Treating Other People With Respect

Lorentz said:
Speaking of political correctness, the recent American uproar about a Dutch newspaper using the N-word in a headline (a quote from an anti-racist book), counts as Political Correctness gone mad, in my opinion.

Dutch newspaper uses n-word

While we understand that the U.S. has taboo words and this is one of them, it was a DUTCH article written for Dutch people, reviewing a book by Ta-Nehisi Coates. The article was not racist in any way, shape or form. Outrage is spent on the word, utterly disregarding the content.[/SUB]

**Yes, I'm taking the mickey
Click to expand...


What's interesting there is the projection of American sensibilities and race relations history onto another country, one with a very different history and sensibilities. (Is this a case of cultural imperialism? :D )

On a related note might be this story from early July: MFA recasts kimono days after complaints of stereotyping. People in Japan were utterly perplexed by this reaction, an example of which can be found in this video. There was also push back from local folks, as described in this article.

In this case, who was being disrespectful? The museum for putting on the kimono exhibit and those supporting it? Or the people complaining about it?



Upchurch said:
I disagree. Offense can be intentionally delivered, even if politely.
Click to expand...


Sure. The question there, however, is this: how does one determine that offense was deliberately intended? Short of the speaker expressly stating that was their purpose, how would one know it with any degree of certainty?
 
Corsair 115 said:
Sure. The question there, however, is this: how does one determine that offense was deliberately intended? Short of the speaker expressly stating that was their purpose, how would one know it with any degree of certainty?
Click to expand...
The context is that offense can only be taken, not given. Presumably, the speaker knows their own intent when giving an intentional insult, though politely.
 
Upchurch said:
The context is that offense can only be taken, not given. Presumably, the speaker knows their own intent when giving an intentional insult, though politely.
Click to expand...


You haven't answered the question. Short of the speaker expressly stating that giving offence was their goal, how would any other party, and specifically the recipient of the comment, know that was the intent?
 
Corsair 115 said:
You haven't answered the question. Short of the speaker expressly stating that giving offence was their goal, how would any other party, and specifically the recipient of the comment, know that was the intent?
Click to expand...

I was explaining that the question isn't relevant to what we were talking about. It's a non sequitur. Even if one cannot tell if someone is politely insulting them has no baring on whether or not someone can do it.
 
theprestige said:
It's not a definition, it's a description. It's not my fault if people who make a fetish of political correctness are largely incoherent.
Click to expand...
I agree with this, but it's not what you think.

See, the thing is, "political correctness" is a pejorative. It's something you call someone else's actions. The only people who make a fetish out of it are those who label others with it.
 
Upchurch said:
I was explaining that the question isn't relevant to what we were talking about. It's a non sequitur. Even if one cannot tell if someone is politely insulting them has no baring on whether or not someone can do it.
Click to expand...


So, intent doesn't matter?
 
Upchurch said:
I agree with this, but it's not what you think.

See, the thing is, "political correctness" is a pejorative. It's something you call someone else's actions. The only people who make a fetish out of it are those who label others with it.
Click to expand...

Kinda like sexism, racism, misogyny?

Upchurch said:
I was explaining that the question isn't relevant to what we were talking about. It's a non sequitur. Even if one cannot tell if someone is politely insulting them has no baring on whether or not someone can do it.
Click to expand...

Of course you can insult someone, but this doesn't force that someone to take offense. Your insult has no offensive effect if the words you use to demean someone have no effect on that someone. I could write a series of insults in Estonian slang here and if you had no idea what it means you would probably not take it as an insult. Even if I'm trying to insult you, no offense is taken. However you could take offense for the fact that I wrote in a foreign language that you don't understand and might consider that disrespectful, even if what I wrote was perhaps pure praise of you. You are the sole arbiter of which words or actions you let yourself to be offended by.
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
Matter to whom?
Click to expand...


You've lost me. Let's recap the conversation thus far. You said:

Upchurch said:
I disagree. Offense can be intentionally delivered, even if politely.
Click to expand...


I replied:

Corsair 115 said:
Sure. The question there, however, is this: how does one determine that offense was deliberately intended? Short of the speaker expressly stating that was their purpose, how would one know it with any degree of certainty?
Click to expand...


To which you responded:

Upchurch said:
The context is that offense can only be taken, not given. Presumably, the speaker knows their own intent when giving an intentional insult, though politely.
Click to expand...


My reply was then:

Corsair 115 said:
So, intent doesn't matter?
Click to expand...


How your reply given at the beginning of this post is an appropriate follow-up to this exchange is not apparent to me.
 
arthwollipot said:
Why did you put "NSFW" there?
Click to expand...

Because I've learned this forum is pretty fidgety about that kind of stuff. Better safe than sorry.

Upchurch said:
Are you arguing that sexism, racism, and misogyny doesn't exist?
Click to expand...

I have nowhere argued anything of that kind. Are you referring to your notion that political correctness doesn't exist? If you agreed that political correctness was just like sexism, racism and misogyny, it indeed would mean - according to your line of thought - that the latter don't exist. This is you, not me, arguing it.

"See, the thing is, "political correctness" is a pejorative. It's something you call someone else's actions. The only people who make a fetish out of it are those who label others with it."​

"See, the thing is, "misogyny" is a pejorative. It's something you call someone else's actions. The only people who make a fetish out of it are those who label others with it."​

"See, the thing is, "racism" is a pejorative. It's something you call someone else's actions. The only people who make a fetish out of it are those who label others with it."​

It fits your description to a T.
 
TeapotCavalry said:
Because I've learned this forum is pretty fidgety about that kind of stuff. Better safe than sorry.



I have nowhere argued anything of that kind. Are you referring to your notion that political correctness doesn't exist? If you agreed that political correctness was just like sexism, racism and misogyny, it indeed would mean - according to your line of thought - that the latter don't exist. This is you, not me, arguing it.
"See, the thing is, "political correctness" is a pejorative. It's something you call someone else's actions. The only people who make a fetish out of it are those who label others with it."​
"See, the thing is, "misogyny" is a pejorative. It's something you call someone else's actions. The only people who make a fetish out of it are those who label others with it."​
"See, the thing is, "racism" is a pejorative. It's something you call someone else's actions. The only people who make a fetish out of it are those who label others with it."​
It fits your description to a T.
Click to expand...


You missed the meaning.

"Political Correctness" is merely a pejorative, unlike racism/misogyny which are actual causes.

No one advocates for 'political correctness'. They argue for respect/courtesy/politeness/pick-your-term and people call that political correctness as a pejorative.

IMO that goes a bit far and there are some edge cases around college campuses which tend into overreaction. But over the life of the term for the vast majority of instances, this holds.
 
Last edited:
Corsair 115 said:
How your reply given at the beginning of this post is an appropriate follow-up to this exchange is not apparent to me.
Click to expand...
Then, allow me to deconstruct it for you.

All communication consists of up to three parties. A speaker sends a message. A recipient receives a message. Potentially, there could be a third-party audience that witnesses the exchange. Each party has their own perspective of the message and no message has an inherent value outside of the perception of at least one of these parties.

So, you asked me if intent matters. The only intent in a single message is that of the speaker, but the value of that intent (i.e. whether it "matters") is likewise dependant upon the value a party puts upon it. This is why I asked, "matters to whom?" I want to know from whose perspective you're asking.

The simplest answer is that intent most definitely matters to the speaker. After all, without intent there is no reason to send a message. (This is barring any kind of impared babbling.) As for the other two, it is much more complicated and dependant on factors not defined in the scenario.

So, does intent matter? Sometimes. For whom are you asking if intent matters?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom