:laugh3:
you are funny!!! :laugh3:

[quote]Originally posted by calyman
[quote]Originally posted by ElProximo
[quote]Originally posted by calyman
Wrong on that. I not only consider her censorship proposals and complaints 'allowable' but even though I disagreed with them I also considered them worthy of consideration.
That is why I engaged them.

Well we agree on that except for your last sentence and that is almost a self-contradicting proposal but there you go.

At lot of this is relating to Marcus' BB rant and even though he was wrong on one charge,
and,
even though Marcus is an intellectual hypocrite,
yet,
He was correct in so far as blaming so many of the 'PC Police' for actually stirring and encouraging racism (in a sort of backhanded way).
I would much rather have someone go about the BB house making all sorts of racist opinions - IF those are sincerely held. (same for anything else too),
and,
The reason I totally welcome that free speech is because that is exactly how and when any opposing views get the chance to win and make a difference.
IF it is wrong and socially unhelpful to mock a way a pakistani speaks english then let it be seen. Bring is to the light of day. Explain why it is.
Show the consequences.
Let the people actually work out why its bad, wrong or good etc.
IF the person is in the wrong and has the worse idea then let it lead to bad consequences for them.
So be it.
By putting down a 'no talk' rule and censoring any ideas you end up actually 'freezing' the various people in their various world views never to be changed, convinced and maybe worse never knowing WHY such a thing is wrong.
30 years from now. An adult is asked why its wrong to criticise homosexuality.
They have no idea. Cant remember where the taboo started and only know that 'society says so'.
You just dont!
That is a bleak future.

My god i feel like i've missed something big here :puzzled:

I'm a straight married woman -not that it makes any difference- but i don't even notice half these comments on people sl*gging sexuality i'm thinking i gloss over it because it doesn't matter who likes who we are all humans at the end of the day :shrug:

Not sure if that's good or bad thing either way i'm cool :shrug:

......except, you'll find people like the original poster explaining their thoughts on why mindsets like homophobia is repellant anmd respondents like yourself, basically advising them to "shut up". While the majority of your post makes some sort of sense, you perform a Volte-face from your original position; such that, I'm not sure what your clear position on bigotry is.

Too many people are eager to jump on the anti "political correctness" bandwaggon, losing sighth of the need for such. Things have improved in society's understanding and acceptance of ethnic minorities, different sexualities, women rights, disabilities etc. All due to "acceptance of "political correctness", yet some Dinosaurs still see this as a censuring factor in peoples lives. The usual reactionary falsehoods are dragged out (Christians not being able to celebrate Christmas, toddlers not singing Baa Baa Black sheep, Manhole covers being refered to as Personhole covers etc). Inevitably, when looking for concrete examples of such ludicrous claims, they are usually found to have started in the deranged mind of some hate merchant. All such examples are usually given to appease the typical Sun / Daily Mail reader type, who would want the world to be frozen somewhere in 1950's mindset.

Bigotry, prejudice, ignorance etc, should always be challenged. The intolerant should always be forced to justify their intolerance. That is how 30 years down the line, people today still know why any form of hatred and ignorance must be challenged. Most people have taken "political correctness" at it's core value, which is to increase the level of tolerance and understanding of those who are perceived as "different" from the norm

Sure but you cannot challenge these ideas and attitudes if they are effectively banned from the social arena.

I do not care for 'political correctness' when applied to language word-think rules and laws. This is actually what 'freezes' the negative connotations and even gives them more power than ever.
As an example of this see the Clint Eastwood film 'Gran Torino'. In particular Eastwood who (somewhat stuck in the 50s) is all too happy to banter with his old mates "Haven't seen you for ages you big dumb Polak" who replies with endearing teases "You old Dago Wop!"
[wildly paraphrasing from a year ago memory but you get the idea here]
Now. this might seem like a bizarre human social peculiarity but what has happened is that what were once serious 'racism' issues have been allowed to freely express themselves and be worked out between people ultimately evolving to a point where their ethnic identifications became endearing and even the racist name-calling has turned to endearment.
Indeed the 'men from the 50s' have progressed far more than those bridled with PC rulings.
'Chink' is not only still highly offensive but its, if anything, become more dangerous, more volatile and certainly has not progressed at all since 1970s when the first 'PC Wordspeak' rules started being introduced.
Now you can be charged with writing 'chink' in a newspaper.
Yes, it absolutely was PC people in government thinkspeak ministries who renamed a mountain from 'Chinaman Mountain' to (probably 'Climatechange Mountain'),
but,
No, that is NOT a rumour started by anti-PC people. In fact the actual BS rumour is PC People speading a story that they actually found out it was from Anti-PC people.
Anyways,
'Chinaman' was not even regarded as offensive by Chinese people UNTIL it was weirdly designated as such and empowered as such by PC people.

