Probably because arguing against political correctness in the manner Žižek does isn't the same as saying dismissive, demeaning, and hostile conduct should be condoned or ignored?

no because screaming racism at people is a MUCH better way of getting people to see the fault in their ways

political correctness has been weaponized, so the intention behind the words means NOTHING, only the perception. Even if what you're saying isn't by the culture's norms an "offensive" term, as long as some perceives oppression, you're a privileged bigot.

One of Trump's sons, I believe, made a comparison to taking in refugees with potential terrorists, as eating skittles, when you know a few of them are poisoned.

Now we can argue the logistics behind that statement, and even disagree with it:

however immediately after that speech, he was called a racist. This baffled me, and when i actually found some articles and read them entirely: it was shocking. Apparently after the Micahel Brown shooting (i believe it was that one) there had been a movement in which they handed skittles out around the neighborhood. Thus when the metaphor reference "skittles" i suppose they saw that as racist... somehow.

Because it doesn't even matter what the speaker KNOWS, it matters what the listener FEELS

Actually, it kind of does, but he's too clueless to recognize it. He's making a case that racist jokes are ok because "it's only a joke" He shouldn't mistake that for

Also, predictably enough, it includes fake news. In fact, the Perth Opera company dropped Carmen, because they have a major grant from the public health agency, which recommends not promoting smoking, quite reasonably. It wasn't required, but the management felt that complying with the guidelines of a major donor was reasonable. It has precisely zero to do with "political correctness" Nada. Four pinoccios.

Also, calling it "fake" goes to show how utterly clueless he is about racism sexism and its impacts. How about this. Why don't we spend the next hundred years joking about how stupid men are, how inferior white people are, let's pay men 25% less, just for being men. Let's make men get have to get permisssion from women to own property or engage in contracts. let's make it basically legal for cops to shoot white men at will Let's remove wealth from white men and remove them from any political representation (we can leave a few tokens). Then we can make decades of movies and stories about how dumb and amoral and basically inferior white men are. Then, you can complain about that treatment and we can get all indignant about how you're just being :politically correct" and "fake." I'll believe this guy's perspective when he's spent a year being black.

Basically, this guy is a total crank who understands virtually nothing about race, politics or anything else much. What is this guy known for, being someone's drunken uncle? He understands precisely nothing about the power of language. He's unbelievably naive about the world, frankly.

"Why don't we spend the next hundred years joking about how stupid men are"

just watch most shows with a female lead. really, men get pissed on a LOT.

"how inferior white people are"

ever heard of Polish jokes? oh i'm sorry, you don't see different cultures. just skin color. piss off

"let's pay men 25% less, just for being men."

alternative fact is alternative


Quick question: is south park racist?

That's right, it doesn't matter what the speaker knows (or more likely doesn't). Ignorance is no excuse.

And why shouldn't denunciation of racism be weaponized? God knows racism has been weaponized for at least half a millenium. Why on earth should ANYONE put up with that kind of bullshit?

(and if you can't tell what was wrong with Kushner's analogy, then try talking with someone who isn't an ignorant ass for an explanation. And as for why the Michael Brown skittles were entirely different, look up Trayvon Martin. Again, if you had actual knowledge and understanding of American society from anyone's perspective other than your own, you wouldn't need to be told. But you do. Fine. The first time, is ok, but after that if you behave like an ass, then expect to be attacked harshly. Because you'll deserve it. People have dealt with absolutely inexcusable shit for centuries and still it goes on. Give me one good reason anyone should have any patience with racism or sexism, even at a small microaggression level. We live in the twenty-first century. This shouldn't be a new concept for anyone. There aren't any excuses for it anymore.

A hundred years. Not a few shows, but ALL shows. We need a TV environment where EVERY man is protrayed as an idiot.
What's alternative about the fact that women get paid 23% less? That's just the facts.

(And, it will amuse you to know, that I got silenced at a liberal discussion blog taking women to task for peddling this "oh, men are all stupid and women make better decisions" bull crap. If you substitute female chauvinism for male chauvinism, you are just perpetutating the problem and are no feminist. THAT was a popular view, let me tell you)

I have no idea about South Park. I don't watch it. However, it depends on the instance and the context.

