Yorkshire Air Ambulance Comes In The...
Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
The term Politicaly Correct?
Not news, but we deal with this P.C term alot in life for fear of insulting a group of people, the wrong wording blah blah blah...
My Q. is when was this term introduced and by who? was it political spin and by which party? was it right wing or left wing? Why was it introduced at all? I dont remember this PC stuff being around when programmes like 'Open All Hours' was on, or 'Till Death Do Us Part' just an example to give as I was watching Ronnie Barker yesterday and giggling at his stammer lol... not PC these days then?....
My Q. is when was this term introduced and by who? was it political spin and by which party? was it right wing or left wing? Why was it introduced at all? I dont remember this PC stuff being around when programmes like 'Open All Hours' was on, or 'Till Death Do Us Part' just an example to give as I was watching Ronnie Barker yesterday and giggling at his stammer lol... not PC these days then?....
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by yesmadam. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Yesmadam, it first came to my notice in the 80s when, basically, excluded groups (gay/disabled/ethnic minorities etc) started to appear to becoming more aware and demanding of their rights. As a parallel to this, there were some excellent left-wing initiatives taking place in the Metropolitan Borough Councils (so Thatcher abolished them, apart from the GLC, of which Ken Livingstone was leader). Then, whenever something smacked too much of left wing ideas, particularly if it had a silly name, it was riduculed. A case in point was the supposed banning of the term 'blackboard' in case it offended black people. Of course this would have been a ridiculous claim, had it been true, but it wasn't. It was made up and stirred up by the likes of the Sun/Dail Mail to get apolitical or right wing hackles up. It then led to people's claims that such a thing was racist, homophobic etc to become easily dismissed by the blanket term 'Politically Correct', making it safe again for bigots to use offensive and abusive language/bahaviour. People who are actually trying to promote equality in society can now be easily laughed at and said to be 'too PC'.
It has also occurred alongside the (Thatcher-led but continued by Blair) depoliticising of education and society, leading to a situation where few people are capable of presenting a real political argument.
'Till Death Us Do Part' was set in a totally different era, but even then, the joke was supposed to be on Alf Garnett - people were supposed to be laughing at him, but too many agreed with him and laughed with him. i was only a kid and loved the programme but even then found the real star of the show to be Dandy Nichols, who took the p$ss out of him mercilessly.
It has also occurred alongside the (Thatcher-led but continued by Blair) depoliticising of education and society, leading to a situation where few people are capable of presenting a real political argument.
'Till Death Us Do Part' was set in a totally different era, but even then, the joke was supposed to be on Alf Garnett - people were supposed to be laughing at him, but too many agreed with him and laughed with him. i was only a kid and loved the programme but even then found the real star of the show to be Dandy Nichols, who took the p$ss out of him mercilessly.
It's one of those phrases that has been around for hundreds of years, but has changed its meaning in recent times.
The exact phrase, 'politically correct' , was used in Marxist Leninist doctrine in 1917, but received its jokey, wink wink interpretation from left wingers in the 1980's who used it to describe overly conscientous people within their organization who were often more concerned about the appearance of their work than the substance.
It was appropriated by many right wing commentators and retains its sneering aspect, but is now aimed at people who espouse muti-culturalism, gay, women's and disabled rights. It is used, somewhat unfairly, as a symbol of the erosion of free speech.
Many 'supporters' of PC would argue that it is merely a matter of being polite and not using terminology to incite anger or cause unnecessary upset to others.
Like most things in life, it means different things to different people.
The exact phrase, 'politically correct' , was used in Marxist Leninist doctrine in 1917, but received its jokey, wink wink interpretation from left wingers in the 1980's who used it to describe overly conscientous people within their organization who were often more concerned about the appearance of their work than the substance.
It was appropriated by many right wing commentators and retains its sneering aspect, but is now aimed at people who espouse muti-culturalism, gay, women's and disabled rights. It is used, somewhat unfairly, as a symbol of the erosion of free speech.
Many 'supporters' of PC would argue that it is merely a matter of being polite and not using terminology to incite anger or cause unnecessary upset to others.
Like most things in life, it means different things to different people.
right, now I've got a headache!!! so, we based our political correctness on Marxism/Leninist communism? were these good guys or bad guys? because I've just briefly read, and I mean briefly, some of the idealogies (sp)? and I keep catching Mao Tse Tungs name in there...
