|
|
Post by chris on Dec 27, 2006 19:00:21 GMT
Hi all
Bit of a favour to ask if it's ok. At the end of January I am partaking (albeit without being actually asked...) in the Rotary Club "Youth Speaks" competition. It bascially is a public speaking competition, and my role is the main speaker and I have to speak for 6 mins on a topic of our choice. (Some of you may already be aware of it and what happens.)
This is where you come in. The topic my team is discussing in "Political Correctness" and your views and ideas would be greatly appreciated, especially given the vast range of people and opinions on the forum!
Please note that politcials (yes - i know i'm doing PC, but i believe its referring more to party polictics) and religion are not allowed. (Although a possible passing reference may be inevitable). Also, for the purposes of the well being of the forum, could any extreme or contravertal views pleased be PM'd to me, or if you want to be kept anonymous or not give your views publically a PM would be fine!
Oh, and i'd be grateful if this thread could be kept on topic!
Thanks alot in advance.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Dec 27, 2006 20:29:27 GMT
Oh, and i'd be grateful if this thread could be kept on topic! That's asking quite a lot Chris  . It's more than the admins have ever been able to achieve..... But seriously 6 mins is a HELL of a long time if it's your first time. You'll need a huge amount of material If it were me, I'd start with a Bernard Manning joke. Read it out ("this is the sort of joke I mustn't say"..), get the laugh, then immediately go on to your first main point while you've got the audience (some laughing, some fuming, doesn't matter which). It needs to be a mix of research (history of...., different countries, etc.) and examples - some reasonable, others ridiculous. For example on our Parish council the first female chairman refused to be called the 'chair' (she was 'madam chairman') because she had no intention of being sat upon and pushed all over the place!! Whether you use anti-racist as examples of PC is up to you, but that's where it started ('blacks' were banned even though Afro-caribbeans have always called each other that), this slow decline into not wishing even to risk upsetting anyone. Then (if you dare) there's the 'spastics'>mentally disabled>mentally impaired> learning difficulties> special needs, which now means that the man in the street has no idea what's being talked about. And the inevitable conclusion on that line of the council which banned special (mentally disabled) categories for their Art competition and then complained that because all the disabled entrants came bottom the judges were biased against......... More later if you like but I hope that's given you food for a start |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2006 22:50:03 GMT
What about 'Bah bah Black Sheep' and stopping teachers using phrases such as 'brainstorm'?
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,347
|
Post by Colin on Dec 28, 2006 2:34:31 GMT
Certain schools banning references to Christmas in case 'minority cultures' got offended  . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2006 3:31:41 GMT
I don't know who might be offended by the original term, but some local councils here do not refer to "pets": they are "companion animals".
And this IS on topic: an example of ridiculous PC!
|
|
|
|
Post by Tubeboy on Dec 28, 2006 4:50:51 GMT
Is this a rant thread?
As to"Disabled people" I have a "Disabled" brother and would not mind any of the terms above been used to describe him.. However "Spastic" is a word that is used in a derogatory and offensive manner, and has been used in that manner for many years, despite its original usage.
I think other spheres are not too bad, obviously some stupid examples exist eg "vertically challenged" to describe short people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2006 8:45:06 GMT
Hmmm, well i have a heck of alot of views on the situation.
I suggest a full scale riot over the governments situation on immigration and PC, say 300,000+ plus people in London just like the poll tax riots. OR a decent protest. Put it this way, John majors first speech included getting rid of the poll tax.
ha ha
But seriously the situation is out of control. Whats wrong with Black coffee or bah bah black sheep or Christmas. If you want to live here get use to our culture. Because if i were to take a trip to Pakistan and build a church for example it would not be allowed and i might be killed. *Not to offend anyone Phil. Just an example*
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 28, 2006 8:59:30 GMT
The idea of starting with a PC joke is one i'm toying with Phil. On my first draft I have my opening sentance the same as the first sentance the Queen used in her christmas message (then went on to say if such a figure of authority, respect etc can feel she can use the word christmas, then me too!) The people at the rotary club are (in words of people I have talked to (not parents or school teachers!) "conservative, boring old farts"!! So finding the correct joke is vital!