I am not sure what is being argued here because I haven't really engaged in the thread, but political correctness is an effort to limit free speech and also was designed by cultural marxists to polarize society. One of the reasons I like President Trump is because he doesn't subscribe to PC behavior/thought and views it as a determent to society (as do I).

"What's alternative about the fact that women get paid 23% less?"

what's "alternative" is the fact that it is done "just for being women" it's a LOT more complicated than that.

"I have no idea about South Park. I don't watch it. However, it depends on the instance and the context."

hahahahahaha ok man, the first few episodes are fairly childish... and so is every other episode... but it's a pretty damn great show. EXTREMELY anti-PC and hilariously well made. Eric Cartman is possibly the most hilarious character ever to grace TV, and he is a racist, sexist, vile 8 year old.

South Park is a good show.

And if you don't want to be perceived as a privileged bigot, then don't act like one. It's not complicated.

Let's say, you say "Obama should grow a pair" To you, that may be relatively innocuous. People say that commonly. Fair enough.

Then someone informs you that, that's actually really problematic, since castration was a pretty common component of lynching and in fact you've just alluded to a particularly barbaric history directed specifically at "uppity" black men. In light of the huge amount of racist abuse hurled at the President, you are informed that's pretty offensive. Do you

a) say "Gee, I didn't know that. Sorry. Won't do it again. I'll find another term"
b) say "You're being oversensitive and politically correct. Get over yourself" and keep using the term

If you answered choice A, then congrats, youre a decent human being.
If you answered choice B, then you're acting like a privileged bigot.

See the difference? "Political correctness" is invariably a term used when dismissing the concerns of others. It's never used for any other purpose, really.

Actually, much of it is "just for being women" and there's a lot of research to back that up. That's just the reality. If you submit identical resumes with a "black sounding" name, you'll get half as many interviews than you do with the same resume with a traditional "white" name. Pay disparities for women abound and are systematic. Of course, you can try to deny that, begging the question of why you resist this basic fact? Please see the example of my post above.

Well, maybe South Park has a lot of racist and sexist stuff in it. Depends on context. It always does.

"Perth Opera company dropped Carmen, because they have a major grant from the public health agency, which recommends not promoting smoking"

Does Carmen actually promote smoking?

You say context matters, but then your above post clearly would say otherwise, as I guarantee no one saying "grow a pair" to Obama is referencing lynching.

Also I'd like to point out that the post
"Actually, much of it is "just for being women" and there's a lot of research to back that up. That's just the reality. If you submit identical resumes with a "black sounding" name, you'll get half as many interviews than you do with the same resume with a traditional "white" name. Pay disparities for women abound and are systematic. Of course, you can try to deny that, begging the question of why you resist this basic fact? Please see the example of my post above."
Begins by saying the issue is a gender issue then jumps via non sequitur to being a race issue, then comments about how that's a gender issue without ever calling it a race issue.

"Actually, much of it is "just for being women" and there's a lot of research to back that up"

the most i've ever seen is a 5% gap, and even those studies don't take into account a multitude of factors.


Gender Pay Gap Sources:

http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048

http://money.howstuffworks.com/gender-gap1.htm

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2012-08-13/don-t-blame-discrimination-for-gender-wage-gap

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/davidgreen/9666597/The_gender_pay_gap_does_not_exist/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505125_162-28246928/the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-complete-myth/

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-gender-wage-gap-is-a-myth-2012-07-26

http://www.businessinsider.com/actually-the-gender-pay-gap-is-just-a-myth-2011-3?op=1

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/wage-gap_b_2073804.html

http://oratorasaurus.tumblr.com/post/41131660349/the-so-called-pay-gap

http://tgjesusfreak.tumblr.com/post/59991585178

http://wwww.examiner.com/x-22884-Canada-Politics-Examiner~y2010m2d22-Gender-pay-gap-is-not-what-activists-claim

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/vickiwoods/7957186/Sorry-ladies-Im-not-worried-about-wage-gaps.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/opinion/22Sommers.html?_r=1&hp

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/the_wage_gap_myth.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa3pKN3XUKM&feature=youtu.be

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/06/business/economy/06women.html?_r=2

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/biggest-shock-fridays-payroll-report-sorry-men