Any chance of a simple laymans explanation lol....
Any chance of a simple laymans explanation lol....
Sorry 'bout that :-) that'll teach me to not ask questions lol...
hmmmm, so, as jenstar has said.... 'right on' was the term before PC, and I think they should have stayed with that one. Then I wouldn't get confused with these terms.... but?... now I know where the PC brigade started... with Karl Marx et al and the left wing were based on it previously, it makes sense they would choose that term.
'Acceptable Practice' or AP rather than PC is best.
My poor brain cell.... :-) thanks for your articulate explanation....
hmmmm, so, as jenstar has said.... 'right on' was the term before PC, and I think they should have stayed with that one. Then I wouldn't get confused with these terms.... but?... now I know where the PC brigade started... with Karl Marx et al and the left wing were based on it previously, it makes sense they would choose that term.
'Acceptable Practice' or AP rather than PC is best.
My poor brain cell.... :-) thanks for your articulate explanation....
I think Thatcher abolished the GLC too, violetblue. Personally, I've always thought politically correct was the same as 'polite'; my mum taught me that it was wrong to snigger at people with different coloured skins, different religions, or different pronunciation of the language (etc), and I still think she was dead right.
The difficulty many people have with the principle of PC (or whatever else you like to call it) is that the standards accepted or adopted by a particular group of people are mercilessly rammed down the throats of others without those others necessarily buying in to the concept.
Most normal people (if that�s an acceptable term) agree with the rule of law and the vast majority of people are law-abiding. What they do not like is being told what they can and cannot say, do or think whilst they remain within the law. PC (I shall continue to refer to it as such for convenience, though I believe the term itself is a misnomer) sets out to dictate people�s behaviour to a set of standards which are arbitrarily and anonymously set by unknown faces.
There is no doubt that a number of examples in the popular press must be taken with a pinch of salt. However, others are genuine and are infuriating. Curiously, it does not usually seem to be the groups who are (allegedly) likely to be offended that protest. Once again it is the faceless �PC Panel� who determine what is and is not acceptable.
I refuse to spend my life treading on eggshells, worrying about things I might say or do which might upset somebody somewhere. Many of the terms and actions vilified by the PC Panel have been used in England for many, many years. The fact that some people think that some other people might now take offence at them is no reason for their discontinuation.
I am often offended when told that harmless traditions which have gone on in my country of birth are now forbidden, but nobody seems to worry about what offends me and other English people.
You need to have a sense of humour to live in England. Those who have not ought to seek their fortune elsewhere in a country where the population is far more sensitive and caring.
Most normal people (if that�s an acceptable term) agree with the rule of law and the vast majority of people are law-abiding. What they do not like is being told what they can and cannot say, do or think whilst they remain within the law. PC (I shall continue to refer to it as such for convenience, though I believe the term itself is a misnomer) sets out to dictate people�s behaviour to a set of standards which are arbitrarily and anonymously set by unknown faces.
There is no doubt that a number of examples in the popular press must be taken with a pinch of salt. However, others are genuine and are infuriating. Curiously, it does not usually seem to be the groups who are (allegedly) likely to be offended that protest. Once again it is the faceless �PC Panel� who determine what is and is not acceptable.
I refuse to spend my life treading on eggshells, worrying about things I might say or do which might upset somebody somewhere. Many of the terms and actions vilified by the PC Panel have been used in England for many, many years. The fact that some people think that some other people might now take offence at them is no reason for their discontinuation.
I am often offended when told that harmless traditions which have gone on in my country of birth are now forbidden, but nobody seems to worry about what offends me and other English people.
You need to have a sense of humour to live in England. Those who have not ought to seek their fortune elsewhere in a country where the population is far more sensitive and caring.
now I would have thought PC was to protect and include those that were originally denigrated or just simply ignored by 'normal' society' ie: disabled access... parking etc... it's correct to allow that... politically? why? what's it got to do with MPs, it's just human behaviour to want access up a path or a parking space wide enough to get out of.... but it's not law....
How funny, I deleted the point about people saying one has 'no sense of humour' if they thought you were 'PC', thinking it was too predictable, and here we have it. I think you're right, jno, but I don't think the GLC was abolished at the same time as the other 6, I think it hung on for a bit longer, as many London people actually liked it. Come to thinkof it, I have a photo of the Town Hall the day it (the GLC) was abolished.
