A video of the debate that the article refers to can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST6kj9OEYf0
Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
61–70 of 101 posts
Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
#62> "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…
> 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. If that were true, either no one would be on social media except perfectly politically correct people, or everyone would be desperately trying to be perfectly politically correct. But instead, social media is filled with racist, homophobic, sexist jerks who constantly say things that hurt…
> But instead, social media is filled with racist, homophobic, sexist jerks who constantly say things that hurt other people and reinforce stereotypes. So..
Thats all politically correct its just the oppositions political parties idea of politically correct.
Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
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”?
They claim that being politically correct is not learned by children. > they enforce "political correctness" of speech without being told but then claims that they have learned the difference > When I was a kid "gay" was one of our go-to pejoratives for almost anything uncool. With my kid's cohort, it's not acceptable because they don't think being gay is insulting. Obviously they are different kids growing up in dif…
The point OP made was that speech patterns can influence thoughts/ideas. The point wasn’t that their kids don’t have any biases or don’t have a new set of pejoratives they use. It was an argument being made that perhaps political correctness does have a place or is useful. That’s what I deduced from OP’s comment.
Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t understand your point. The person you responded to isn’t generalizing to all people based off of school age kids. They noticed something about attitudes and speech in their kids versus when they were growing up and this observation comports with well a known fact. Namely, that regulation of speech can frame peoples’ thinking. None of us are experts in everything and we need to try to make sense of things as w…
If they're arguing against a general statement (by Fry) with a specific, anecdotal example, it's fair to question whether that specific example is generalizable.
You have it backwards. The general statement by Fry is justly questioned by an example which, if true, suggests the general statement might be false.
Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
#65This 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'm not the OP, but I have a hard time understanding why people can't separate the bias from the facts in any news piece. Sure, it's "The PoSt MiLlEnNiAl", but you lose the chance or opportunity to broaden your mind and understand why readers of these articles feel the way they do, which can help sympathize with your fellow person and not the local echo chambers of beliefs people seem to have put themselves in in the past couple decades. I guarantee you a lot of people who read The Post Millennial daily would have your same reaction if someone posted something from a more left-leaning outlet (which is part of the problem, but that's a discussion for another time)
If you know a media outlet is biased (like 90% of them are) - then you know you have to be careful when trying to extract the facts and general sentiment of the writer.
I don't know where this was lost in the collective consciousness of society or if we had it in the first place.
Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "I'm very, very... I won't say dreading, but I'm, hmm, somewhat tentative about this whole thing. I don't think Jordan Peterson is a man with whom I necessarily share an enormous amount of, you know… I don't know, an I'm an enormous fan of both men. Both are academic types, Peterson has a love for the natural world, Fry for history. They both believe in values - Peterson focusing on self-discipline, Fry on kindness…
Early Jordan Peterson was great. My first intro to him was in 2015 or so and it was a talk he gave on depression that helped me. Recent Jordan Peterson has gone off the rails and seems more interested in attention. He's become kind of a troll like Ben Shapiro. I guess it's a way to make a living and get your jollies.
How so? You’ve given examples of good things but not bad things.
Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
> wildly hateful To be clear, the bit where they mention biology exists, or the bit where they say they won't conform to other people's preferred language?
Both and neither? The language itself isn’t the core issue, it’s the overt repudiation of someone’s identity. The biology bit is just an excuse, made worse by it being wrong: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony...
Do you believe that there exists a moral obligation to affirm someone's identity?
Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
#68> "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…
This is also the problem I see behind critiquing cancellation / shunning when the act is often based upon either the freedom of speech or the freedom of association. People must agree to stop shunning each other, but they cannot be compelled without cutting back on their freedom of speech or freedom of association.
Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
#69Earlier 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…
> because they understand the principles of why it's wrong. Do they? Do they really? How old are these kids? Have they reached the rebellious age where they start to question arbitrary rules their parents put in place? When I was a teen, it wasn't hard to censor myself when I was around adults who had their own ideas of what was inappropriate. But when we knew we were out of earshot, we said whatever we wanted. We sa…
I'm obviously not listening in on every private conversation, but my kids have shown me group texts of kids chatting with kids in private and they don't let other kids get away with exclusionary language. They still curse with the same sort of f-bombs and such that have been used forever.
Ironically, the biggest rebellion language I see is an inordinate number of kids who opt for gender neutral pronouns (they/them). It's not really an expression of being nonbinary as much as it's a statement that they don't want to be told or expected to be a certain way and they'll pick a gender and orientation on their terms when they're good and ready.
Re: Why Stephen Fry is arguing against political correctness (2018)
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both and neither? The language itself isn’t the core issue, it’s the overt repudiation of someone’s identity. The biology bit is just an excuse, made worse by it being wrong: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony...
Do you believe that there exists a moral obligation to affirm someone's identity?
Not OP, but I think we are not obligated to be respectful and nice, but why deliberately be an asshole? It's like someone preferring a nickname. If I know my friend Michael prefers to go by "Mike" and will get upset if I use "Michael", I'm not obligated to call him Mike, but I would be an asshole to deliberately call him Michael. Why be an asshole when you can do something very simple to not be an asshole?