Luke - Cheers, easily leads into a anecdote like "whilst preparing this speech we did a brainstorm. Sorry, I meant a mindmap. Oh dear, now i've offended everyone." (But with alot mre thought put in and eloquent language!)
Sydneynick - Something from the other side of the world - brilliant!
Has anyone else noticed the "Less Abled" spaces popping up at National Trust car parks? I'm "less abled" than Jimi at building MSTS routes. Can I park there?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tubeboy on Dec 28, 2006 10:42:15 GMT
A caring, common sense approach/attitude springs to mind, when reading this thread. See the person, and not the "label".
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Dec 28, 2006 10:55:07 GMT
Of course, James has reminded us that there are (extremist) forces and groups at work who are deliberately making PC where there is none (black coffee is a good example) in order either simply to ridicule and subvert the whole PC thing, or, worse, to provoke a reaction from the normally passive majority and destabilise even more fundamental things (free speech etc.).
And if your audience is boring old farts, remind them that it all started with the gollywogs on jars of Robertson's jam (details if you want them): that's their generation. Also, as a sweeping generalisation, the 'boring old fart' type are exactly the type of folks who think all this PC stuff is nonsense...........
|
|
|
|
Post by johnb on Dec 28, 2006 11:51:48 GMT
Interesting points above. For balance, it might also be worth noting the extent to which right-wing groups exaggerate the impact and effect of PC.
For example:
* the "banning of Baa Baa Black Sheep" story came out of a song based on Baa Baa Black Sheep aimed at teaching children colours, in which the sheep was described as a different colour in each verse (red/orange/yellow/etc) and had nothing to do with discrimination against black people.
* "Winterval" was adopted by Birmingham City Council five years ago to promote its shopping and cultural events from November through to February. Diwali, Eid and Christmas celebrations were all promoted under their own names, at the relevant date, as part of the overall Winterval season. No council or official body has ever banned the use of the word "Christmas" (a few individual headteachers have, and have generally been criticised by the councils who employ them for being silly).
|
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Dec 28, 2006 12:57:26 GMT
I think other spheres are not too bad, obviously some stupid examples exist eg "vertically challenged" to describe short people. Which is of course, more offensive. and anyway, it should be applied to tall people, as they're the one's with the problems - low doorways, fitting in tube stock, etc  You could cite Labour's version of the religious and racial hatred act. It thankfully was modified before being passed (by Blair being sent home by the Chief Whip, as HMG opposed the changes, but thought they were going to win the vote). If it had been passed as originally proposed, it would have made reading many bits of the Bible in a public place (eg a church) illegal, ditto other religious texts. And it would backfire, as it would have just created more tension, as every religious group, be they secularists, humanists, christian, muslim, or whatever, would have ended up trying to get leaders of other groups arrested in a tit for tat war. |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 28, 2006 14:46:55 GMT
If anyone knows any politcally incorrect jokes, (preferbaly from the aforementioned Bernard Manning) please PM them to me.
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Dec 28, 2006 16:09:23 GMT
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Dec 28, 2006 22:24:28 GMT
And the best topic of all if you want to take it on: mention fox-hunting (or fur coats)
Ignore whether you support either, just to mention these can bring out the PC brigade............
