5 ms·

Quote from Neil Gaiman: http://urbanbohemian.com/2015/08/07/neil-gaiman-on-political-correctness/ http://urbanbohemian.com/2015/08/07/neil-gaiman-on-political.

Quote from Neil Gaiman: http://urbanbohemian.com/2015/08/07/neil-gaiman-on-political-correctness/ http://urbanbohemian.com/2015/08/07/neil-gaiman-on-political... I was reading a book (about interjections, oddly enough) yesterday which included the phrase “In these days of political correctness…” talking about no longer making jokes that denigrated people for their culture or for the colour of their skin. And I thought, “That’s not actually anything to do with ‘political correctness’. That’s just treating other people with respect.” Which made me oddly happy. I started imagining a world in which we replaced the phrase “politically correct” wherever we could with “treating other people with respect”, and it made me smile. You should try it. It’s peculiarly enlightening. I know what you’re thinking now. You’re thinking “Oh my god, that’s treating other people with respect gone mad!”

anaisbetts 7y ago
Great comment. This is easy stuff: * If someone from a marginalized (or tbh, any other) group says, "Please call me XYZ", do it * If you use the wrong term, briefly apologize and use the right one instead. That's all you gotta do.
- SamReidHughes 7y ago
  Wrong, you should do the opposite, because they want to control how you think, and you have a duty to keep your thought independent.
  - anaisbetts 7y ago
    Who exactly is "they" here?
  - krapp 7y ago
    >Wrong, you should do the opposite, because they want to control how you think, and you have a duty to keep your thought independent. But... "doing the opposite" as some kind of "duty" because you believe marginalized groups want to control your thoughts is the antithesis of having "independent" thought. Please tell me this place has just broken my ability to detect irony.
  - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
    Hm. Where's the line with this? Would you call your partner what they asked you to call them, or avoid something they say they don't like? What about relatives, friends and neighbours?
- SpaceRaccoon 7y ago
  > Three quarters of African Americans oppose political correctness. This means that they are only four percentage points less likely than whites Why does the author use "African Americans" and then "whites"? I prefer "European American", thank you.
  - wtdata 7y ago
    Because saying "blacks" is politically incorrect while saying "whites" is just fine. Which interestingly just goes further to exemplify this state of "politically correctness gone extreme" which the author is warning us about.
  - Niksko 7y ago
    Cool, I'll call you a European American. It's that easy.
- cljs-js-eval 7y ago
  This doesn't pass a very basic sniff test. All marginalized groups need is to be called some specific terms? This is entirely a question of terminology rather than a fight by marginalized people to achieve specific, better outcomes? That view is so convenient that I have a hard time believing that it's right. edited to remove a typo
  - anaisbetts 7y ago
    I was specifically addressing the anxiety that people are feeling about "saying the wrong thing" and offending someone, it's certainly not all that needs to be done to end marginalization, but many of the other things such as preventing housing and employment discrimination aren't on individuals to fix, it's on the government to enforce
  - krapp 7y ago
    > All marginalized groups need is to be called some specific terms? This is entirely a question of terminology rather than a fight by marginalized people to achieve specific, better outcomes? Calling someone by the terms they prefer is a baseline for common courtesy, from which those better outcomes can follow. Nowhere is it claimed that this is "all marginalized groups need," rather that it's simply the least you can, and should, do. >That view is so convenient that I have a hard time believing that it's right. It isn't right, because you're purposely misrepresenting it an attempt to discredit it through a false dichotomy. Also I don't understand what's "convenient" about it. Are we supposed to infer an ulterior motive on the part of people who want to be called by a certain pronoun?
- tomohawk 7y ago
  All you gotta do is call me Your Royal Highness.
deogeo 7y ago
Political correctness is far more than "treating people with respect". It includes truths you're not allowed to say, and claims you're not allowed to question, no matter how respectfully.
ikeyany 7y ago
Except that example is a bit trivial. How about a harder example. Is it "disrespectful" to say that one of the reasons there are fewer women in engineering is because engineering simply doesn't interest women? This is something that can't be "wondered about" out loud in some circles, including HN. I've seen threads get removed even when the comments on it seemed somewhat in good faith.
- tasty_freeze 7y ago
  Don't stop there. Think about why women are less likely to be interested in it. Think why that might be true in the culture you come from but is not true in other countries. Don't stop at proximate causes and try to find root causes.
- Niksko 7y ago
  It definitely can be discussed. The key is that you had to temper your assertion that the discussion was only 'somewhat' in good faith. Usually the discussions around these things aren't in good faith. Sometimes they're actually in poor faith from BOTH sides. Interpret this as 'people are fallible and bad at discoursing respectfully' rather than 'people don't want to discuss these sensitive topics'
- krapp 7y ago
  > Is it "disrespectful" to say that one of the reasons there are fewer women in engineering is because engineering simply doesn't interest women? No, some women finding engineering fields not to be a fitting career choice, in and of itself, is not controversial. But such arguments never exist in a vacuum, or without context. They typically lean into the premise that women are uninterested in engineering due to "innate differences between gender," claiming that women can't grasp mathematics or logical thought as well as men, or else implying that the women who are in these fields are only there due to gender politics. The conclusion we're meant to reach being that not only is the gender imbalance in engineering fields justified, it should be even greater than it is. The "inconvenient truths" people claim PC culture won't let them express are usually pseudo-scientific or naturalistic arguments that attempt to defend and justify existing forms of prejudice, and that's what becomes disrespectful. There are no such "truths" that don't diminish, harm or dehumanize some group.

