the same treatment as I would if expressed that I'm glad my son doesn't want to be a girl. It…

I don't think that's quite right. If you were a full-on Nazi you'd be generally ignored by the sort of people who spend their time calling out minor transgressions among their fellow travellers.

Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)

#30

Post by syzar »

tootie wrote: post #10
SeanLuke wrote: post #2

For an article with this headline, it's rather surprising that it never says why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness. Here's why, I think: because Stephen Fry is, among other things, a comedian. And comedians are highly sensitive to political correctness and its ills. They are the canaries in the coal mine of wokeness.

I think he's arguing from the most superficial level. That shaming people for things like use of language is ineffective at actually convincing them to change their minds. FWIW, I think he's actually wrong. Just by observing my kids and their school-aged peers, they are incredibly accepting of different types of people and lifestyles without a second thought. And they enforce "political correctness" of speech without…

I’m interested in the reasons for downvoting this comment. What is written is thought out and done in good faith. I don’t like regulation of word usage but it is true that propagandists can be effective at changing thinking patterns by changing speech patterns.
Post reply on HN