I put maybe an incorrect label on some here and some turned around and labled me.

Just to be clear, read what I wrote:

You are acting like what is called a “concern troll”…

I did not label you as anything… I simply pointed out the behavior you were displaying. You were very quick to jump to conclusions about the give and take here… and I suggested you look into it a bit more before making such grand statements.

Actually, it’s highly questionable that the phrase “rule of thumb” ever had anything to do with wife beating – instead it refers to the use of the first thumb joint as a rough one-inch measure. See any of these references:

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-rul1.htm

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/000512.html

http://www.word-detective.com/back-n.html#rulothumb

>I think I’ve been pretty clear that I’m not talking about trite BS like this,

Wait, let’s get this straight. You consider this issue BS? But this is exactly the kind of stuff that is Political Correctness gone mad that people talk about. Except it’s really important to some people.

Think of it this way. Think if our language had embedded in it racial designations. For instance, suppose the word was “mailanglo” or “fisherblack” or “stewardanglo”. Sure, it sounds weird, but that is exactly the context that some people see with regards to sex in our language. We have “mailman“, and “fisherman“, or “stewardess” (as opposed to “steward”, both of which being replaced by “flight attendant”). To some people, the apparent inherent sexism is an impediment to the attitude of cultural equality. And so they want to change all the words.

But you say that’s not what you are talking about. Okay, fine, but that is what everyone else is talking about. So when you bring up oversensitivity to PC, this is what you’re stepping in.

> My problem is that people cry “political correctness out of control” when people denounce something that is clearly offensive.

Okay, so you’re problem is that jerks are jerks. No seriously, some jerk who thinks a racial slur is a necessary part of polite conversation and omitting the racial slur is equivalent to not calling it a “black hole” because that gives a negative conotation to “black”, and thus creates an underlying impression of black = bad, wants to complain because other people tell him that racial slurs are not polite and should be avoided. Okay, so some people are quick to accuse PC running rampant. But who is the proper judge? Who’s opinion is the right one?

Take your example of “jipped”. Right there is a perfect example of the problem, people don’t even know how to spell the word. It is a word they have heard, not read, and has no origins or connections to anything but the definition “ripped off”. So most people would be confused to learn the root is “gypped” as in “ripped off by a Gypsy”, and it is similar to the phrase, “that guy Jewed me down” when referring to someone haggling. So is it PC madness to ask people not to use the word “gypped” because it refers to a derogatory stereotype? Where is the line?

learjettech said:
>Phil, again you prove my point. Someone may not agree with your point, so you slam.

Irony alert!

Y’all are diverse as long as people say what you think they should say and use the words you believe to be correct. Free speech, y’all don’t even know what that means

Phil, again you prove my point. Someone may not agree with your point, so you slam. The sad thing is I agree with what has been said prior, I just think people should be able to disagree without be labeled. Another point for Tyler, something tells me he doesn’t even watch Fox, any news channel I watch has it bias. Including the BBC.

Argument from ignorance.

Spend some time reading around here, and don’t just gloss over a few posts that get your nickers in a bunch. You’ll not only find that you’re wrong in your “absolute assertion” of how people are treated around here, you might learn a thing or two about why certain people are argued against more vehemently than others. Respectful arguments are argued respectfully, if not heated. Commenters who act like jerks are treated in kind. Even the case of the discussion here between Jose, Evolving_Squid and Centipede… it’s certainly a debate, and at times a heated one, but I still think it’s a civil one, which considering the topic, is saying something. At the end of the day I think we’d all be able to sit around the table and have a beer or two (or eight) amongst ourselves.

You are acting like what is called a “concern troll”… and I really don’t see the need for it. Save your hyperbole for when it’s actually applicable.

“That’s why I’m not outraged when I hear black people use the word like you apparently are.”

Wrong again, bucko. I’m annoyed that there is a double-standard over the use of a word and the assumption of the negativity of its use outside of any consideration of context.

Let’s get back to the point here: the only censor should be one’s own conscience, and this is where, again, “being a decent person” is different from “political correctness.” Two entirely different concepts. If you, personally, decide not to use “gypped” then that’s your call and that’s fine. Were you to demand that we not use it because of its history, a history it’s pretty much been completely disassociated from in the minds of the user (sort of like no one thinks “wife-beating” when they say “rule of thumb”) then that’s a different matter entirely. “What harm is it not to use particular words” is a strawman that ignores the point of the disagreement, which is “who gets to decide what one gets to say?”

Read Bradbury’s afterword to Fahrenheit 451 for a decent summary of where, intellectually, I’m coming from here. In short, I need my hands to wave or make fists as necessary; I need my mouth to shout or whisper. People can complain as much as they like, and I encourage it–they’ve their own mouth and hands to do exactly that–but they’d best not tell me how to use my own.