Define PC and SJW!

Post Reply New Topic

True, but this kind of behaviour is notable for its rarity (and even then my understanding is that views are mixed in the Latino community). It happens, but it's unusual. It's remembered as a bad example (and yes, I can cite others).

That having been said, it's a somewhat simplistic view of racism. Racism is as much - or more - about the systemic consequences of hierarchy as it is about attacking a black person in the street, just as ableism is more about our 85% unemployment rate than it is about calling an Aspie a r*tard.

Throwing around the word racist (or ableist) is easy, but the nuances need to be thought about. If anything, that's a big part of social justice campaigning.

My own preference is to side with social justice against social injustice, and not just when it's about Aspies.

From the story of the Nine Hostages?

Yep.

I can see why people would get upset by a constant drip-drip-drip of racism, homophobia and so on. I get upset by the constant drip-drip-drip related to Aspie traits.

I don't know what you mean, then, by "actual bigotry". Sure, physically attacking someone, or Uncle Jack mouthing off over the dinner table, but actual bigotry manifests itself in many ways, whether it's the criminalisation of the Black community, especially in the US, or our dismal employment rate.

The Right howls about enforced conformity when their hate speech is silenced, but seem to be quite happy with it when they expect Aspies to pass or the LGBTQ community to shut up and be cured. That's why I don't want alliances with them.

I don't see ABA as "micromanaged coddling". Child abuse, (and enforced conformity) certainly. Coddling, no.

Isn't it pertinent to a discussion on racism?

How?

Black people say they were enslaved, for somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 yrs.

Of which I was aware, white people would have been enslaved, for somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 yrs.

I'm making dinner, so I only have time for a short reply.

Short version, there is a difference between the chattel slavery suffered by black people in the US and elsewhere, and the forms of servitude suffered by some white immigrants (many forced) to the Americas. Finding links isn't hard, but dinner is about to burn.

True. I got a well paid job through affirmative action. The right would hate that. The right whingers would say it's not fair but my schooling wasn't suited to aspies. I got bad grades so I couldn't get into college so I could get the job the traditional way. I figure leapfrogging into the job is the perfect way to regain balance after the ill-suited education I was forced into.

I would also like affirmative action jobs to be given to other groups who are at an educational disadvantage. The right wing just was us to "try harder in school". That doesn't always work.

(I empathetically listen for an oven alarm, in the background.)

Ariel said that Egyptians were anatomically Caucasoid.

Others would say that whites were in hard bondage, under black people, who ruled Egypt.

Scota is interpreted to be of the half-tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh.

That's a weak interpretation of very patchy data that I understand has now been pretty much discredited.

Either way, I don't see how it's relevant to a discussion of addressing modern racism and other abuses of hierarchy.

I was not necessarily talking about about a white person telling a black person directly what they should be offended by, that probably is rare (unlike people telling autistics we should not call ourselves "autistic" and call ourselves "a person with autism" because "autistic" is offensive). It is a whole bunch of mostly white people screaming "racism" or "microagression". This is not rare in certain locales like college campuses. The media which banned using the literal word "n****r" in favor of the "N-Word" in all contexts is also guilty of something similar. The mostly white people who run these organizations made assumptions about what offends black people. That is a racist attitude.

"Racism" was once defined as the belief that people of certain race or races are inferior or prejudice against people based on their race. That was it. It has been changed to something to pretty much all white people are a part of intentionally or not. It has also been expanded to mean bigotry and prejudice against not only blacks but most ethnic groups. This was not done because it was easy but it was done to guilt trip people to advance a social agenda. The belief that being born white automatically gives you an unfair privileges is racism by the so called outdated definition because it makes a negative assumption about individual people based on their race. Because it is done for the greater good does not change this and two wrongs still does not make a right no matter how laughably quaint that idea seems in 2017.

Systematic racism is overdone because it is based on false assumptions about people in general. There is no mass conspiracy against black people consciously or subconsciosly (same with NT's against Autistics). There are groups of people and people in power that do conspire and make decisions based on racist views. But of most of if is if you are a minority of any kind it is usually going harder because often you are at a disadvantage for a number of reasons including bigotry. Decisions big and small are going to be made that hurt you. This is not necessarily systematic prejudice but the facts of life or life is unfair however you want to phrase it.

All the above does not mean efforts should not be made to ease these disadvantages. But "educating" people by expanding the meaning of words and intimidating people were flawed tactics to begin with that did help to ease unfairness in the short run in some cases but was overdone and has run its course.

He makes a valid argument. However, I wonder how much contact he has with rural America. I saw plenty of low-hanging fruit on the branches in Texas. However, almost no one objected. When I objected, I got social support about half the time.

When I moved from a small town to a giant metropolis, I saw more active PC discussion and almost no bigotry. It seems like the top universities have extensive PC activity, and have to deliberately misconstrue a scientific hypothesis as bigotry in order to satisfy their appetite for complaining.

It therefore seems plausible that PC has outlived its purpose in the places where it has the most support, but that doesn't address the many remaining unreconstructed regions of the US. If PC has outlasted its usefulness, then it has happened because it worked in some places but will never work in others in its present form.

I used the word unreconstructed deliberately. I heard comparisons of SJW-types to carpetbaggers.

His video is a good four minute summary of a lot of my posts here and elsewhere. I have theorized that ABA being accepted as the gold standard treatment for autistic children and the big push to diagnose children in infancy is a result of what he calls hyper-parenting.

I can't say I'd argue about the countryside. I'd worry though, and that worry seems to be shared by the Youtube skeptic community - if not all at least most, that they'll do such pernicious things judicially and legislatively (or really are beginning to - add their speech policing on campuses) that they'll make everything they stand for something that public perceives as needing to be fought. That's when you have the urban suburbs as well start increasingly taking on the ethos of the countryside and eventually whatever social progress has been made against real bigotry starts rolling backward.