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,347
|
Post by Colin on Dec 29, 2006 4:24:43 GMT
No, it isn't ;D ;D You are being asked for ideas to be added to a speech about the subject of political correctness. It is not a thread intended for general discussion, which in any case would most likely end up getting locked on account of.............well, I'm sure you can appreciate where this sort of subject could lead if were a 'full on' discussion............ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2006 10:40:02 GMT
And if your audience is boring old farts, remind them that it all started with the gollywogs on jars of Robertson's jam (details if you want them): that's their generation. Be careful about this. When the BOFs were in their teens, school girls wore Robertson's gollywog badges to indicate they had lost their virginity. OK, OK: it's off topic. I'll get me coat.... |
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Dec 29, 2006 11:32:26 GMT
When the BOFs were in their teens, school girls wore Robertson's gollywog badges to indicate they had lost their virginity. . That's a new one on me!! I was (perhaps) too innocent at the time to know that. So what did that say about the teenage fellas that wore them?? |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 29, 2006 13:52:00 GMT
When the BOFs were in their teens, school girls wore Robertson's gollywog badges to indicate they had lost their virginity. . That's a new one on me!! I was (perhaps) too innocent at the time to know that. So what did that say about the teenage fellas that wore them?? I didn't know that either! Learn something new evveryday! Thanks for all your ideas so far folks. I'm getting there slowly but surely! I'll publish it when i'm done and if i think it's worthy! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2006 20:24:14 GMT
Mel Brooks movies are a rich source of un-PC humor, especially given his fondness for Hitler jokes. Brooks is Jewish so he can get away with it, sort of like African-Americans being able to use the N word. Radical Feminists are also a rich source, starting with their insistence on spelling women as womyn to "get the men out". The shift in Feminist rhetoric is also telling, from the strong women seeking empowerment in the 60s to the victims seeking reparations in the 90s. To me Political Correctness seems very weak and passive, driven by a sense of victimization and a fear of offending others and is often taken to absurd lengths. I find it hard to believe that a woman is surrendering to male fascism if she shaves her armpits and uses deodorant.
Good luck and have fun.
PS: How many radical feminists does it take to change a lightbulb? That's womyn and that's not funny.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jan 7, 2007 10:49:17 GMT
One more for you from yesterday, Chris.
2 prisoners escaped from a jail in Derbyshire. Press asked for photos to warn the public. Police declined, saying it would 'infringe the civil rights of the escapees'.
Fortunately the press went straight to the Prison service. They released the pics straghtaway, and, asked about the police refusal and human rights, said something to the effect of "how ****** stupid can you get?".
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jan 8, 2007 9:06:03 GMT
And, far more controversially and seriously (for freedom of choice), Exeter University are banning the Christian Union from their official societies because the CU inisist on people being Christians to join: that apparently contravenes a new charter which states that all Uni societies are to be open to all, whatever their beliefs.
Ignore the 'religion' aspect of this - imagine a rabid communist insisting on joining the Conservative society or whatever.
However atheist you are, who would have thought we'd see the day when one branch of the official state religion is forced to go underground?
|
|
|
|
Post by johnb on Jan 8, 2007 18:56:38 GMT
Phil - I think you're misreading (or misled on) the Exeter story - it isn't the Christian Union that's been refused funding, it's the Evangelical Chistian Union, while the Christian Union is still allowed.
The ECU forced all would-be members to sign a "statement of belief" (not about being Christian, but about its own specific fundamentalist intepretation of Christianity) before allowing people to join. If a Communist or UKIP or Green or Monster Raving Loony chapter at a university were to follow the same procedure, it would be denied funding under the same rules.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Jan 8, 2007 19:37:42 GMT
John: I stand corrected ( I think...). It came straight off BBC local news.
And I didn't pick up on funding at all. The point the beeb made was that it would not be recognised as official so could not advertise on public notice boards etc. Funding wasn't mentioned AFAIK.
And as to there being 2 similar-named societies: it would be nice if the beeb checked their facts before going out on air.
|
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Jan 8, 2007 21:15:32 GMT
The ECU forced all would-be members to sign a "statement of belief" only leaders and speakers yes, it covers the fundamentals, and is specific about them. If Christian is anyone who says they are, then it's not a faith, it's a social club. The DB, while in no way perfect, covers most of the basics, fundamental, tenants of Christian faith and is completely silent about secondary issues allowing all possible viewpoints with respect to them. The whole thing started someone who considered themselves a Christian disagreed with their Doctrinal Basis so demanded that the SU renamed them. They did, and the CU appealed, they lost the appeal (as the appeal process called for a referendum by the whole of the SU (ie every student at Exeter) and not enough people voted for it to be valid). This is like an American (or a Rugby fan) demanding that the Government changed the name of the FA to the "Association Football Association" because it takes a less liberal line on what body parts can touch the ball, and they play football mostly using their hands. However that isn't the main complaint - the main complaint is that the SU then froze the accounts of the ECU, and then disaffiliated them. The frozen accounts is the big one, followed by the disaffiliation. Birmingham CU won a similar battle against it's SU for freezing their accounts, and are further along the road with the battle to get reinstated. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2007 3:09:02 GMT
When the BOFs were in their teens, school girls wore Robertson's gollywog badges to indicate they had lost their virginity. . That's a new one on me!! I was (perhaps) too innocent at the time to know that. So what did that say about the teenage fellas that wore them?? It was around 1960 that I'm talking about... The fellas didn't wear golliwog badges then. At least, not at my school. (Although, as it was a Public School, quite a few of them should have been in dresses.) |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jan 27, 2007 21:16:21 GMT
Well folks the competition is this coming tuesday! (And since thursday is battle of the bands i'll be a nervous wreck by the end of the week!) Sorry to bump the thread but was wondering if there are any gems people might like to add. I think i've finished the speech (to the full 6 minutes!) and am trying to learn it by heart. I'll publish it (if people want) after the event.
Thanks again for all your help. I dont know where i'd have got half the stuff from if it wasnt for you guys! Special thanks to Phil, Colin, Slowjoecrow, Luke - your ideas are all in there as well as others i might have forgotten!
Now the only worrying part is what question i will be asked on the subject. Shame i wont know that till the night!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dmitri on Jan 27, 2007 23:07:40 GMT
I'll publish it (if people want) after the event. Yes, if possible. At least, we'd like to know the outcome.
Incidentally, a PC equivalent for an 'idiot' is 'an intellectual majority representative' ;D. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,347
|
Post by Colin on Jan 28, 2007 14:01:30 GMT
Good luck matey |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jan 30, 2007 21:18:22 GMT
I have just got back from the competition and..... my team came third!! Which i'm quite pleased about because it's the first time i've ever done anything like this before, we get recognised by the judges and i dont have to go do it again in the next round!
Once again, thank you all for your help - i wouldnt have got half the decent material without you lot! Some of your points raised a chuckle! As promised here is the speech. Sadly i did over run a bit, but the judges said time penalties were inflicted on all teams, so it didnt matter. And, obviously, i did vary parts as i read it.
“I have lived long enough to know that things never remain quite the same for very long”. An apt way for the Queen to open her speech this Christmas and an apt way to open this one.
And it is with the slightly indirect, but nevertheless appreciated, support of Her Majesty that I would like to talk to you about political correctness, and the ridiculous extremes that all in society are now facing in order to save themselves from offending others. For the purposes of those in the audience not fully acquainted with political correctness, it is the concept of using language it such a way it avoids any form of offence or discrimination. For example my learned friend Eleanor here is the “chairperson” rather than the previously accepted “chairman”. A change of suffix I am sure she is thrilled about. Incidentally, a local parish council had a female chairperson who even refused to be called the “chair” because she didn’t want to be sat on. I guess you just can’t win!
It’s worth noting, that, yes I accept the idea of political correctness. No one can challenge something that saves people from unnecessary upset. And yes, I accept that some members of the audience may fully support it. But don’t you think it has gone too far? Her Majesty went on to say in her speech “One of the things that has not changed all that much for me is the celebration of Christmas”. I’m afraid it has, my dear. Christmas is now offensive. Apparently… The Red Cross has banned Christmas and, excuse the cliché of a statistic, 70% of surveyed employers said they would not decorate offices at Christmas in case they offend people of other faiths. So what’s next? Going by this reasoning it is time for the Red Cross to have a name change. Using “red” in their name may offend people of a rather flushed looking complexion, and a “cross” is the symbol of Christianity. Yet if the head of state, a figure of national pride and a symbol of all things British feels she can use the term “Christmas” then so can I.
And is one of the nations most loved children’s writer to be deemed a “racist”? I am, of course, referring to the legendary Enid Blyton, and her creation “The Three Golliwogs”. It would be interesting to know how many people feel her book “Noddy” is an offensive story. Given it was banned in a local primary school because, and I kid you not, Noddy showed “homosexual tendencies” and “Big Ears” was being discriminated against because he had big ears, somebody obviously was. Maybe it was the same people who decided the “Fat Controller” should now be referred to as “Sir Topham Hatt”. Now a days we read about, and I owe all thanks to author James Finn Garner for these analogies, “Snow White taking refuge with seven vertically challenged men, Little Red Riding Hood setting up a household based on mutual respect and co operation and an Emperor who was not naked but merely endorsed a clothing optional lifestyle.” Come on people. I’m looking a round the room and I’m seeing people who read The Ugly Duckling and not correct, inoffensive “The Duckling that was judged on its Personal Merits and not on Its Physical Appearance” and, apart from a few who look a bit worn round the ages, you look fine.
It’s not just England who is suffering either. It has reached the other side of the world. In Australia, pets are known as “companion animals”. No, I don’t know why either. In case they get offended I suppose. And at this point I think I could sit down in the knowledge that I have proved my point perfectly. But I have six minutes to fill, so on we must press. And by using the word “press” I would like to apologise to any journalists. I didn’t mean to offend you.
How many people here actually know the politically correct phrases? I hope I don’t embarrass her, but whilst writing this piece of lexical art, Eleanor here admitted she would love to help, but she doesn’t know much about the subject. Either it was a very poor excuse for laziness, or she is one of the masses who views political correctness as another pointless bureaucracy devised by a jobs worth trying to justify his (or her) salary. And whilst we are temporarily digressing, I wonder how many people really view political correctness? Do the younger generation believe its worthwhile, or a waste of time? Was it originally a sound idea that spiralled out of control when minority groups figured they could exploit it? On the other hand, do the older generation who have lived in a time of political correctness and non political correctness change the way they speak? Or does everyone do as they please?
Let’s find out what people think. Let’s question ourselves a bit. Let’s have a politically incorrect joke. Brace yourselves…
Why do women have small feet?
So they can stand closer to the sink.
So how are we feeling? Mortally offended? Furious? Are men trying to suppress a laugh so they don’t deemed sexist, or, more to the point, trying to surpass a slap to the back of the head? Yet the simplest jovial comment can go totally wrong. Even if no one of the minority races are around. Watching every word we say, refraining from saying some things, surely that compromises our free speech?
Speaking of speech, with such a vast range of ages and varying vocabularies, I doubt that we are all singing from the same hymn sheet. What is the correct term for someone in a wheel chair? And if I asked for suggestions I dare say no one would offer an idea for fear of getting it wrong. So we ignore this little bit of awkwardness and quietly move on.
Furthermore, political correctness is giving us tunnel vision. It is forcing us to see the label. It is forcing us to distinguish a person. It is forcing us to do what it is working so hard to attempt to stop. Think about this for a moment. The origins of political correctness seemed to originate through race issues. While previously acceptable to call someone “black”, it is now frowned upon. I recall a film I once watched where one man of a minority group referred to another of the same group with a politically incorrect reference. Yet when his friend of the majority did the same, he got quite a beating. Fictional example I know, but it does happen. Why should there be a different set of rules for one group, and another set of rules for another? I believe the correct term would be, ‘apartheid’.
And on this slightly damning note, I would like to conclude with asking people not to abide by political correctness, but to abide by common sense. We all have it, even Horizontally Gifted Male Sibling contestants. That’s Big Brother, to you more offensive lot. Although political correctness works in theory, so does communism. So let’s just try and get on with each other without having to re write the dictionary. We have bigger things to worry about than whether “woman” is spelt with a “y” rather than an “a”. And when we talk, does it even matter how we spell things? Political correctness working? Over my living impaired body.
Thank You.
And, again, thank you very much for your help.
|
|
. 