You are indeed correct, JudgeJ, that many of these terms have been used in England for many years, such as spastic, n!gger etc. That these terms are now seen as offensive by the 'PC panel' as you call it, is what I prefer to call progress.
You are indeed correct, JudgeJ, that many of these terms have been used in England for many years, such as spastic, n!gger etc. That these terms are now seen as offensive by the 'PC panel' as you call it, is what I prefer to call progress.
... and normally get copied from some second rate rag and posted on this website by *you* so you can get all upset about it...
...and then invariably turn out to be entirely made up or misreported (by the papers, not you)...
-------------------------------------------------------------
Where do I apply to join the PC board, by the way? Is there an address to write to? What's their manifesto? Who are their members?
...and then invariably turn out to be entirely made up or misreported (by the papers, not you)...
-------------------------------------------------------------
Where do I apply to join the PC board, by the way? Is there an address to write to? What's their manifesto? Who are their members?
Blimey...what an excellent load of posts. I am truly impressed - especially with what Violetblue and Suffragette wrote.
Couldn't put it better myself...
All I can add is that PC to me is just the act of being polite...which in my view is a sign of good manners.
That in itself I see as a typically British character trait and it takes absolutely no effort.
Couldn't put it better myself...
All I can add is that PC to me is just the act of being polite...which in my view is a sign of good manners.
That in itself I see as a typically British character trait and it takes absolutely no effort.
Yes, violetblue, the terms you mention are (only in my opinion) not particularly pleasant and not among those I would care to use. Most of the rest of the population would probably agree, and exercise their judgement and discretion accordingly. Some do not.
However, the examples you quote are fairly clear cut and not many people would argue that the terms are acceptable.
Where your argument is less solid is when the issues are not so clear cut. Individuals have been warned over their �attitudes� when debating perfectly rational topics in a non-confrontational civilised manner (examples, Author Lynette Burrows being warned by a Scotland Yard officer of being involved in a "homophobic incident" after criticising gay adoption on a BBC programme. A Christian couple in Lancashire were told by police they were "walking on eggshells" after complaining to their council about its gay rights policies. A British Muslim leader, Sir Iqbal Sacranie, head of the Muslim Council of Britain, was said to have sparked anger by condemning civil partnerships and describing homosexuality as harmful.
This is the sort of thing that annoys people. These are points of view of people trying to engage in a reasoned debate. Because their views do not concur with the PC �template� they are howled down or even threatened with prosecution.
There is also the issue that some of the terms in use (and which are now frowned upon) have origins that are so arguable or obscure that nobody can be seriously expected to be aware of them. �Nitty-Gritty� is one such recent example. People do not want to be �educated � in the origins of these terms which they have used harmlessly for generations.
I am not a racist or a bigot nor do I hate gay people. (Homophobic is another misnomer. It means fear of homosexuals, not hatred). I simply don�t like being told that I am not sufficiently civilised to exercise my own judgement.
However, the examples you quote are fairly clear cut and not many people would argue that the terms are acceptable.
Where your argument is less solid is when the issues are not so clear cut. Individuals have been warned over their �attitudes� when debating perfectly rational topics in a non-confrontational civilised manner (examples, Author Lynette Burrows being warned by a Scotland Yard officer of being involved in a "homophobic incident" after criticising gay adoption on a BBC programme. A Christian couple in Lancashire were told by police they were "walking on eggshells" after complaining to their council about its gay rights policies. A British Muslim leader, Sir Iqbal Sacranie, head of the Muslim Council of Britain, was said to have sparked anger by condemning civil partnerships and describing homosexuality as harmful.
This is the sort of thing that annoys people. These are points of view of people trying to engage in a reasoned debate. Because their views do not concur with the PC �template� they are howled down or even threatened with prosecution.
There is also the issue that some of the terms in use (and which are now frowned upon) have origins that are so arguable or obscure that nobody can be seriously expected to be aware of them. �Nitty-Gritty� is one such recent example. People do not want to be �educated � in the origins of these terms which they have used harmlessly for generations.
I am not a racist or a bigot nor do I hate gay people. (Homophobic is another misnomer. It means fear of homosexuals, not hatred). I simply don�t like being told that I am not sufficiently civilised to exercise my own judgement.
Latest Posts
News2 mins ago
ChatterBank2 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.