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/share-of-men-in-labor-force-at-all-time-low/?src=recg

http://www.businessinsider.com/women-in-tech-make-more-money-and-land-better-jobs-than-men-20

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0752118220071107?feedType=R

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=10630664

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/03/nyregion/03women.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

http://www.ksee24.com/news/local/Young-Women-Earn-More-159818705.html

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2011/03/14/jobs-where-women-earn-more-than-men/http://www.womenintechnology.co.uk/news/young-women-earn-more-than-men%E2%80%94news-800761492

http://www.womensviewsonnews.org/2011/10/young-women-now-earn-more-than-men-in-uk/http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0752118220071107?feedTy%E2%80%A6

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/BUSINESS/03/15/optout.revolution/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23413243

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/Careers/06/13/dads.work/index.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-05-04-equal-parenting_N.htm

http://www.science20.com/news_articles/women_science_no_discrimination_says_cornell_study-75984

http://social.dol.gov/blog/myth-busting-the-pay-gap/

http://www.payscale.com/career-news/2009/12/do-men-or-women-choose-majors-to-maximize-income

here’s how the conversation ACTUALLY goes:

me:

“maybe Obama should grow a pair with Putin”

friend: “yeah, i know”

outside 3rd person listening in on conversation:

“actually castration of African american men is a serious part of our history that you really shouldn’t laugh about like that, especially since you're obviously very privileged”

me:

“uh... ok, sorry”

3rd person:

"uh... i don't think you really are"

(continues rant until i tell them to mind their own business)


I've been exposed to THAT scenario several dozen times: i have only ever seen YOUR scenario once. And this isn't me trolling around the internet, i mean this is me in RED STATE Oklahoma, and i got some redneck friends

Hmmm, I bet Oklahoma wishes it had a mute button.

my first source is outdated, please ignore it and use this

https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/public-policy/hr-public-policy-issues/documents/gender%20wage%20gap%20final%20report.pdf

oh... we do.

The rebuttal to @Yanik's article is here:

http://amptoons.com/blog/?p=10083

Among the points raised in the rebuttal was that the study was commissioned by the Bush administration. But it goes on with a criticism of a number of things. If you read the study, you should read the rebuttal too.

One of the biggest issues with wage gap is women just don't enter high-paying STEM fields and even when they do, they pick the lowest paying ones, such as biology or environmental engineering. Once a woman (or anyone) enters college, though, the chance of them picking a STEM major if they didn't already have interest is pretty much zero. Girls needs to be encouraged to enjoy STEM starting at a young age.

@abgemacht, I think you got things backwards. It is when women enter a field that the pay goes down, not that women enter fields where the pay is already low (although undoubtedly some do).

@Hauta

where do you find this shit?

"2) The single largest factor that CONSAD found “explained” the wage gap is the difference in hours worked. Since women are more likely to work part-time, and since CONSAD (unlike standard wage gap studies) included part-time workers in their sample, in effect CONSAD is comparing mostly female part-time workers to mostly male full-time workers. Then — what a surprise! — they determined that the difference in hours worked accounts for a huge portion of the wage gap they measured."

actually, the wage gap comes from ALL women earnings compared to ALL men earnings.

eliminating part time workers from statistics is NOT representative of the total wage gap.

furthermore, there is more than just the CONSAD report i posted

@Hauta

What? Do you have anything to back that up?

Hey ogion, when will the racist sierra club add some native americans to their executive board?

@yanik, I think the rebuttal was making the point that the author included part-time workers in the sample and that the difference in hours worked actually masked the PAYRATE/HR difference. So, no one objects to a pay gap based solely on men working more hours than women. The problem is when the hourly rate for men exceeds the hourly rate for women with all else being equal (e.g., same experience).

@abgemacht, try this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/upshot/as-women-take-over-a-male-dominated-field-the-pay-drops.html?_r=0

I just searched for "does pay decline when women enter the field" in google. There are other articles of course.

@Hauta

"and that the difference in hours worked actually masked the PAYRATE/HR difference."

pay per hours is one of the factors CONSAD specifically DID account for.

@Brad, here's the board of the Sierra Club:
http://www.sierraclub.org/board

Kinda white but not entirely and also hard to tell if anyone has native american ancestors.