Did you know: the term "racist" has been overused to the point it became meaningless (or almost meaningless). Now when people hear the term "racist", people no longer believe it, as they think they were saying it to be desperate. If you called a storeowner "racist" for denying service to an African-American because of his/her skin (when that was the real reason), then I think your use of the term is justified. However, most of the times it was used, it was only to strip personal power from someone or to object to a norm we were living with, including:
- A conservative that is winning a debate.
- Voter ID laws, stand-your-ground laws, guns, and police.
- Supporting a non-white conservative.
- Opposing Obama and/or his policies and actions.
- Punishing a non-white person (such as giving an F for getting more than 40% incorrect answers), even when deserved.
The list can go on and on, and you can see how ridiculous the term is. They also use that term as an excuse for bullying. Under no circumstance is it acceptable to bully anyone. If they are bigots, bullying them doesn't make you any better. If they're not, but you're accusing them of it, then you're the bad guy for accusations and bullying. What's pretty funny is that in the 1800's to the mid 1900's, the liberals were the tolerant ones while the conservatives were intolerant. Today's liberals are much more intolerant than historical conservatives while today's conservatives were at least on the par with historical liberals. Political correctness, safe spaces, trigger warnings, no-platforms, and social justice warriors all prove this point, and there's still more from the left.
Conservatives and liberals are as bad as each other when it comes down to it, they are both intolerant in many different ways to each other and saying things like "Today's liberals are much more intolerant than historical conservatives" is ignorant unless you have valid evidence which you haven't provided, you only have opinions not facts. Each side has bad features to them and it's understandable that you, a conservative, would leave out all the conservative bad sides in modern society because you are biased, which again is completely understandable.
I have to admit, I did make a blanket statement. But I do have to admit that not all liberals do that. But on both sides, the radicals give the whole group a bad name, which makes opponents generalize the whole group and not just the radicals. That's kinda why I have been harsh, but I'm not lost, so I have no disability getting along with liberals.
Sorry if the formatting is a little wonky. I'm on my phone and reading the firm between games ok Mario Kart 8.
Firstly, why should anyone respect your opinion if you think respecting others opinions is "bologna"? You need to be willing to extend the olive branch first if you expect the same respect in return. And, again, if you show respect and others don't, take it in stride and be above that.
Secondly what's "trashy" or offensive to you might be hilarious to 10other people. So try not to police what people joke about. If you don't like it, voice your opinion, and if it doesn't stop, remove yourself from the situation.
(Tbh, the formatting looks fine to me!)
I'm not asking for people to respect my opinions, I'm saying that if they don't respect me as a human being that I won't be obligated to extend the same courtesy their way.
For your entertainment, I came up with a tier system for coercive political correctness, which measures how ridiculous it is and how severe it gets. There's low, medium, and high. And no, stuff like ban on slurs and stereotypes don't count, because they are literally offensive. Political correctness (like what we were talking about) attacks non-offensive stuff some people find offensive when most don't. Likewise, non-coercive PC (like adding more gay characters to your own story by choice) isn't included in the tier system.
You don't have to take the tier system seriously, but this is something I came up with to describe political correctness and how bad it can be.
- Low Tier - Basically language police. Some words (other than racial slurs and stereotypes) are forbidden usage as alternatives are suggested. Some people can even get punished or at least directed to an alternative. Milder cases include changing "Christmas" to "holiday" and changing "BC/AD" to "BCE/CE". The worst cases of this is an attack other words because of one or two definitions or relations to something else, as well as an attack on words that only apply to like 95% to 99% percent of the population and not the other population. An example of that includes NYC's ban on the words "dinosaur", "birthday", "Halloween", "divorce", and "television" on standardized testing.
- Medium Tier - This is when political correctness starts to go out of control. It's not just language police at an extreme, but also the ban on some stuff because of how easily offended people can get or how not everyone follows the same customs or whatever. For example, a beach officer got fired for calling Trayvon Martin a "thug" (and this was on Facebook while off duty). Also in the same year, some teachers (or school faculty) in Oregon have declared peanut butter and jelly sandwiches to be "racist" because of how in other cultures some don't eat sandwich bread (which meant they were banned from discussion). The most infamous case of this was the suspension of five students for wearing American flag shirts on Cinco de Mayo in 2010. And this tier of political correctness is more than just that. Censorship of art and literature made prior to 2000 and censorship of history also goes here.
- High Tier - By this point, it's not even about ridiculous ways to minimize offensiveness for all. This is where double standards and PC discrimination go. The bullying and discrimination of white people, men, Christians, the rich, straight people, and American-born US citizens goes here (which includes portraying them as intolerant without proof). It also includes the bullying and discrimination of non-whites, LGBT, and women that associate with the Republican Party or are at least conservative. People who support PC at this level would be perfectly fine or would encourage it if all the groups I mentioned above were being bullied or discriminated out of hate, but if the same happens to anybody else for any reason, then they would take offense and do crazy things. This is also where no-platforms, safe spaces, and trigger warnings go under. I might even include the whole "cultural appropriation" nonsense under this group.
The Low Tier is only scorned by conservatives, sometimes scorned by moderates. But as I go higher up, it starts to include liberal opponents, not just conservatives and moderates. The High Tier is only supported by far-left Millennials and far-left Gen Z-ers.
It has come to my attention that the SJW definition of "triggered" is completely different to the normal definition of 'triggered'.
Being triggered does not mean "being upset" or "being offended" or "being angry," but instead it means "having a significant anxiety attack or strong emotional response via a flashback to survived trauma". Being 'triggered' isn't being upset because you saw the word 'dog' in someone's post, it's hearing or seeing something that causes a flashback (and flashbacks suck). Basically, the only content that should have trigger warnings is explicit/violent content picturing violence, sexual content/sexual abuse or blood and gore. Not the word "Christmas", "food", "dog", "cat", "math(s)", "hexagons", "man", "woman", i.e words that are used in everyday in the English language.
Literally anything can be a trigger. For instance, Christmas could be a trigger for someone whose loved one died on Christmas, or someone who was assaulted on or near Christmas, or a non-Christian who faced extreme hostility during the season. I'm not saying that all Christmas-related content should come with trigger warnings, but I am saying that triggers aren't always conventional. I remember a post by someone who is triggered by popsicles, clear broth, and jell-o, because those were the only things they were allowed to eat during a very long, unpleasant stay in the hospital. Food can also be a trigger for people with eating disorders, or alcohol can be a trigger for recovering alcoholics, etc.
Also, trigger responses look different in different people. Not everyone has flashbacks. Some people become withdrawn, some get aggressive, some have panic attacks, some fall into depressive episodes, some relapse into harmful habits, and so on.
When I use the word "trigger", I try to stick to only the strict definition to it, and that would mean "activate" (in terms of switches). If I triggered something, it means I pressed a button or pulled a switch on a machine, causing it to do something (like opening doors or moving parts). Somehow, people distorted that word, making it mean "remind people of a bad time" or "offend". Now it has become one of the worst words in the English language.
Literally anything can be a trigger. For instance, Christmas could be a trigger for someone whose loved one died on Christmas, or someone who was assaulted on or near Christmas, or a non-Christian who faced extreme hostility during the season. I'm not saying that all Christmas-related content should come with trigger warnings, but I am saying that triggers aren't always conventional. I remember a post by someone who is triggered by popsicles, clear broth, and jell-o, because those were the only things they were allowed to eat during a very long, unpleasant stay in the hospital. Food can also be a trigger for people with eating disorders, or alcohol can be a trigger for recovering alcoholics, etc.
Also, trigger responses look different in different people. Not everyone has flashbacks. Some people become withdrawn, some get aggressive, some have panic attacks, some fall into depressive episodes, some relapse into harmful habits, and so on.
When I use the word "trigger", I try to stick to only the strict definition to it, and that would mean "activate" (in terms of switches). If I triggered something, it means I pressed a button or pulled a switch on a machine, causing it to do something (like opening doors or moving parts). Somehow, people distorted that word, making it mean "remind people of a bad time" or "offend". Now it has become one of the worst words in the English language.
You're not allowed to call them dinosaurs any more. It's speciesist. You have to call them pre-petroleum persons.
-- snip --
Basically, the NYC standardized testing was banning some words because of a controversy it relates to or because of one definition they object to, or whatever. It can take one bad context or one controversy to completely taint a word.
Here are the reasons some everyday words mentioned were banned by NYC standardized testing:
-- snip --
And all of this happened before political correctness got worse.