anaisbetts 7y ago

Great comment. This is easy stuff: * If someone from a marginalized (or tbh, any other) group says, "Please call me XYZ", do it * If you use the wrong term, briefly apologize and use the right one instead. That's all you gotta do.

SamReidHughes 7y ago
Wrong, you should do the opposite, because they want to control how you think, and you have a duty to keep your thought independent.
- anaisbetts 7y ago
  Who exactly is "they" here?
- krapp 7y ago
  >Wrong, you should do the opposite, because they want to control how you think, and you have a duty to keep your thought independent. But... "doing the opposite" as some kind of "duty" because you believe marginalized groups want to control your thoughts is the antithesis of having "independent" thought. Please tell me this place has just broken my ability to detect irony.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  Hm. Where's the line with this? Would you call your partner what they asked you to call them, or avoid something they say they don't like? What about relatives, friends and neighbours?
SpaceRaccoon 7y ago
> Three quarters of African Americans oppose political correctness. This means that they are only four percentage points less likely than whites Why does the author use "African Americans" and then "whites"? I prefer "European American", thank you.
- wtdata 7y ago
  Because saying "blacks" is politically incorrect while saying "whites" is just fine. Which interestingly just goes further to exemplify this state of "politically correctness gone extreme" which the author is warning us about.
- Niksko 7y ago
  Cool, I'll call you a European American. It's that easy.
cljs-js-eval 7y ago
This doesn't pass a very basic sniff test. All marginalized groups need is to be called some specific terms? This is entirely a question of terminology rather than a fight by marginalized people to achieve specific, better outcomes? That view is so convenient that I have a hard time believing that it's right. edited to remove a typo
- anaisbetts 7y ago
  I was specifically addressing the anxiety that people are feeling about "saying the wrong thing" and offending someone, it's certainly not all that needs to be done to end marginalization, but many of the other things such as preventing housing and employment discrimination aren't on individuals to fix, it's on the government to enforce
- krapp 7y ago
  > All marginalized groups need is to be called some specific terms? This is entirely a question of terminology rather than a fight by marginalized people to achieve specific, better outcomes? Calling someone by the terms they prefer is a baseline for common courtesy, from which those better outcomes can follow. Nowhere is it claimed that this is "all marginalized groups need," rather that it's simply the least you can, and should, do. >That view is so convenient that I have a hard time believing that it's right. It isn't right, because you're purposely misrepresenting it an attempt to discredit it through a false dichotomy. Also I don't understand what's "convenient" about it. Are we supposed to infer an ulterior motive on the part of people who want to be called by a certain pronoun?
tomohawk 7y ago
All you gotta do is call me Your Royal Highness.

deogeo 7y ago

Political correctness is far more than "treating people with respect". It includes truths you're not allowed to say, and claims you're not allowed to question, no matter how respectfully.

ikeyany 7y ago

Except that example is a bit trivial. How about a harder example. Is it "disrespectful" to say that one of the reasons there are fewer women in engineering is because engineering simply doesn't interest women? This is something that can't be "wondered about" out loud in some circles, including HN. I've seen threads get removed even when the comments on it seemed somewhat in good faith.

tasty_freeze 7y ago
Don't stop there. Think about why women are less likely to be interested in it. Think why that might be true in the culture you come from but is not true in other countries. Don't stop at proximate causes and try to find root causes.
Niksko 7y ago
It definitely can be discussed. The key is that you had to temper your assertion that the discussion was only 'somewhat' in good faith. Usually the discussions around these things aren't in good faith. Sometimes they're actually in poor faith from BOTH sides. Interpret this as 'people are fallible and bad at discoursing respectfully' rather than 'people don't want to discuss these sensitive topics'
krapp 7y ago
> Is it "disrespectful" to say that one of the reasons there are fewer women in engineering is because engineering simply doesn't interest women? No, some women finding engineering fields not to be a fitting career choice, in and of itself, is not controversial. But such arguments never exist in a vacuum, or without context. They typically lean into the premise that women are uninterested in engineering due to "innate differences between gender," claiming that women can't grasp mathematics or logical thought as well as men, or else implying that the women who are in these fields are only there due to gender politics. The conclusion we're meant to reach being that not only is the gender imbalance in engineering fields justified, it should be even greater than it is. The "inconvenient truths" people claim PC culture won't let them express are usually pseudo-scientific or naturalistic arguments that attempt to defend and justify existing forms of prejudice, and that's what becomes disrespectful. There are no such "truths" that don't diminish, harm or dehumanize some group.