Political Correctness

  • Thread starter Thread starter rockford
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, someone who buys into the academic definition would say that everyone can be the victim of racial prejudice but that the term “racism/racist” has a very specific legal and academic meaning.
 
Last edited:
rac·ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/Submit
noun
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.
“a program to combat racism”
synonyms: racial discrimination, racialism, racial prejudice, xenophobia, chauvinism, bigotry, casteism

the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

So what would another definition be? This is pretty much what I said. From google
 
For those interested, here is a quick summary of a common definition of racism among academics and activists who study race: Prejudice plus power - Wikipedia

It might also be important to look at the definitions of terms like “institutional racism” and “systemic racism.”
 
jesucated said:
In sum, people responding negatively to speech because they were offended is a legitimate exercise of free speech ( again depending on the norms of a given country) and ought to be protected and respected.
Click to expand...
Indeed it should be protected, but should that protection be extended to effectively include a right not to be offended?
 
Yes, I’m sure every citizen refers to academia when they feel they’re the victim of a bigot.

No. All shades of no.

On that note, I’m done - because this just isn’t how the world actually operates.
 
No one did, though.

Racism is what we’ve said it is.

Those two are additional concepts that apply in specific circumstances.

Racism is still racism.

Wow.

And if you are an academic, why quote Wikipedia?
 
Last edited:
I’m not sure I follow what you’re asking, and I want to make sure I understand before I respond. Can you rephrase a bit?
 
Specify specialized uses to the term.

Racism stands on its own. Most of us have been to college. We know the rest.
 
What makes you think I’m relying “too heavily” on it? If the the film-makers have indeed strayed from their intent, I’d like to see a case for it beyond, “Because some people feel disparaged.”
 
I think the point the other poster was making was that there are indeed different definitions that do get used (and rather widely), and that sometimes we all forget to see this and end up talking past/at and not with each other.
 
Pup7 said:
Yes, I’m sure every citizen refers to academia when they feel they’re the victim of a bigot.

No. All shades of no.

On that note, I’m done - because this just isn’t how the world actually operates.
Click to expand...
As is your right.

Someone (am not sure it was you?) brought it up, so I offered an explanation as to why it is that some people say that some can’t experience racism.

You are welcome to totally disregard their thought process, but they aren’t just making stuff up or trying to attack you.There is literally decades of scholarship on this issue.

I think there is value in understanding where other people are coming from even if I disagree with them.

I’m happy to talk more about it via PM if you want.
 
You seemed to be appealing to motive or intent as the best measure of what a piece of work means/how it is to be interpreted. All I was pointing out was that modern literary and cinematic criticism disagree heavily with this claim. By and large, motive or intent is generally accepted by critics to be among the least important factors when assessing a piece of work (and some even say it’s irrelevant).

I do apologize if I misunderstood your claim.
 
I’m asking whether the right to speak out against things someone finds offensive extends to maintaining that the person who expressed the views one finds offensive should not have had the right to express these views.
 
Last edited:
I’m aware of those definitions. They weren’t the one I used.

Have a good one. :raised_hands:t2:
 
Last edited:
If you’re asking whether I think state sanctioned censorship is permissible, then no. If that’s not what you’re asking, then I apologize.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top