Marcus is a fuktard but his rant was correct this far (and as seen in my example) that much of the racism and racial offense in our society IS INSTIGATED AND EVEN CREATED by the same self-righteous allegedly progressive 'tolerant' types who are actually MAKING racism and giving power to it.

btw.. its not working.
Obvious example:
60 years ago it would have been absolutely unheard of to see some of the Richard Dawkins books absolutely spewing hate at a minority group and their religion. 'spewing hate' doesn't even describe it.
Just blatantly accusing them of being wrong, destructive and evil and then viciously hacking and all but urinating on their thoughts, ideas and custom.
Even worse is Christopher Hitchens and 60 years ago that would be almost beyond 'hate speech' and into sheer demonic pornographic gore and savagery.
yet,
It is NOTHING to see either of them showing up on tax-payer funded television with nothing stopping them from promoting and speaking as much venomous hate and vilification of those 'sick and evil baby rapers' and no penalty or censorship but not even a raised eyebrow.
Not even a question of taste is brought up.

So PC Correctness sure as hell didn't work there.
But,
Then again, maybe it did. See it depends. If you mean PC correctness for the ideas, opponents, world views and thoughts and words for which YOU conform with then great,
but,
If you are happy to see it not apply to thoughts and ideas you disagree with with or want to oppose well then that is good too.
Of course that is bald-faced intellectual hypocrisy, selective intolerance and inequality but maybe that is alright with you as long as it gets you where you want to go?

Wow that's deep:blush2:

i don't see any homophobic comments, just like i have seen no racist comments. it really p1sses me off that people are so quick to pull out their prejudice cards as soon as they possibly can. PATHETIC.

I thougt this was a BB forum, not some half educated version of what people can and can't say?
I like Charlie best of the remaining h/mates, and this is based entirely upon his sense of humour, oh and racim is far more widespread on here than homophobia!
Some silly woman the other day made a racist remark, but justified herself by claiming to be asian!

I thought HIRA was your fave helliwontgo? says so on your panel! lol

I haven't seen charlies sense of humour yet, he's a sneaky litle bugger

Hira is my fave.

Charlie I don't mind so far although I can never really tell if people who think he is gay are just playing along with his joke thing about being gay or they actually believe he is serious?

:thumbs:

your lips are flapping in the wind. you are sick heterophobic!!!


http://i674.photobucket.com/albums/v...nbowFlag-1.jpg

You must be at least a teenager. No one in an adulthood could give some weak arguments about homosexuality. But if not, your mind is just like a person who discovered the sex and what is "not allowed" to do. Or maybe, in a tiny possibility, you are a stupid man, maybe hetero, maybe not - who cares?, whose mentality is simpler.

Good on ya. :thumbs:

From some of the comments I've read here, yeah everyone's entitled to their opinions, but when such homophobic views are taken on to a macrocosmic scale, and lgbt people are treated as second class citizens, then I think there's a problem.
Its not so long ago that homosexuality was seen as a mental illness, then there's the aftermath of the stonewall riots....

indeed
:thumbs:

A argument with these people is obviously never going to end. It's pretty much like arguing with a child. I just wish the mods would reign in on them.

I didn't notice it before, but I just saw a really repulsive homophobic thread. If you don't like a housemate that's fine, but to generalize about an entire group of people based on that one housemate is pathetic and ignorant. Some might thing it's funny, but it's actually downright offensive!

Me too!!!goody:hello: