Has political correctness gone too far sometimes?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rozellelily
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rozellelily said:
Yes,thankfully lol.
While not on the same level,dark isn’t really suitable/appropriate towards kids either though.

I guess what I don’t really fully get is while adults who are aware of social constructs etc could potentially see this “dog scene” as pedo,would a child because a child hasn’t been exposed to life’s situations (and potential dangers) so isn’t it to them just “innocent” in a sense?
Click to expand...
99.9% of the time, someone who wants to have a child sit on their lap is totally innocent. We know now, however, why it is wiser to avoid getting children used to adults who want them sitting on their laps, even though children often do like to do that.

We’re the adults. We’re supposed to look out for them in ways that don’t let them know how much they need to be looked out for.
 
The short answer to your original question is YES! Way too far. Certainly great comedies like Seinfeld (and even The Honeymooners) could NEVER have been aired today. It’s too much.
 
Last edited:
It’s always about making others do what you tell them to do with the pc crowd…seldom, if ever is it done logically…
 
I can understand toilet humor and butt humor in a scene for 5 and 6 year olds. It’s not my favorite thing but I know kids find it funny.

But genital humor? I mean, that’s fine for the Family Guy crowd, but not 5-year-olds. Weird, just weird.
 
I wouldn’t call it weird. I’d call it diabolic. An effort to desensitize us to good vs evil.
 
It made me wonder if whoever wrote that scene grew up in a household where they were sexually molested as a child and told it was no big deal, just ignore it etc.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
The short answer to your original question is YES! Way too far. Certainly great comedies like Seinfeld (and even The Honeymooners) could NEVER have been aired today. It’s too much.
Click to expand...
(a) Seinfeld isn’t meant for children
(b) Seinfeld’s characters would have been appalled on behalf of the dog.
(c ) The Honeymooners didn’t even show married couples sleeping in the same bed together. When Lucy was going to have a baby, CBS didn’t even allow the word “pregnant” in the script. Apparently “great comedies” somehow figured out how to be funny while under censorship far beyond anything dreamt of now.
 
Last edited:
The PC issue I refer to in The Honeymooners involves stereotyping of ethnic groups, such as Carlos, the Mambo dance instructor, Mrs. Manicotti (even the name itself), and so on. The long arm of the PC community would not allow such things today. Same for Seinfeld: whether Puerto Ricans, Chinese, Native Americans, Muslims, gays, hardly any group escapes stereotyping. This is prohibited now. Never mind that it’s funny.

In other words, I’m not addressing the specific issue here which involves children, but rather the general topic regarding whether PC has gone too far.
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
The PC issue I refer to in The Honeymooners involves stereotyping of ethnic groups, such as Carlos, the Mambo dance instructor, Mrs. Manicotti (even the name itself), and so on. The long arm of the PC community would not allow such things today. Same for Seinfeld: whether Puerto Ricans, Chinese, Native Americans, Muslims, gays, hardly any group escapes stereotyping. This is prohibited now. Never mind that it’s funny.

In other words, I’m not addressing the specific issue here which involves children, but rather the general topic regarding whether PC has gone too far.
Click to expand...
I have noticed watching television produced in other countries that not everyone on the planet is so uptight about treating ethnic groups satirically when the genre is obviously slapstick. It is like stepping back into the days of “Laugh-In.” The stereotypes are there but making fun of people who actually believe the stereotypes is also there.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top